The What if NTTD is the last EON produced Bond film? page 62

15758596163

Comments

  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,404
    Interesting info @moneyofpropre2 I hadn't heard that the role was conceived as a male to begin with. I knew a woman named Tola.

    Maybe it was never in the script but talked about, or like you say an internet myth that gained some legs.

    I am guessing Bond and Tola didn't hit any hot tubs? LOL!
  • edited March 8 Posts: 859
    Yes, maybe it was discussed about, or an internet myth (the source about that cited on wikipedia is not something we can trust about). A brief cameo for Anya was howewer scripted in Moonraker.

    Well, nah no hot tube for the male version (lol), was other scenes with him but with the same (original) purpose (but I don't tell more to not "spoil" you if one day you want to read Scripting 007).
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,404
    It came up on the missed opportunities thread, and never being shy about re-using content, thought I would use it here.

    What if M had been recast for Daniel Craigs first film CR?

    It was announced as a reboot and as such it was clear the producers were clearing the deck. No Moneypenny, no Q and no Tanner. At least not to start Craig's era. But they needed an M. The original plan was to cast a new actor in the role. Barbara even went so far as to have a lunch with Judi Dench to share this news. Legend has it when Barbara went to state that they had found a new James Bond and the plans for a reboot, Judi replied "when does filming start?". Barbara didn't have the heart to tell her she wouldn't be a part of it and so Judi returned as M. Although the character was written differently.

    But what if Judi had accepted not being in the new film. What if the producers re-cast M for Craig. Do you think that they would have kept M female? Or would they have gone with a male actor?

    We may not think this makes much of a difference, but by Daniel's third film it was decided to kill off M. This had more emotional weight since Judi had been playing the character for well over a decade. Would the plot of SF killed off M? Would it have had the same impact as the new actor would only have been in two films before being killed off?

    So lets discuss, what if M had been re-cast for CR? how would it impact Craig's films and would it have changed the plot of SF?
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited March 17 Posts: 4,512
    Killing of Judi Dench M in Skyfall only works because it was Judi Dench M. Have there cast new M then should have another way to bring Silva to Skyfall. Moost easy option have been to delay death and Bond bring her with him. Bond left Casino and there stil meet at that boat, but then she asking for help and she going with him. Some how Silva still end in London to find her. Mabey message from to exited news guy (mabey faked with help of Mi6) who discover she is witness in court that day. The island stil can been hide place of Silva. But him at mi6 is canceled. Another option have been Camile back and she been Silva ex co-worker or/and ex boyfriend.

    But also in CR and QOS some things only works because Judi Dench M. Inspecialy the whole Mother and trust issues with him that started with Twine. Trust issues be in first place why she been in the court and look there going to replace her in Skyfall. Severine in court be only replament i can think about to keep Silva running and driving trow London. There is something in that scene when Silva take the car that writers/eon whant we see. Her speach saying so much, i always name it Judi Dench M told truth whyle she was lying.

    Emotions of some scenes like empty chair/missing bullet in QOS (the empty chair also symbol of Mr White his death) and little bit earlier tricker finger sound when Judi Dench name pop up in maintitle or her name in a star who been atacked in CR maintitles. All examples of hinting of her death. Skyfall self with Judi Dench name over graveyard, the bell of death sound (turn later also be hint of Bond Death).
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,404
    Very good points @M_Balje I hadn't thought of expanding the role of Serverine within the movie. She becomes the prize.

    Without Judi the dynamic between Bond and the M character would need more screen time to bring the emotion to the death.

    Interesting thoughts.
  • Posts: 1,971
    The series has a history of reusing actors in different roles. With Dench it's a matter of seeing her as M in the Brosnan series and the same actor playing a different M in the Craig series. At first I thought it weird, but I've long since stopped trying to connect one Bond series with another.
  • edited March 18 Posts: 1,324
    M_Balje wrote: »
    Killing of Judi Dench M in Skyfall only works because it was Judi Dench M. Have there cast new M then should have another way to bring Silva to Skyfall.

    I guess a new M is a good idea after all!

    ;)

    It's a good movie until the third act. Bond's plan never made sense and also...it didn't work.

    You can have stupid plans but they have to work.
  • edited March 18 Posts: 15,106
    SF would have been very different. If they'd kill M then it would have has a lesser impact than what we got. I think they would also have added to the pressure: casting a new Bond is already hard enough, you have all the usual other roles, then added to it a new M?

    If they'd gone for male M, I suspect they would have been criticised for ditching Judi Dench in favour of a male actor.
  • Posts: 4,109
    Yeah, it seems the biggest changes would have been to SF. Perhaps not fundamentally though. I mean, I get the sense M was written as a new incarnation of the character anyway for the Craig era, so no matter who the actress (if they went with another female M anyway) we’d have had a similar dynamic between Bond and M. SF could still have been a film based around M’s failures, with Silva swearing revenge on her. It’s just more unlikely she’d have died. Not that this would have improved the film.
  • To be honest, I don't think it would have had that much of an impact on Skyfall. Everything would have depended on the actress (or actor) chosen to replace Dench. I guess Eon would have gone for a high-profil actress (or, again, actor). If she, or he, had been embraced by the audience, I suspect Skyfall would have happened the way it did.

    Based on this premise, I'm more curious to see who could have been chosen, in 2006, to play M. If we start from the idea that the character would have remained feminine and that a famous actress would have been chosen, Maggie Smith would have been the obvious choice from that time. Vanessa Redgrave could have been another possibility.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,277
    I think they might have cast anyone as M, male or female, in CR. Say it were Fiennes, I still think he would have worked in SF, in obviously a very different role.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,606
    echo wrote: »
    I think they might have cast anyone as M, male or female, in CR. Say it were Fiennes, I still think he would have worked in SF, in obviously a very different role.

    He could have been a young Sir Miles!
  • Anthony Hopkins as M.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,196
    Having Dench return as "M" , obviously not the same "M" of the Brosnan era, worked but I hope it's not something that they try to repeat. Anthony Hopkins would have been excellent; I would have loved to have seen he and Craig playing off of each other and suspect that they would have had a great dynamic.

    As far as how would it have impacted "Skyfall", I think that Hopkins' "M" could have been somewhat a surrogate father to Bond; by the time he died the loss would have been just as devastating as was Judi's.
  • Anthony Hopkins as M.
    A nice callback to GoldenEye and the original background of Trevelyan, back when Hopkins was approached to play him.
    talos7 wrote: »
    Having Dench return as "M" , obviously not the same "M" of the Brosnan era, worked but I hope it's not something that they try to repeat.
    Same. As much as I like Fiennes, I hope Eon won't try to repeat what they did with Dench.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,787
    What happened here? @thedove ?

    I'd liked to add a topic myself in here if you would permit me? 😊
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,147
    If M had been recast for CR in 2006? As others have said: Fiennes. Even at 45, he'd've made a great M.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,404
    SIS_HQ wrote: »
    What happened here? @thedove ?

    I'd liked to add a topic myself in here if you would permit me? 😊

    I ran out of topics or what if's. If you have one, PM and I will feature it!
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,404
    Well it seems some have wonderful ideas for this thread. I would like to feature @TheSkyfallen06 who has proposed an interesting what if...

    What if the Brosnan Bond films had been a reboot?

    Even though there was a 6 year gap between LTK and GE, the producers picked up where they left off. This Bond acted like his predecessors. He drank, was misogynistic and generally marched to his own drum. The character was seen driving a DB-5 with no back story. Granted he got a new M, but his Q remained from the other films.

    But what if the producers had decided to reboot with Brosnan in GE. After all back in 1986 Wilson and Maibaum had written a script that showed a younger Bond. Cubby famously said "no one wants to see Bond before he became Bond." (or words to that effect)

    What would the implications have been if they had re-booted Bond with Brosnan in 1995. One assumes that Desmond would be gone and a new Q would have joined the new M and Moneypenny. No dressing down from M in the briefing scene. What else might have been?

    Do you think a Brosnan reboot would have worked?

  • edited September 6 Posts: 4,109
    I think Llewelyn would have returned much like Dench did. To some extent I suspect a more conscious reboot would have been more or less the GE we got but setting up a bit more backstory about how Bond became a 00.

    It’s a bit tricky gauging because reboots as we know them today with the likes of Batman Begins or CR ‘06 weren’t quite around like that. The Bond series had had soft reboots of sorts with DAF, LALD, TLD and OHMSS, but none consciously restarted a new ‘timeline’. As was said, I don’t think Cubby or even anyone else were all too keen on seeing a film about how Bond became 007.

    It may well have ended up like CR - a Bond adventure showing one of the character’s earlier missions but with him more or less established (so in effect the idea of Bond in GE being a ‘relic’ of the Cold War could have been replaced with him being a new agent in a post Cold War world… maybe just rejig the PTS/Alec’s ‘death’ and it’s doable). But I’m not sure how much they would leaned into it.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,277
    "Soft reboot" makes little sense to me. It's like being a little bit pregnant. Either it's a reboot, or it's not.

    They were more or less obligated to keep Llewelyn on into GE, for continuity. They didn't have any other options, really, because I don't think Brown ever had the impact that Lee did as M.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,606
    thedove wrote: »
    Well it seems some have wonderful ideas for this thread. I would like to feature @TheSkyfallen06 who has proposed an interesting what if...

    What if the Brosnan Bond films had been a reboot?

    Even though there was a 6 year gap between LTK and GE, the producers picked up where they left off. This Bond acted like his predecessors. He drank, was misogynistic and generally marched to his own drum. The character was seen driving a DB-5 with no back story. Granted he got a new M, but his Q remained from the other films.

    But what if the producers had decided to reboot with Brosnan in GE. After all back in 1986 Wilson and Maibaum had written a script that showed a younger Bond. Cubby famously said "no one wants to see Bond before he became Bond." (or words to that effect)

    What would the implications have been if they had re-booted Bond with Brosnan in 1995. One assumes that Desmond would be gone and a new Q would have joined the new M and Moneypenny. No dressing down from M in the briefing scene. What else might have been?

    Do you think a Brosnan reboot would have worked?

    Yes, it would have. I think Alec Trevelyan would have been a mentor, not a similar age as Bond.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,404
    Our next suggestion for a what if comes from @MaxCasino who has suggested the following idea:

    What if Jeffery Deaver (or another author) had picked up the threads of Carte Blanche in the modern era for the book series?

    Do we think modern book readers would have responded to a Bond literary series of novels. Deaver certainly was bold to base his Bond in the modern era. Some love it while others found it to be lacking. What if IFP had commissioned Deaver to proceed with a series? Or had signed another author to continue what Deaver had started?
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,767
    I thought Jeffrey Deaver did a great job related to the villain and the Hydt death obsession. And the recycling mischief made sense by extension. Further extending uncomfortably to his employees.

    What was more difficult was the Cape Town locale and the characters operating there.

    I'm not a good judge for how it would be received, still I'd be interested in Deaver trying European, Asian, or Central and South American locations in a similar approach if he had the inspiration for it.


  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,606
    I thought Jeffrey Deaver did a great job related to the villain and the Hydt death obsession. And the recycling mischief made sense by extension. Further extending uncomfortably to his employees.

    What was more difficult was the Cape Town locale and the characters operating there.

    I'm not a good judge for how it would be received, still I'd be interested in Deaver trying European, Asian, or Central and South American locations in a similar approach if he had the inspiration for it.


    https://www.thebookbond.com/2017/04/jeffrey-deaver-turned-down-second-bond.html

    He did have some great villains. One of who survived at the end. Felicity Willing could have come back. I view Carte Blanche as a "Year Two" (from DC Comics) for Bond. We could have also dug deeper into Bond's parents' history. Maybe Charmian Bond could have made an appearance.
  • edited October 5 Posts: 259
    Deaver had an alright first book, but there were some habits that would grate further on. Too many end of chapter misdirects, too many moments of reader being kept in the dark, a relatively bland characterisation of Bond (the Ophelia Maidenstone affair just one of many missteps). For example, M tells Bond once that explanation is a sign of weakness, and then Bond goes about explaining himself in full detail to Bheka Jordaan when he's in full justification.

    He'd be a worse version of John Gardner I think.
    One annoying bit is how the villain plot is built up to be a big thing that goes against British interests but actually just supplying food to rebels fighting the British to keep the war running. The university plot is quite important as well but I also feel a bit underwhelmed by it. Maybe because it's defeated before the "main" plan

    Not to take away from his great book at all though: he did a great job updating Bond's world and putting a realistic spin on what Bond does (ODG is a great new name as well). Maybe the slightest bit lazy with Bond's Afghanistan backstory but still really good work and I come back to it every once in a while.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,404
    Deaver is known for his misdirects or his "whodunit" nature. To some this is different as I don't think a Bond author has ever been a suspense or murder writer. I didn't find the misdirects all that much. I found myself trying to guess where things were going. It engaged me more.

    A worse version of Gardner? I am not sure I see that. Gardner played fast and loose with Bond and some of his habits. I saw what Deaver was doing as building some new aspects of the character. He took risks and they all didn't pay off.

    I think it is an interesting idea of modernizing Bond but not aligned with the cinematic Bond but a new take. I would have loved to have seen this developed out more.
  • In terms of misdirects I don't mean like twists. I mean sort of like the scene where the MI5 agent is tailing Bond's car, and then there's a twist in the next chapter that it wasn't Bond's car at all. Or when he's sleeping with the girl, saying he suspects someone and then the next chapter we learn he never suspected them at all. Felt like over a series that sort of pattern of Bond being ahead of the reader, without us ever getting an insight in his thought process beforehand. That sort of thing reminded me of Gardner with the random double-crosses (like the Irish copper who's Bond's mate and ends up with a gambling problem).
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,404
    Thanks for clarifying. Your post is making me want to re-read the book as it's been a while since I've read it. Thanks @Reflsin2bourbons
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,404
    Another interesting idea for a what if courtesy of @MaxCasino they asked the following:

    What if Gary Oldman played Blofeld in Spectre/No Time To Die?

    Surely after the hype of seeing the casting of Christophe Waltz as Blofeld for SP. People were excited and enthused, many called it perfect casting. Then we got the performance and it was found to be lacking. Was this all on Christophe or was it on the script? Either way the performance was sighted as one of the troublesome aspects of the film.

    Would a different casting choice made a different film? Or would it have saved the villain from being a disappointment? We know Oldman is a talented actor, how would his Blofeld looked on screen?

Sign In or Register to comment.