Would you rather watch CR 67 OR NSNA?

DarthDimi

echo wrote: »

GoldenGun wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

NSNA obviously.

I like Casino Royale but I think they should have given David Niven more room.

For sure. I consider myself a David Niven fan and I would have been up for Niv being cast as an elderly Bond in a proper film. He's definitely one of the elements that make CR67 worth at least one watch.

I think for CR'67 Feldman was just throwing money at people and promising only a few days work, which is how he got Niven, Kerr, etc. They weren't really planning out a narrative.

Both the making-of book and the BR bonus features indicate that there had always been a plan to deliver a strong, albeit 'comedic' narrative. Things got messed up along the way. It's one of the more interesting production histories I've ever dived into. ;-)

DEKE_RIVERS

echo wrote: »

GoldenGun wrote: »

DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »

NSNA obviously.

I like Casino Royale but I think they should have given David Niven more room.

For sure. I consider myself a David Niven fan and I would have been up for Niv being cast as an elderly Bond in a proper film. He's definitely one of the elements that make CR67 worth at least one watch.

I think for CR'67 Feldman was just throwing money at people and promising only a few days work, which is how he got Niven, Kerr, etc. They weren't really planning out a narrative.

Yes, but something along the lines of The Pink Panther would have worked better.

007HallY

CR ‘67’s a mess for a few reasons to be fair. I think there was a lack of clear direction early on which didn’t help, but things like Sellars having effectively a breakdown doesn’t help. I think what makes it watchable ultimately is due to the calibre of talent both behind and in front of the camera, and you get some genuinely great sequences like the Berlin training school sequence or Mata’s dance number.