It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
But let's face it, we were never going to see that film. Broccoli in 1982 was probably going to have the same legal difficulties with McClory as he was having a decade earlier, especially since NSNA was allowed to happen at the same time. Someone correct me if I'm wrong on that point.
I think it's very sensible that they didn't incorporate S.P.E.C.T.R.E into the story for Octopussy. Not only from a potential legal battle with McClory, but also having a rival Bond film with Sean Connery, that also has the organisation of S.P.E.C.T.R.E as a large part of its films story.
How certain are we that they were considering to bring back SPECTRE? Blofeld had died the movie before. Unnamed.
https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/comment/1175869/#Comment_1175869
That's my theory for Octopussy; regarding TSWL, I guess the intention was similar: the series had hit rock bottom with TMWTGG, and, to relaunch it, it made sense again to return to its golden age by reintroducing Blofeld and SPECTRE. Again, the intention might have been to cement an actor (Moore with TSWL, a new actor for OP) by returning to the Connery's era.
Blofeld with a new actor would have made some sense, yes. In OP with Moore as the lead, not at all.
As much as McClory gets slagged for giving EON the middle finger and trying to antagonize Cubby, I think the feeling was somewhat mutual. So I would imagine that Cubby was trying to show that he would still use SPECTRE and Blofeld to mess with McClory.
Funny how EON had scripts in 1976 and 1982 that featured Blofeld and SPECTRE and those happened to be years that McClory was either trying to get a film off the ground or did get a film off the ground.
Sure. The Thunderball remake was always in the contract.
Lets move on to the final Bond film of Sir Roger Moore. The year was 1985, Moore had been in the role for over 10 years and had starred in 6 Bond films, with AVTAK making it seven films.
The producers seemed to be wanting to tap into a youth market with Duran Duran signed to sing the iconic song. They cast Grace Jones and Christopher Walken as the main baddies. They had computers has the main plot point. Some would say they took inspiration from GF with the plot that Zorin launches with Project Mainstrike. Based a great deal in San Francisco the film is an interesting blend. Does it work?
What are the missed opportunities of A View To A Kill?
A reminder that missed opportunities are things like story lines, casting choices, music or things that the film seems to "drop the ball" on. So saddle up, Build up your speed and stamina and tell us, what are the missed opportunities of A View to A Kill?
A new Bond and a new Moneypenny would have been welcomed and would have allowed the movie to resonate better with the audience (let's not forget that while profitable, the film made less at the box-office than FYEO, OP, TLD and even LTK).
Regardless of who could have played Bond, I think the plot lacks structure, especially at the beginning, and at several points the film seems to start again, forgetting previous plot points. All while skimming over what could have been a very interesting plot point: Zorin's past. You have a character with ties with Nazis, who sells his tech to both the British government and the USSR, two of the main powers responsible for Germany's defeat, and this is never at the heart of the plot. It is a major missed opportunity in my opinion.
What follows is more of a rewrite of the plot than a highlighting of the film's missed opportunities, but I think the plot could have been based on the unused elements of the novel Moonraker. Being Dr. Hans Glaub's protégé, Zorin wishes to take revenge on the USSR and Britain whom he judges to be responsible for the defeat of Nazi Germany; he manufactures critical components for communication, weapon and missile guidance systems, selling them to both Britain and the USSR, allowing him to remotely paralyse and control their systems.
As in the actual film, Bond recovers a Zorin microchip from the body of 003 in Siberia, indicating the company is selling top secret technology to the Soviet Union. Zorin is seen as a national hero and the Defense Minister can't believe he would be a traitor working for the Soviets, nevertheless, M, who already found Zorin suspicious, tasks Bond with instigating the company. Gradually, Bond discovers that, far from working for the Soviets, Zorin is corrupting the strategic systems of the two Blocs, with the intention of remotely controlling their weapons and causing the destruction of the two countries.
In summary, to focus exclusively on the microchip plot, tying it to Zorin's past and drawing inspiration from the Moonraker novel, would have made the plot stronger in my opinion.
I'm split on saying not casting Dalton or Brosnan was a missed opportunity here. I think Moore is great, but perhaps the script could have leaned into his age a bit more.
That's an interesting rewrite, and yeah, I'd say not doing more with Zorin's Nazi past/backstory is a missed opportunity.
Ironically, Richard Maibaum said he felt they used too much of the Nazi stuff.
Also it's a bit of a shame that Bond and Mayday never really have a proper face-off before she turns good. Even just a fight on the Eiffel Tower where she perhaps gets the better of him might've been good, or having a proper fight in the tunnels before they flood. Or maybe Mayday should have been involved with the fire truck chase.
And why does Pola disappear? She could have popped up again in the mine at the end perhaps. The KGB aspect could have been ramped up a bit perhaps, although I guess then it actually starts getting a bit similar to the previous film! Maybe even Anya makes a comeback for Roger's curtain call to help against Zorin.
Otherwise it needs some better set pieces here and there: the factory and mansion fights are just terrible and have very little thought put into them. Just making bits like that better would improve it a lot.
Oh and David Hedison's Felix instead of Chuck Lee- how nice would that have been to round off Roger's tenure. Although obviously you can't kill him as he'd just be Tibbet again.
Yes, I'm honestly not sure why he thought that though. If anything it's underutilised and arguably one of the most interesting things about the film.
Side note: from what I remember the original script depicted Zorin as having different coloured eyes, and I believe the plan was to hire David Bowie originally. Now, Walken is arguably the better choice here (although I'd love to have seen a David Bowie Bond villain) but for some reason the idea of a Zorin played by Walken with two different coloured eyes sounds kind of interesting, although another side of me thinks it's just one gimmick too many (he already has the dyed blonde hair which probably is enough).
Earlier drafts also focused on Zorin manipulating Halley's Comet into crashing into Silicon Valley. So from the start the story seemed to include microchips and high-technologies... With very different plot points it seems.
Also, ironically, that’s how Richard Maibaum started his drafts. Michael G Wilson was the one who brought just a bit of realism to the script. And blamed others for not being realistic. Like @007HallY said, there really should have been a creative shake up for AVTAK. Like TMWTGG before it, having some new ideas and people could have helped make a better product. Hopefully to a degree, Bond 26 can learn from overusing people for too long.
Who funnily enough didn't have differently-coloured eyes! :)
I agree that contrasting eyes does sound quite Bond villain-ish, but I'm not sure if it would have been worth doing.
I don't know how, but I think they even needed more Walken and Jones in the movie. I mean, they're clearly the best part, although I have a soft spot for Macnee.
That's true! He had anisocoria (essentially one pupil was much larger than the other, I think from when he got punched in the face as a kid). But from my understanding it made it look like he had one eye that was darker than the other so I guess I can see where they got the idea from.
I suppose Horowitz included Colonel Boris in WAMTK who had different coloured eyes from what I remember. But yeah, it doesn't add much in itself (unless for Zorin it'd been worked into the script as being a result of the Nazi experiments or something). I do like the idea of someone like Bowie playing a Bond villain though. I can imagine him being scene-chewy and fun, but still menacing (a bit like an early Silva). He was a surprisingly good actor.
God that sounds like a silly idea. Can imagine Cubby balking at the prospect of having to spend that much on special effects as well!
Tibbet and Lee killed off screen, we aren't even really shown who does the killing, through it's suggested its May Day. Then May Day doesn't get any retribution from Bond. Marking the first time that I can recall a hench person does some killing of agents and gets off scott free for her efforts. Actually we can add in the French detective at the tower.
I think there was a darker film here but because we have Moore we have the danger diffused. Bond never feels in any real danger in the film. Even the final bridge fight is light on tension and with Stacey screaming JAMES at various points it's all rather tame.
What a waste of talent with Walken and Jones suffering from rather poorly drawn characters. While I am on the subject are they lovers? Friends? There seems romantic tension when they spar in France and then it is never referenced or shown again.
So better maintitles and more Screen Time for Jenny Flex (Alison Doody)
Alison Doody with Pierce
Yes, I think she could have been a good Stacey.
Time to turn to the Tim Dalton era of films. First up is the premiere adventure for Dalton. Given a script that wasn't tailored to his Bond, Dalton did remarkably well. The film harkened back to the Connery era with a return to the danger and the menace of the character. Dalton was hard nosed and with nary a raised eye brow or a quip.
Even though the fandom embraced the movie, one does wonder if there are missed opportunities within the film. We only have one female lead as the AIDS epidemic was front and centre and casual sex was frowned upon. We have two villains that some say are weak, were they a missed opportunity? The theme song was a mightmare with Barry and a-ha not exactly hitting it off. This was the last film to feature a Barry score.
What are the missed opportunities of The Living Daylights?
Remember a missed opportunity is not a flaw of the film but rather a casting decision that doesn't click, a storyline that goes nowhere or doesn't have a good pay-off, an action sequence that wasn't needed or maybe could have been better.
And, I do love the film as it is, but I watch Remington Steele and Fourth Protocol (from this year), and I think Pierce would have been great in it, and I suspect would have connected better with audiences. But I guess that's not a missed opportunity as such as they tried their best not to miss it! :)
James Coburn would have been a great Brad Whitaker. I don't know if he could have done it at the time, as he was having some health problems.
Yes good point: it's a fairly random thought of mine! :) But imagining someone with his sort of presence in it (Jack Palance? Jeff Bridges? Some more random names there :D ) works for me and kind of makes the part make more sense.
Joe Don Baker is great, but he's almost more of a character actor than a lead villain for me.
Folks will disagree I'm sure and that's absolutely fine of course.