Tom Mankiewicz Appreciation Thread

2»

Comments

  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited August 24 Posts: 4,693
    peter wrote: »
    thedove wrote: »
    I consider the Mankiewicz trilogy to be something of a guilty pleasure. Sure all three films have their faults but they do have some redemption within them too.

    DAF
    • I give Tom all the credit in the world for the wonderful dialogue within the film. The Bond meeting Case scene, the ride to the Slumber funeral home, even the exchange between Bond and Blofeld in the penthouse are all well done and delivered.
    • Connery looks a little more at ease and having fun in the role, something that looked unlikely to happen after YOLT. While he isn't in FRWL, GF and TB territory He acts and the script highlights his strengths.
    • The fight in the elevator is a great bit of action. Whether it was Hamilton or Mankiewicz who came up with it is moot. It has some danger, and it's an unique setting for fisticuffs.

    LALD
    • Some more great dialogue here. Bond getting driven Uptown in the Taxi. Kananga delivers some wonderful lines and brings back the glamour of the Bond villain. The chemistry between Bond and Leiter here is strong and in some ways the script facilitates that.
    • Sherriff JW Pepper is a fine bit of social commentary and while he's a buffoon and clearly a charactiture of a southern sheriff, he is well played by Clifton James. This portrayal got us to Jackie Gleason in Smokey and the Bandit.
    • Again some unique action sequences with the airplane chase with Mrs Bell being another unique bit of action. The boat chase goes on for far too long but has some great moments.

    TMWTGG
    • here comes the dialogue again...the briefing scene with the bullet, meeting Lazar and the dinner scene at the end of the film, all well delivered and well written.
    • They played a bit with the tropes of the films with Hip's nieces holding their own while Bond merely watched. Bond is seen having to use his smarts at the end to overcome an equal, lets also say that Chris Lee delivers as the villain and gives you a sense this guy just might knock off our agent.
    • We see a film where Roger does some un-Roger like things. Interesting to see him being in this light. It is a side we won't see again till FYEO and it's a welcome change of pace.

    These are a few highlights in each film for me. They are a mixed bag overall and while not in my top 10 Bond films, they each hold a special place in my heart.

    I'm of a very similar mind as you, @thedove . Thanks for those mini-thoughts on each. Not my favoBond films, but always entertaining and they give a little tickle to the gut.

    I agree with you both on this Bond trilogy. Silly, but mostly grounded and believable villain plots. They helped prove that a silly Bond could work.
    007HallY wrote: »
    Hamilton was an odd director. Even on GF Peter Hunt felt the film wasn't being properly made and claimed there was quite a lot of 2nd Unit work. I remember reading he had particular gripes with the car chase, and he cut it in a very specific way to salvage it... tricky to tell of course without specifics, but it kind of makes sense when you account for the rather slow, underwhelming pace of the Vegas chase in DAF, or how drawn out the otherwise fun boat chase is in LALD. I suspect Hunt may well have sped things up through his editing, giving it more oomph.

    I suspect Hamilton didn't have much eye for detail as a director unfortunately. Even with the lower budgets some of the filmmaking in DAF-TMWTGG is pretty atrocious, with DAF having the worst examples in the PTS alone - bad, slow fight choreography during the first Blofeld/Bond fight, the weird sped up 'Bond, James Bond', a close up of a man not saying anything and yet this requiring dubbing (all of which could have been fixed with alternative takes/some alternative editing or ADR presumably). There are many more examples. His humour and creative direction fitted GF, but I think only in tandem with a very good team behind him (by DAF no one like Hunt was there to put that much needed life into the editing/pace, and Mankiewicz obviously leaned much more into that cynical, darkly humorous and zany direction).

    It’s terrifying to think that Guy Hamilton was going to direct a 500 page script for Superman. It probably would have been a low point MCU type of movie. He would have lacked Donner’s epic vision. He and the Salkinds would have grounded Superman before he could fly. He probably would have hurt Superman 2 even more if he had directed (which apparently did almost happen). I think we dodged a big Kryptonite bullet by Guy Hamilton not directing Superman. And TSWLM, as well. As I said before, Mankiewicz is a bit of a hypocrite by calling the original Superman scripts to campy. His Bond stories are also on the campy side. I do think his Batman script did have potential though with the right director. Apparently Donner wanted Mankiewicz to direct his version of Superman 3. Supergirl and Brainiac would have been major characters. Another big what if of Superman.

    Also, does anyone know if TM commented on Bond after he left? Not just on his own movies. I know he endorsed Timothy Dalton as Bond. He also said that Richard Donner was too American to direct one.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,475
    I am not sure if he ever commented on Dalton, Brosnan, and Craig.

    I do remember him in the DVD's saying how it was different to write for Sean and Roger. That Sean would be brutal and cold and Roger needed to be light and romantic. I find the comment odd because whoever had the biggest hand in TMWTGG had Roger doing some very un-Roger type things.

    When I did a google search on him it was amazing how many of the articles and headlines mentioned James Bond and not Superman. Yet I would say that the Superman movie was much more impactful on movies and cinema than Bond.

    Interesting discussion!
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,342
    peter wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    Tom Mankiewicz was the worst thing that ever happened to Bond! Sacrifizing all sense, story and character just to shoehorn in some ridiculous, asinine jokes? His stint represents the dark age of the series.

    Sadly, as a Bond fan, I find it very hard to disagree with any of that. Tom Mankiewicz ushered in some crass elements and characters. Query: Should James Bond films be full-blown comedies? I'm not so sure they should. Of the films he wrote or co-wrote LALD is the only one that stands up to much scrutiny for me. DAF and TMWTGG are pretty weak tea.

    Just like we look at today's films, I don't think these scripts were ever written in a vacuum. Or on spec. I imagine they had plenty of script meetings, and the writers of this era delivered scripts based on discussions with their bosses (?).

    Yes, that's quite true. We have to be fair in our comments and sometimes we don't see past the official credits on the film when we deliver our criticism or indeed our praise. No Bond film was made in a vacuum as you say and Bond films were very much written by committee and not solely by own hand. So pinning down who wrote what without cross referencing all of the various draft scripts and minutes of meetings would be close to impossible. I suppose the tone of the film comes down from the producer as they're putting up the money for the finished product so they have the final say ultimately.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    Tom Mankiewicz was the worst thing that ever happened to Bond! Sacrifizing all sense, story and character just to shoehorn in some ridiculous, asinine jokes? His stint represents the dark age of the series.

    Sadly, as a Bond fan, I find it very hard to disagree with any of that. Tom Mankiewicz ushered in some crass elements and characters. Query: Should James Bond films be full-blown comedies? I'm not so sure they should. Of the films he wrote or co-wrote LALD is the only one that stands up to much scrutiny for me. DAF and TMWTGG are pretty weak tea.

    Just like we look at today's films, I don't think these scripts were ever written in a vacuum. Or on spec. I imagine they had plenty of script meetings, and the writers of this era delivered scripts based on discussions with their bosses (?).

    Yes, that's quite true. We have to be fair in our comments and sometimes we don't see past the official credits on the film when we deliver our criticism or indeed our praise. No Bond film was made in a vacuum as you say and Bond films were very much written by committee and not solely by own hand. So pinning down who wrote what without cross referencing all of the various draft scripts and minutes of meetings would be close to impossible. I suppose the tone of the film comes down from the producer as they're putting up the money for the finished product so they have the final say ultimately.

    Nicely stated @Dragonpol , and that is the long and short of it: producers who are assembling the financing and the crews and the actors have an overall vision. They then hire the best people available to make the vision a reality via the writers they hire, the directors, set designers, costume, stunt coordinators…. It really takes a village, or an army, to get a film made from the blank page all the way across to the final locked picture we see on the big screen.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,693
    thedove wrote: »
    I am not sure if he ever commented on Dalton, Brosnan, and Craig.

    I do remember him in the DVD's saying how it was different to write for Sean and Roger. That Sean would be brutal and cold and Roger needed to be light and romantic. I find the comment odd because whoever had the biggest hand in TMWTGG had Roger doing some very un-Roger type things.

    When I did a google search on him it was amazing how many of the articles and headlines mentioned James Bond and not Superman. Yet I would say that the Superman movie was much more impactful on movies and cinema than Bond.

    Interesting discussion!

    I think that he was a bit sensitive to talk about Superman, for a fair reason. While the Cubby and Harry partnership was getting more and more stressed during his movies, they weren't the greediest of producers. They generally supported TM, and Guy Hamilton sounds like he wasn't the most humble of directors. The Salkinds, on the other hand, were repeatedly criticized by people even outside the Superman series. After Donner was fired, he (and Stuart Baird, the main editor) didn't come back out of respect for Donner. Donner was the one who got TM hired, after TM didn't want to do it, at first, from a rewriting standpoint. Another reason that TM didn't come back, was losing a possible directing job: Superman 3, with Brainiac, Bizzaro and Supergirl. So I understand why there aren't many articles about his time with Superman.
Sign In or Register to comment.