Would Goldeneye have been a success with Dalton?

19899100102104

Comments

  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    Revelator wrote: »
    It's successful and soulless.

    Haha good one. =))
  • Posts: 11,425
    I just don't know that we would have gotten the same GE if that had happened, and I would't want to give that up.

    I thought Dalton movies were fine, but I just wasn't very big on him.

    Maybe I was being too hard and he deserved another go, but again I wouldn't give GE up.

    First of all, wasn't there a Bond 17 screenplay to do a Bond Film in 1991, which can also be found on this website? And did they not have to rewrite the GE script, when they realized, that TRUE LIES actually had some stunning similar passages? But would it have worked with Dalton in the lead? With the TLD Dalton it probably would, but with the LTK Dalton, it might have been different. But it's all hypothetical. GE is in my Top 5 of Bond movies, and so is TLD.

    Yes it was supposed to be set in China I think. I thought it sounded okay as a premise. People don't like the robots element but it could have worked. Bit like the current speculation around B25 - potential sci-fi elements cause some to freak out.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited August 2019 Posts: 13,999
    Getafix wrote: »
    A nasty little dig at Dalton.

    And one that didn't need to me made. In that 9 year gap, Bond doesn't age a single bit (yet look at Brosnan in 1986) between 1986 and 1995? Does he think he is Dorian Gray?
  • edited August 2019 Posts: 1,399
    Getafix wrote: »
    A nasty little dig at Dalton.

    And one that didn't need to me made. In that 9 year gap, Bond doesn't age a single bit (yet look at Brosnan in 1986) between 1986 and 1995? Does he think he is Dorian Gray?

    Interesting, as I always assumed the 9 years earlier PTS, was meant to be "Dalton's Bond". Then, TLD and LTK happen, Bond has a few missions between 1990-1994 just no movies! Cue the DB5 chase in the present day. That's how I saw it anyway.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited August 2019 Posts: 13,999
    Getafix wrote: »
    A nasty little dig at Dalton.

    And one that didn't need to me made. In that 9 year gap, Bond doesn't age a single bit (yet look at Brosnan in 1986) between 1986 and 1995? Does he think he is Dorian Gray?

    Interesting, as I always assumed the 9 years earlier PTS, was meant to be "Dalton's Bond". Then, TLD and LTK happen, Bond has a few missions between 1990-1994 just no movies! Cue the DB5 chase in the present day. That's how I saw it anyway.

    I see where you are coming from, maybe that is how the GE PTS is supposed to be taken. I just find that hard to buy into, because it is Brosnan. If the PTS took place in 1990, that problem would have gone away entirely.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    Does he think he is Dorian Gray?
    Yes.
    FcDQeVTl.jpg




  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,999
    Murdock wrote: »
    Does he think he is Dorian Gray?
    Yes.
    FcDQeVTl.jpg

    The grey at the temples, and leatherly skin suggest otherwise. ;)
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    Murdock wrote: »
    Does he think he is Dorian Gray?
    Yes.
    FcDQeVTl.jpg

    The grey at the temples, and leatherly skin suggest otherwise. ;)

    I just hope I look that good at 61. :D
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,999
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Does he think he is Dorian Gray?
    Yes.
    FcDQeVTl.jpg

    The grey at the temples, and leatherly skin suggest otherwise. ;)

    I just hope I look that good at 61. :D

    All jokes aside, he has aged pretty good, i'll say that much for him.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,480
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    thedove wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    TBH, I think I prefer the original Michael France draft of the script to the final film.
    I'd probably watch GE far more often had Dalton starred.
    Regardless, I was thrilled Bond had returned to the screen after such a long hiatus.

    What were the differences in that original script?

    The PTS , for example, was completely different; set on a train. Trevelyan is considerably older and more of a mentor to Bond, the TWINE buzz saw copters are in it........... I believe there's a link to the script on one of the threads here.

    Can't find that thread so here it is from another source.........

    https://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/Goldeneye.pdf

    Thanks for the link. I am going to check it out.
  • Posts: 19,339
    He looks brilliant in 2014 still.

    As for the villains,between GE and LTK it is very close,i just think the villains close to Sanchez are more ruthless and ooze an evil sleaze about them.
  • Posts: 11,425
    The LTK villains wipe the floor with those in GE.
  • edited August 2019 Posts: 11,425
    Is Boris a villain or just contender for most irritating character in a Bond film ever?

    Ditto Xenia? Well crafted character or cartoon Cruella Deville cut out?

    Ourumov is the best of that trio probably but isn't he just a poor man's rehash of the Berkov character in OP?
    The whole film feels like a stale rehash to me though with way too much 90s generic action and machine guns everywhere.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Ouremov vs Krest is too hard to call - both favourites of mine played by great actors.
  • Posts: 7,616
    Birdleson wrote: »
    On balance, I’ll go with GE villains. Sanchez is slightly better than Alec Trevelyan, yes, and Benito does a great job, but the rest of that crew are pretty bland. Xenia, Boris and Ourumo are all excellent and extremely memorable.

    Have to disagree. Sanchez wipes the floor with Trevelyan, Beans irritating accent alone was enough to make him less threatening!
    I also think the minor henchmen in LTK made more if an impression than the main villains in GE. Boris is one of the most annoying characters in the series, Xenia was a poor rip off of the superior Fatima Blush, and Ouromov, though starting out well in the pts, turns into a hip flask swigging buffoon by the latter half of the movie!
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,999
    Trevelyan was a good villain, but he comes off as bland when compared to Sanchez. Sanchez is the most nastiest Bond villain. I genuinely would not want to spend even a few minutes in that mans company.
  • edited August 2019 Posts: 19,339
    Trevelyan was a good villain, but he comes off as bland when compared to Sanchez. Sanchez is the most nastiest Bond villain. I genuinely would not want to spend even a few minutes in that mans company.

    That's probably all you would get before he 'deep-sixed' you !
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,480
    Which film had the best villains? I'd go with GE I enjoy Bean's performance and he delivers in that final fight with Brosnan. I enjoy Sanchez and how Bond turns him to suspect people within his organization. He performs probably some of the more graphic and violent deaths and maiming.

    Boris is a colourful character to me. Yes he's over the top but that's what Bond villains used to be. That's why I embrace the movie so much is that it is an updated take on the classic Bond formula. Compare the action scenes in LTK and GE and I think you will see the spectacle and entertainment is stronger in GE.

  • edited August 2019 Posts: 678
    Birdleson wrote: »
    On balance, I’ll go with GE villains. Sanchez is slightly better than Alec Trevelyan, yes, and Benito does a great job, but the rest of that crew are pretty bland. Xenia, Boris and Ourumo are all excellent and extremely memorable.
    The GE villains are far superior and so is the movie as far as I'm concerned.
  • AntiLocqueBrakesAntiLocqueBrakes The edge
    Posts: 538
    Birdleson wrote: »
    On balance, I’ll go with GE villains. Sanchez is slightly better than Alec Trevelyan, yes, and Benito does a great job, but the rest of that crew are pretty bland. Xenia, Boris and Ourumo are all excellent and extremely memorable.
    The GE villains are far superior and so is the movie as far as I'm concerned.


    Agree with both takes. Sanchez and Dario are a good duo. The rest of the LTK pack are just Lethal Weapon re-treads. GE's complete cast of villains are strong and eccentric. You remember them all for their quirks. Trevelyan himself is forgettable. What does his bring to the table besides a grudge - that has to be fully explained by Bond. Even Stromberg, tired and lifeless as he was, does a better job of explaining himself.
  • Posts: 11,425
    thedove wrote: »
    Which film had the best villains? I'd go with GE I enjoy Bean's performance and he delivers in that final fight with Brosnan. I enjoy Sanchez and how Bond turns him to suspect people within his organization. He performs probably some of the more graphic and violent deaths and maiming.

    Boris is a colourful character to me. Yes he's over the top but that's what Bond villains used to be. That's why I embrace the movie so much is that it is an updated take on the classic Bond formula. Compare the action scenes in LTK and GE and I think you will see the spectacle and entertainment is stronger in GE.

    GE has better action than Ltk? Shurely shome mishtake?
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,480
    I never joke about my work @Getafix The action is LTK feels small, even quaint. Even the underwater action seems rather dull and uninspiring. I'm not a fan of the guys Bond kills jumping 4-6 feet in the air and falling but I find the action in GE seems bigger and bolder. Might be more to be Glen's direction versus Campbell's?
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited August 2019 Posts: 8,452
    This is easily answered. Dalton would've sucked in GoldenEye - the version we got. He isn't smooth at all. He's as sharp as barbed wire. I mean, could you really imagine him wrestling with Onatop in the sauna? No, say what you want about Brosnan, but he fit his movies better than Dalton or Craig could have.

    By the way, TLD is a top 3 Bond film of mine, and I think Dalton is much better suited there.
  • Posts: 2,921
    Agree with both takes. Sanchez and Dario are a good duo. The rest of the LTK pack are just Lethal Weapon re-treads. GE's complete cast of villains are strong and eccentric.

    That's a funny way of saying "they're cartoons." In any case, what counts more in a film is the major villain, not the minor or subsidiary ones. The major villain is the motor of the film.
    Getafix wrote: »
    GE has better action than Ltk? Shurely shome mishtake?

    Indeed. GE has more spectacle (and some bad CGI), but it doesn't have anything filmed as well as the truck chase, or amusingly as the water skiing/plane scene.

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,452
    The tank chase is amazing, and probably the high point of GE. As good as the finale is, it can never live up to it.
  • edited August 2019 Posts: 7,616
    The tank chase "amazing"? I don't think so. It's basically a tank crashing through different obstacles, not very inventive.In fact, quite boring!
    The truck chase in LTK was really well choreographed and thrilling, and way more spectacular and the best finale for a Bond movie alongside OHMSS!
  • Posts: 1,985
    This threads still goin?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    The tank chase "amazing"? I don't think so. It's basically a tank crashing through different obstacles, not very inventive.In fact, quite boring!

    I have to agree.
  • fjdinardo wrote: »
    This threads still goin?
    It's just a measuring contest at this point, and I'm guilty of it too.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    Maybe we need a tip jar for it. ;)
    dngaKgN.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.