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
AVTAK is probably the low point but even that has plenty to recommend it.
Yes but that makes them in some respects closer to the first two Bond movies - more emphasis on plot, tension and good use of locations.
Said it before and will say it again - Glen is very underrated round here.
He's not even sure whether he wants to continue now it seems.
Also, in 1995 Dalton would have been almost 50 and I wonder if he'd have considered himself essentially too old for the part...at least if he were to potentially play the role several more times.
Agreed. I believe he came to the same conclusion, correctly. He did the right thing imho. He should have had his third, but not in 1995. Rather, sooner, but it was not to be.
Because they had reasons to cast a new Bond for GE and one of them was the lack of appeal of Dalton. Look I understand he was unfairly treated and criticized at the time and that his fans resent it but there's no way to rewrite history: the Dalton tenure was not the popular and critical golden age his fans think he deserved.
Ideally Tim would have done a third before GE.
As it stands now TLD, LTK and GE are all absolute favourites of mine. Probably even my three favourites outside the 60's.
Part of my point is that he wasn't unfairly treated or criticised at the time. He was actually pretty well received by audiences and critics alike.
The myth that Dalton was critically panned or that the fans hated him is just not true.
I think during the 6 year hiatus and after GE, history was rewritten and Dalton somehow blamed for the long gap, when it actually has nothing to do with him at all.
If it hadn't been for the background issues Cubby would have certainly made a third Dalton movie in 1991 and then probably at least another one in 1993.
Even now on these threads people seem to imply that it was Dalton's unpopularity that was the reason he only did two. But the truth is that if there hadn't been the legal disputes going on then we would have had at least three and probably more. That's a fact.
Cubby had been trying to get Dalton since the 60s and wouldn't have ditched him after the minor box office blip in the US with LTK - which everyone at EON blamed on the studio anyway.
But you never get a sense EON pulled out all the stops to keep him either.
No sign of the studio weighing in with a wheelbarrow full of money as they did to get Sean back either.
Just doesn't suggest people were coming out to see Dalton. Even with new Bond bounce TLD was unable to beat tired AVTAK with an aged Rog.
Yet still a long way behind SP the Bond film of the day which is what we are comparing it to. What's your point exactly?
I am not saying anything. Apart that even with an unpopular Bond, close to no budget, minimal advertising, and going against Ghostbusters, Indy, Batman, Lethal Weapon and Back to the Future, EON has never made a Bond film that finished below a yearly 12th place, in 24 attempts.
Picture this. It's 1980 and they haven't made a Bond movie since The Man With the Golden Gun. Rog has been waiting 6 years for another crack at Bond but legal wrangling has prevented EON going into production. Gun was a commercial success but nowhere near as big as previous Bonds. Audiences don't seem to have taken to him in the same way as Sean. Suddenly everything drops into place and its go. Do EON pull out all the stops to keep Rog? Will the studio produce a wheelbarrow of cash? Or do they recast? There's no easy answer.
Point being that if Rog hadn't been able to make Spy, history might have been very different.
Similar legal issues could have hit Connery before he'd barely started. Imagine a six year break after FRWL. No GF, no TB. How would Connery be regarded now? Two very good movies, but would a cinematic legend have been established?
According to Dalton (who doesn't strike me as a liar), EON wanted him to sign on for three films in 1994, but he felt he was too old. So despite the break, EON felt invested in him and wanted him to stay. After all CuBby had been trying to get Dalton since the 60s. That's a pretty big vote of confidence.
Here he is in 2002 at the premiere if Die another Day.
[img][/img]
So GoldenEye in 1995 would not have been an issue at all
Private person, in a very public Occupation. I doubt he would have returned after the
Break in filming. As he seemed to be really uncomfortable with all the media Intrusion
In to his life. Some actors can handle the pressure of constant press interest, others are
Very very uncomfortable with it.
Case in point Daniel Craig.
I agree on both points, but I can't imagine Dalton staying around for more than 4 films. TLD, LTK + 2 more would be fine by me. Had they the rights to CR, they maybe could have tempted him back for a 5th, but that's a maybe.