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
I am not saying that TLD would have been better with Roger Moore in the lead, just saying that Timothy Dalton was not as popular an actor and I believe anybody wouold have a hard time following Moore.
For me the script of TLD feels like it would have been a better fit for a younger Roger or Brosnan. While the next one was written more towards Dalton even if it was a Miami Vice wannabee.
Fair enough, I can't disagree with you there. It was a tall order follow an actor as popular, and one that had held the role as long as Moore did. And if that was not enough, the successor turned out to be the polar opposite.
It probably was written that way, which is why I think that Brosnan was looked upon as Moore's natural successor, the kind of Bond that you could take your gran to see. Whatever it's conception was, The Living Daylights is still my favourite Bond (not just favourite Dalton era Bond).
Pleaser remember: Timothy Dalton was first considered for the role of James Bond 007 before Roger Moore had been signed to the part. In 1972 he turned the role down, thinking he was too young to play an experienced agent. In the late ‘80s he had the role for two films, and sometime in the early ‘90s he voluntarily stepped down from the series, thinking that he had become too old to credibly play the role. Those who claim Moore was too old to be Bond in AVTAK ought to praise Dalton for taking this action, based to some extent on Fleming’s own dictum that there is an 8-11 year window in which an agent is fit for 00 status. After that, he is physically and emotionally wasted, and needs to be replaced. Every step of the way the decision to play Bond or decline was Dalton’s; the only decision that was out of his hands was the legal maneuvering that put the series on hiatus for 6 years. Do I wish there had been a few more films made with Dalton as Bond? Certainly. Am I able to appreciate the two that we have, praising the candles rather than cursing the darkness? Darn tootin’ I am!
Many Bond fans grade TLD as among the Top 10 Bond films and I am happy to declare that I am firmly among this camp. I admire the way the film-makers take a Fleming short story and flesh it out into a full-length adventure. I appreciate the romance between Bond and Kara, one of the most convincing relationships in the series’ history. I am in awe of Dalton’s Bond during his scenes with General Pushkin -- here Bond is clearly a dangerous man, one who has solidly earned his reputation as a cold-blooded killer for Her Majesty’s government. It is an important side of the character that Moore never delivered in my eyes, but Dalton shows this facet of Bond more convincingly in his first film than Moore ever did in seven. There is so much right in this film that I can overlook the weakness of TLD’s two main villains, Whittaker and Koskov. At least we have Necros and the fight on the net dangling from the cargo plane. At least we have the fight inside the MI-6 safe house, with Chrissie Hynde & the Pretenders wailing spookily out of Necros’ earphones. At least we have Saunders and his “Need to know,” plus Georgi’s escape from behind the iron curtain via pipeline.
In many ways, we should acknowledge Dalton as the transitional Bond. Fleming’s Bond was very much a creature of the Cold War. His adversaries were generally Russians or in Russia’s employ, until TB came along and S.PE.C.T.R.E. followed in its wake. Even though Connery and Moore seldom explicitly focused on Russia as Bond’s chief enemy, the Cold War was still very much alive throughout their tenures, with TSWLM, FYEO and OP particularly utilizing Russia as a potential adversary. But TLD is the last Bond film with that world-view as a backdrop for the action…and if Bond’s alliance with the Mujahideen gives contemporary audiences a brief moment of surprise, with Bond taking the side of what is currently viewed as a gang of terrorists, then so much the better for grounding TLD in the political realities of its’ time. And if Dalton’s detractors find LTK a little too commonplace for offering nothing better than a pock-marked drug dealer as that film’s chief adversary, then again I must insist that the series is guilty of nothing more objectionable than attempting to stay contemporary, as inevitably it must.
Yes, LTK is not quite the exemplary effort that TLD is, but I don’t really fault Dalton for that. Let’s not forget the writers’ strike that minimized Richard Maibaum’s contribution to the screenplay for this offering. (This was Maibaum’s last go-round with the series, a Herculean effort that saw him contributing to the scripts of 13 out of the 16 Bond films up to this point in time.) Let’s also take note of the studio meddling that forced a last-minute title change from the more appropriate “License Revoked” to the more generic “License to Kill” -- and the marketing difficulties that ill-considered behind-the-scenes move engendered. Much of LTK is quite thrilling, from the amazing PTS with Bond lassoing a plane in flight to the incendiary truck chase that is the film’s climax. Some of the last useable bits of Fleming material are to be found in this film, including Felix Leiter’s “disagreement with something that ate him” and various elements of “The Hildebrand Rarity” including the character of Milton Krest. Many of the actors in this film are among the series’ very best, including Robert Davi, Benicio del Toro, and Carey Lowell. Desmond Llewellyn comes in for an extended visit as Q in this film, and it is one of his most memorable appearances. My own dissatisfaction with LTK comes in the character of Professor Joe Butcher and the location of his meditation institute, a set that is clearly constructed for the obligatory scene of hideout destruction. I really don't find this location, doubling as a cocaine-distribution hub, believable in the slightest, and Professor Joe's telecasts disguising an ordering system for cocaine distributors throughout the world is simply ludicrous.
But if there is one element of this film that many viewers find objectionable, it is the extreme violence and gore depicted herein, from Sanchez offering Lupe her lover’s heart to the explosive decompression of Milton Krest. I don’t find these moments as bothersome as others do…but it is clear that this film does not satisfy the audience as completely as a top-of the-line Bond film should. I remember discussing LTK with a fellow Bond fan shortly after its’ release…and he was simply not satisfied with Dalton’s rendition of James Bond. Perhaps he had been too taken with the Moore style and found Dalton “humorless” -- a common enough complaint, albeit one that I do not agree with -- perhaps (as an American who watched too much television) he had simply been expecting Pierce Brosnan to take over the role and would be satisfied with nothing else. One way or the other, it seems apparent that Dalton had served his purpose as Bond in a mere two films -- he made us ready for “somebody other than Moore,” just as Lazenby prepared the audience for somebody other than Connery…and Pierce’s long stint of waiting in the wings is about to come to an end. These days it seems quite fashionable in some quarters to trash Brosnan in order to praise Dalton. I don’t feel the need to do that…but yes, I do wish that “The Property of a Lady” had been able to come to reality. Still, reality is what it is, and we mere mortals must do with it what we can. Today, I celebrate the tenure of Timothy Dalton as James Bond. Tomorrow will come soon enough...and as we are to learn, it never dies!
I took that as a challenge, and tracked down your date of birth. 11 April 1954, unless I have done a poor job. All I could find was this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk//sciencetech/article-1332945/Revealed-The-boring-day-EVER--April-11-1954.html
I disagree nothing significant happened if that is indeed your date of birth. We all value you tremendously.
So I saw them both on tv, and wasn't impressed. Though TLD still held some bondian feel for me, LTK did not and was just a long episode of a tv series. That is, up until years later I started to read Fleming. It must've been around 2000 I bought my first book (not counting From Russia With Love which I'd given to my brother as a birthday gift). After that I started bying all the DVD's as well in order. So when I finally got round to TLD, my thoughts had changed, considerably.
I feel TLD is a very good spy thriller. Especially the start, when Bond shoots at Kara and willingly just hits the gun, not the girl. When he drives back and says to Saunders he'd thank M for firing him, all that just felt so much like the book I was almost overwhelmed. Timothy indeed is very close to Fleming now and then.
Sure, the villains aren't that convincing. Jeroen Krabbé is having perhaps a bit too much fun palying a Bondvillain and indeed Brat is more of a brad then an arms dealer. Still Necros is extremely dangerous and, as I said before, Timothy IS Bond.
I'm afraid I don't feel like that about LTK. Though again Tim shines as Bond and as 'problem eliminator', especially when he seeds doubt about Krest, but Felix isn't much of a Felix, and most of the cast seem to just run along with it. Except for the excellent Benicio of course. I'm also one of the view who don't like Pam, and prefer Lupe, whom I found far more convincing as a girl from the slums who uses her looks to get to a safer life then Pam as CIA agent getting shot in the back and thinking nothing of it.
So, in the end, I'm now happy with Tim as Bond, though honesty bides me to say I wasn't at the time.. But can you blame this then 7yo?
Ha! Just kidding, @CommanderRoss. ;)) Thanks for giving us your background re Dalton's era. I'd love to say I was seven then but, er ... no.
I really have two very different feelings about Dalton's two films. I wholly love the first one but truly can barely stomach the second one. His era cries out for a third film to at least give us a balance. I did admire Dalton's performance in LTK, just not the overall film.
I'd love to hear from some more Daltonites, the ones who read our thread but don't post often. :D
You don't have to be lengthy - all comments, short or pithy, long or eloquent, are welcome.
:)>-
I don't fault Dalton for LTK either.
And I am one of those who really disliked the sadism and violence in the film. That is one of the things that ruined the movie for me. It bothered me quite a bit when Sanchez started to whip Lupe; actually, it rather turned my stomach and that stayed with me, that feeling, like a nagging toothache throughout the whole film; only made stronger when Della was raped and killed (offscreen, I know, but still sickening). I simply don't want to have those kinds of feelings when watching a Bond film. A Pacino or Scorcese flick, ok I'm prepared. Or even when I watched Miami Vice (deja vu ...). But that is not a good feeling as a Bond fan.
Well, thanks for the kind thoughts, @Thunderfinger. I wasn’t really trying to throw out a challenge, just kidding around with @chrisisall … but consider this: knowing full well that one’s birthdate is easily accessible on this forum, wouldn’t a wise agent use that situation as a means of spreading disinformation? Can you really trust the information you’ve been given? And if indeed you do think you can trust the date in question, then consider further: with @Beatles’ hypothetical 60th birthday coming up soon, wouldn’t now be a wonderful time for a friend from Q Branch to gift him with oh, I don’t know -- one of the few remaining Richie Fahey-covered Penguin editions of the Bond novels that I haven’t yet tracked down? (Those would be TSWLM, TMWTGG, and OP/TLD -- or maybe even QoS if M and the Queen would have it so!)
Disinformation -- or shameless posturing for swag? YOU decide!
8-|
Agree. LTK was a better version of LALD merged with THR. And I would ship you a copy of those titles if I owned them for your upcoming 60th, Beatles.
To those who claim Dalton was the reason LTK did not perform so well, I would point to the tone of the film. It does not look or feel like a classic Bond movie, although many of the elements are still there. It's easy to see why it might not have done so well at the box office. People seem to forget that it took Roger three films to really hit his stride as Bond, whereas Dalton got it right from his first film. Moore also had a few weaker entries in terms of box office and yet came back to deliver some strong performers. I believe that had Dalton had a third film, it would have been more along the line of TLD. He himself said he wanted the next one to be a bit more light-hearted.
I'm not really sure why LTK wasn't more of a success really, I guess there are just a lot of factors, I'm not sure if Timbo was one of them or not, without asking every movie goer from the 1980's if they like Dalton or not we will never know. Still think it's a great film though and despite being different is still easily identifiable as a Bond film in my opinion.
TMWTGG actually took in plenty of cash on a very small budget and if you look at inflation adjusted it's a $450 million taker, I don't think the box office was the main factor with this film being seen as a disapointment, the reviews were terrible and it was also rushed out so probably created a lukewarm feeling about the whole thing.
You guys are all spot on. My feelings about Dalton and his films are well documented. I prefer LTK to the lighter TLD because it does push the envelope. From the early parts of the PTS, this film kicks you in the solar plexus and does not look back.
The implied rape and murder could have been much more brutal and realistically portrayed. Like @Chrisisall, she is shown lying dead fully clothed. (Ask a police officer what a real rape and murder scene looks like) This would have gone too far and the film tries to keep the brutality to a minimum.
I really admired LTK because it does take chances and pushes the envelope. Something I wish the Brosnan films and done more of,,but more on that later.
We can agree that all the Bond movies do great box office. With inflation factored in the most successful films were TB and SF. Even TMWTGG made money, not as much as the previous film but it did decent. At the time I recall reading where Cubby worried about MR because it had cost so much to produce and he wondered if it would make money.
Ironically the lowest grossing film was DN. It made less $$ than Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. Just an interesting observation.
Agreed also. LTK was a bold departure and I for one love the risks that it took as well as its fidelity to Fleming.
-fake laugh ("ha-ha-ha-ha")
-overly dramatic expressions
-bad delivery of one-liners
Personally I think the best moments Dalton has are when he's outside Felix's and Dellas house, and when he's on the boat threatening Lupe.
Its ironic @Getafix talks about subtlety. I'd argue Connery finding Jill in GF is far more powerful than Dalton finding Della in LTK. I feel Connery's sadness in a way I don't quite with Dalton.
"DELLLAAA!"
There's some bad supporting performances that I think drag the film down.
Personally I think the second half is stronger than the first, which, to be honest, does feel a little cliched.
Yes, LTK does indeed take some risks. I don't think it's as dark as some make out - while I'm the first man to crave a bit of comic relief, Q's role is massively at odds with the rest of the movie. Plus the intro, while not being terrible, comes across as being a little bit TV movie - Slow mo. A little bit slapstick (Sanchez in the plane) followed by a dollop of schmaltz in the wedding. It's, on the whole, a pretty stripped back affair, but I can't help but feel they should have gone the whole hog and removed all the half-hearted flings with the tried and tested canonical way-points. Davi is above and beyond and I think the tanker chase is an exemplary bit of Bondian action. I'd go as far as to say, while having none of the darkness, TLD is more tonally coherent film overall.
I just dislike the overall feel of the film, the sadism bothered me, and the film feels at times schizophrenic, with wrongly placed attempts at humor (especially happy Felix at the end), it looks and feels more like a TV movie, and yes, the storyline was quite disappointing to me. It is not coherent, as RC7 just pointed out, and that leaves an uneasy impression. The fine moments - and I include the tanker chase and final killing of Sanchez in that - are very good. I feel cheated a bit. I wish it was a well rounded film, but for me it really is not enjoyable to watch.
But again, I don't find much fault with Dalton himself. The man so deserved a third film to balance out his era.
I don't go to Bond movies to see a film like that. It was unexpectedly grim, yet had quirky moments that fell flat or seemed odd, a cheaper overall look, a story that exasperated me from the beginning, and Timothy whom I loved already from TLD ... but so much I disliked or found unsavory, unenjoyable.
Even if it were a more serious Bond film, I could handle that. LTK just goes off the rail at times for me. It does feel like a Miami Vice rehash, and I felt disappointed in that. I wanted Dalton as Bond closer to what TLD was like, although it could have been more serious than that. It was the overall feelings I had after seeing LTK that just merged and made me feel unhappy. But I didn't blame Dalton; not at the time and not now.