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 will agree that a big name director is something an actor of Dalton's calibre needed. Craig only agreed to sign on as long as the best possible people were hired to direct.
I do think it strange that Dalton had to tell his Bond women how to kiss when it is the director's job. But they both loved working with him. John Glen said Dalton was super professional on set and knew exactly what he was doing. Glen was under huge pressure for LTK due to the budget cuts and MGM falling apart behind the scenes.
In the film business there will always be clashes as it is a creative medium. I am a huge Polanski fan and sometimes creative differences can be an issue. Pirates ended up not being a great film for Polanski and he did it more as a favour to get back on his feet after his exile from the USA.
Apparently the atmosphere on the TND set was awful too with the script writer falling out with the director. Film makers are like musicians and ego is so prevalent in both industries.
Connery fell out with many directors he worked with.
Dalton if he had any on set tantrums were tiny compared to Connery. Connery did not even want to see Saltzman on set. And I heard about the League Of as well as NSNA super arguments.
Bond looks glamorous on the outside to the world and movie goers but the blood sure spilled metaphorically to deliver any film.
Now I understand why actors avoid watching their films. I think it is because they know where the faults are and it must frustrate them to see that once it is released it is impossible to change.
If you watch the commentary on TLD, Michael Wilson says Dalton was a leader having coached actors on sets before and had a healthy ego. Dalton is the only actor Cubby did not say a bad word about in his book. And Dalton never pissed him off once which speaks volumes.
You seen the SF poster with Craig with one hand in his pocket? Dalton wanted to put his hands in his pockets for once scene in TLD and Glen over ruled him after a heated argument.And then years later, it is so normal.
Glen had his work cut out with Dalton because no question but as an actor, he floors Moore. Dalton did know Fleming better as Cubby even said so in his book that no actor went to the depths of study like Tim.
I watched FYEO the other day and notice when you take the humour away from Moore he suffers with the drama as well as action. Naturally, Dalton could have made that a better film.
I think trying to make Moore serious is going against his nature as an actor. He pkays Bond best as a laugh. And that's fine if that is your cup of tea.
I love the fact that the directors and actors used to argue over that kind of stuff. I really does explain why the detail and feel of the films up to 1989 is so different. You just can't imagine the directors from Cambell onwards having that awareness and sense of what is right and wrong for the character. Bond has frankly been a bit all over the place since LTK. Brosnan desperately needed a director that could mould him into Bond but he never got it.
@Getafix this is very astute and possibly my favourite ever post of yours. :)>-
I understand your point but I think "the good old days" weren't always as good as we like to think they were. I remember being astonished watching a few minutes of a Moore film (I can't remember which one) on TV when I was 13 or 14 years old. Even then I knew it was ridiculous for Bond to be wearing a double breasted blazer - how would he get the gun from his shoulder holster? Interestingly, years later I read a book about the Bond films and that was a criticism the author had - I seem to recall he said that Fleming pointed out Bond would never wear a double breasted jacket for that very reason.
;)
Well, MR was in the past as well... ;-)
We're not saying that everything was "bad" in the "good old days", we're just saying that neither was it all good. There are several psychology studies that show that people tend to look at the past with rose-coloured glasses, imagining an ideal that never really existed in the first place.
However, my point was that whatever problems the Bond films have now would also have been experienced by previous productions (in addition to other problems). So when someone says that it's too bad that actors and directors don't hash out details like whether or not Bond would stand with his hands in his pockets, just remember that are are lots of other details that they *didn't* hash out in the "good old days" (like the afore-mentioned double-breasted blazers).
In fact, something that I really admired about Craig's Bond in CR was that in some scenes he had a very military walk (such as when he first approaches the new Aston Martin in Montenegro). There was an interview with Craig where he said that getting the posture and walk right was very important to making the character believable as someone who had been in the service. The fact that I noticed it when watching the movie (and before I read the interview) shows that actors and directors do indeed still hash out important character details.
Point taken and appreciated. :)>-
Nice post, and it also shatters the rosy coloured tint of the `good old days' which weren't really that good from YOLT onwards. With the exception of OHMSS and Dalton's films, I find it hard pressed to really love everything about the good old days.
For every Moore film which had a few decent scenes, there would be some nasties in equal measure (no need to repeat them again, you all know which scenes there are).
Then Brozza came along and the series really took a dive domb.
I think the best of Bond is living with us right now - two of the greatest films in the franchise belong to modern Bond, it's just some here are reluctant to let go of the past, and their memories of the past are clouding their judgement.
I wouldn't call TLD good old days, as it isn't old. I think more 60s, where in addition we have the brilliant DN and FRWL and iconic GF above all else.
This. Also, nostalgia can be a very dangerous handicap. I know some people who flat out refuse to go back and watch certain films or tv shows because they are scared about hating it and they know they will if they revisit it with now. The preservation of their enjoyment from their younger years is that important to them and they don't want to tarnish that and to some degree this applies to many things.
That makes two of us..... ;)
The Prisoner, UFO, Planet Of The Apes, Star Trek TOS- most of the stuff I loved as a kid I still love (Lost in Space's 2nd season being a glaring exception). ;)
He was just brilliant. He was the most ruthless Bond but also the most caring. He wasn't just a blunt instrument, he didn't blindly follow orders if it wasn't the right thing to do. He had a conscience and a clear sense of right and wrong, he was human. And even though he was more cold blooded than Fleming's Bond he was pretty faithful to the source material. He captured the world weary, burn out side of Fleming's Bond perfectly. More than any of the others you got the sense that Dalton was sick of his job. His Bond was also a daredevil, maybe not to the extent of Brosnan's Bond (who was daring to the point of being suicidal), but he did do some great stunts, and it's also impressive how Dalton did a lot of these himself. He was also resilient, he'd keep going until the job was done no matter how much he went through, and he was a complete badass. He also managed to define his Bond instantly. With some of the others, it seemed like they got better as they got more settled, for example I don't think Moore really hit his stride until TSWLM, but Dalton owned the role from day one.
The only flaw I can think of was that some of his one liners fell a bit flat but that's not to say he wasn't funny. He might not have been great at the quips but he was funny ("I hope you don't snore Q" and "piss off" being his funniest moments imo).
Dalton just is James Bond for me. Such a shame that he didn't do more.
Why by a mile? Not a Dalton fan?
He certainly looked the part, was suitably ruthless when he needed to be and yet was able to project some vulnerability. He had a steeliness like Craig, but just looked more like Bond to me.
Unfortunately, all the variables around him are much better in Craig's era (it's not even close).
Dalton (in his prime mind you) stuck into a Craig era Bond film would have been masterful.
I disagree. I couldn't picture Dalton's Bond with all the modern technology like the overuse of cellphones, etc. Just like I can't see Craig's Bond in the late 1980's era. While both are quite similar, I think they both wouldn't fit in the other's period of time.
The trouble with questions like this is they are impossible to answer. The times are different. If Dalton was 20 years younger, and made CR in 2006 for example, and Craig was the one who was 20 years older, and made LTK in 1989 for example, then Dalts would have been able to learn from Craig's mistakes, just like Craig has inevitably been able to learn from the mistakes of all the actors before him. There is a collective learning that has to be accounted for, as well as EON's learning.
Craig no doubt studied Dalton, saw what worked and adjusted - including retaining the humour.
Dalton only had Moore to go from (in the past 12 years) when he took over. What he was able to acheive in his two movies was very impressive, especially with the supporting cast he was given (nowhere as good as Craig).
Plus, when Craig made Bond, serious was in and Bourne was around (not all that different from Bond in the sense that he was a spy - if a US based one) and successful. When Dalts made LTK, buff r-rated American superheroes were in (Willis, Sly, Arnie, Gibson) - something Bond could never be - so Dalts was already disadvantaged. Plus it was the 80's (which had its share of cheese).