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
No one is dying but MI6 are definitely not happy with this topic.
I'm off to thank Barbara and Michael for making millions of dollars out of us.
"The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions"
But this site does seem pretty biased towards EON at times.
Its only natural to be biased towards EON and I dont really have a problem with that. Its when are prevented from being critical of EON or EON bring pressure to bear on the site it gets worrying.
Although of course I'm not suggesting EON have anything to do with this situation at all (certainly not without any evidence).
We better not, though.
In fairness I think it is dying the natural death it would have done a long time ago had they not interfered.
Well done to us all for taking the fight to the shadowy powers that be but how much more is there to say about this fairly obscure personality in the world of Bond?
The fact that she is so obscure and at the end of the day unimportant just makes it all the more curious as to why they wanted the discussion silenced but we all know what will happen if we try and discuss that matter!
So in terms of trying to keep it ticking over err - why did Nikki revoice Jane Seymour? Its fair enough for the rest who either couldnt speak English or had shocking accents (the 'Cockney Bombshell' springs to mind). But Jane had perfect RP. I can only assume that when they did the sound edit there were a few lines that needed redoing and Jane was on another job in the states or something so it was just easier and cheaper to get Nikki in for a days work rather than fly Jane all the way back.
*If this IS about royalties Nikki not getting her fair share, why then did she continue to work for EON all the way through Moonraker? Surely her relationship up until that point was cordial, one would think...
*Why does she specifically target Shirley Eaton?
*When is her book being published and how can one attain a copy?
I don't feel it necessary to provoke the powers that be here. But it is still very unusual, why we couldn't at least get a straight answer on the matter...the responses we got seemed a bit flippant to me. I don't see anything wrong with us fans, who have tirelessly participated enthusiastically about all topics Bond and have contributed to THIS SITE, can't at the very least discuss the matter, or receive a respectful response.
Maybe once the book comes out we'll get some more info.
She does not have direct contact with Roger because his foreword was supplied by Gareth Owen at Pinewood. Perhaps he has got the answers as to why she is persona non grata in the Bond world.
In response to JBFan626 I can confirm:
1) it is NOT about royalties - just fair recognition for the great work Nikki did in creating the Bond girls sexy image.
2) she did NOT target Shirley Eaton. Regrettably the organizer of Goldfinger Day Thomas Bowington was persuaded by Eaton that Nikki should not be allowed to appear at the Goldfinger Day, otherwise Eaton would walk. How professional is that?
3) The Special Collector's edition of Nikki's book is available now via her website, as are details about the paperback launch.
There will be a Q&A session at the launch so I will be asking my questions to find out what its all about.
'Rog's premature withdrawl'? warrants a Moore-esque raised eyebrow I think!
Anyway nteresting development about the pulping which after a modicum of research yields the following:
http://commanderbond.net/16885/book-launch-nikki-van-der-zyl-for-your-ears-only.html
http://www.barnet-today.co.uk/news.cfm?id=1840&headline=Bond voiceover artist pulps her autobiography after Sir Roger withdraws foreword
(Don’t know if links to c*******rbond.net are allowed but as the likelihood of the subject being discussed on here is about the same as Liverpool winning the premier league what can you do?)
Seems like some sort of legal dispute over her kids years ago and seemingly her son still has some problem with her if he is writing to Rog to block the book. Christ knows what shes done that her family don’t want to know her but although this is perhaps more evidence that shes a bit mental (note in the 2nd article her moan ‘They made so much money out of my voice – millions – but I haven’t had either the money or the recognition’ which just smacks of Connery-esque sour grapes at not having negotiated a more lucrative contract at the time. Perhaps she might have done better getting Sean to write the foreword?) once again it fails to explain why MI6 has gone to the lengths it has to suppress all discussion about her. Unless the son is threatening legal action maybe? Would explain Rog backing out I guess so who knows...
The plot thickens.
One has to ask why, decades later having supposedly worked on 12 films she feels she was unfairly treated and underpaid. You don't come back time after time to do more if you think you're being used!
Also she admits EON never invite her to anything. Is it any wonder when she acts in a way such as the '007 Quiz' on her website.
Robert Rietty dubbed many Bond actors, but he doesn't go around harping on about it and trying to flog a book on the back of it. Mind you, he has had a career as an actor whereas Nikki Van Der Zyl never did.
Sour grapes me thinks. But as her book has been withdrawn it's all rather bavkfired on her anyway.
Reel your neck in love.
In fairness if we are accusing new poster Edwin of being in league with Nikki then who exactly are you?
Seems very odd to me that a one off poster should specifically single out this thread, which is tucked away in the backwaters where no one can find it, to make their one and only post. Are you James Page in disguise?
In fairness I tend to agree with your points. She signed a contract which she got paid for so whats her gripe? I tend to recall that Vic Flick got something like a mornings pay for playing on the Bond theme so shes not alone in that respect but you can hardly accuse Cubby and Harry of shafting people for just paying them the going rate; a rate they were happy to accept at the time.
And the fact that shes a bit of a nutter is clear from her website but that really isnt the issue here anyway. The reason this thread still exists is to ask why the powers that be want Nikki silenced and why, for example, someone would go to the trouble of creating an account on this website merely to slag off a frankly pretty inconsequential old woman.
I've read Norman Wanstall's replacement foreword and it's far more interesting anyway.
Do the powers that be want the woman silenced? I think it's more a case of them not being interested in the rants of a nutty old woman.
Why would the Mi6 staff intentionally block this thread from bumping? Seems a little extreme for "not being interested in the rants of a nutty old woman." If it didn't bother them, they would have fixed this issue for the members who want to talk about this issue.
Quite JBFan626.
A batty old woman who feeds bread to the ducks in the park and collects tin cans in a shopping trolley is a threat to no one.
But for some reason people on this site dont want us to discuss it, other people higher up dont want Rog writing a foreword for her book and even stranger people create an account on this website merely to call her 'nutty' - unless I'm wrong friendlyfire and you are just a Bond fan whose sole interest in the series in Nikki Van Der Zyl?
Seems a bit curious to say the least that you only make 2 posts, 2 weeks apart and they are both in this thread. You can claim that Edwin is Nikkis husband or even Nikki herself if you like and we have no way of proving or disproving that but you yourself have zero credibility as you have clearly just joined the site to partake of this smear campaign against her.
It could just as easily be that you are one of the people such as those on this site who want to shut her up. The easiest way to discredit someone is to say they are mental but what if actually they are telling the truth?
I dont know your reasons for banning her from the GF Day any more than I know why Rog pulled his foreword or the owners of this website tampered with this thread to stop it bumping but I would say that if you think I'm going to accept that it was for pissing Shirley Eaton off I'm not buying it.
I hear plenty of people saying how awful she is (and if you read all of her website she is indeed clearly totally mental) but when you ask them for any sort of evidence or facts to back up their smears they seem to go rather quiet and expect you to take it on trust.
To sum up my position - I see a woman who obviously has a screw loose and who thinks she should be entitled to a slice of the Bond pie.
Legally I doubt she has any claim as EON presumably had a contract with her which they fulfilled. Morally you could argue that there is some validity in what she says but this is all an irrelevance.
The main point is that she has been declared persona non grata in the world of Bond to the extent that people are leaning on a bloke as nice as Sir Roger Moore but nobody will tell us why apart from some half arsed bullshit about slagging Shirley Eaton off and your unsubstantiated claims that she conducted 'a hate campaign' against you and is 'nasty' and 'vindictive'.
If people are not willing to offer reasons and a little thing called evidence why do you expect me to convict on your say so? Is it all sub judice and your hands are tied?
Anyway dont worry friendlyfire, I'm the only one following this thread now as most people are too caught up with the fact SF has won the spurious 'best British picture' BAFTA to give a toss that someone who contributed heavily to 50 years of success is now being smeared (or not but until I see proof...) with impunity so you, James Page et al should be happy I guess.
I cannot comment on Sir Roger Moore, though I believe a combination of Van Der Zyl saying things in a less than kind way about Shirley Eaton and Eunice Gayson (they are closer friends to Sir R than Van Der Zyl claims she is) and her son writing to Sir Roger warning him of litigeous content in her book all contributed. I cannot see why you feel there is "someone leaning on him". He is his own man. He probably just felt he didn't need the headache. He is 85 after all.
Van Der Zyl was invited to Goldfinger Day. But given her past comments about Shirley Eaton it was obvious getting them together on the same stage would be impossible. We all have sensitivities remember. Acting in good faith sometimes backfires.
Miss Eaton did not stamp her foot, she simply said she'd rather not attend if it meant sharing a stage with someone she couldn't get on with (and had tried previously without success).
It was therefore suggested Van Der Zyl be the main guest at the November show, two months later, when her book was published and available (which made commercial sense in that she'd earn more and have something to promote) - a show centred solely on her. But her ego wouldn't stand not being at the Goldfinger Day too. And so she threatened a web campaign against the show, to picket outside and generally rubbish everyone involved. Why? Because she could not see a compromise situation was needed for everyone to be happy.
It's not about erasing her contribution, but incorporating it in a positive way at a time when there wouldn't be any issues with other guests feeling upset.
But when she reacted with venom, and was verbally threatening about bringing negative publicity there is only so much you can take.
EON don't invite her to anything because she pursued them in a similar vein - recognise me or else.
Mr Robert Rietty dubbed far more people than she, and he is warmly welcomed and regarded at events. The difference is he doesn't try to take anything away from the actors he dubbed by suggesting he made them stars. He was just happy to be involved.
Any negative feeling towards Van Der Zyl is self inflicted.
I cannot prove she made threatening phone calls but do have a collection of emails from her and her husband (and his alter ego Edwin) which are with my lawyer. The IP address is the same for all, so there is no doubt Edwin is her husband.
If she is such a lovely person why has her book been withdrawn from sale? Why is she never invited to anything by Eon? Why was she not part of the 50th anniversary?
Thanks for this friendlyfire - I have no reason to disbelieve anything that you say (and bearing in mind you have made some potentially libellous accusations against her and her husband, I'm assuming you can back them up) and as I have never really had any contact with her I defer to your experience.
You have explained why you disinvited her from the GF day and to a degree why Rog might have withdrawn his foreword but one thing still has no explanation:
Why do the owners of this website not want us discussing her? Even if they loathe and despise her why would you feel the need to prevent Bond fans talking about the matter?
Unless of course you were scared she might sue the website if fans bandied around accusations and tittle tattle?
But then you would close down the thread not resort to this insidious 'censorship by non bumping.'
So although you have explained a lot of the reasons why she is maybe disliked I'm still not convinced there isn't more to come out.