›

George Lazenby's Diamonds Are Forever or Timothy Dalton's Bond 17/Goldeneye

124»

Comments

  • Herr_StockmannHerr_Stockmann
    Posts: 910
    Chriskarr wrote: »
    No one knows how we can get a PDF copy of the Bond 17 script that William Davies and William Osborne wrote?
    Unless there is another sale, I suppose that it would need that the buyer of the copy you mentioned in a previous message make it public. Considering he paid it £700, I doubt that he will share the PDF online without any consideration in return. If you find another way to find it, I'll be glad to know it!

    And since we are on a thread which is also about Lazenby, nobody has ever gotten hold of the treatment or the script written by Maibaum for the version of Diamonds Are Forever starring Lazenby?
  • RevelatorRevelator
    Posts: 2,917
    Herr_Stockmann wrote: »
    And since we are on a thread which is also about Lazenby, nobody has ever gotten hold of the treatment or the script written by Maibaum for the version of Diamonds Are Forever starring Lazenby?

    That is stored with the rest of Maibaum's papers at the University of Iowa. An incredible book could be written about that collection.

  • Herr_StockmannHerr_Stockmann
    Posts: 910
    Revelator wrote: »
    An incredible book could be written about that collection.
    At the risk of being naive, there is no one on this forum who would have had the opportunity to go there and report here? Beyond this community, I find it surprising that nobody has really been interested in this treatment we know little about but that seems quite easily findable to any American scholar.
  • RevelatorRevelator
    edited April 2020 Posts: 2,917
    Herr_Stockmann wrote: »
    At the risk of being naive, there is no one on this forum who would have had the opportunity to go there and report here? Beyond this community, I find it surprising that nobody has really been interested in this treatment we know little about but that seems quite easily findable to any American scholar.

    I think the keyword is "scholar." Most folks on a board like this are fans rather than scholars. I don't mean that in a pejorative sense--it's just that most fans would rather track down and read a script online instead of doing extensive onsite research. Most Bond fans are interested primarily in the actual Bond films, rather than their production histories and alternative storylines.

    Speaking only for myself, I would love to take a look at Maibaum's papers, but that would require a considerable investment of time and money. I would need at least a week (probably two) of precious vacation time to go through Maibaum's many drafts (and to be honest, I would rather spend my limited vacation time in Europe rather than Iowa). I would also need money for a plane flight and hotel room, since my hometown of San Francisco is 1,909 miles away from Iowa City.

    But I am curious if there are any members of this board who live near Iowa and are interested in unused Bond scripts...

    As for scholars, Bond films are rarely the subject of serious study in universities. When they are, professors focus on race, gender, imperialism, etc. There are no serious academic histories of the production histories of Bond films. So the only folks who have ventured to Iowa are serious independent scholars like Charles Helfenstein, and unfortunately there aren't many other people out there like him.

    I will also add that the level of general interest in unproduced scripts by notable writers is disappointingly small. If I were a publisher I would start a book series called "The Greatest Films Never Made," to reprint many of the incredible scripts that have never been filmed.
  • OctopussyOctopussy Piz Gloria, Schilthorn, Switzerland.
    edited April 2020 Posts: 1,081
    On Her Majesty's Secret Service left the door open for a property revenge-driven Diamonds Are Forever and what we got was far from that. To me Diamonds is a let down firstly and foremost as it's a follow on from the best film in the series, IMO. Similarly I find Quantum of Solace a huge disappointment for the same reason, it was the sequel to the brilliant Casino Royale. If we had been granted a revenge-driven DAF with Lazenby as Bond, directed by Peter Hunt, I genuinely believe it would be regarded as one of the best films in the series. It also would've potentially cemented Lazenby in the role of Bond. He would've perhaps gone on to do more films, but regardless I feel at least he would've been more appreciated by the general public had he done one more film. However, Lazenby's single appearance in the role is one of the reasons that On Her Majesty's Secret Service is unique.
  • Herr_StockmannHerr_Stockmann
    Posts: 910
    Thank you @Revelator for this detailed explanation. Of course I understand the difficulty that this represents. It is a pity that no academic really takes interest in the unmade Bond movies as, in general, cancelled projects always have a fascination and are regularly the source of publications or studies (Luchino Visconti's In Search of Lost Time, Hitchcock's Kaleidoscope).
    Octopussy wrote: »
    If we had been granted a revenge-driven DAF with Lazenby as Bond, directed by Peter Hunt, I genuinely believe it would be regarded as one of the best films in the series. It also would've potentially cemented Lazenby in the role of Bond. He would've perhaps gone on to do more films, but regardless I feel at least he would've been more appreciated by the general public had he done one more film.
    I think it would have taken more than two films to cemented Lazenby in the role. Dalton may have done two but he never seems to have been fully accepted, as well as Moore if he had stopped with The Man with the Golden Gun. As well as, I think, Dalton should have had three installments under the belt to fully mark the series of his imprint, it would have required Lazenby to do more than just Diamonds Are Forever, especially at a time when Connery's shadow remained present.
  • OctopussyOctopussy Piz Gloria, Schilthorn, Switzerland.
    Posts: 1,081
    Herr_Stockmann wrote: »
    Octopussy wrote: »
    If we had been granted a revenge-driven DAF with Lazenby as Bond, directed by Peter Hunt, I genuinely believe it would be regarded as one of the best films in the series. It also would've potentially cemented Lazenby in the role of Bond. He would've perhaps gone on to do more films, but regardless I feel at least he would've been more appreciated by the general public had he done one more film.
    I think it would have taken more than two films to cemented Lazenby in the role. Dalton may have done two but he never seems to have been fully accepted, as well as Moore if he had stopped with The Man with the Golden Gun. As well as, I think, Dalton should have had three installments under the belt to fully mark the series of his imprint, it would have required Lazenby to do more than just Diamonds Are Forever, especially at a time when Connery's shadow remained present.

    I'll rephrase. I meant that Lazenby would've at least gotten more recognition then he does. That's probably a better way of putting it. I agree with you that it would've taken more for him to be cemented in the role.
  • Agent_47Agent_47 Canada
    Posts: 330
    I would enjoy both, however I would not want Dalton in Goldeneye, I'll take Pierce anyday. But still, it's a shame that Dalton didn't get a third film between 89 and 95.

    Part of Lazenby's charm is that he is a one off Bond and personally I'd be happy to have another post Craig.
  • Herr_StockmannHerr_Stockmann
    Posts: 910
    Octopussy wrote: »
    I'll rephrase. I meant that Lazenby would've at least gotten more recognition then he does.
    Yes, I think so too. Perhaps he would today be ranked in a similar way than Dalton, if he had made two films. To come back to Maibaum's script, I suppose that it would have been in terms of structure fairly close to Fleming's novel with the initial meeting between Bond and Tiffany Case and their trip to Las Vegas. However, I find it hard to imagine what Blofeld's role could have been in this story since his diabolic scheme with the satellite was later added to the plot, as a rewrite of Goldfinger's brother's one.
  • ThighsOfXeniaThighsOfXenia
    Posts: 1,596
    Are we meant to imagine those actors in the films as they already exist, or are we meant to also imagine different films entirely, because that might change my answer.

    I actually like both films as they are currently cast, and wouldn't want to see them changed, but if I had to choose I'd be far more okay with Dalton in GE than I would with Lazenby in DAF (which would be a nightmare to watch him struggle through that screenplay, I'm sure).

    If the films change entirely (i.e. if we get a true follow-up to OHMSS) then I suppose my answer would be Lazenby even though I don't like him as Bond, I would be foaming at the mouth to see what that movie might look like in '71.
  • Herr_StockmannHerr_Stockmann
    Posts: 910
    ThighsOfXenia wrote: »
    Are we meant to imagine those actors in the films as they already exist, or are we meant to also imagine different films entirely, because that might change my answer.
    To the extent that both for Lazenby's Diamonds Are Forever and Dalton's Goldeneye scripts had been written and that they more or less differ from the films which finally happen, I suppose you are invited to imagine what you would have prefer between what we got and what could have been.

    Personally I'm hesitant. Although Dalton is my favorite Bond, I'm really fond of Brosnan in Goldeneye. On the other hand, despite the fact that I would have loved to see a real sequel to OHMSS, I find that Lazenby has a certain charm because he starred in only one movie. With this in mind, it is difficult for me to make a choice but my choice would be on another Lazenby movie. However, I'm not sure if I would have liked it to be DAF.

    More than a Bond 17, I would have liked to see Dalton begin his run one movie earlier. Keep the complete title of "From A View To A Kill" and change all the rest. It's the easier way for me to answer the question of this thread, without, I suppose, compromising the timeline.
  • Agent_OneAgent_One Ireland
    edited April 2020 Posts: 280
    If it's a whole new B17 in the early 90s, Dalton.

    If it's just Tim in GE, then Lazenby's DAF. I really like Brosnan's performance in the film we got, and the whole Blofeld/Tracy arc deserved a better conclusion (excluding FYEO...)
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,547
    Oh, Lazenby’s DAF for sure.
  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 7,418
    Much as i like Lazenby in OHMSS, biggest disappointment is not getting a third Dalton movie, so most definitely the latter!
Sign In or Register to comment.