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
A monkey?!
'Producer Harry Saltzman wanted an elephant stampede in the movie, so Bond and Scaramanga could chase each other on elephant back. The rest of the creative team balked at the idea, but Saltzman went to see an elephant trainer. It turns out, that elephants need a special shoe on their feet to protect them from rough surfaces when they work. A few months later, while filming in Thailand, Producer Albert R. Broccoli got a call saying his elephant shoes were ready. Saltzman had ordered about twenty-six hundred pairs of them. The sequence was not in the movie, but the man who made the shoe had not been paid. As of 1990, Eon Productions still owed him. '
Not sure how true it is but I've seen it bandied about for years so no reason to doubt it. Didn't realise the bloke never got paid though. I always thought Harry actually shelled out a shit load of money out for the shoes and then Cubby did his nut when he found out about the biggest waste of money in EON history (a record that stood until 2015 when it was broken by the SP explosion).
It would be interesting to track down the elephant shoe guy (if he's still alive) to find out his side of it. A genuine unused TMWTGG elephant shoe would be a cracking piece of Bond merchandise for people's collections too!
Wow! What can you say to that, other than: «What the hell was Harry thinking?!»
Worst thing is probably the bloke who might still not have been paid, though. That's just sad to read. An unused TMWTGG elephant shoe would be a very specific and strange object to own! Sure there are people here on the forum that would actually pay for such a thing!
Edit: Not going to lie, I probably would too - if the price was cheap enough!
Just follow the novel and add some good action around the spine of the story. No drag as well.
Except that the novel is rather weak. Especially the Spangs and the ending (which might have worked better with a Willard Whyte cowboy character).
I think the film would have been better served with more time in Amsterdam and less in Vegas, which is when the momentum starts to flag.
Would love for Amsterdam to feature more in DAF. Amsterdam always looks good on film.
I suppose we could have had them as secondary villains before Blofeld is revealed but not as main villains.
How about we have some more scenes in Amsterdam and introduce Rufus B Saye as a diamond merchant as in the book, making it look like we're setting him up as the main villain and trim down the Vegas scenes (could happily lose Plenty and the feeble Circus Circus and moonbuggy sequences)?
That would be a good basis for a better DAF!
The novel's structure is problematic but it would probably work better in an action film, provided more action is added. The problem with the Spangs is that Fleming didn't give them enough "screen time." If they'd been given an equivalent to Wint and Kidd's scene with Tingaling Bell, they would have been effective villains. I think there's a good deal of potential in having twin mafia bosses as the villains, and the screen version of DAF toyed (rather erratically) with a similar idea by giving Blofeld various doubles.
Giving Spectreville to a Willard Whyte character would be too on-the-nose. As a first or second generation American Seraffimo Spang would be eager to overcompensate by going crazy for the wild west. Bond's torching of Spectreville and his "dueling" with the Spang's locomotive represent Britain triumphing over America--where the desperadoes of old have become the mafia--and its heritage.
You might as well have Shady Tree as the main villain.
That's true, but the Spangs do have pretensions to class--one pretends to be a London diamond merchant while the other runs what he thinks is a classy casino. The manicure scene at the Tiara is an excellent illustration of the bully behind the respectable businessman exterior of Seraffimo. Nevertheless, both characters would need considerable building up before being movie-ready. But even raw form they wouldn't have been worse than Gray's Blofeld.
Take this one for instance. Does anyone know the story behind it? It's clearly not taken for a publicity shot as Connery is seen visibly taking some kind of direction from someone slightly off camera. And for anyone who wants to argue that it is a PR shot, ask yourself why? It doesn't make sense.
I also agree that it's shame that the finale couldn't have been more spectacular. The oil rig scenes seem to end with a fizzle rather than a bang, and it's a shame they didn't get to shoot the salt mine chase and final death of Blofeld there. Of course a lot of this is down to Connery's own contract stipulating a shorter shooting schedule with an added bonus for every day it went over schedule. There was no way Harry and Cubby were going to dig further into their pockets and give Connery even more money than he'd already gotten, sadly for us. Maybe if they hadn't wasted unnecessary days shooting Connery in scenes they weren't going to use then it might have been possible and things would've worked out differently?
But would I change anything? Not really. Apart from the things I've mentioned, I still think this is the best Bond movie of the Seventies. Yes, even over and above TSWLM.
I really think it's a PR shot. I've read versions of the script and am sure there was no motorcycle scene. It was probably just handy and somebody thought it could make a good publicity photo. If somebody's giving him direction it's probably the person responsible for the bike or Eon's insurance guy making sure their investment isn't taking unnecessary risks.
There's also a publicity shot of Moore during the filming of LALD where he's aiming a huge canon/gun thing on a ship and it's not anywhere in the film, so it's not unreasonable to have an actor pose with something that's in the spirit of the character.
DAF is my guilty pleasure. It's a beautiful mess. If any of it had been done better (or done well at all) it wouldn't have the same charm/appeal.
But if pressed, I'd say: 1. A little more Jimmy Dean. I mean, what the heck was this guy doing in a Bond film? Who knows, but I needed more of that accent like Christopher Walken wanted more cowbell; 2. The special effects used in the explosions were straight out of a third grade film class; there's campy and then there is "embarrassing campy" and this falls in the latter category. 3. A full-on topless Lana Wood. Why not? It was 1971. Roll with it.
But looking at the movie itself and if I could wish for a different Connery Bondfilm from the early era I would ...
- assure that Connery is in better shape for the monstrous deal he got
- cast someone different for the female lead
- cast someone different for Blofeld
- pick up from OHMSS in tone and keep that throughout the film
- stay closer to the book but still enhance the flow
- add scenes that play to Connery's strengths
- keep SPECTRE behind the plot but more threatening and less campy
- no oil rig, keep the ranch
- keep Vegas and maybe even the Willard Whyte switch plot
- keep the horse racing bit
- make Wint & Kidd less cartoonish gay and more threatening
- keep the excellent elevator fight
As in every Bond film (also the ones I don't like that much as DAF) there's great elements I would not want to miss - see above. But the overall movie is a parody that seamlessly fits into the Austin Powers series and I dislike that for Bond ... yet it's entertaining as all of Sir Roger's later entries.
From a last Connery film I would basicall wish for a mix of DN (roughness), FRWL (intelligent plot), OHMSS (physicality, like the elevator fight we got), GF (humour, villain) and TB (scale of the picture, beautiful landscapes).
Again - DAF was exactly the right picture for those times and in some ways I am sure it safed the "franchise" (hate that word for Bond). But if the continuation of the series was a guarantee, I would drastically change it in tone.
It's probably a scrap between DAF and TMWTGG for second worst film of the series (the worst needs no introduction obviously).
Sure, it's always going to be a bone of contention arguing over the merits of DAF vs the Moore Bonds, but I don't happen to think much of TSWLM (Greatest Hits package with Captain Nemo tagged on) and most definitely not MR (the less said the better). As for LALD, I like it but I feel it's hampered by its lack of Panavision, unlike DAF. Never understood why the first two Roger Moore films, LALD and TMWTGG, reverted to non-anamorphic widescreen like DN, FRWL and GF? Made both those two movies feel less grand in scale for me.
As for one thing done better in DAF than in TSWLM: the fighting scenes. I'll have Sean fighting in an elevator over Moore's lame karate chops over the back of the neck any day.
Bond was to be lured away by Wint or Kidd,saying there was a phone call for him from Willard Whyte.
When he discovers there is no phone call he heads back,meanwhile Tiffany is bound and gagged on the bed with a pot of steaming oil or broth balanced over her head and the room door rigged to tip the liquid onto her head once its opened by Bond or a maid.
Bond,feeling something is up,goes on the outside of the ship and and comes in through the porthole.
Basically Wint gets impaled on something and Kidd dies the same way as in the film,being set alight by the oil when bond throws it at him,the only difference is that Bond uses a blanket to extinguish the fire and wraps Kidd up in it before throwing him out through the porthole.
Indeed. I especially like Bond having dinner with Goodnight and saying his job doesn't often let him enjoy his moments and Bond explaining the difference between his assassinations and Scaramanga's. Some very Flemingian moments there (too bad there are so many truly bad moments as well).
That would be quite the ending! Shame it didn't happen that way.