›

Should there be a Rival Bond Film

002002
edited November 2011 in General Discussion Posts: 581
i was thinking back in 1983 when Octopussy and Never Say Never Agian were facing off against each other. do you believe there should be a rival bond film...considering that during the filming of The World is Not Enough they were going to re-remake Thunderball as Warhead 2.0 with Timothy Dalton as Bond

would this have been a bad idea and lets face it considering that QOS was the least james bond film around...there should have been a rival bond film that was actually bond

<b><font color=darkblue>Moved from News to General /Disco</font></b>

Comments

  • shadowonthesunshadowonthesun Banned
    Posts: 1,894
    ... Why?
  • craigrulescraigrules
    Posts: 284
    I welcome the fact quantum had a fresh take it was just a bad film and i would welcome a new rogue bond.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    edited November 2011 Posts: 14,591
    No. I love NSNA, but no.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,187
    I wouldn't mind a rival Bond TV series, one that works from Fleming's collection, spends two 40 min episodes on eacht book (and one or less on the shorts), puts the whole thing in its original period and casts a great actor for this one time thing.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    Not really. Only one Bond series would survive and this is something that may be more interesting if it happened to another film series.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I don't see the point. The whole Connery-Moore face off was just Sean getting back at EON in my opinion and Thunderball surely doesn't need remade again EON. It was great the first time.
  • 00130013
    Posts: 1,817
    Never. I'll never turn to the Dark Side. My loyalty is with Mr Broccoli and his heirs!
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    i would love to see a rival bond film series for these reasons:

    1- We would get bond films more often. If both producers bought out a film every 2 years, then we would get a bond film a year. I sure would be happy.

    2- It decreases the chance of there being an awful bond film. Sure there's still a chance that there we be another bad bond film but with 2 companies competing to make the best bond film then I think that chance would decrease. If eon had competition to keep them on thier toes then im pretty sure we would never have another film as bad as DAD.

    3- We get variety. If there are 2 bonds with 2 different approaches to the role then we'd be happy. Say eon keep on with realistic craig while film company X get a lighter, more brosnan/moore style bond, fans of both styles are happy.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited November 2011 Posts: 13,355
    That would confuse the hell out of the public.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    No because it's a daft idea.
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    NO, NSNA & OP was a special moment namely the battle between the two biggies of the 007 franchise. ANd it was a great year with two Bonds and their movies. It will never happen again, a special moment in 007 history.
  • craigrulescraigrules
    Posts: 284
    never say never
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    No. For better or worse EON is Bond.
    002 wrote:
    i was thinking back in 1983 when Octopussy and Never Say Never Agian were facing off against each other. do you believe there should be a rival bond film...considering that during the filming of The World is Not Enough they were going to re-remake Thunderball as Warhead 2.0 with Timothy Dalton as Bond

    <b><font color=darkblue>Moved from News to General /Disco</font></b>

    I never heard of that Warhead 2/Dalton idea. Could someone please elaborate?
  • shadowonthesunshadowonthesun Banned
    Posts: 1,894
    Kevin McClory still had the rights to SPECTRE at the time. He started talking up another remake of THUNDERBALL, to be called "WARHEAD 2000 AD". He was not going to cast Dalton in it, though - he wanted Pierce Brosnan in the role, mostly because Brosnan had been EON's first choice for the role. Nothing more came of it.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    edited November 2011 Posts: 14,591
    It's a pity that it didn't come to fruition...not. The Bond universe is fine as it is.
  • shadowonthesunshadowonthesun Banned
    Posts: 1,894
    It was never going to happen. McClory saw that the world wasn't shattered by NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN, and wanted the world to remember him. Even if the film had gone ahead, Brosnan would not have appeared in it - he'd be smart enough to recognise what was happening. And even if he did appear in it, it would not have stopped EON from casting him in GOLDENEYE.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    edited November 2011 Posts: 14,591
    What was his deal with wanting to remake Thunderball over and over again, anyway? NSNA was unnecessary, but it turned out fine IMO. Remake done. Finished. Sometimes you just have to let it go. :-t
  • shadowonthesunshadowonthesun Banned
    Posts: 1,894
    Because he could. Because he wanted to keep making James Bond films, but because of the court rulings, he could only ever remake THUNDERBALL.
  • 00130013
    Posts: 1,817
    I'm not a lawyer, but I can't understand why the Court gave McClory the rights to the character of James Bond, and also M, Moneypenny and Q. I mean, he claimed rights over the story of Thunderball... but they gave him rights over previously created characters!
  • shadowonthesunshadowonthesun Banned
    Posts: 1,894
    0013 wrote:
    I'm not a lawyer, but I can't understand why the Court gave McClory the rights to the character of James Bond, and also M, Moneypenny and Q.
    I think you will find those characters are never actually named in the film. Alec McCowen's character was named as "Algernon", not "Q".

    And McClory had the rights to THUNDERBALL, which is a James Bond film. He helped create it. The courts recognised that he had some claim to the characters as they appeared in that film. They couldn't say "You have the rights to THUNDERBALL, but not to James Bond" because they are inherently linked together. THUNDERBALL without Bond is not THUNDERBALL.
  • 00130013
    edited November 2011 Posts: 1,817
    I should've know that neither in this one we could agree...
    My point is precisely that one: they should have given him the rights to Thunderball (the plot of the stolen bomb, etc), the Spectre characters, Blofeld, but not James Bond, which was created by Fleming previously, and by him only.
    I repeat, that is my opinion.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    shadowonthesun wrote:
    Kevin McClory still had the rights to SPECTRE at the time. He started talking up another remake of THUNDERBALL, to be called "WARHEAD 2000 AD". He was not going to cast Dalton in it, though - he wanted Pierce Brosnan in the role, mostly because Brosnan had been EON's first choice for the role. Nothing more came of it.

    If you're referring to Brosnan being EON first choice for TLD you're wrong. They wanted Dalton from the very beginning. Watch TLD documentary on the DVD for confirmation .
  • shadowonthesunshadowonthesun Banned
    Posts: 1,894
    I meant the first choice after Dalton declined due to commitments to BRENDA STARR. McClory didn't start talking about WARHEAD 2000 AD until Dalton turned the role down to THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS, but he did it before Brosnan was approached because he knew EON wanted Brosnan.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    DarthDimi wrote:
    I wouldn't mind a rival Bond TV series, one that works from Fleming's collection, spends two 40 min episodes on each book (and one or less on the shorts), puts the whole thing in its original period and casts a great actor for this one time thing.

    I like the idea of a Bond TV series, and I don't think it needs to be based in the original period of each novel. A Bond TV series would do great (especially now that 24 is off the air).
    0013 wrote:
    Never. I'll never turn to the Dark Side. My loyalty is with Mr Broccoli and his heirs!

    So be it. Jedi.
Sign In or Register to comment.