›

Dalton in FYEO. Could it have worked? I say ABSOLUTELY!!

13

Comments

  • Goldeneye95Goldeneye95
    Posts: 546
    Sir Timothy Dalton in For Your Eyes Only would have worked! This would have been a great way to introduce Dalton as 007. That way he would have had a longer run as James Bond.
  • JBFan626JBFan626
    Posts: 1,497
    Without a doubt. In fact, it would have improved the film considerbably. Roger Moore works as a Bond in an over top fantastical Bond film full of wink-wink, eye brow raising, boyish innuendo moments. Dalton is perfect for the more serious Bond film. The 80's signaled a shift to more serious action film-making.
  • MrBrownMrBrown
    edited December 2012 Posts: 202
    Dalton as Bond
    Music by John Barry

    Would have made for an excellent film.

    I don't mind Sir Rog in this, though. Actually, it's my favorite Bond flick from the Moore era. I have a problem with Bill Conti's score, however. I can only admit to liking a few tracks from that score.
  • mdo007mdo007 Katy, Texas
    Posts: 259
    I think Dalton in FYEO would've work, but too bad we don't have time machine so we can alter the timeline.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    MrBrown wrote:
    I have a problem with Bill Conti's score
    It kind of disgusts me to a degree I do not wish to fully elabourate on.
    8-|
  • Baltimore_007Baltimore_007
    Posts: 5,634
    Moore did a good enough job that year, so in retrospect I wouldn't want anyone else to have done it. Dalton, could of done it, in that it was feasible, but 1987 once again was the right time for his debut. Just keep Moore for 1981, and tried to have find another Bond for Octopussy and View to a Kill in between, before Dalton, came in, at the right time. I think anything else before then, just wouldn't have worked so well
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Baltimore_007 wrote:
    Moore did a good enough job that year, so in retrospect I wouldn't want anyone else to have done it.
    Agreed.
    It was a fine antidote to MR, and OP was good too. If anything, Dalts should have gotten AVTAK- he would have made it better with his fight to make it more serious like he did on TLD.
  • Baltimore_007Baltimore_007
    Posts: 5,634
    I got more enjoyment from Moonraker, but the difference is, Moore took is so much more seriously in 1981 than the previous release and it's sometimes absurd humor. It was almost "I made such an embarrassment at times in the previous release, I'll take a different route this time and give a serious story". (before reverting to type for his final two appearances)

    I wouldn't have Dalton in View to a Kill. Yes, if he had been involved, it would of looked so much better, but the fact of the matter is, Moore did it, and all I can look to, is, it's a ridiculous release and I wouldn't want Dalton's name really even associated with it. The man was the epitome of serious and straight faced, and I simply couldn't envisage him being in it, looking back right now. He made his debut at the right time, anything else (before) would of been too soon, and I couldn't really picture him in anything before 1987 to be truthful (James Bond I mean)
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Baltimore_007 wrote:
    it's a ridiculous release and I wouldn't want Dalton's name really even associated with it. The man was the epitome of serious and straight faced, and I simply couldn't envisage him being in it,
    The movie as produced, you're right of course.
    I was just thinking how it might have been seriously played & re-written if Dalton had been on board...
  • Baltimore_007Baltimore_007
    Posts: 5,634
    Can you imagine Dalton hanging to an airship rope over San Francisco dodging obstacles that may endanger precious places of one's anatomy, or snowboarding to some Beach Boys music. Maybe they would of cut all that nonsense out had it been someone else in the role, but still insist, it was such a nonsense release every now and again, that Dalton shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as View to a Kill

    It's like having a Connery of 1963 involved in Die Another Day or something, for example (if he was able)
  • josiahjosiah
    edited February 2016 Posts: 1,386
    Master_Dahark wrote:
    I've always said how I would have loved Dalton in GoldenEye- but after re-watching most of the Bond movies recently, as well as catching bits of Flash Gordon on Netflix on a rainy day, I can't help but think that the series may have benefited from having him show up as early as FYEO!

    Dalton would have been 37-- a GREAT age for a new Bond, and judging by how he looked in Flash Gordon, he would have looked virtually identical to TLD.
    ...
    But as much as I like Roger as OO7, I almost feel as if MoonRaker would have been the perfect way to put the lid on 'his' Bond, and all of its fun wackiness. Roger could have been the Bond of the 70's (what the hell, put him in Diamonds are Forever since I'd hate cutting his run short) and Dalton could have been the Bond of the 80's!

    Tim and Carole would have made a much better couple-- Bibi's crush on Bond would have been more believable and funny, (sorry Rog) all of the fights would have been a joy to watch and very intense
    All of the above, and plus I found this cool video that really sets the tone of 'what if'.

    A new decade, a new Bond, a trendy upbeat 80's song- check it out:


    I couldn't agree more! Funny that you should mention Flash Gordon because according to IMDB Cubby Broccoli saw Flash Gordon and wanted not only Timothy Dalton but the actress who plays the princess in that movie (Ornella Muti) as well as Topol for FYEO. The part of Melina Havelock was originally written for Ornella Muti in that film. Dalton has said he was offered the role in the early 80s but there was no script and he said the films at the time didn't fit his idea of a Bond movie. Pure speculation, but I think there's a lot to suggest FYEO was originally written for him and the writers made a couple tweaks to the beginning and end when it became clear Roger was in fact returning. I watched the commentary on this movie by Sir Roger Moore and it doesn't sound like he intended to leave yet, but rather that his agent was maybe playing hard to get with the producers. At any rate, the producers seem to have been unsure if he was returning at the time and to have been shopping elsewhere. I think the decision to bring Bond more back to basics was done because they wanted a script to show Dalton to entice him to take the role. I know Cubby had approached him several times over the course of the franchise and really wanted him. I always thought only getting two Bond films from Dalton was a pretty huge missed opportunity. I'd have loved to see him start here and get at least 3 more Bond films from him.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    edited February 2016 Posts: 1,731
    SaintMark wrote: »
    It wouldn't have worked, TD lacked the real charisma that is needed for a leading role. A lot of TD fans live under the assumption that he was some kind of saviour, while in fact he was alienating the general audiences, claiming that other blockbusters were too big a competition while in fact they had leading men with screen charisma where TD just did not have enough in the area.
    TD is a good actor but his leading parts have never been that impressive, he is however a good supporting actor or villain. That is why he never would have worked as the leading man of a series that with Roger Moore in the lead managed to survive the years after Sean Connery.

    FYEO was the movie that RM needed to make to keep the series on track and with him it came believable. He was that popular that we got him twice more.

    It is my believe that with TD that early in the part we would not have the franchise around today. RM's version carried the show through the years when the danger was that 007 would have become a endagered species. TD's effort was not that spectacular since most non-fan would not name him when asked name a actor that played 007, he failed to impress the general audience and they pay the tickets.

    A longer TD series is just a fans wet dream. But when you wake up you are covered with Yugh.

    A common case of mistaking popularity with with actual quality.

    Moore and Brosnan were far more popular, partly because they were pretty bland (even Rog acknowledges this) - lowest common denominator mass audience pandering does not, however, equal a good product.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,112
    If Dalton had starred in every 80's Bond film, it would have been the pinnacle of 007 alongside the 60's.

    Imagine FYEO, OP, AVTAK with a physically strong Bond and without the silliness. Imagine Dalton going up against Walken, Dalton in that Alfa Romeo, Dalton climbing St. Cyril's.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2016 Posts: 23,883
    I think Dalton could have pulled off FYEO (it almost seemed made for him), but OP required Moore imho.

    Only he could have pulled off that Tarzan yell and other elements, including the auction scene and backgammon. It required a deft balance of humour, wit and action and fit Rog like a glove. OP was made for Moore, unlike FYEO.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,715
    In that case, switch OP with FYEO - Moore ends with an 'all time high' in 1981 and Dalton takes over with FYEO in 1983.
  • Master_DaharkMaster_Dahark
    Posts: 4,813
    I like that idea ^
    But of course they could always just not have the Tarzan tell if they felt Dalton was out of place doing it (which he absolutely would have been)
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    None of OP's 'silliness' is intrinsic to the screenplay or script. It was just crammed in there for comedic effect (god only knows why...), so TD would easily have done it if the script had been tailored to him.
    I'd even go so far as to say that the opening 15mins after the titles seem perfect for Dalton, reminiscent of TLD's opening tension & mood.
  • berdodudeberdodude california
    Posts: 2
    Moore was perfect in TSWLM but for FYEO Dalton would have been great. I see this not looking at the Box office but how great a film FYEO would have been with him in it at his prime age.
  • bondsumbondsum
    Posts: 3,333
    I tend to agree with @AceHole that FYEO, OP and AVTAK would have been tailored to Dalton's strengths had he been cast in them, and altered accordingly to accommodate a different 007. To suggest that these three movies would've been exact mirror images of the Moore films is nonsensical. However, I don't believe Dalton was ever in the frame to takeover Moore in FYEO. The only actors we know of that were screen tested for Bond back then, and were considered, are: Michael Billington, Patrick Mower, Michael Jayston, and Oliver Tobias.

    I do recall all the media hoopla back in 1980 about the possibility of Moore quiting Bond, which I suppose is why Cubby asked Terence Young (first) and then Peter Hunt (second) to helm what would have been a new Bond movie with a new 007. It's a shame Young or Hunt didn't return as I'm sure they'd have got rid of the smoke stack, Bibi Dahl and that bloody awful parrot alongside Janet Brown's impersonation of Thatcher.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,114
    bondjames wrote: »
    I think Dalton could have pulled off FYEO (it almost seemed made for him), but OP required Moore imho.

    Only he could have pulled off that Tarzan yell and other elements, including the auction scene and backgammon. It required a deft balance of humour, wit and action and fit Rog like a glove. OP was made for Moore, unlike FYEO.

    That's my opinion too. I think FYEO is meant to be a movie for a new Bond actor, it just happened that there was no true successor at the time. But OP without Moore would not have worked.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    Well, yes, I'm sure it could have worked but I'm thankful that it didn't turn out that way. I don't say that to dismiss Dalton. I really think FYEO is fantastic with Moore. The story actually benefits from having an older Bond, in my opinion. I'm sure they would have reworked it for any new actor, obviously, although I'm not sure how audiences would have reacted at the time.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I agree @pachazo, I think FYEO was pretty good with Moore.

    Also, perhaps it was best Moore was around to go up against Connery when NSNA was made. I don't know if a sophomore Bond actor could have necessarily been able to take on the legend as well.
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    edited February 2016 Posts: 7,653
    AceHole wrote: »
    SaintMark wrote: »
    It wouldn't have worked, TD lacked the real charisma that is needed for a leading role. A lot of TD fans live under the assumption that he was some kind of saviour, while in fact he was alienating the general audiences, claiming that other blockbusters were too big a competition while in fact they had leading men with screen charisma where TD just did not have enough in the area.
    TD is a good actor but his leading parts have never been that impressive, he is however a good supporting actor or villain. That is why he never would have worked as the leading man of a series that with Roger Moore in the lead managed to survive the years after Sean Connery.

    FYEO was the movie that RM needed to make to keep the series on track and with him it came believable. He was that popular that we got him twice more.

    It is my believe that with TD that early in the part we would not have the franchise around today. RM's version carried the show through the years when the danger was that 007 would have become a endagered species. TD's effort was not that spectacular since most non-fan would not name him when asked name a actor that played 007, he failed to impress the general audience and they pay the tickets.

    A longer TD series is just a fans wet dream. But when you wake up you are covered with Yugh.

    A common case of mistaking popularity with with actual quality.

    Moore and Brosnan were far more popular, partly because they were pretty bland (even Rog acknowledges this) - lowest common denominator mass audience pandering does not, however, equal a good product.

    The Roger Moore years can hardly be called bland and the actor has his qualities as A leading man, which applies to Brosnan as well. As said Dalton is just not the quality material to lead a franchise like EONs 007 with.
    The opening weekend of Weekend of Batman took in more cash than Daltons 007 in his whole run in his 007 movie. Keaton & Nichelson are leading men and have charisma.
    Dalton is a great supporting actor or a great TV actor but was never meant to be a leading man. And he never had the ability to become any more. With TLD he had a great script and director to make him look good and the next one was a poor Miami Vice copy and his next one would have robot girls in the script. That would have made Look Lazenby like bloody Richard Burton/Laurence Olivier. -)
    I think that you mistake quality and popularity when compared to a man that is just not able to be a leading man.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    While I have become fond of FYEO, I do think that casting Dalton would have fixed the uneven tone that FYEO has. It was clearly filmed as a debut Bond, anyway.

    Also, come on, there is no way that the androids what have made it into the finished Bond#17. Does anyone actually believe that was the shooting script?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    Also, come on, there is no way that the androids what have made it into the finished Bond#17. Does anyone actually believe that was the shooting script?
    I honestly think it depended on when the film was going to come out. If it was in the early 90's then it's possible, due to the success of T2. If it was around 1993 or later then probably not.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    bondjames wrote: »
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    Also, come on, there is no way that the androids what have made it into the finished Bond#17. Does anyone actually believe that was the shooting script?
    I honestly think it depended on when the film was going to come out. If it was in the early 90's then it's possible, due to the success of T2. If it was around 1993 or later then probably not.

    I don't know. I think the Bond #17 androids are like the elephant stampede in TMWTGG, or Dr No being a monkey. I think it's likely that EON might have been influenced by something in T2 (what, I don't know), but I can't imagine them actually following through with that. Moore's Bond couldn't get away with android fisticuffs, so I see even less chance of that happening in a Dalton film.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    edited February 2016 Posts: 1,984
    Nope, I think FYEO was fine with Moore. Moore also should've stayed for OP to counter Connery in NSNA, but I think he could've bidden farewell after. Dalton should've gotten AVTAK.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    I prefer Moore in FYEO. His age in relation to visiting Tracy's grave worked perfectly. Starting with AVTAK would have worked best.
  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,252
    With a few tweaks (eg remove the prime minister at the end) FYEO could easily work with Dalton
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,112
    FYEO as it is has a very unbalanced tone. One moment he's kicking off that Mercedes from the cliff with Locque inside, the other he's making ice hockey goals with humans. As if the crew was thinking: "Let's not forget we have Moore in the lead."

    With Dalton I think those things would have been left out.
Sign In or Register to comment.