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
It would have made perfect sense. Heck, at they addressed Tracy's death explicitly in DAF and made it central to the plot Connery's unfit look would have made sense then too.
Not sure how controversial this is, but they should have cast a better for Max Denbigh. I find Andrew Scott overrated and coming off more as an annoyance than a threat in any of the roles he plays (especially his Jokerarty.)
I agree. I have never liked the Dench version (as written, not the actress herself whose reputation speaks for itself). I think some of the best examples of the Bond-M relationship are Bernard Lee and Moore in TSWLM and MR where shows pride in Bond and defends him against his own superior. TB also features good examples of this.
We'll see where this goes in the future. With NTTD being Craig's last, it is hard to say where Fiennes will go with his M.
On that topic, Tanner in the Craig era has always been horrifically miscast with Rory Kinnear (don't know how controversial this is around here). He's a fantastic actor by all accounts but totally wrong for the role. If they wanted to make a loyal terrier for M, they should have just invented a new character.
Regarding a faithful adaptation of YOLT, it has always been delicate in my eyes since the novel is not cinematographic at all in its structure. There are of course elements that should or could have been adapted (the Garden of Death, Bond's revenge), but not the story itself. The closest thing could be the Reunion with Death scrapped treatment from the 90s, which nonetheless remains a loose adaptation.
Nevertheless, I would agree with @ToTheRight as a faithful adaptation of Moonraker would have been a far better option to follow Thunderball and would have left YOLT intact.
I think you have to throw Michael Kitchen in there as well. I've never liked his version of Tanner while others said they didn't mind. The guy brought nothing to a character said to be Bond's closest friend in the service. As you suggested, just change the name and not leave a blank impression of one of Fleming's more interesting characters who was underwhelmed by the films.
I liked Kitchen a lot actually, and maybe it's just because of his banter with Bond re: M at their first meeting in GoldenEye; it sort of established a friendship with Bond much more effectively than anything Kinnear's Tanner has done in the Craig era. Kitchen seemed to portray the proper charisma for a friend of Bond.
To your point, though, he was certainly a lot less involved than Kinnear's Tanner.
And besides, who else is there? Salmon? They ironically created a new "Tanner" character at a time when they didn't need to.
Forgot they even existed.
A tad too famous for my taste, but far better choice. And with the right maturity too.
YOLT did a bit of the Garden of Death (the piranha pool).
What's this RwD treatment?
Eon only got the rights to MR in 1967 or so. Otherwise, I think we might have seen it sooner.
The law is the law. Disney can lobby until they are blue in the face, if they like, but one day copyright will expire. That is one of the reasons why copyright exists in the first place.
This is why I do not fear for the long term future of JB.
1. 2020-2034: Eon have a monopoly on 007. That’s good, they can bring out films.
2. 2034 onwards, Eon: they still have a monopoly on the gun barrel, the theme, lots of characters, probably Blofeld and Spectre too. So their films will still have that ‘Bond feel.’ So that’s good too.
3. 2034 onwards, non-Eon: well, non-Eon companies can bring out their own films too, utilising Fleming. I think we will see some films set in the 1950s for instance. They will be serious, a bit like the Tinker Tailor movie from a few years ago. But this is good too because (1) they’re still Bond films and (2) it’s competition for Eon so they might up their game.
Long term future looks fine to me. Is that a controversial opinion? I hope not.
To be honest, what else could Tanner do? Just because Tanner is supposed to be friends with Bond doesn’t really mean he’ll turn a blind eye to his unsanctioned activities. He’s the chief of staff doing his job.
It’s a possibility. Toho does this with Godzilla where they “retire” the franchise for a number of years and bring it back when there’s a great hunger for it again. Instead of hopping to another actor, they let Bond sit out for awhile and when the time is right they bring it back with a new actor and the hype machine already prepped with Bond’s long awaited return.
Though it was not EON’s intention to have a six year gap before GE, it no doubt partly added to audiences feeling hungry for another Bond film.
Back in 1994, when Michael France was writing Goldeneye, Eon commissioned two separate treatments to John Cork et Richard Smith for future Bond films starring Dalton. Reunion with Death would thus, hypothetically, have been Dalton's fourth movie and was the one written by Smith. In this story, Bond would have traveled to Japan after the murder of a British businessman. The villain would have lived in a medieval Japanese castle and worn samurai armor to face Bond in the third act.
By the way, this here's my favourite M actress:
I probably would have liked RwD more than TND. Damn I wish Tim had stuck around.
Right. Except for most of DAD and the second-half of TND, I would rather watch my least favorite 8-9 Bond films than just about anything available. With full self-awareness that most of those 8-9 are not, objectively, good films.
Me too. I still rate my #21, FYEO, 7 out of 10. Ergo, still a decent movie.
I LIKE TIMOTHY DALTON'S HAIR IN LTK!
Agree! Daltons hair never bothered me in that scene, at least its his own!!