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
This LTK one I always thought is a bit obvious, because if there really were a giant door in the floor that opens up, you wouldn't shoot it from that angle. It kind of admits to you that it's fake.
Yep, as u say, loads of good use of F/G miniatures in earlier Bond films. I do agree with you about the angle of the shot in LTK, but it's still a well photographed F/G miniature.
In his memoirs Glen writes that "MGM/UA were giving us a bit of a hard time about budget control since Licence Revoked was budgeted at approximately the same level as every Bond film since Moonraker. This hadn't posed too much of a problem with For Your Eyes Only, but by the end of the 1980s it was becoming a bit of a struggle to make ends meet without compromising the quality expected of a Bond film. We remained economically minded and extremely efficient, but we were making first-division action films on a fraction of the budget available to our principal competitors in the US."
It seems insane that the studio didn't bother acknowledging a decade's worth of inflation!
Glen adds that the "Thatcher government's unfriendly attitude towards filmmakers in England" promoted the move away from Pinewood and to Mexico. Unfortunately Churubusco studios in Mexico City was dilapidated and "everything was smaller than we had been used to and not all the stages were available to us." Crest's warehouse, brought up earlier in this thread, was among the sets built at Churubusco.
Glen writes "The fact that we were based in Mexico meant that much of the casting was done from local or American agencies," which explains why much of LTK's cast was familiar to American TV watchers.
DAF and LALD were also made with reduced budgets, and this shows in the climaxes of both films. LTK is the reverse--parts of its first half feel low-budget, but the climax is grade-A. I prefer the LTK approach.
This nails it. I was genuinely involved with Bond when re-watching and questioning his motivations. The threat Bond is facing really feels huge and Sanchez is not the guy to monologue. Bond actually feels in danger. Moreover, the more I think about it, the more I realise that the characters are actually very well sketched. For example, Sanchez believes Bond is loyal to him and even in their last scene is unsure why Bond has turned on him. For Sanchez, maiming Leiter was a negligible and forgettable act. But for Bond it was his driving force.
The scenes where Bond goes renegade are not just atypical for the franchise but inspired overall (gone is the heroic sheen). You get the sense that Bond has become the villain (which harkens back to Fleming's CR novel). There's a steely menace to Dalton that is so threatening. For the first time in the series' history, you're actually afraid of Bond. He's dangerous, ruthless and damn sexy. This more angsty Bond is actually reminiscent of Batman....Which is more interesting given that in '89 the Batman character hadn't been depicted like this. It's only in recent incarnations has he moved in this direction. So....Dalton was first.