Would this Bond film have improved with another actor from the time ? : Quantum of Solace

123468

Comments

  • edited May 2019 Posts: 3,333
    Dalton wouldn't have done it, though. He went on record saying he turned down yet another chance of a screen test back in 1980 when Moore was umming and ahing over his FYEO contract talks because he didn't like the direction that the movies had gone in. Lewis Collins made the big mistake of telling Cubby that he was doing it all wrong and that they needed to make 007 tough again and jettison the silliness. It was a case of "no thank you" and Collins was shown the door before he even had a chance to sit down. Trouble was, Cubby believed he had his winning formula already down pat. Even when he eventually managed to lure Dalton into a tux, he still couldn't resist spoofing his new 007 in TLD, fearful that audiences would reject the new Bond if he wasn't parodying him in some way.

    The other problem I had with OP back in 83, apart from the goofiness, was that Moore was looking decidedly older around the chops than he had in FYEO, and with a fresh-faced Harrison Ford looking to show an old dog some new tricks, he was also looking sadly out-of-date. The Battle of the Bonds? Nah, OP came out a good 7 months before NSNA, so had the clear advantage. Add to the fact that rumours were circulating that Connery's Bond movie was a hot mess due to the actor suing the producers and being dissatisfied with the results, it eventually filtered over into the B.O. takings.

    Had Mr. Broccoli shown the same ruthlessness that his daughter had shown to Brosnan in 2004, then FYEO in 1981 should've been the turning point of a new and revitalised Bond series with a new actor in the lead. After all, Brosnan was still incredibly popular and the problems had nothing to do with the leading man during his tenure. And there's the rub. Sometimes a complete change of actor in the lead role is necessary to show the audience that they're going in a completely different direction. FYEO was a poor attempt at that because they kept the same actor as before, even though they were making noises about it being a back-to-basics Bond. It backfired as the B.O. takings were down on their previous MR. The downward slide would continue with OP and AVTAK, making it even harder to win their lost audience back.

    I know some are nostalgic and sentimental when looking back at some of the Moore Bonds, but I'm less so due to the fact that I was old enough to remember the Connery and Lazenby's Bonds when they were actually good movies—and because I didn't like the lampooning years, I'm more pragmatic when it comes to the later Moore years.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited May 2019 Posts: 6,304
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    One thing is certain. It would have deteriorated massively with Brolin.

    Agreed. That screentest is awfu!
    OP was perfect for Rog!

    I never understood if they were serious with Brolin or just calling Moore's bluff.

    Duran Duran actually approached Cubby after All Time High and asked if Eon was ready for a real title song.

    I actually don't mind All Time High but it's in the lower tier of theme songs.
  • edited May 2019 Posts: 3,333
    I'm inclined to agree with you @echo. In Cubby's When The Snow Melts, he glosses over Moore's OP contract talks as if it was no great shakes nor anything worth discussing, and instead concentrates on his rivalry between NSNA. I think Brolin was a bluff, and being a close friend of Cubby's, he probably did it as a favour to demonstrate perhaps that this time round he was serious about replacing Moore with another actor that had a reasonable Hollywood resume. I don't know how true the story of Brolin even going so far as buying a house in London for the production really was. You'd have thought Cubby would've mentioned something about this in his autobiography. However, if it's true that Brolin was indeed prepping himself in the production and scripts, to then be replaced by Moore at the eleventh hour, then it supports my own belief that Cubby was all at sea without Saltzman by his side.

    And yes, I'm totally aware that Roger Taylor approached Cubby at a Hollywood party after OP and asked him when was he going to get someone good to do a Bond song. My own point was that they should have been looking at performers with more worldwide clout that weren't middle-of-the-road artists. Cubby even stated that he wanted Laura Branigan (Power of Love and Gloria fame) to sing the title song. Still not a great choice but far better than Coolidge IMHO.
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,138
    OP without Rog. Not on your life me old son.
    That's as bad as listening to the Beatles without earmuffs.

    I think OP perfectly fit Moore's Bond. Yes I get the gripes (not all) that people have with this film. But it was a Bond film of the times. A film of the times. Could you get away with a lot of it now. Never!
    But watching Bond films is sometimes like watching a time capsule. The attitudes, the clothes, the music, the styles.
    I don't think many actors would've fit into OP as well as Rog did. Maybe Brosnan could've played it, he has a similar ability to add humour and danger together.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    No.

    It's an enjoyable ride.

    But I still cannot figure out if Moore should've quit after OP or FYEO...
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    bondsum wrote: »
    I'm inclined to agree with you @echo. In Cubby's When The Snow Melts, he glosses over Moore's OP contract talks as if it was no great shakes nor anything worth discussing, and instead concentrates on his rivalry between NSNA. I think Brolin was a bluff, and being a close friend of Cubby's, he probably did it as a favour to demonstrate perhaps that this time round he was serious about replacing Moore with another actor that had a reasonable Hollywood resume. I don't know how true the story of Brolin even going so far as buying a house in London for the production really was. You'd have thought Cubby would've mentioned something about this in his autobiography. However, if it's true that Brolin was indeed prepping himself in the production and scripts, to then be replaced by Moore at the eleventh hour, then it supports my own belief that Cubby was all at sea without Saltzman by his side.

    And yes, I'm totally aware that Roger Taylor approached Cubby at a Hollywood party after OP and asked him when was he going to get someone good to do a Bond song. My own point was that they should have been looking at performers with more worldwide clout that weren't middle-of-the-road artists. Cubby even stated that he wanted Laura Branigan (Power of Love and Gloria fame) to sing the title song. Still not a great choice but far better than Coolidge IMHO.

    Brolin’s American Bond screen test was awful. What was Cubby thinking????
  • edited May 2019 Posts: 678
    Nope. Moore makes the movie, along with Maud Adams and Louis Jordan and Steven Berkoff.

    And I have zero nostalgia or sentimentalism for his era as I wasn't even alive, so no bias from me on that front.

    Having said that, OP is one of my favorites for sure, despite some flaws.
  • edited May 2019 Posts: 3,333
    Perhaps your own biased comes from what age you were when you first watched OP @FrankXavier? I don't know your own personal history with Bond movies, but if you watched OP as a youngster (whether it be on TV at Christmastime or VHS or DVD) and you're now an adult, then it's bound to have some sentimental connotations with happier times—assuming that your childhood was indeed a happy one. Personally, I'm talking as a lifelong Bond fan that was an active cinemagoer back in 1983 and how I felt about yet another fatuous Roger Moore Bond movie coming out that same year. Especially after experiencing the so-called return to Bond's more serious roots in FYEO to then go straight back to the unadulterated buffoonery of MR with an even older Moore in OP.

    I also find it odd that Cubby had criticized George MacDonald Fraser's early draft, where Bond dressed as a gorilla and later, a clown, to then include it in the final movie. Yet he did discard Fraser's idea for the opening sequence, featuring a motorbike chase set at the Isle of Man TT. I'd rather he kept that and jettisoned the clown idea, personally.
  • edited May 2019 Posts: 678
    bondsum wrote: »
    Perhaps your own biased comes from what age you were when you first watched OP @FrankXavier? I don't know your own personal history with Bond movies, but if you watched OP as a youngster (whether it be on TV at Christmastime or VHS or DVD) and you're now an adult, then it's bound to have some sentimental connotations with happier times—assuming that your childhood was indeed a happy one. Personally, I'm talking as a lifelong Bond fan that was an active cinemagoer back in 1983 and how I felt about yet another fatuous Roger Moore Bond movie coming out that same year. Especially after experiencing the so-called return to Bond's more serious roots in FYEO to then go straight back to the unadulterated buffoonery of MR with an even older Moore in OP.
    I watched it in my 20's, which are currently far from my best time, so for me that's not true either.

    If I had rose colored glasses for any era, it would have to be the Brosnan era. But GE still holds up for me, whereas I've been able to see how flawed TWINE is years later.

    I think this is all relative anyway and not as black and white as you make it, because my father has been following Bond since Dr. No in the 60's, and he's not a big fan of the Craig era at all, despite still enjoying the movies.

  • Posts: 385
    bondsum wrote: »
    Especially after experiencing the so-called return to Bond's more serious roots in FYEO to then go straight back to the unadulterated buffoonery of MR with an even older Moore in OP.

    That is certainly an opinion...
  • edited May 2019 Posts: 3,333
    I'm not making anything out to be black and white as I know absolutely nothing about you @FrankXavier, hence my previous question. I still don't know anything about you as I don't understand why you'd feel compelled to wait until you were in your twenties to watch OP for the very first time, unless you weren't that much of a Bond fan to begin with. Maybe you're mostly a Craig fan that wasn't attracted to the franchise until he appeared? Without question you're a 007 late bloomer. Either way, it doesn't make anything I said to be true or false. Not sure where you got that one from?

    I'm only talking from my own perspective as a Bond fan since Lazenby's Bond to present day, and how I felt about an ageing Bond coming back for more of the same. Clearly Moore didn't care that much about the script, just a case of how many extra noughts were on his paycheck. It's also pretty evident it's the same one they gave to Brolin, judging by the screen tests available and the photos on-set with Vijay.

    Of course, it's fine that you liked OP as a fully grown adult. Some here prefer the cheesy self-parody Bonds to the more serious Bonds. I like my Bond when the humour is dry and not wet, and we're not laughing at Bond but with him. I also prefer a younger Bond. Ideally early thirties to mid-forties. OP felt like a Peter Rogers production, written by Talbot Rothwell and directed by Gerald Thomas rather than a Peter Hunt, Guy Hamilton or Terence Young style of Bond. That's not to say there's not good things in OP. I like Louis Jourdan as Kamal Khan, Kabir Bedi as Gobinda, and David & Tony Meyer as the Twins. There's also some great stunt work in this movie. It just sucks that Cubby hadn't retired Moore and found a younger Bond to replace him before this one. And no, I thought Brolin and all of Cubby's other candidates for OP were horrendous, too. But I honestly don't think he was trying that hard.
  • Posts: 678
    I mean, @bondsum you stated that the Moore era is looked at with nostalgia and sentimentalism, so naturally when I stated my opinion on OP I clarified why I believe it isn't the case with myself. Then you wondered if I still had some other type of bias for the movie.

    I've been into Bond since I was a kid, with the Brosnan movies and the videogames. Then I moved into the older ones, but I hadn't gotten into the Moore era until recently.

    Since Bond is a generational thing, I think all eras have a degree of nostalgia and sentimentalism for the people who grew up with them. Which is why I'm not sure why it is brought up as a negative sometimes, but it is what it is.
  • Posts: 3,333
    Yes, you're quite right @FrankXavier, I did state that. That's because the vast majority of Bond fans start their love affair with Bond movies when they are very young. I would also say the same for Star Wars fans. Of course, there are going to be the odd exceptions, but they're a very small minority in the big scheme of things.

    So basically, you were only into the Brosnan movies as a kid, plus the videogames, and your interest stopped about there until you got older. What about Connery? Was he also on your not-too-bothered list as a child, or did you explore his earlier movies with more enthusiasm? Just curious.
  • edited May 2019 Posts: 678
    bondsum wrote: »
    Yes, you're quite right @FrankXavier, I did state that. That's because the vast majority of Bond fans start their love affair with Bond movies when they are very young. I would also say the same for Star Wars fans. Of course, there are going to be the odd exceptions, but they're a very small minority in the big scheme of things.

    So basically, you were only into the Brosnan movies as a kid, plus the videogames, and your interest stopped about there until you got older. What about Connery? Was he also on your not-too-bothered list as a child, or did you explore his earlier movies with more enthusiasm? Just curious.
    To be honest I wasn't that into the old Bonds when I was growing up. I found them boring when I tried watching them and didn't finish them. Mostly the Connery ones anyway.

    Same for the old SW movies.

    It was only until like seven years ago that I started getting into old films more, and subsequently the old SW and JB movies. Octopussy I only watched from start to finish for the first time recently. My top five unranked would probably include TB, GE, CR, OHMSS, and TSWLM.
  • edited May 2019 Posts: 3,333
    That's not a bad top five ranking @FrankXavier. It's curious that you found the older ones boring growing up, but you now have TB (which is probably the most drawn out of all the Connery Bonds) in your top 5. Your tastes have obviously matured for the better. Good to see OHMSS in there also. Can't argue with that.
  • edited May 2019 Posts: 11,189
    I think OP was one of Moore's strongest performances as Bond so no I don't think it would have improved with another actor.

    I DO think that a stronger female lead could have improved the film though as I'm not too fond of Maud Adams in this.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,304
    But Maud Adams had arguably the best chemistry with Bond. I wouldn't change her either. She's all right when she's generally being bossy with her pussies, as well as in the bomb scene. But she is awful in her OP-short-story exposition scene.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    MooreFun wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    Especially after experiencing the so-called return to Bond's more serious roots in FYEO to then go straight back to the unadulterated buffoonery of MR with an even older Moore in OP.

    That is certainly an opinion...

    And I for one agree with him.
  • Posts: 17,756
    Octopussy is actually one of my top ten Bond girls. Maud Adams and Roger seemed to have a genuine on-screen chemistry. In TMWTGG too, IMO.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Octopussy is actually one of my top ten Bond girls. Maud Adams and Roger seemed to have a genuine on-screen chemistry. In TMWTGG too, IMO.

    Yes, and that was why they wisely brought Maud Adams back again for a lead role. It certainly paid off in my opinion.

    Her character remains the only Bond girl to have a film named after her and deservedly do in her case.
  • Posts: 17,756
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Octopussy is actually one of my top ten Bond girls. Maud Adams and Roger seemed to have a genuine on-screen chemistry. In TMWTGG too, IMO.

    Yes, and that was why they wisely brought Maud Adams back again for a lead role. It certainly paid off in my opinion.

    Her character remains the only Bond girl to have a film named after her and deservedly do in her case.

    Indeed. She'll be a tough act to follow should a future Bond film also share the name with its female lead Bond girl.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    PUSSY GALORE could have been a good title for another type of film.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    PUSSY GALORE could have been a good title for another type of film.

    Just not a PG-13 one! :))
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    PUSSY GALORE could have been a good title for another type of film.

    Just not a PG-13 one! :))

    PUSSY GALORE 13?
  • Posts: 12,473
    OP without Roger Moore? No way. Not for me
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    PUSSY GALORE could have been a good title for another type of film.

    Just not a PG-13 one! :))

    PUSSY GALORE 13?

    The Goldfinger spin-off film series hits number 13. Appropriately the same number as Octopussy in the official Bond series!
  • Posts: 40
    The thing about OP is that it is a film that changes mood with location. In India it is high camp adventure while in Germany is a serious (sans Gorilla suit) thriller. Only Roger could have pulled off both.
  • edited May 2019 Posts: 678
    Octopussy is actually one of my top ten Bond girls. Maud Adams and Roger seemed to have a genuine on-screen chemistry. In TMWTGG too, IMO.
    I agree. I'm a big fan especially of the scene where Kamal Khan informs her about Bond and she talks to him offscreen like Blofeld. She does alluring and mysterious so well.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Octopussy is actually one of my top ten Bond girls. Maud Adams and Roger seemed to have a genuine on-screen chemistry. In TMWTGG too, IMO.
    I agree. I'm a big fan especially of the scene where Kamal Khan informs her about Bond and she talks to him offscreen like Blofeld. She does alluring and mysterious so well.

    Yes, and that scene always reminds me of how the new Blofeld first appears in John Gardner's For Special Services (1982). It may even have been an influence?
  • edited May 2019 Posts: 17,756
    Octopussy is actually one of my top ten Bond girls. Maud Adams and Roger seemed to have a genuine on-screen chemistry. In TMWTGG too, IMO.
    I agree. I'm a big fan especially of the scene where Kamal Khan informs her about Bond and she talks to him offscreen like Blofeld. She does alluring and mysterious so well.

    She really does! One of many good scenes that one.
Sign In or Register to comment.