George Lazenby's Diamonds Are Forever or Timothy Dalton's Bond 17/Goldeneye

24

Comments

  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited September 2015 Posts: 5,131
    Everyone is forgetting that Bond 17 with Dalton would have had a cyborg and robots....awful!!!! Due to the box office disappointment of the excellent LTK, the producers would have made a fantasy laden DAD/ MR film in 1991. I'll stick with Brozzer's GE.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Everyone is forgetting that Bond 17 with Dalton would have had a cyborg and robots....awful!!!! Due to the box office disappointment of the excellent LTK, the producers would have made a fantasy laden DAD/ MR film in 1991. I'll stick with Brozzer's GE.
    Having read the original script for GoldenEye (a name which the script was given but was never referenced in the story), I must say it was awfully (not as an insult) different from what we've had with Brosnan's film. I still prefer Brosnan's own, but of the three choices Lazenby's DAF, or Dalton's B-17 or GE, I'd go with Dalton's GE.
  • StirredNotShakenStirredNotShaken Searching for No Time to Die in the "Favourite Bond Film" section...
    Posts: 2,067
    This is where I stand.

    I consider DAF to be the worst Bond film precisely for the fact that it didn't follow up OHMSS.
    I also think that GE would unequivocally be the best Bond film had they cast Dalton again.

    So for me it's a question of making DAF "not the worst Bond film with the potential of being one of the best entries"
    OR
    The certainty of making GE the best Bond film

    I'm gonna go with Dalton in GE.
  • Posts: 11,175
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Everyone is forgetting that Bond 17 with Dalton would have had a cyborg and robots....awful!!!! Due to the box office disappointment of the excellent LTK, the producers would have made a fantasy laden DAD/ MR film in 1991. I'll stick with Brozzer's GE.
    Having read the original script for GoldenEye (a name which the script was given but was never referenced in the story), I must say it was awfully (not as an insult) different from what we've had with Brosnan's film. I still prefer Brosnan's own, but of the three choices Lazenby's DAF, or Dalton's B-17 or GE, I'd go with Dalton's GE.

    What was so different about it in the original script?
  • I read that GoldenEye was heavily rewritten because it was too similar to True Lies (or was it the other way around)
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    Dalton. He's an actor. Not sure why lazenby gets so many boners here. He's not an actor. He's a trivia question
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Everyone is forgetting that Bond 17 with Dalton would have had a cyborg and robots....awful!!!! Due to the box office disappointment of the excellent LTK, the producers would have made a fantasy laden DAD/ MR film in 1991. I'll stick with Brozzer's GE.
    Having read the original script for GoldenEye (a name which the script was given but was never referenced in the story), I must say it was awfully (not as an insult) different from what we've had with Brosnan's film. I still prefer Brosnan's own, but of the three choices Lazenby's DAF, or Dalton's B-17 or GE, I'd go with Dalton's GE.

    What was so different about it in the original script?

    The settings, the characters, the sets, the scenes. Only a few lines survived from the first, and the cradle sequence remained almost the same.

    As for GE rewritten for being similar to another film, I don't think that's true. That might be the previous B-17 script that has nothing to do with GE.
  • QsAssistantQsAssistant All those moments lost in time... like tears in rain
    edited September 2015 Posts: 1,780
    I would actually prefer Connery to be in OHMSS. I just think after following him in his previous films it would've been nice to see that side of him in OHMSS. Then the writing in DAF probably would've been better since we followed Connery's Bond through his tragedy.Lazenby doesn't deserve a second film because of his attitude. He probably would've made DAF worse than it already is.
    For years I always thought Dalton shouldn't be in GE, it just didn't seem fitting. Recently I've changed my mind. While I still think Brosan should be in it more than Dalton, I think it would've been a great send off for Dalton. I can just picture him and Hopkins in the climax of the movie, "For Enland, James?" "No. For me." Damn, that would've been badass! Although I am having a hard time picturing the two of them in what I consider one of the best fist fight scenes in a Bond movie, at the end GE. Still though, I like Brosnan and Bean in the roles.
    I'd much prefer Dalton in his own Bond-17.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,950
    It's fair to say that rather than a physical threat to Dalton's 007, Hopkins' Trevelyan would have been more of a psychological threat. He wouldn't put up much of a fight with Bond, but he would know how Bond's mind works, how he'd plan his attack.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    It's fair to say that rather than a physical threat to Dalton's 007, Hopkins' Trevelyan would have been more of a psychological threat. He wouldn't put up much of a fight with Bond, but he would know how Bond's mind works, how he'd plan his attack.
    He was both a psychological and physical threat in the first draft. He was quite untouchable and played Bond out like a patsy until the climactic ending.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    The actual Bean vs Brozzer fight we got was very physical, quite violent.....A definite Brozzer high point.
  • I would have loved to have seen a proper follow up to OHMSS with Peter Hunt in the directors chair. So I will go with Lazenby's DAF. Concerning the 17th Dalton film, the assassin robot sounds interesting if handled correctly...
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    suavejmf wrote: »
    The actual Bean vs Brozzer fight we got was very physical, quite violent.....A definite Brozzer high point.
    I agree with that. As much as I'm a fan of Brosnan's Bond films, his physical presence in combat was never the same in the other three follow-ups. He was brilliant against Trevelyan, why was his melee skills were toned down I'll never grasp.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    Who the fuck is brozzer?
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Language, sir. PG-13. ;)
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    I'm actually allowed one for a pg13;) a few more if I'm a Spielberg;)
  • edited September 2015 Posts: 389
    I would have preferred Dalton in Bond 17, not in GE thoug, as I consider it a good movie for a new Bond and new era. In my view, an exotic adventure with TD, released in mid-late 1991, would have been the best option.
  • suavejmf wrote: »
    The actual Bean vs Brozzer fight we got was very physical, quite violent.....A definite Brozzer high point.

    Agreed. Brosnan's best fight scene by a country mile. I also quite liked the short fight he had with that nameless guy on the yacht.

    For whatever reason Brosnan softened up throughout the rest of his run.
  • KillmasterKillmaster Roanoke, Virginia USA
    Posts: 15
    I would have liked to have seen Lazenby do a legitimate follow-up to OHMSS, with a more physical Bond. I feel that with him as Bond and maybe a return of Savalas as Blofeld, the mess that was DAF could have been turned into a solid down-to-earth revenge film. Unfortunately, Connery more or less phoned in his performance for the paycheck, Charles Gray as Blofeld was a poor choice and Jill St. John was one of the weaker Bond girls. To me NSNA is superior to DAF.

    I would have LOVED to have seen a third Dalton, but I would like to have gone in the other direction, with Dalton replacing Moore one film sooner and doing a far more serious version of AVTAK. Bond 17 would have been a bonus.
  • suavejmf wrote: »
    The actual Bean vs Brozzer fight we got was very physical, quite violent.....A definite Brozzer high point.

    I definitely agree with this. I loved GE and the tone that it set for his era as Bond. It was a highly over the top film (satellite weapon in space, cradle coming out of the water in Cuba, etc.), but there was legitimate tension that seemed to ground the film in a way. I feel like Tomorrow Never Dies was similar up until the end of the parking deck car sequence. After that the film went off the rails with non-stop action, no personal developments, and then TWINE & DAD never righted where TND went bad.

  • edited September 2015 Posts: 3,280
    Actually, I would've liked to have seen both versions, but if I had to choose one then it goes to Lazenby. After all we got too see a second Dalton movie but not a second Lazenby one which makes me all the more curious as to how DAF would've played out. Would Saltzman have taken a more active role in the DAF script because Lazenby was "his boy" so to speak, and therefore substituted Cubby's wacky dream of Howard Hughes influencing the plotline? Would Saltzman have helped Lazenby more with some acting classes to sharpen his skillset? Maybe.

    It's certainly implied by Peter Hunt that DAF was intended to be a straight revenge story if Lazenby had continued, with Savalas returning as Blofeld. As much as I like Dalton I'd rather see an alternative "classic era 007" if given the chance.

    And as @sauvejmf pointed out Dalton's third would've been Property of a Lady with killer robots which could've killed any goodwill Dalton had procured from his previous two Bond movies.
  • JohnHammond73JohnHammond73 Lancashire, UK
    edited September 2015 Posts: 4,151
    This is a tough question as I'd have liked to have seen both of these movies. If choosing the one, then I'd probably have to say I'd rather have seen Lazenby in DAF and have a proper revenge movie. OHMSS is one of my favourite Bond movies and is always pretty much in my top 5. I always kind of feel for Lazenby in that 1) he had his voice dubbed during scenes at Piz Gloria (although, to be fair, that was a valid plot point) and also because I wasn't overly keen on the links to the past (when he tries to resign and the caretaker whistling the GF tune); I don't think they were needed, and, of course, the breaking of the fourth wall; this should not happen in a Bond. Things like this take away from what GL was trying to do with his Bond, in my opinion.

    Anyway, I'd rather have seen GL in DAF.
  • bond_azoozbondbond_azoozbond Portland,OR
    Posts: 97
    Well if we had Lazenby in DAF then I doubt we would get Dalton as bond even .. Last time I saw bond movies by order I felt really mad after watching DAF .. If we had Lazenby in that movie instead and maybe 2 or 3 more bonds from him that would be really awesome.. He could've established his own bond .. But sadly he quit and he left us wondering and hoping :(

    Since that didn't happen .. Having more Dalton movies would be really interesting.. As his bond is very different and serious.. Maybe bond 17 in 1991 and two more movie following that up in : 1993 and 1995 .. I would like more Dalton bond instead of Brosnan for sure ..
  • edited September 2015 Posts: 1,498
    Easy - Dalton's 3rd is one of the great missed opportunities of mainstream cinema.
    A well marketed film with a script tailored to his strengths would have altered the perception of his 007 by a mile.

    The reason being that Lazenby worked for OHMSS - but with a weaker film he would have blundered. Dalton didn't even need a half-decent film to shine in the role (or any role, really...), his Bond's were good because of him, not the other way around as with Lazenby (who did v well and I like his OHMSS portrayal, but he would not have worked in DAF or LALD....)
  • TreefingersTreefingers Isthmus City, Republic of Isthmus
    edited September 2015 Posts: 191
    True, he did do his job well, but OHMSS is great really because of the story itself and the style of direction and the other experienced actors, it is a mix of elements.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    AceHole wrote: »
    Easy - Dalton's 3rd is one of the great missed opportunities of mainstream cinema.
    A well marketed film with a script tailored to his strengths would have altered the perception of his 007 by a mile.

    I like Dalton in the role. However, LTK played perfectly to his strengths as 007. Unfortuntately it didn't fair well at the box office so I guarantee (as quoted on the DVD commentary) that Cubby would have gone back to a more comic film in 1991, regardless of whether Tim was in it or not.
  • edited September 2015 Posts: 962
    Unpopular opinion time: Lazenby's DAF would have been a weird and funny romp, much like the existing version, just with a revenge plot added and some more violence, IMHO.
  • Posts: 2,300
    I would have loved to have seen a proper follow up to OHMSS with Peter Hunt in the directors chair. So I will go with Lazenby's DAF.

    Yes, that's what swings it for me. Hunt's presence is more important to me than the actors involved--although I would have loved to see more Dalton Bond films. Hunt was one of the most forceful directors to ever work on a Bond movie--he shaped OHMSS to conform to his own vision. He insisted on following the novel and rewrote Maibaum's drafts (with Simon Raven's help), and because he was a trusted member of the Bond team, the producers gave him creative freedom. He brought in a new director of photography and a new editor, thus introducing the most experimental editing ever seen in a Bond film (the cutting in QoS looks derivative in comparison). Most Bond directors have been guns-for-hire--few have been as hands-on and as passionate about Bond as Hunt. The auteurs in the Bond series have usually been the producers, but Hunt was the guiding force of OHMSS. Had he directed DAF, whether with Lazenby, Connery, or Moore, the film would have been a much tighter production with an individual vision. There might have been more humor than in OHMSS, and there would have been major deviations from the source novel (in order to incorporate Blofeld) but I have little doubt that Hunt's DAF would have been a classic. Another Bond movie with the drive, force, look, and feel of OHMSS? Yes please.
  • DragonpolDragonpol The Crazy World of David Dragonpol
    Posts: 14,723
    I'd like to see both of them if I could! :)
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Hunt was a great Bond Director because he learnt from the best......Terence Young.
Sign In or Register to comment.