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

13

Comments

  • AntiLocqueBrakesAntiLocqueBrakes The edge
    Posts: 538
    Killmaster wrote: »
    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.

    Heck of an idea. Though I'm not too sure what Dalton could have done with AVTAK that Moore didn't. Over the top plot entirely. The pairing of Brosnan and Roberts would have made more sense at the time though.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Killmaster wrote: »
    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.

    Heck of an idea. Though I'm not too sure what Dalton could have done with AVTAK that Moore didn't. Over the top plot entirely. The pairing of Brosnan and Roberts would have made more sense at the time though.
    As much as I love Brosnan and his films, AVTAK with him in 1985 would never have been differentiated from his Remington Steele gig. Seriously he was going to be more comedic than Bondian, which not even I could've tolerated. However, I'd very much rather Dalton did AVTAK, with more theatrical, dramatic and still far-fetched plot, along with a lot better third act. The film goes down the well for me once the horse race/death of Tibbett segment is over.
  • AntiLocqueBrakesAntiLocqueBrakes The edge
    Posts: 538
    @ClarkDevlin Good points though I guess we're moving a little further away from the plot topic. Rem Steele was way goofy and Brosnan likely benefitted from the time away from the character to establish himself as Bond. And I think you're right on Dalton giving AVTAK a bit more intensity early in the film. Zorin would have wrought psychological havoc on Dalton's Bond whereas Moore seems to take the blows like a seasoned pro.

    Get the feeling a '91 Dalton would have looked like Lethal Weapon 2 or one of those bad Van Damme movies. Would have liked to see he and Glen carry the franchise into the new decade, but the idea holds a lot less appeal to me than what Lazenby could have done 20 years earlier.
  • PlykshowPlykshow Kent, United Kingdom
    Posts: 35
    It depends on which draft of Bond 17 you're talking about. During pre-production of Bond 17 the story changed drastically with almost every draft.

    The first draft had Sir Henry Lee Ching as the villain, with locations including Hong Kong, China, Japan, London and Scotland. Main plot points included an explosion in the Nanking Atomic Plant, a car chase between the DB5 and Rodin's car, a fight with the Kohoni brothers and the ending taking place beneath the sewers of Hong Kong.

    The second draft had General Han and Sir Henry Furguson as the villains, with locations including Vanouver, Vegas, China, Hong Kong and Libya. Main plot points included a fight with a robot programmed by Colonel Al-Sabra of the LSSP, Aston Martin DB5 vs monster truck chase in Vegas, a fight with female body builders and a finale taking place inside the Hoover Dam. (Felt a lot like GE with TND mixed in)

    The third draft (I don't know much about) had 006 (not name Alec) as a rogue agent. Similar to Goldeneye but with similar jokes to those in True Lies

    The final draft would be Goldeneye as we know it in 1995.

    If the first draft had been made (obviously with a bit of tweaking here and there) I think it would be one of the best of all the films and I would definitely prefer it to a Lazenby Diamonds are Forever. In fact, if I'm honest, I would have preferred Connery in OHMSS.
  • TreefingersTreefingers Isthmus City, Republic of Isthmus
    Posts: 191
    That second draft sounds bonkers, i'll have to find it.

    I read one dated January '94, with Bond fighting Trevelyan, he was not 006 but a defector head of section. Different locations and many different characters. Would have been a pretty solid film with Dalton and a few alterations.
  • BirdlesonBirdleson San Jose, CAModerator
    Posts: 31,006
    Now that the SPECTRE furor is abating, it's nice to see some of the standard threads making their way back to the fore.
  • SerialHitmanSerialHitman Plotting my revenge
    Posts: 45
    Dalton in a third Bond film would have been tremendous. If Dalton had come back for a third film in 1991, I suspect it would have been something akin to the first draft of Bond 17 which sounds great to me, and if he had done a third he probably would have gone on to do a fourth as well in 1993 which probably would have been GE. Now that sounds like a winning collection of Bond films.

    As for Lazenby in DAF, although DAF is disappointing, I don't think they could have turned it into a revenge story. They had already messed up the Blofeld arc from the novels so it makes sense for them to just take it in a new direction. And even if they had found a way to make it work it seems unlikely the inexperienced Lazenby would have been able to handle the deeper emotions such a film would throw at him. I'd much rather have seen Connery in OHMSS.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited January 2016 Posts: 15,534
    And even if they had found a way to make it work it seems unlikely the inexperienced Lazenby would have been able to handle the deeper emotions such a film would throw at him. I'd much rather have seen Connery in OHMSS.

    In my perfect world, if Lazenby had been in DAF, he'd let his fists do the talking for 2 hours. No need of an Oscar worthy performance, just pure badassery.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    edited January 2016 Posts: 1,984
    Another one from Dalton. He might not have been the most charismatic Bond, but he sure as hell is a much better actor than Lazenby was. Also, if Lazenby had continued, I have a feeling that it would've killed the franchise.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I did read Michael France's script treatment what would become the first draft of GoldenEye (titled The GoldenEye) back then. It was definitely written with Dalton in mind, which was why I prefer the final film to the script.

    However, those who have read Ruggerrio Jr's script, I would heartily appreciate it if anyone spares me a digital copy or a link to it. I am eager to read it.
  • Posts: 3,280
    Another one from Dalton. He might not have been the most charismatic Bond, but he sure as hell is a much better actor than Lazenby was. Also, if Lazenby had continued, I have a feeling that it would've killed the franchise.
    And yet Lazenby was the actor that was nominated for a Golden Globe after his performance in "Majesty's". No offence, but I think I'd rather take the recommendations of the 93 members of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association over your opinion, @Eyes.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    edited January 2016 Posts: 1,984
    bondsum wrote: »
    Another one from Dalton. He might not have been the most charismatic Bond, but he sure as hell is a much better actor than Lazenby was. Also, if Lazenby had continued, I have a feeling that it would've killed the franchise.
    And yet Lazenby was the actor that was nominated for a Golden Globe after his performance in "Majesty's". No offence, but I think I'd rather take the recommendations of the 93 members of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association over your opinion, @Eyes.

    Well, of course, that's just my opinion. Nominations don't really relate to my point, though, and in fairness, Lazenby had issues with his colleagues (or his colleagues had issues with him) that Dalton didn't have.

    EDIT: He was voted for "most promising newcomer", and I agree - he's pretty promising for his lack of acting experience. I just don't think he would've taken the franchise in a sustainable and enduring direction, and how many nominations he received isn't really relevant to that. But again, this is just my opinion, and I'm not going to be upset over differences in opinion.
  • Posts: 11,175
    suavejmf wrote: »
    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.

    I don't think it helped that Dalton himself, by all accounts, didn't have the greatest of experiences when filming LTK. It's known that he regularly clashed with Glen.

    Laz, by contrast, wasn't an experienced actor but he did have a director with a clear vision.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Yet Glen now sites LTK as his best Bond film......rightly so.

    Yes, Laz, by contrast, wasn't an experienced actor but he did have a great director with a clear (and Flemingesque) vision. Hence, why his performance is good.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Enemy of the state
    Posts: 41,566
    Lazenby said Hunt didn t even talk to him during shooting.
  • edited January 2016 Posts: 11,175
    Lazenby said Hunt didn t even talk to him during shooting.

    He probably did but Laz was too busy chasing anything with breasts and a pretty face to notice ;)

    @suavejmf. It's funny then that Dalton has said on record that he prefers TLD. Having watched both in the last couple of months, TLD does seem the classier of the two IMO.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Enemy of the state
    Posts: 41,566
    That could be it of course. Maybe Hunt was jealous.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Enemy of the state
    edited January 2016 Posts: 41,566
    Damn doublepost!
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I remember reading it here somewhere that John Glen and Dalton had a small fall out over a use of elements... Dalton wanting more acting, whereas Glen demanding more action.
  • Posts: 104
    Plykshow wrote: »
    It depends on which draft of Bond 17 you're talking about. During pre-production of Bond 17 the story changed drastically with almost every draft.

    The second draft had General Han and Sir Henry Furguson as the villains, with locations including Vancouver, Vegas, China, Hong Kong and Libya. Main plot points included a fight with a robot programmed by Colonel Al-Sabra of the LSSP, Aston Martin DB5 vs monster truck chase in Vegas, a fight with female body builders and a finale taking place inside the Hoover Dam. (Felt a lot like GE with TND mixed in)

    Where did you read this? I've never heard about any of this before.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    That could be it of course. Maybe Hunt was jealous.

    Jealous that Laz wasn't paying him attention. Ha ha!
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    edited January 2016 Posts: 16,057
    Delete
  • edited January 2016 Posts: 3,280
    That could be it of course. Maybe Hunt was jealous.
    According to The Laz, he upset Hunt's entourage of gay friends on set, when he was asked by other members of the production crew to clear the sound stage of Hunt's friends larking around when they wanted to set-up the next shot. Lazenby admits his mistake, and everything had to be relayed via the Assistant Director after then. Also, with the exception of Tracy's death scene, Lazenby was mostly only ever given one take.... I will repeat that again... ONE TAKE to get a scene right!

    Lazenby: "Peter Hunt got me the job. If it wasn’t for him wanting to use me as James Bond, I wouldn’t have been there. But then we got on the set. Peter is gay as gay can be and I had no idea. I wasn’t sophisticated enough at the time, but there was a bunch of gay guys who were friends of Peter’s running around the set. Someone told me to clear the set and I said “How do I do that?” They said “Just pick up the speaker over there and say that you want the set cleared and if anybody’s not working on the scene to get of the set.” I did that and all these guys that were Peter’s friends had to leave. They told Peter that I had thrown them off the set, but I had no idea what I was doing. I was just doing the crew a favour. But Peter wouldn’t talk to me through the whole movie. He never spoke one word to me. I did that whole movie without speaking one word to the director after that day, and that was the second day on the set."
  • edited January 2016 Posts: 11,175
    This doesn't paint Peter Hunt in a particularly good light. Thanks @Bondsum. I'd heard Laz say in an interview that he and Peter didn't talk to eachother, but I didn't know the (apparent) story.
  • Posts: 789
    I would Timothy Dalton Bond17/Goldeneye with different story & done in 1991 or 92.
  • Dalton. He's an actor. Not sure why lazenby gets so many boners here. He's not an actor. He's a trivia question

    Omg... "He's not an actor. He's a trivia question" lmao xD

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Enemy of the state
    Posts: 41,566
    Some members here are trivia questions.
  • ChriskarrChriskarr Spain
    edited February 2020 Posts: 44
    Plykshow wrote: »
    It depends on which draft of Bond 17 you're talking about. During pre-production of Bond 17 the story changed drastically with almost every draft.
    The second draft had General Han and Sir Henry Furguson as the villains, with locations including Vanouver, Vegas, China, Hong Kong and Libya. Main plot points included a fight with a robot programmed by Colonel Al-Sabra of the LSSP, Aston Martin DB5 vs monster truck chase in Vegas, a fight with female body builders and a finale taking place inside the Hoover Dam. (Felt a lot like GE with TND mixed in)
    Anyone have this second draft?

  • Posts: 552
    Plykshow wrote: »
    It depends on which draft of Bond 17 you're talking about. During pre-production of Bond 17 the story changed drastically with almost every draft.

    The first draft had Sir Henry Lee Ching as the villain, with locations including Hong Kong, China, Japan, London and Scotland. Main plot points included an explosion in the Nanking Atomic Plant, a car chase between the DB5 and Rodin's car, a fight with the Kohoni brothers and the ending taking place beneath the sewers of Hong Kong.

    The second draft had General Han and Sir Henry Furguson as the villains, with locations including Vanouver, Vegas, China, Hong Kong and Libya. Main plot points included a fight with a robot programmed by Colonel Al-Sabra of the LSSP, Aston Martin DB5 vs monster truck chase in Vegas, a fight with female body builders and a finale taking place inside the Hoover Dam. (Felt a lot like GE with TND mixed in)

    The third draft (I don't know much about) had 006 (not name Alec) as a rogue agent. Similar to Goldeneye but with similar jokes to those in True Lies

    The final draft would be Goldeneye as we know it in 1995.

    There are some inaccuracies here I'd like to clear up.

    The "first draft" you refer to was actually a story treatment by Alfonse Ruggiero & Michael Wilson. That treatment was expanded into a screenplay by William Osborne & William Davies (the "second draft" described above).

    The treatment and screenplay were completed in 1990-91, before the litigation that caused the long gap in Bond films.

    The Michael France GOLDENEYE script was a completely different project with no connection to the early '90s material and was developed after the lawsuit battle.

  • OctopussyOctopussy Piz Gloria, Schilthorn, Switzerland.
    Posts: 1,081
    As a fan of Lazenby and Dalton this is a difficult one for me to decide, but I'll have to go with my favourite, George. While I'm a huge Dalton fan and I would've loved to have seen Goldeneye with him reprising the role for a third film, I can't help but think what could've been had Lazenby continued. Hypothetically speaking, I would've loved to have seen a proper follow up to On Her Majesty's Secret Service with Bond seeking revenge on Blofeld for killing Tracy with either Hunt or Young in the directing chair. Properly executed, I feel that would've been a more thrilling film then a Dalton Goldeneye. Lazenby was brilliant in OHMSS but only would've improved as time progressed. I feel like his physicality would've played well into a Diamonds Are Forever with him in it. I've always hated how as a result of Lazenby only doing a single film that he is written off by the public at large, whereas I feel had he done more then one that this public perception would've have changed, potentially. I can only image the relationship between 006 and 007 had Dalton returned for a third. I know there's discussions around the original script, but I feel that even the GE that we got would've played right into the wheelhouse of Dalton's Bond. Both are massive missed opportunities, but it's Lazenby that wins it for me.
Sign In or Register to comment.