›

007: What would you have done differently?

1…1011131516…56

Comments

  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 6,816
    Birdleson wrote: »
    That whole sub-plot should have been removed. It should have been all about Bond versus Scaramanga.

    I don't think any Bond fan could argue with that!
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,808
    Birdleson wrote: »
    That whole sub-plot should have been removed. It should have been all about Bond versus Scaramanga.

    Yes, I think that's where they really went wrong but I suppose they copied the source novel a bit as it had various sub-plots about sugar, drugs and prostitution.
  • barryt007barryt007
    edited April 2018 Posts: 19,339
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    That whole sub-plot should have been removed. It should have been all about Bond versus Scaramanga.

    I don't think any Bond fan could argue with that!

    If only....but they were aiming lighter after DAF and LALD did their jobs.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,808
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    That whole sub-plot should have been removed. It should have been all about Bond versus Scaramanga.

    I don't think any Bond fan could argue with that!

    If only.

    This is MI6 Community! ;)
  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 6,816
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    That whole sub-plot should have been removed. It should have been all about Bond versus Scaramanga.

    I don't think any Bond fan could argue with that!

    If only....but they were aiming lighter after DAF and LALD did their jobs.

    True. Apparently Christopher Lee was too serious and Hamilton kept telling him to lighten up!
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    That whole sub-plot should have been removed. It should have been all about Bond versus Scaramanga.

    I don't think any Bond fan could argue with that!

    If only....but they were aiming lighter after DAF and LALD did their jobs.

    True. Apparently Christopher Lee was too serious and Hamilton kept telling him to lighten up!

    Another reason why i admire Sir Christopher Lee..
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Birdleson wrote: »
    The original choice, Jack Palance would have been great. Or Anthony Quinn. Better yet, Lee Van Cleef!

    Palance would have been perfect. Ironic that he instead played another of Lee s iconic roles that year-Dracula.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,808
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    The original choice, Jack Palance would have been great. Or Anthony Quinn. Better yet, Lee Van Cleef!

    Palance would have been perfect. Ironic that he instead played another of Lee s iconic roles that year-Dracula.

    Wow, I never knew he played Dracula. Ironic indeed!
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Actually it was filmed in 1973, and came out early in 1974, so he could still have played Scaramanga as well.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,808
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Actually it was filmed in 1973, and came out early in 1974, so he could still have played Scaramanga as well.

    It would've been interesting to see. Presumably a more serious Scaramanga would have emerged?
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    However,Lee is no way the problem re this film.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Of course not. Lee was great as always.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,808
    barryt007 wrote: »
    However,Lee is no way the problem re this film.

    No, far from it. He's one of it's main strengths and redeeming features, in fact.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,979
    Revelator wrote: »
    This is why there needs to be a comprehensive book-length study of all the early and unused scripts in the Bond series. There is a mountain's worth of fascinating "what if?" material, ranging from the early versions of OHMSS and TLD detailed in Helfenstein's books to the Spectre-draft of Octopussy to the early versions of DAF, TWTGG, TSWLM, etc. Maibaum's papers are at the University of Indiana, Bloomington, and some enterprising scholar needs to go through them.

    Agreed. I'd also like to see all the TSWLM drafts, particularly the Burgess one.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 15,818
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    The original choice, Jack Palance would have been great. Or Anthony Quinn. Better yet, Lee Van Cleef!

    Palance would have been perfect. Ironic that he instead played another of Lee s iconic roles that year-Dracula.

    Wow, I never knew he played Dracula. Ironic indeed!

    Palance made an excellent Dracula. Most definitely worth checking out!
  • bondsumbondsum
    edited April 2018 Posts: 3,333
    echo wrote: »
    I do find all of this fascinating. There was a comment--I believe it was Cubby--that OHMSS was too similar to TB to follow it--"Thunderball on skis."
    I haven't read that quote myself, but I can say that the OHMSS movie that would have been shot after GF wouldn't have resembled the Lazenby version one bit. Richard Maibaum's script for the '65 version of OHMSS even featured a submersible Aston Martin, which was later resurrected for TSWLM after Hunt threw it out in favour of sticking closer to Fleming's book.
    echo wrote: »
    Then they went with YOLT, presumably because it was a recent novel in the public's mind. It stands to reason that TMWTGG would also be up soon because it too was a recent novel.
    It was all down to the weather in Switzerland. Even Connery is quoted in interviews during TB's production that the next movie was going to be OHMSS. I think the main reason for YOLT being chosen as the replacement story (apart from the lack of snow in Switzerland) was due to Bond's meteoric rise in popularity in Japan. Obviously YOLT is the continuation story to OHMSS so the decision would've been made reluctantly at the time.
    echo wrote: »
    I wonder why they announced DAF at the end of OHMSS. Perhaps they were going to carry on with the marriage theme?
    As the main titles and end titles are done last, the decision would've been made just week's prior to OHMSS's cinematic release. Possibly even days. Not that that was set in stone. After all, the original end titles of GF still proclaim OHMSS as the next Bond picture, as does at the end of TSWLM that it would be FYEO. GF's were changed for its re-release in cinemas when they double-billed it with FRWL just before TB came out. I think TSWLM still remains as FYEO though. Lazenby was informed towards the end of making OHMSS that the next movie would either be TMWTGG or DAF.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    bondsum wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    I do find all of this fascinating. There was a comment--I believe it was Cubby--that OHMSS was too similar to TB to follow it--"Thunderball on skis."
    I haven't read that quote myself, but I can say that the OHMSS movie that would have been shot after GF wouldn't have resembled the Lazenby version one bit. Richard Maibaum's script for the '65 version of OHMSS even featured a submersible Aston Martin, which was later resurrected for TSWLM after Hunt threw it out in favour of sticking closer to Fleming's book.
    echo wrote: »
    Then they went with YOLT, presumably because it was a recent novel in the public's mind. It stands to reason that TMWTGG would also be up soon because it too was a recent novel.
    It was all down to the weather in Switzerland. Even Connery is quoted in interviews during TB's production that the next movie was going to be OHMSS. I think the main reason for YOLT being chosen as the replacement story (apart from the lack of snow in Switzerland) was due to Bond's meteoric rise in popularity in Japan. Obviously YOLT is the continuation story to OHMSS so the decision would've been made reluctantly at the time.
    echo wrote: »
    I wonder why they announced DAF at the end of OHMSS. Perhaps they were going to carry on with the marriage theme?
    As the main titles and end titles are done last, the decision would've been made just week's prior to OHMSS's cinematic release. Possibly even days. Not that that was set in stone. After all, the original end titles of GF still proclaim OHMSS as the next Bond picture, as does at the end of TSWLM that it would be FYEO. GF's were changed for its re-release in cinemas when they double-billed it with FRWL just before TB came out. I think TSWLM still remains as FYEO though. Lazenby was informed towards the end of making OHMSS that the next movie would either be TMWTGG or DAF.

    It does indeed,a nice little anomaly re the Bond films.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    When renting TB on VHS in the 90s, it still said that OHMSS was next.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    When renting TB on VHS in the 90s, it still said that OHMSS was next.
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    When renting TB on VHS in the 90s, it still said that OHMSS was next.

    I bet they are worth something now.
  • bondsumbondsum
    Posts: 3,333
    Yes, I do believe you're right @Thunderfinger. I think there were various edits and cuts of those movies which were used for TV and video sales that were a little different to the modern versions. There's even a U.S. uncut Dr No video showing Bond firing several more bullets into Dent (more directly illustrating Bond's "you've had your six" remark) than the version we still get today.
  • coco1997coco1997
    Posts: 124
    Revelator wrote: »
    Maibaum's papers are at the University of Indiana, Bloomington, and some enterprising scholar needs to go through them.

    It's actually the University of Iowa.

  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    edited April 2018 Posts: 4,416
    I'm watching now too. Lots to enjoy for me
  • RevelatorRevelator
    Posts: 2,896
    coco1997 wrote: »
    It's actually the University of Iowa.

    You are correct. Here's a description of everything in Maibaum's papers.
    I got confused and wrote the "University of Indiana, Bloomington," which is actually where Fleming's papers and manuscripts are. How convenient it would have been if Maibaum's papers had been at the same university!
    Anyway, I hope more scholars will make their way to Iowa City in the near future.
  • Lancaster007Lancaster007 Shrublands Health Clinic, England
    Posts: 1,874
    coco1997 wrote: »
    Revelator wrote: »
    Maibaum's papers are at the University of Indiana, Bloomington, and some enterprising scholar needs to go through them.

    It's actually the University of Iowa.

    That's brilliant. I'm certain that two such perceptive talents will enjoy working together
  • coco1997coco1997
    Posts: 124
    Revelator wrote: »
    coco1997 wrote: »
    It's actually the University of Iowa.

    You are correct. Here's a description of everything in Maibaum's papers.
    I got confused and wrote the "University of Indiana, Bloomington," which is actually where Fleming's papers and manuscripts are. How convenient it would have been if Maibaum's papers had been at the same university!
    Anyway, I hope more scholars will make their way to Iowa City in the near future.

    I'm in Chicago so the University is only about a three hour drive. I'd be totally willing to make the drive up there and unearth what they have there.
  • bondsumbondsum
    Posts: 3,333
    That would be fantastic @coco1997. It would be great to find out the hidden gems in the early drafts for OHMSS, YOLT, TMWTGG and DAF. I think the rest have been covered extensively.
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    edited April 2018 Posts: 2,115
    Revelator wrote: »
    This is why there needs to be a comprehensive book-length study of all the early and unused scripts in the Bond series. There is a mountain's worth of fascinating "what if?" material, ranging from the early versions of OHMSS and TLD detailed in Helfenstein's books to the Spectre-draft of Octopussy to the early versions of DAF, TWTGG, TSWLM, etc. Maibaum's papers are at the University of Indiana, Bloomington, and some enterprising scholar needs to go through them.

    Maibaum's papers are at the University of Iowa. So are the papers of Norman Felton, executive producer of The Man From UNCLE.

    https://hmssweblog.wordpress.com/hmss-archive-iowa-spy-central/

    Ian Fleming's manuscripts (or at least most of them) and correspondence are at Indiana University.

    https://hmssweblog.wordpress.com/a-visit-with-ian-fleming/
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    edited April 2018 Posts: 17,291
    Off-topic question: Why are the Fleming papers, manuscripts etc. at Indiana University? Why not somewhere in Britain?
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    Posts: 2,115
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    Off-topic question: Why are the Fleming papers, manuscripts etc. at Indiana University? Why not somewhere in Britain?

    Indiana University's Lilly Library specializes in rare books. It even has a Gutenberg Bible.

    The library approached Fleming's family after his death, primarily about buying his collection of first edition books. It ended up getting the manuscripts and correspondence as well.
  • RevelatorRevelator
    edited April 2018 Posts: 2,896
    bondsum wrote: »
    That would be fantastic @coco1997. It would be great to find out the hidden gems in the early drafts for OHMSS, YOLT, TMWTGG and DAF. I think the rest have been covered extensively.

    Don't forget TSWLM (dozens of scripts and treatments by everyone from Anthony Burgess to John Landis) and OP (whose early treatments included Spectre, Blofeld, an Asian Octopussy, and Goldfinger's brother Monsieur Diamant [not all in the same treatment I hope])!
    To be honest, I think a few weeks will be required to sift through all the goodies there.

Sign In or Register to comment.