Reunion with Death - early third Dalton treatment?

2456

Comments

  • DragonpolDragonpol The Crazy World of David Dragonpol
    Posts: 14,731
    RC7 wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    Have you considered ordering the issue and supporting the magazine?

    https://www.mi6confidential.com/issue_43.php

    Bond fans buying things? You must be joking. There’s a reason EON have limited merchandise.

    I try to make up for them all. I always try to buy my sources where at all possible.
  • Timothy Dalton circa 1991. We were robbed, people :’(

    008870d273d3e24864b5f211f38b1abb--timothy-dalton-love-letters.jpg
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,499
    Definitely pulls off the facial hair better than Craig in SF.
  • Posts: 19,339
    I think his 3rd film would have been his best performance as Bond.
  • Posts: 7,642
    I am just glad Brosnan and came in and took over.
  • Posts: 3,771
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I think his 3rd film would have been his best performance as Bond.

    Absolutely. We indeed were robbed
  • Posts: 3,771
    SaintMark wrote: »
    I am just glad Brosnan and came in and took over.

    Not me. The doldrum years imo!
  • Posts: 7,642
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    SaintMark wrote: »
    I am just glad Brosnan and came in and took over.

    Not me. The doldrum years imo!

    I can understand you'd prefer a world with more Dalton but the Franchise did well without further installments of this this never happened to the other fella, as a certain Aussi said. ;)
  • Posts: 3,771
    And who is to say it wouldn't have done well 2 yrs later with Dalton with a solid marketing campaign like GE ("You were expecting someone else?)
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,954
    Timothy Dalton circa 1991. We were robbed, people :’(

    008870d273d3e24864b5f211f38b1abb--timothy-dalton-love-letters.jpg

    And c.2002:

    1f0fe252e97c2c899083c2e1813ce7c2.jpg

    The 90's could have belonged to T-Dalts.
  • Posts: 3,771
    Indeed. We can only dream!
  • edited February 2018 Posts: 19,339
    He does look good in both those photos,tbh.
    Could have got another 7 films out of him in 1991,93,95,97,99,01,03.
    Or 5 from 1995.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    edited February 2018 Posts: 1,499
    barryt007 wrote: »
    He does look good in both those photos,tbh.
    Could have got another 7 films out of him in 1991,93,95,97,99,01,03.
    Or 5 from 1995.

    Love Dalton but I could never give up Brozza. I think four films would've been perfect for him. And Dalton had no interest in being the longest serving Bond anyway.
  • Posts: 3,771
    I just would have liked that 3rd movie from him. Just felt we were really getting into a great era for Bond. The Brossa years for me simply sucked the life out of the series, don't care what box office figures are thrown at me. TLD or LTK EACH are worth all of Brossas films together..And more!
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,954
    Remington wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    He does look good in both those photos,tbh.
    Could have got another 7 films out of him in 1991,93,95,97,99,01,03.
    Or 5 from 1995.

    Love Dalton but I could never give up Brozza. I think four films would've been perfect for him. And Dalton had no interest in being the longest serving Bond anyway.

    Looking at it a different way, it's possible that Dalton & Brosnan fans could have what they wanted. Dalton could have done another two or three post LTK, then Brosnan takes over for either '95 or '97. I can't imagine Dalton making more than five anyway, four is the best number, even back when they were able to crank 'em out on a two year cycle.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Enemy of the state
    Posts: 41,579
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    I just would have liked that 3rd movie from him. Just felt we were really getting into a great era for Bond. The Brossa years for me simply sucked the life out of the series, don't care what box office figures are thrown at me. TLD or LTK EACH are worth all of Brossas films together..And more!
    A lot more.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,499
    Dalton
    .The Property of a Lady 1991 - based on the Bond 17 treatment but without the cyborg and stealth car. Dalton's biggest movie. Tone of LTK with the scale of TSWLM.
    .Risico 1993 - very grounded, glamorous, classy European spy movie. Reminiscent of FRWL/OHMSS.

    Brosnan
    .Everything Or Nothing 2004 - epic film but with a much darker tone like Brosnan wanted. Basically the look of DAD with the tone of CR.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited February 2018 Posts: 15,423
    TLD has a decent first half, but that’s about it, even though Dalton is a great Bond, it has a weak leading lady and laughable villain (Krabbe, who actually is a good actor).

    But, to say LTK is worth the Brosnan films all? The movie is full of cheap assets and terrible actors that make Denise Richards look like a thespian. I watched the film last night and couldn’t help but cringe at most of what came and went. It was an overglorified television movie that seemed like a Miami Vice spinoff. It’s enjoyable, but nowhere near to hold a candle for either of the Brosnan films. If it wasn’t for Robert Davi, I don’t think the film would be regarded with a high value, these days.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,954
    Remington wrote: »
    Dalton
    .The Property of a Lady 1991 - based on the Bond 17 treatment but without the cyborg and stealth car. Dalton's biggest movie. Tone of LTK with the scale of TSWLM.
    .Risico 1993 - very grounded, glamorous, classy European spy movie. Reminiscent of FRWL/OHMSS.


    I like it. Though in my dream timeline, I have Dalton stay on as Bond until 1998, with James Purefoy taking over in 2000. TLD was the last spy thriller of the series, so Dalton making another spy thriller Bond, pleases this fan.
  • edited February 2018 Posts: 12,395
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    And who is to say it wouldn't have done well 2 yrs later with Dalton with a solid marketing campaign like GE ("You were expecting someone else?)

    As much as I love Dalton and would have killed for more films with him, I don't think he would have been as successful as Brosnan. I think people forget how popular he actually was at the time.
    Remington wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    He does look good in both those photos,tbh.
    Could have got another 7 films out of him in 1991,93,95,97,99,01,03.
    Or 5 from 1995.

    Love Dalton but I could never give up Brozza. I think four films would've been perfect for him. And Dalton had no interest in being the longest serving Bond anyway.

    Looking at it a different way, it's possible that Dalton & Brosnan fans could have what they wanted. Dalton could have done another two or three post LTK, then Brosnan takes over for either '95 or '97. I can't imagine Dalton making more than five anyway, four is the best number, even back when they were able to crank 'em out on a two year cycle.

    As a Dalton and Brosnan fan, that sounds perfect, although I'd add one more Dalton film in 1985 in place of AVTAK (keep Walken and the score though).
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Enemy of the state
    Posts: 41,579
    Dalton had a 3 film contract, with an option for a fourth-same as Brosnan. Releasing the next films in 1991 and 1993, was the plan all along.
  • DragonpolDragonpol The Crazy World of David Dragonpol
    Posts: 14,731
    Dalton had a 3 film contract, with an option for a fourth-same as Brosnan. Releasing the next films in 1991 and 1993, was the plan all along.

    Pity that it never came to fruiton.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,499
    The Bond 17 screenplay written by MGW, Ruggiero, Osborne, and Davies is dated January 1991 so I have a feeling the film would've been released in 1992.
  • Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dalton had a 3 film contract, with an option for a fourth-same as Brosnan. Releasing the next films in 1991 and 1993, was the plan all along.

    Pity that it never came to fruiton.

    Does anyone know how much we can blame Mcclory and how much of it was just due to them not getting things together/settling on the direction to take it? Because I always thought it was the court case stopping them but they seemed to go through a bunch of treatments in that time, it seems like they were trying to get the next one off the ground as that stuff was going on.
  • edited February 2018 Posts: 552
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dalton had a 3 film contract, with an option for a fourth-same as Brosnan. Releasing the next films in 1991 and 1993, was the plan all along.

    Pity that it never came to fruiton.

    Does anyone know how much we can blame Mcclory and how much of it was just due to them not getting things together/settling on the direction to take it? Because I always thought it was the court case stopping them but they seemed to go through a bunch of treatments in that time, it seems like they were trying to get the next one off the ground as that stuff was going on.

    It had nothing to do with Kevin McClory; the lawsuits with him came later (in the late 1990s).

    The legal wrangling that caused the gap between Dalton's and Brosnan's eras involved Pathe Communications (and its head, Giancarlo Parretti), the merger of Pathe/MGM and television rights to the Bond films. You can read all about it here:

    http://lifebetweenframes.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-lost-dalton-film.html

    Another factor in the delay had to do with a change in regime at MGM/United Artists. John Calley came onboard as MGM/UA President and hired Jeff Kleeman as his VP. They didn't want to use Dalton and Michael France's draft of GOLDENEYE (which was written for Dalton), and they worked with EON to rethink the direction of the series.
  • Escalus5 wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dalton had a 3 film contract, with an option for a fourth-same as Brosnan. Releasing the next films in 1991 and 1993, was the plan all along.

    Pity that it never came to fruiton.

    Does anyone know how much we can blame Mcclory and how much of it was just due to them not getting things together/settling on the direction to take it? Because I always thought it was the court case stopping them but they seemed to go through a bunch of treatments in that time, it seems like they were trying to get the next one off the ground as that stuff was going on.

    It had nothing to do with Kevin McClory; the lawsuits with him came later (in the late 1990s).

    The legal wrangling that caused the gap between Dalton's and Brosnan's eras involved Pathe Communications (and its head, Giancarlo Parretti), the merger of Pathe/MGM and television rights to the Bond films. You can read all about it here:

    http://lifebetweenframes.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-lost-dalton-film.html

    Another factor in the delay had to do with a change in regime at MGM/United Artists. John Calley came onboard as MGM/UA President and hired Jeff Kleeman as his VP. Neither of them wanted to use Dalton nor Michael France's draft of GOLDENEYE (which was written for Dalton), and they worked with EON to rethink the direction of the series.

    Cheers for this. I'll give that a read in the morning.
  • ChriskarrChriskarr Spain
    edited February 2018 Posts: 44
    Remington wrote: »
    The Bond 17 screenplay written by MGW, Ruggiero, Osborne, and Davies is dated January 1991 so I have a feeling the film would've been released in 1992.
    Or maybe the release was on december of 1991?
    Hopefully one day we can read that entire script.

    I think that the business factor greatly influenced for fear that Dalton would not work at the box office from 1993 until the end of the 90s. I don't think that it would have been a commercial failure.
  • edited February 2018 Posts: 3,290
    To be fair to Dalton, I believe Bond 17 would have been handled completely differently to the LTK debacle. First off, much like TLD and GoldenEye, it would not have been pitted against that year's biggest blockbusters in an overcrowded summer schedule. Lessons would have been learnt from UA's mishandled and lacklustre marketing campaign for LTK — witness the superior marketing campaign for GE compared to its predecessor. More than likely, production would've been brought back home to England for a highly-polished makeover. A far better and marketable song would have been found to garner constant radio-play and chart success than Gladys Knight's (sans her Pips) insipid effort. Personally, I think it was a great shame that Dalton didn't get to do a Bond film in the early Nineties, as I'm sure it would have reversed how the Brosnan fans now tend to view him, that of a disagreeable curiosity who almost sank the series until their saviour came along.

    I loved Dalton in 1992's Framed with Penelope Cruz, though I did feel he needed a shorter haircut for playing Bond. One thing I didn't like about him in LTK was his long, poncy locks. This is how he looked in 1992.

    timothy-dalton-penelope-cruz-framed-1992-BPE232.jpg
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Enemy of the state
    Posts: 41,579
    I read that Dalton walked away from the part in early 1994, after having read Michael France s script. Can t say I blame him. He recognized a cringy Bond film there, I suppose.

    His six year contract had expired so he was free to do so.
  • Posts: 552
    I read that Dalton walked away from the part in early 1994, after having read Michael France s script. Can t say I blame him. He recognized a cringy Bond film there, I suppose.

    I've never seen anything to confirm that he walked away because of France's script. That sounds like something fabricated by the fans.

    In reality, here's how it went down:

    1. Dalton was keen on doing one more Bond film, which would have been GOLDENEYE. The problem is, Cubby Broccoli wanted him to sign a multi-film contract. Dalton refused.

    2. MGM/UA did not want to proceed with Dalton in the lead. Calley and Kleeman convinced EON to go with a new actor.

Sign In or Register to comment.