› ›

Would Goldeneye have been a success with Dalton?

1…6364666869…104

Comments

  • gumboltgumbolt Now with in-office photocopier
    Posts: 153
    I think GE was a success partly because it relaunched the series. Whilst Dalton doubtless could have put in a decent performance, I think it would have been harder to achieve a relaunch with him. So from a viewing perspective, yes it could have been a success with Dalton. But looking at the bigger picture, Dalton would have probably quit after that or 1 more (he has recently said as much), and you would need another relaunch. Two movies did not make a relaunch in those days.
    I think Eon would entertain a planned "two film Bond star" today because they recognise that reboots and relaunches are now much more familiar and comfortable territory for 21st century audiences. As I have said about Dalton before, right man in the role at the wrong time.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,809
    Everything is a success with Dalton. He got the James Bond role so right he only needed to play him twice to reach perfection! :)
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    I think Dlaton was an idiot not to sign a three movie deal
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited January 2017 Posts: 11,189
    I think he did originally. But the long gap made him reconsider.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,809
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I think he did originally. But the long gap made him reconsider.

    Exactly how it happened there.

  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    What I mean is he was an idiot not to sign on for three more in 1994/5. I think that is the commitment that EON wanted. He had this daft idea that he'd be to old at 50.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Anything with Dalton is a success.

    He could have played Bond from DN to SP, it would be all good, but maybe it would have become a tad boring with time.
    On second thought...no, not even that.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,331
    Thank goodness that never happened. :))
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Actually @Murdock I would settle with this:

    1981 to 1989 DALTON
    1995 to 2006 BROSNAN
    2008 to 2022 DALTON

    :P
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,331
    @BondJasonBond006, I'd give my alternate Bond timeline but you wouldn't like it. =))
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited January 2017 Posts: 9,020
    Murdock wrote: »
    @BondJasonBond006, I'd give my alternate Bond timeline but you wouldn't like it. =))

    Oh I could live with:
    1962 to 1981 (as it was)
    1983 to 2022 PIERCE BROSNAN
    I definitely could.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,331
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    @BondJasonBond006, I'd give my alternate Bond timeline but you wouldn't like it. =))

    Oh I could live with:
    1962 to 1981 (as it was)
    1983 to 2022 PIERCE BROSNAN
    I definitely could.

    Here's my version.
    1962-85 as it was.
    1987 to 2020 Pierce Brosnan. :D
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Alternate Timeline? Sounds interesting. Here goes:

    1962-1969 - As it was (although I would have been ok with Conners in OHMSS)
    1971-1983 - Moore (I can live with him stopping in 1979, but OP is just so damn good)
    1985-1989 - Dalton (just so the Daltonites can stop whining about him not getting his 3rd)
    1995-2002 - Brosnan (if there was no Brosnan, there would be no Craig)
    2006-2015 - Craig (I wouldn't have minded him stopping after SF to be honest)
    2019- somebody new.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Murdock wrote: »
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    @BondJasonBond006, I'd give my alternate Bond timeline but you wouldn't like it. =))

    Oh I could live with:
    1962 to 1981 (as it was)
    1983 to 2022 PIERCE BROSNAN
    I definitely could.

    Here's my version.
    1962-85 as it was.
    1987 to 2020 Pierce Brosnan. :D

    That'll do as well :D

    But seriously now:
    If I really had the means to alter history it would have played out like this:

    1962 to 1967 CONNERY
    1969 to 1971 LAZENBY with DAF a gritty revenge story
    1973 to 1983 MOORE
    1985 to 1991 DALTON with Property Of A Lady being made
    1995 to 2020 BROSNAN assuming 2018 and 2020 saw two more Bond films
  • LordBrettSinclairLordBrettSinclair Greensleeves
    Posts: 167
    Jase how silly of you!

    This is the only way it should have been...

    1962 - 2002 Roger Moore
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited January 2017 Posts: 8,504
    "Anything with Dalton is success"
    Really?!?!? He never had a hot/hit film. Ever. His Bond films under-delivered.
    Yet someone like @Mendes goes after Craig who, even when a film doesn't exactly hit makes more than Dalton's films combined.

    And, as i remind @Mendes, DC's films are not the popcorn flicks seeking number one at the Box office (aside from his LATE CASTING in CBvsA).
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,504
    In the end, I admire the Daltonites since their man was correct in his analysis of the character.

    He just didn't deliver.

    I was once a Daltonite. I was twelve when he was cast. I loved his face. I ate up everything I could find on the man.

    But man, oh man, he couldn't execute. And believe me, I defended his interpretation against anyone who had a bad word to say about him, including dear old dad who said he couldn't hold a candle to Connery; Dad was turned off by Dalton 's staginess, but, I fought and fought the good fight , coz everything Dalton said made sense about the character.

    But, as I grew older, I came to agree with the critics that I personally knew and had argued against: Tim blew as Bond. Uncomfortable. Over-acting. Stagey. Too Shakespearian. Can see him telegraphing emotions...
    I started to see it all. And, to this day,I have a tough time watching his very interesting to very good films (despite his wooden staginess).
    No, Goldeneye would NOT have been a hit with Dalton, on soooo many levels, but most of all that he had lost the audiences two films prior.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Let me rephrase then:

    <font size=7> DALTON RULEZ™ </font>
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    peter wrote: »
    In the end, I admire the Daltonites since their man was correct in his analysis of the character.

    He just didn't deliver.

    I was once a Daltonite. I was twelve when he was cast. I loved his face. I ate up everything I could find on the man.

    But man, oh man, he couldn't execute. And believe me, I defended his interpretation against anyone who had a bad word to say about him, including dear old dad who said he couldn't hold a candle to Connery; Dad was turned off by Dalton 's staginess, but, I fought and fought the good fight , coz everything Dalton said made sense about the character.

    But, as I grew older, I came to agree with the critics that I personally knew and had argued against: Tim blew as Bond. Uncomfortable. Over-acting. Stagey. Too Shakespearian. Can see him telegraphing emotions...
    I started to see it all. And, to this day,I have a tough time watching his very interesting to very good films (despite his wooden staginess).
    No, Goldeneye would NOT have been a hit with Dalton, on soooo many levels, but most of all that he had lost the audiences two films prior.

    Apostate! Under ISIS this would be a criminal offence.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,331
    Thank goodness this place isn't ISIS. Though sometimes it does feel like ISIS. ;)
    Archer_office.png
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited January 2017 Posts: 9,020
    I must say I look rather hot in that black suit. Look at my perfectly rounded ass.
    I'd do myself :D
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,331
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    I must say I look rather hot in that black suit.
    I'd do myself :D
    Tactleneck buddies! :D
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Dalton knew how to deal to these Islamist nutters - befriend them and make them allies in the fight against those damn Commies!
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Getafix wrote: »
    Dalton knew how to deal to these Islamist nutters - befriend them and make them allies in the fight against those damn Commies!

    HA! Yes, exactly!
    Also Dalton is the only Bond who knows how to set a man on fire !
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    Also Dalton is the only Bond who knows how to set a man on fire !

    Didn t Craig set Silva on fire?
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,600
    With hindsight, Dalton was in a very tricky position and there were contrasting requirements. The need to get darker and closer to the original material is well documented but so is the issue of Bonds operating in a "post aids" culture where he does not sleep about etc and has a much more personal and sensitive relationship with the Bond girl (s). These two requirements dont sit well with each other IMHO as the "back to Fleming Bond" concept includes Bond's attititudes to Bond girls.
    They were trying to have their cake and eat it regarding which part of Bond's character was comtempory and which parts were from the original material so we end up with a rather confused and conflicting portrayal and its hard to work out how much of this is down the the script and how much is down to the actor.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Fleming s Bond didn t sleep around much, so don t see what your point is?
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,570
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    Anything with Dalton is a success.

    He could have played Bond from DN to SP, it would be all good, but maybe it would have become a tad boring with time.
    On second thought...no, not even that.

    Part of what made Bond a success was Connery playing him as a swaggering, cultured snob. Also his build and movement was incredibly appealing to the ladies.

    Dalton abandoned all of this for a casual, off-the-peg everyman which was fine for what it is but offered no longevity.

    Afraid the wider audience (you know the people, they can't spell Fleming, never mind tell you who he was) who pay Dalton's wages didn't buy in to his portrayal.

    So, I'm afraid I agree with @peter. No point me saying it all again. GoldenEye was a success because Bond was brought back with a facelift and a popular actor. If Dalton had continued it would not have made as much money.

    A success..maybe..just.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    @NicNac
    Of course I was exaggerating a tiny bit.
    Connery is elementary in the series success.
    GE was the perfect storm, I wouldn't want it any other way.
    What I mean is GE as Dalton's fourth after 1991's Property Of A Lady had worked perfectly. Dalton needed another chance that never materialized. He had gone down the same road as Moore who wasn't exactly very popular before TSWLM.
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited January 2017 Posts: 1,243
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    1423503682_james_bond_timothy_dalton_deal_with_it.gif

    He even scowls putting on those glasses.

    You have to be kidding if you think he is scowling. He looks cool as f**k!. But, Craig in the scene in Skyfall when he is in the museum, where he gets introduced to the new Q is pathetic. He looks so uncomfortable and the way he delivers "You must be joking!", is an insult to how superb Connery did it.


    My wife is Colombian and finds Dalton highly culturally relatable, and has a look that can translate to other cultures, which is part of what James Bond is. She thought Dalton has mixed ancestry. Craig is ideal for a white audience and hardly represents diversity. No one I know in Colombia sees him as James Bond!

    Bottom line. Dalton in his younger form would be a better representation of Bond now in an age where cultural diversity is playing a greater role, because he has those dark looks. Certainly for where a Latin American audience is concerned!



Sign In or Register to comment.