If you had to swap one Bond for another for a different Bond film. Who would it be?

2

Comments

  • One of my favorite "alternate Bond timeline" fantasies would have had TMWTGG done in '72 with Lazenby. The far eastern setting coupled with his martial arts prowess would have made for an interesting mix. He certainly would have not needed those school girls to fight for him I can say that much. Plus with Lazenby's connections to Bruce Lee maybe the latter could have been cast as the villain, or a least a very powerful henchman. Oh to dream...

    Actually that sounds really good. Lazenby would've been great in some of the fight scenes, we could've actually got some decent martial arts fights in there.

    Replace Nic Nac with a henchman played by Bruce Lee? God this sounds brilliant.
  • Posts: 161
    lahaine wrote:
    Timothy Dalton in QoS

    If Dalts was in it chances are it wouldn't be at the bottom of my list.

    QoS is great Bond film. Craig is awesome in it but Dalton Bond would have fitted in well.
  • 002002
    Posts: 581
    lahaine wrote:
    lahaine wrote:
    Timothy Dalton in QoS

    If Dalts was in it chances are it wouldn't be at the bottom of my list.

    QoS is great Bond film. Craig is awesome in it but Dalton Bond would have fitted in well.

    Thats because QOS is basically a watered down remake of LTK only with the eurotrash villians instead of a Drug lord
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 12,837
    QOS is nothing like LTK.

    LTK is actually a good film for one thing :P

    Seriously though they're nothing like eachother. It felt like they were sort of going for a LTK style revenge approach but the tacked on water subplot ruined that.
  • I find QoS to be vastly superior to LTK if for no other reason than the artistry and direction of the former and Dalton's dracula hair in the latter.
  • George Lazenby for Sean Connery in DAF and Timothy Dalton for Pierce Brosnan for Goldeneye.
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 546
    chrisisall wrote:
    So I'm just curious about...What if?
    Tim was way too young for Bond in OHMSS, and Pierce was still a bit young for Bond in 1987.
    Like Spock said, the Universe unfolded as it should have...

    Pierce Bronsan was 35. He was old enough to play Bond. But at the end of the day, it all turned out the way it was suppose to be.
  • Posts: 4,762
    Although I really enjoy Roger's performance in AVTAK, I think it would have also been really cool to see Timothy Dalton in the role in 1985! The movie actually does fit his style, especially when considering scenes like Zorin's slaughter of his own men.
  • I find QoS to be vastly superior to LTK if for no other reason than the artistry and direction of the former and Dalton's dracula hair in the latter.

    QOS has some nice moments (the opera scenes) but overall I think it's a mess. It should've had a straight forward story about Bond tracking down Yusef and Quantum but instead we got a tacked on water plot which frankly didn't intrest me.

    Some scenes are well directed but the editing ruins the action scenes. It seems like they tried to copy Bourne but failed. And there's too much action for the run time, it takes over the film.

    And the villian and henchman are imo, crap.

    LTK has a straight forward but good revenge story, well edited action with some of the best stunts in the series, it was different but still had all the classic Bond elements (gadgets, etc), a threatening villian with a cool henchman, and more.

    The only thing I think QOS does better than LTK are the locations.
  • Posts: 161
    QOS is nothing like LTK.

    LTK is actually a good film for one thing :P

    Seriously though they're nothing like eachother. It felt like they were sort of going for a LTK style revenge approach but the tacked on water subplot ruined that.

    Qos kicks LTK ass. Craig on a one man reveange mission seems more real then Dalton's for me anyway
  • edited December 2012 Posts: 12,837
    He wasn't on a revenge mission though. He was on a mission to save the Bolivians some money on their water bill or something. Camille was on a revenge mission.

    It SHOULD have been a revenge mission but like I said, I think they over complicated things.

    I think I gave good reasons in my other post for why I think LTK is a much better film than QOS. I'd like to know why you think QOS is so much better.
  • Jazz007Jazz007 Minnesota
    Posts: 257
    I would swap out the bored Connery for a then-broken-in Lazenby in DAF - OHMSS deserved a follow-up that mirrored its own tone and completed the story.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,372
    Again, something nobody seemed to realize. There's no need to keep commenting in this thread, because we already have another thread on this:

    http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/1950/switch-the-bond-actors-to-different-films/p1
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited December 2012 Posts: 1,243
    lahaine wrote:
    QOS is nothing like LTK.

    LTK is actually a good film for one thing :P

    Seriously though they're nothing like eachother. It felt like they were sort of going for a LTK style revenge approach but the tacked on water subplot ruined that.

    Qos kicks LTK ass. Craig on a one man reveange mission seems more real then Dalton's for me anyway

    QOS is no more real than LTK. In fact, in real life, Quantum would have taken care of Bond quickly as he leaves his mark all over the place. Green knows who Bond really is and fails to kill him at the party just before Matthis dies.

    Fails to kill a man who is a huge liability as in exposing the operation? Green suddenly loses his ruthless streak despite showing at the opera how ruthless he can be as well as earlier?

    This is after Bond wreaked havoc at the opera. Very realistic? Not!

    I am not saying QOS is a bad film, but for a $200 million price tag to get it made, it could have been significantly better. The writer's strike does not explain everything as Bond films occasionally screw up even with no strike.

    In LTK, Bond infiltrates Sanchez's organisation and gets the villain to do some of the killing for him. Which is smart if you are just one man. It is only towards the end that Dario blows Bond's cover.

    In QOS Bond is a bit idiotically gung ho and seems to forgotten that he is going up against people that almost cost him his private parts not too long ago.

    His gung ho attitude makes little sense in an age where everything you do get's recorded. Sure he should be tough but a little smarter considering his expert training.



  • bond50bond50 Banned
    Posts: 42
    SANCHEZ IS ONE GOOD ASS VILLAIN FOR BOND..................................................................
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    Posts: 1,243
    bond50 wrote:
    SANCHEZ IS ONE GOOD ASS VILLAIN FOR BOND..................................................................

    I think Sanchez to me is one of the greatest Bond villains ever. He has not dated psychologically and you really get a sense of his sadism.



  • bond50bond50 Banned
    Posts: 42
    TRADE IN SKYFALL FOR LIVE AND LET DIE....................................................
  • Quantum of Solace with Pierce Brosnan!
  • acoppola wrote:
    In QOS Bond is a bit idiotically gung ho and seems to forgotten that he is going up against people that almost cost him his private parts not too long ago.

    I assumed it was because they almost cost him his privates that he was so gung ho. I know I would be! :-))

  • bond50bond50 Banned
    Posts: 42
    Quantum of Solace with Pierce Brosnan!

    WITH GUY HAMILTON DIRECTING YOU GOT IT .....THIS GUY IS THE SMARTEST DUDE ON HERE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited December 2012 Posts: 1,243
    I find QoS to be vastly superior to LTK if for no other reason than the artistry and direction of the former and Dalton's dracula hair in the latter.

    Dalton only has the Dracula hair in the casino scenes. I mean, fair enough. And Dracula is a cool look anyway.

    I mean Craig's "Hello sailor!" hair style in SF, especially in the bar scenes where he is getting drunk during his MI6 post-shooting absence. That to me did not look good and I have no idea why they gave him a crew cut. It looks a bit too YMCA butch for me. :)

    I mean Connery had shorter hair but it makes his hair look long comparitavely.

    But it did not spoil my enjoyment of the film is the point I am making.



  • Posts: 11,189
    acoppola wrote:
    bond50 wrote:
    SANCHEZ IS ONE GOOD ASS VILLAIN FOR BOND..................................................................

    I think Sanchez to me is one of the greatest Bond villains ever. He has not dated psychologically and you really get a sense of his sadism.



    That is true. Davi's Sanchez is the best aspect of the film. His performance is chilling.
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    Posts: 1,243
    BAIN123 wrote:
    acoppola wrote:
    bond50 wrote:
    SANCHEZ IS ONE GOOD ASS VILLAIN FOR BOND..................................................................

    I think Sanchez to me is one of the greatest Bond villains ever. He has not dated psychologically and you really get a sense of his sadism.



    That is true. Davi's Sanchez is the best aspect of the film. His performance is chilling.

    I think he is brilliant. He was scary. Like when he watches Milton Crest in the decompression chamber. Sanchez will be like Scarface and that is timeless.

    Dalton's Bond was perfect for this type of villain. The two have similarities as men and the sub-text of LTK shows how they could easily be best of friends had he not hurt Felix.

    Very perverse.

  • George in DAF and LALD would have been cool...
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    Posts: 1,243
    George in DAF and LALD would have been cool...

    But then you would have one less Connery film? :)

  • acoppola wrote:
    George in DAF and LALD would have been cool...

    But then you would have one less Connery film? :)

    DAF was an unfortunate Connery film so I wouldn't mind missing it.
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    Posts: 1,243
    acoppola wrote:
    George in DAF and LALD would have been cool...

    But then you would have one less Connery film? :)

    DAF was an unfortunate Connery film so I wouldn't mind missing it.

    This is amazing. But I love him in DAF. He was so funny and still super cool. This is just me.

  • acoppola wrote:
    acoppola wrote:
    George in DAF and LALD would have been cool...

    But then you would have one less Connery film? :)

    DAF was an unfortunate Connery film so I wouldn't mind missing it.

    This is amazing. But I love him in DAF. He was so funny and still super cool. This is just me.

    He was great but the film was just too camp to be taken seriously. It's his Moonraker...
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    Posts: 1,243
    acoppola wrote:
    acoppola wrote:
    George in DAF and LALD would have been cool...

    But then you would have one less Connery film? :)

    DAF was an unfortunate Connery film so I wouldn't mind missing it.

    This is amazing. But I love him in DAF. He was so funny and still super cool. This is just me.

    He was great but the film was just too camp to be taken seriously. It's his Moonraker...

    It was camp. I give Guy Hamilton credit that he was to me the best Bond director in doing the campier stuff. But DAF is a great comedy and I can forgive it because it knows you are laughing all the way.

    I disliked the campness in TSWLM as well as Moonraker.

Sign In or Register to comment.