Reunion with Death - early third Dalton treatment?

1246

Comments

  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,951
    Podcast featuring the article's writer, describing the treatment in detail, including elements not present in the article.

    Enjoy:

    https://anchor.fm/the-james-bond-complex/episodes/Daltons-Fourth-Reunion-With-Death-e2oeh7

    I'm listening to this now. There's quite a few scenes that found their way into various following Bond films.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Chriskarr wrote: »

    Neeson may well have made a good Bond.
  • edited April 2019 Posts: 377
    Dalton made a wise decision quitting the role of James Bond.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Enemy of the state
    Posts: 41,566
    Mack_Bolan wrote: »
    Dalton made a wise decision quitting the role of James Bond.

    LTK was pretty good, so he left on a high. Who knows what would have followed?
  • DragonpolDragonpol The Crazy World of David Dragonpol
    edited April 2019 Posts: 14,723
    Mack_Bolan wrote: »
    Dalton made a wise decision quitting the role of James Bond.

    Just curious as to why you think that? For me, he's the best of the Bond actors, and the closest to Fleming to boot. To my mind, Dalton had a lot going for him.
  • Posts: 8,682
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Mack_Bolan wrote: »
    Dalton made a wise decision quitting the role of James Bond.

    Just curious as to why you think that? For me, he's the best of the Bond actors, and the closest to Fleming to boot. To my mind, Dalton had a lot going for him.

    Agreed but then I felt that about Craig pre Skyfall and Spectre and now wellllll
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited April 2019 Posts: 9,129
    Dalton is my favorite actor as Bond.

    But timing is everything and as good as he is the 80s films sold him short, and likely that would continue if he returned in the 90s. It was probably better for everyone involved to make a clean break with a new actor.
  • Listened to the podcast a couple of times but - why did the villain want to takeover the British company? Did he have some kind of traditional master plan or something? Or did I just zone out and missed it?
  • DeathToSpies84DeathToSpies84 Haydock, England
    Posts: 193

    Aside from the "Nan" scene, I think this could of been Dalton’s TSWLM moment. And I prefer it to the revised draft which had a plot focusing on a stolen stealth fighter being used to plan a nucealr attack on China, had a monster truck chase through Las Vegas, and Bond infiltrating a rodeo disguised as a cowboy.
  • ChriskarrChriskarr Spain
    edited January 17 Posts: 44

    Aside from the "Nan" scene, I think this could of been Dalton’s TSWLM moment. And I prefer it to the revised draft which had a plot focusing on a stolen stealth fighter being used to plan a nucealr attack on China, had a monster truck chase through Las Vegas, and Bond infiltrating a rodeo disguised as a cowboy.

    I prefer it too, but with modifications.
    I would remove:
    -the comic theme of "I'm too old for this shit" "I'm a nuisance", etc.
    -The mistake of not defusing the plane's bomb, and crashing the plane in Yupland's office.
    -Bond dressed as a cowboy and the whole sequence.

    I would prefer a mix between Alfonse Ruggiero's draft and Davies and Osborne's draft.
    It would eliminate the attacks on nuclear power plants, and would put the theme of the theft of the fighter.
    Change de "Nan" sequence for the pretitles sequence in which Bond is attacked by a robot-like object that is in charge of the security of the industrial complex.
    I have a feeling that the 130-page draft screenplay that auctioned in 2015 https://propstoreauction.com/view-auctions/catalog/id/26/lot/3381/JAMES-BOND-BOND-17-Draft-Screenplay
    is the draft full screenplay that Michael Wilson and Ruggiero wrote based in the "Bond 17 Outline" draft treatment.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 973
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I suppose it would have been difficult for the EON to re-start the series after such a long gap, with the leading man only returning for the one film. Seems similar to what happening now. One last film for Craig after a long gap. Cubby really wanted to get the series back on track. I can imagine he didn't like keeping fans waiting.

    Had MGM/UA not been so concerned about the casting, would Broccoli have changed his mind and allowed Dalton to do only one more film? I think there's a strong possibility. The Broccolis really liked Dalton and wanted to work with him again.

    I suspect had Pierce not been available, that may have happened. We all know they wanted. Brosnan, though, and had since '86.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    edited January 20 Posts: 973
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Chriskarr wrote: »

    Neeson may well have made a good Bond.

    I'm glad he didn't get it. I find him to be extremely wooden. I know Pierce gets a lot hate on here, but he was the right guy at that time.

    EON needed to re-establish the series after a big break, and reaffirm the character post cold war. Brosnan was a safe pair of hands that could bring them elements of Connery and Moore. A big departure, like Craig, wasn't what was needed in the 90's.
  • DeathToSpies84DeathToSpies84 Haydock, England
    edited January 20 Posts: 193
    Chriskarr wrote: »

    Aside from the "Nan" scene, I think this could of been Dalton’s TSWLM moment. And I prefer it to the revised draft which had a plot focusing on a stolen stealth fighter being used to plan a nucealr attack on China, had a monster truck chase through Las Vegas, and Bond infiltrating a rodeo disguised as a cowboy.

    I prefer it too, but with modifications.
    I would remove:
    -the comic theme of "I'm too old for this shit" "I'm a nuisance", etc.
    -The mistake of not defusing the plane's bomb, and crashing the plane in Yupland's office.
    -Bond dressed as a cowboy and the whole sequence.

    I would prefer a mix between Alfonse Ruggiero's draft and Davies and Osborne's draft.
    It would eliminate the attacks on nuclear power plants, and would put the theme of the theft of the fighter.
    Change de "Nan" sequence for the pretitles sequence in which Bond is attacked by a robot-like object that is in charge of the security of the industrial complex.
    I have a feeling that the 130-page draft screenplay that auctioned in 2015 https://propstoreauction.com/view-auctions/catalog/id/26/lot/3381/JAMES-BOND-BOND-17-Draft-Screenplay
    is the draft full screenplay that Michael Wilson and Ruggiero wrote based in the "Bond 17 Outline" draft treatment.

    Having read the Lost Adventures of James Bond by Mark Edlitz, I agree on removing the comic theme of Bond bemoaning "How he’s too old for this shit" and breaking the fourth wall at the end - sounds like something Sir Roger would do! And the whole Jennings character is something you’d find in DAF. I just think Ruggiero’s draft was more mature and less comedic.

    Still, Reunion with Death would of been just as solid.
  • Posts: 7,642
    suavejmf wrote: »
    SaintMark wrote: »
    I am just glad Brosnan and came in and took over.

    Daltons two films were far superior to the Brosnan era. Yes Goldeneye was solid and stylish (despite the awful score), but it’s a ‘middle of the road’/ average Bond film, well directed and with a tone suitable for the times. The 3 following films were (despite commercial success) a low point for Flemings creation.

    Minus the awful cyborg/ robot ideas, I’d have loved a third Dalton film. Licence to Kill was the best Bond film of the 80’s by far.

    well that would be your opinion of course. ;)
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 4,464
    Roadphill wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Chriskarr wrote: »

    Neeson may well have made a good Bond.

    I'm glad he didn't get it. I find him to be extremely wooden. I know Pierce gets a lot hate on here, but he was the right guy at that time.

    EON needed to re-establish the series after a big break, and reaffirm the character post cold war. Brosnan was a safe pair of hands that could bring them elements of Connery and Moore. A big departure, like Craig, wasn't what was needed in the 90's.

    I do think Eon needed Brosnan for GE. The future of Bond post-Cold War (ha!) was very much in doubt, so he was the safe, and right choice, for then.

    And possibly they needed Brosnan for TND, just to show that the first success wasn't just a one-off (the same reason why they rushed out TMWTGG and QoS).

    I'd argue that Brosnan's legacy now would be stronger had he only done two films.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 973
    echo wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Chriskarr wrote: »

    Neeson may well have made a good Bond.

    I'm glad he didn't get it. I find him to be extremely wooden. I know Pierce gets a lot hate on here, but he was the right guy at that time.

    EON needed to re-establish the series after a big break, and reaffirm the character post cold war. Brosnan was a safe pair of hands that could bring them elements of Connery and Moore. A big departure, like Craig, wasn't what was needed in the 90's.

    I do think Eon needed Brosnan for GE. The future of Bond post-Cold War (ha!) was very much in doubt, so he was the safe, and right choice, for then.

    And possibly they needed Brosnan for TND, just to show that the first success wasn't just a one-off (the same reason why they rushed out TMWTGG and QoS).

    I'd argue that Brosnan's legacy now would be stronger had he only done two films.

    Without a doubt. It all started to go wrong for him in TWINE. It's a rare thing for a Bond actor to have two absolute bottom dwellers in a row, but this happened with TWINE and DAD.

    Anyway this thread is about Tim Dalton, so I don't want to derail it.
  • Posts: 8,682
    I kind of wish this film was given the title Risico..

    I felt this way about Craig if you have an actor who brings Fleming's bond to life his films should have Fleming titles.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 8,364
    I started listening to the podcast mentioned above but I couldn't get through it, partially because of the podcasters, but mostly because the script sounded so by-the-numbers that it didn't seem to have anything interesting in it at all.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 2,061
    I just think that Dalton needed a new director. It was for the best that John Glen walked after LTK, Dalton would have been stronger with a new director. Several actors have spoken about how John Glen was weak with them (in the book The Many Lives of James Bond by Mark Edlitz).
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    There is a rumour that after an on set argument Dalton refused to work with Glen again.
  • Posts: 3,769
    There is a rumour that after an on set argument Dalton refused to work with Glen again.

    If you read John Glens book, 'For My Eyes Only ' he states that Dalton was in bad humour on the final days of filming, but puts it down to the arduous shoot!
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 9,129
    You may also recall the film Christopher Columbus: The Discovery (1992) and Dalton dropping out when Glen replaced the planned director.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Columbus:_The_Discovery

  • Posts: 496
    mtm wrote: »
    I started listening to the podcast mentioned above but I couldn't get through it, partially because of the podcasters, but mostly because the script sounded so by-the-numbers that it didn't seem to have anything interesting in it at all.
    I wouldn't be as picky as you are but, yes, this treatment was largely plot-driven and quite predictable due to an overly ordinary narrative template.

    Nevertheless, I think there are some relatively interesting elements that could have been, perhaps by mixing them with Ruggiero's draft for Bond 17, the basis of an excellent installment for the series.

    Among these elements, I'm thinking of the meeting between Bond, M and the English industrialist in a glass and steel complex outside of London, immediately followed by the assassination attempt with Bond noticing that the smoke emanating from M's pipe reveals the beam of a laser pointed at the building. All this industrial espionage and economic terrorism story would have mixed well with what Ruggiero had imagined with his Sir Henry character. Too bad Richard Smith did not try to lean on this foundation to weave his story.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 8,364
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    I just think that Dalton needed a new director. It was for the best that John Glen walked after LTK, Dalton would have been stronger with a new director. Several actors have spoken about how John Glen was weak with them (in the book The Many Lives of James Bond by Mark Edlitz).

    We were chatting on here recently about the idea of someone like John McTiernan doing Licence To Kill, and it's certainly not hard to imagine it being a bit more thrilling and visceral if he had.
    There is a rumour that after an on set argument Dalton refused to work with Glen again.

    Oh really? Not heard that one.
    Among these elements, I'm thinking of the meeting between Bond, M and the English industrialist in a glass and steel complex outside of London, immediately followed by the assassination attempt with Bond noticing that the smoke emanating from M's pipe reveals the beam of a laser pointed at the building.

    Yes the podcasters got very excited by that, but really, is that all that exciting? We'd seen that sort of thing in a dozen movies by then, plus it even made it into Spectre and no-one really hails that as a great cinematic moment- nothing wrong with it, it's just... fine. If that was the best thing in the script then it shows how interesting the script is!
    What is quite interesting about the podcast is that they do make it quite clear that it was primarily the studio's decision not to use Dalton again.


  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 973
    Mctiernan would have made sense.
    LTK has a slightly Die Hard-ish vibe, anyway.

    I still think Glen mostly did a fine job on that, and all his Bond films. He lacked the visual flair that Terence Young and Lewis Gilbert brought, but he had a terrific eye for action.

    That being said I was unaware that various actors didn't rate him.
  • Posts: 496
    Even more than a new director, I would have appreciated that Bond 17, or even LTK, had brought in a new director of photography.

    Not that Alec Mills was a bad cinematographer, it's quite the opposite, but his style probably lacked both classicism and modernity. Dalton was different and it would be in his best interest for the cinematography to summon both the glamor associated with Bond and a new dynamism capable of competing against the action movies of that time. By comparison, Mills' work seemed dated.

    If Bond 17 had a Far East setting, Alex Thomson or Jan de Bont would have been perfect.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 8,364
    Yes I think even though they were trying to push into a slightly tougher area and do something fresh with it, LTK does have a bit of a tired feel around the edges. For all of the energy that Dalton was trying to bring, the rest of the production has a slight sense of people who'd been doing it for a while: Binder visibly running out of ideas is a bit of an example of that.
  • Posts: 88
    I think John Mackenzie or Ian Sharp would've been good choices to direct an 80s or early-90s Bond film.
  • McTiernan directed LTK would have been amazing. It already felt like a Joel Silver film and had that Kamen soundtrack (and had Robert Davi!) so it would have been fitting to go all the way. I think Glen is a very solid action director, but McTiernan is cream of the crop with his incredibly mobile camera and innate sense of drama.
  • edited January 21 Posts: 552
    You may also recall the film Christopher Columbus: The Discovery (1992) and Dalton dropping out when Glen replaced the planned director.

    It was much more complicated than that. Dalton had it in his contract that he would have to be consulted if the producers wished to replace the director. The notorious producers Alexander & Ilya Salkind fired George Cosmatos and replaced him with Glen without Dalton's input, and then they didn't provide a bank guarantee for Dalton's salary. So one would assume that Dalton's exit had more to do with the Salkinds (who he ended up suing) than Glen.

    I think it's incredible that EON even considered hiring John Landis to replace Glen on LTK (Landis's actions on the set of TWILIGHT ZONE were irresponsible and downright criminal). In the interview in The Lost Adventures of James Bond, Landis reveals that he considered the script beneath him, which I find funny considering the junk that he committed to later.
Sign In or Register to comment.