After watching LTK in the cinema I though Bond was dead !
I liked Dalton but the film was a shock to the system after the
Moore years. For whatever reasons When Pierce Brosnan came
along the films did indeed seem reborn. I can remember leaving
The cinema this time thinking Bond was back. Although I do agree
He ended up with little to work with, some weak scripts. although
I do think he is undeserving of some of the more vicious attacks he
Seems to get.
I never thought Bond was dead. I've always liked Timothy Dalton and LTK. Undoubtedly, a switch from Roger Moore to Pierce Brosnan would have been more palatable for the general public, and LTK would likely have been better received. For me, Dalton was the right man at the wrong time.
That's the way I see it too. The shift from Moore to Dalton was much bigger than the shift from Connery to Moore.
After the huge success of MR, Broccoli and Moore entered a game of brinksmanship. Moore publicly stated he did not want to play Bond again, Broccoli let it be known that he was testing other actors. Meanwhile, agents were negotiating. Eventually terms were agreed.
Moore knew he could get better terms if he held out (the huge profits from MR left him in a position of strength). Broccoli wanted to get the best deal he could.
And that is why new actors were auditioned for FYEO.
Which means that the only time Roger Moore was cast as Bond from the get go in the 80s was FYEO.
No, it means that your claim in post 21 re Moore's age causing other actors to be tested is incorrect.
Furthermore, had Connery not starred in NSNA in 83, IMHO they would have cast a new Bond for OP.
Post 5 above, and quoted in post 7: There really was no other choice than Moore for OP.
Well, all of that is your opinion. Mine is that:
1) My post can't be incorrect. Moore was 54 and younger actors were tested. It must have been part of the negotiations, even though Broccoli wanted him. If anything, it was part of the whole story.
2) Had Moore asked for too much, he would have been replaced. It could have easily happened.
3) After Connery announced NSNA, there was no other choice but Moore,granted. As John Glen said, he was glad to have an established Bond. However, I think had NSNA not been made, they would have replaced Moore. As I did not work for EON back then, I can only speculate, but that's my opinion.
Well they'd hardly have tested older actors! It was Broccoli's way of driving down Moore's price- letting him know that he could be replaced, although it was Moore that was wanted. His age wasn't critical, his price was.
Moore and his agent were savvy enough not to ask for more money than Broccoli would be prepared to pay, while angling for the best possible deal.
You're probably right that Connery's NSNA return kept Moore in the role longer than anyone had intended.
There's no doubt that Brosnan, who was already familar to American audiences from Remington Steele, reinvigorated the franchise after Dalton's departure, but even he couldn't overcome the weaker scripts and paint-by-numbers approach to the character.
I was with you up 'till here. It seemed like you were commenting on popularity/public perception, and suddenly you gloss over the fact that ALL of Brosnan's films hit it out of the park in that area in favour of commenting on script originality...? ?:)
It's not an argument that they didn't make money and considerably more than the Dalton films. But the Craig films have not only made even more money, they've been greater critical successes.
Well they'd hardly have tested older actors! It was Broccoli's way of driving down Moore's price- letting him know that he could be replaced, although it was Moore that was wanted. His age wasn't critical, his price was.
Moore and his agent were savvy enough not to ask for more money than Broccoli would be prepared to pay, while angling for the best possible deal.
You're probably right that Connery's NSNA return kept Moore in the role longer than anyone had intended.
Yeah, even if they tested Connery they'd be testing a younger actor, right? )
You're right, Broccoli wanted Moore. But I don't think for instance Michael G. Wilson wanted Moore. However Broccoli was boss. When Michael and Barbara were bosses in 2005, they did the right thing by casting a younger Bond when Brosnan was 52.
Not that it's a credible source, but Wikipedia suggests the collective box office for all four Brosnan films was $1,479,008,618, while the collective box office for the three Craig films was $2,293,736, 687, or nearly twice as much. Of course, I don't believe these figures are adjusted for inflation, but given that Skyfall was announced as the highest-grossing British film of all time )and that all three Craig films would also need to be adjusted for inflation), I'm going to assume that it made more money than any single one of the Brosnan films.
Well they'd hardly have tested older actors! It was Broccoli's way of driving down Moore's price- letting him know that he could be replaced, although it was Moore that was wanted. His age wasn't critical, his price was.
Moore and his agent were savvy enough not to ask for more money than Broccoli would be prepared to pay, while angling for the best possible deal.
You're probably right that Connery's NSNA return kept Moore in the role longer than anyone had intended.
Yeah, even if they tested Connery they'd be testing a younger actor, right? )
You're right, Broccoli wanted Moore. But I don't think for instance Michael G. Wilson wanted Moore. However Broccoli was boss. When Michael and Barbara were bosses in 2005, they did the right thing by casting a younger Bond when Brosnan was 52.
Would have been fascinating HAD EON responded to the challenge of Connery's return by casting a younger, fitter more virile lead against NSNA. (Not James Brolin, of course, big hair, American accent and all).
Sadly, we ended up with two geriatrics cancelling each other out, Connery probably having come to realise wistfully that a James Bond film had now become a Roger Moore film and Roger Moore (and EON) were much better at providing that to the public.
Of course, an ageing Cubby and his gang were never likely to rise to the Connery challenge that way, and probably wisely so: Dalton aside, who the hell do you cast in 1982?
Would have been fascinating HAD EON responded to the challenge of Connery's return by casting a younger, fitter more virile lead against NSNA.
YAY!
EON's reply to the neverending McClory attempt to his own James Bond (Eon's line of defense was always that cinemagoers would confuse the McClory Bond with an EON Bond) would be to use a new, unknown not-established actor* in their own movie whhile the competition uses the signature first actor as the cash-cow for that.
Or with another approach: Seriously who would have watched NSNA without Connery?
--> ergo the main actor is a crucial factor for success of failure!
You Sir certainly know how to run a franchise! -{
*so if they stupidly would have done this - Moore would have been available for McClory however I doubt that he'd done it
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
EON's reply to the neverending McClory attempt to his own James Bond (Eon's line of defense was always that cinemagoers would confuse the McClory Bond with an EON Bond) would be to use a new, unknown not-established actor in the competing movie.
You Sir certainly know how to run a franchise! -{
And you, Mein Herr, do not know how to read someone's full post, or wish to understand the argument it - that however fascinating an idea, it was wisely avoided. 8-)
Would have been fascinating HAD EON responded to the challenge of Connery's return by casting a younger, fitter more virile lead against NSNA. (Not James Brolin, of course, big hair, American accent and all).
I agree with you. It was not in Broccoli, though.
There was no Connery back in 2005, but there were plenty of challenges (post 9/11, the Bourne movies, etc), and EON did just that: casting a fitter,younger,tougher Bond (that nobody accepted at first). But it paid off handsomely.
So I 'd say that you know how to run a franchise better than Broccoli did back in 82. He tried to rejuvenate the franchise by casting pop icons (Grace Jones) and young bands (Duran Duran),which helped only a little. Who knows what would have happened had he cast a new Bond as well in the early 80s? the competition was not really Connery, but Indiana Jones, Star Wars...
Sadly, we ended up with two geriatrics cancelling each other out, Connery probably having come to realise wistfully that a James Bond film had now become a Roger Moore film and Roger Moore (and EON) were much better at providing that to the public.
Just about that time Connery said publicly that both himself and Moore were too old to play Bond. He was right.
Funnily enough, because I became aware of Bond in the mid 80s, I thought the character was a 55-60 year old guy like my grandpa! only later (when Dalton came along and I watched the old movies) did I realise that Bond was supposed to be in his 30s-40s.
Would have been fascinating HAD EON responded to the challenge of Connery's return by casting a younger, fitter more virile lead against NSNA. (Not James Brolin, of course, big hair, American accent and all).
I agree with you. It was not in Broccoli, though.
There was no Connery back in 2005, but there were plenty of challenges (post 9/11, the Bourne movies, etc), and EON did just that: casting a fitter,younger,tougher Bond (that nobody accepted at first). But it paid off handsomely.
So I 'd say that you know how to run a franchise better than Broccoli did back in 82. He tried to rejuvenate the franchise by casting pop icons (Grace Jones) and young bands (Duran Duran),which helped only a little. Who knows what would have happened had he cast a new Bond as well in the early 80s? the competition was not really Connery, but Indiana Jones, Star Wars...
The OBVIOUS alterative take to a thick round the middle, heavily toupeed Connery is a young, fit, virile Bond. You play up on the fact that Bond is in his 30s.. and how **** Connery looked in YOLT and DAF. How no one goes to see his Connery films (the NEXT MAN anyone?) And, as you say, that he's a old guy which Ford and Stallone and YOUR (EON's new guy) isn't.
Or you go old guy against old guy like for like. And hope the McClory mob go along with that, rather than play up to SC's age and play on that in a serious thriller...
Cubby and Rog were like a couple of old queens though - how hard did they negotiate? Cubby was a old guy - as has been pointed out - Rog keeping him solvent and some. And zero desire to challenge that, or have much alterative imagination...
But in lazy ole Cubby's defence who does OP as the new Bond...?
The OBVIOUS alterative take to a thick round the middle, heavily toupeed Connery is a young, fit, virile Bond. You play up on the fact that Bond is in his 30s.. and how **** Connery looked in YOLT and DAF. How no one goes to see his Connery films (the NEXT MAN anyone?) And, as you say, that he's a old guy which Ford and Stallone and YOUR (EON's new guy) isn't.
Exactly, that could have been a perfectly viable marketing strategy. Like, do you still want to see that old guy? we have the NEW Bond... Could have worked. As you say, Connery back in the early 80s didn't have the status of the late 80s post Untouchables.
Who? Dalton, only earlier. I always thought that the FYEO PTS was written as a possible way to introduce a new Bond, and being a harder, grittier film, it could have worked for Dalton really well. Now that I think about it, even the FYEO and TLD posters are similar.
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,652MI6 Agent
I think the overwhelming success of the Craig era is the result of Lazenby's prediction and reason for leaving after OHMSS, because the Bond phenomenon up to that time had grown passé and was identified with the Establishment, which was uncool for the new generation. Because the Brosnan Bonds were consciously packaged by EON as Bond's Greatest Hits, the films were a welcome return though it was bound to plateau at least with audiences' tastes. The Craig Bonds were so radically different and using Lazenby's analogy, the approach was akin to how Easy Rider appealed to the emerging tastes for change and edginess. But on another level, success to me does not equate to "best Bond" in terms of characterization, key traits and canonical Fleming "tradition."
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
Bond was the young cool hip thing in the 60's and 80's. Okay, maybe Moore wasn't young, but he had a coolness about himself. By Brosnan, you're right, it became established. Things naturally become conservative over time.
It's like seeing a guy in his 50's with gray hair, faded tattoos, blasting AC/DC while he's cleaning his truck. All of this was probably cool edgy and rebellious years ago, but now its so standard.
Brosnan became what Bond was "supposed" to be. Craig kind of has that modern-day teen-angsty appeal of the strong cathartic but suffering man.
Now that I look at things objectively, I really can't say Craig was significantly better than the actors who came before him. Craig is who is needed at this time. Eventually, Craig is going to become the establishment.
Comments
You do know the Bonds are shown ALL around the world - not just American audiences.
The problem I have was that the Dalton films changed the game. They interjected stories into it. They were free flowing thrillers.
With the Brosnans..
We went backwards. There was no need for James Bond. We returned to the seventies - done badly..
That's the way I see it too. The shift from Moore to Dalton was much bigger than the shift from Connery to Moore.
AJB007 Favorite Film Rankings
Pros and Cons Compendium (50 Years)
Also they already did a drugs theme sub plot in TLD........
I just can't imagine Moore vs Davi , though
Well, all of that is your opinion. Mine is that:
1) My post can't be incorrect. Moore was 54 and younger actors were tested. It must have been part of the negotiations, even though Broccoli wanted him. If anything, it was part of the whole story.
2) Had Moore asked for too much, he would have been replaced. It could have easily happened.
3) After Connery announced NSNA, there was no other choice but Moore,granted. As John Glen said, he was glad to have an established Bond. However, I think had NSNA not been made, they would have replaced Moore. As I did not work for EON back then, I can only speculate, but that's my opinion.
Moore and his agent were savvy enough not to ask for more money than Broccoli would be prepared to pay, while angling for the best possible deal.
You're probably right that Connery's NSNA return kept Moore in the role longer than anyone had intended.
Yeah, even if they tested Connery they'd be testing a younger actor, right?
You're right, Broccoli wanted Moore. But I don't think for instance Michael G. Wilson wanted Moore. However Broccoli was boss. When Michael and Barbara were bosses in 2005, they did the right thing by casting a younger Bond when Brosnan was 52.
Sorry old boy, you needed to know- sure you understand.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Would have been fascinating HAD EON responded to the challenge of Connery's return by casting a younger, fitter more virile lead against NSNA. (Not James Brolin, of course, big hair, American accent and all).
Sadly, we ended up with two geriatrics cancelling each other out, Connery probably having come to realise wistfully that a James Bond film had now become a Roger Moore film and Roger Moore (and EON) were much better at providing that to the public.
Of course, an ageing Cubby and his gang were never likely to rise to the Connery challenge that way, and probably wisely so: Dalton aside, who the hell do you cast in 1982?
YAY!
EON's reply to the neverending McClory attempt to his own James Bond (Eon's line of defense was always that cinemagoers would confuse the McClory Bond with an EON Bond) would be to use a new, unknown not-established actor* in their own movie whhile the competition uses the signature first actor as the cash-cow for that.
Or with another approach: Seriously who would have watched NSNA without Connery?
--> ergo the main actor is a crucial factor for success of failure!
You Sir certainly know how to run a franchise! -{
*so if they stupidly would have done this - Moore would have been available for McClory however I doubt that he'd done it
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
And you, Mein Herr, do not know how to read someone's full post, or wish to understand the argument it - that however fascinating an idea, it was wisely avoided. 8-)
Besides, I thought you weren't talking to me?
I agree with you. It was not in Broccoli, though.
There was no Connery back in 2005, but there were plenty of challenges (post 9/11, the Bourne movies, etc), and EON did just that: casting a fitter,younger,tougher Bond (that nobody accepted at first). But it paid off handsomely.
So I 'd say that you know how to run a franchise better than Broccoli did back in 82. He tried to rejuvenate the franchise by casting pop icons (Grace Jones) and young bands (Duran Duran),which helped only a little. Who knows what would have happened had he cast a new Bond as well in the early 80s? the competition was not really Connery, but Indiana Jones, Star Wars...
Funnily enough, because I became aware of Bond in the mid 80s, I thought the character was a 55-60 year old guy like my grandpa! only later (when Dalton came along and I watched the old movies) did I realise that Bond was supposed to be in his 30s-40s.
The OBVIOUS alterative take to a thick round the middle, heavily toupeed Connery is a young, fit, virile Bond. You play up on the fact that Bond is in his 30s.. and how **** Connery looked in YOLT and DAF. How no one goes to see his Connery films (the NEXT MAN anyone?) And, as you say, that he's a old guy which Ford and Stallone and YOUR (EON's new guy) isn't.
Or you go old guy against old guy like for like. And hope the McClory mob go along with that, rather than play up to SC's age and play on that in a serious thriller...
Cubby and Rog were like a couple of old queens though - how hard did they negotiate? Cubby was a old guy - as has been pointed out - Rog keeping him solvent and some. And zero desire to challenge that, or have much alterative imagination...
But in lazy ole Cubby's defence who does OP as the new Bond...?
Exactly, that could have been a perfectly viable marketing strategy. Like, do you still want to see that old guy? we have the NEW Bond... Could have worked. As you say, Connery back in the early 80s didn't have the status of the late 80s post Untouchables.
Who? Dalton, only earlier. I always thought that the FYEO PTS was written as a possible way to introduce a new Bond, and being a harder, grittier film, it could have worked for Dalton really well. Now that I think about it, even the FYEO and TLD posters are similar.
Bond was the young cool hip thing in the 60's and 80's. Okay, maybe Moore wasn't young, but he had a coolness about himself. By Brosnan, you're right, it became established. Things naturally become conservative over time.
It's like seeing a guy in his 50's with gray hair, faded tattoos, blasting AC/DC while he's cleaning his truck. All of this was probably cool edgy and rebellious years ago, but now its so standard.
Brosnan became what Bond was "supposed" to be. Craig kind of has that modern-day teen-angsty appeal of the strong cathartic but suffering man.
Now that I look at things objectively, I really can't say Craig was significantly better than the actors who came before him. Craig is who is needed at this time. Eventually, Craig is going to become the establishment.
AJB007 Favorite Film Rankings
Pros and Cons Compendium (50 Years)