"On 12 April 1994 Timothy Dalton announced he was quitting the role"
He was 50 (or 48 depending on sources) and may have felt his day as Bond had passed the expiration date. But more probably it was a decision made on all of the factors in play, not just one single one.
Dalton's DoB has become a mystery. 1944 or 1946? Take your pick!!!
I agree that there was probably more than one factor involved in his decision to quit, his age being one of them (though that never stopped other Bonds!). He had other offers to contend with, of course, and perhaps more than any of the other Bonds Dalton actually liked being an actor rather than a star and to play a range of roles with sincerity.
more than any of the other Bonds Dalton actually liked being an actor rather than a star and to play a range of roles with sincerity.
Plus, in 1994 he got the role in Scarlett and probably relished the idea of doing Rhett. Bond was always just another role to him (besides his admiration for Cubby). He was never in it for the stardom, but the challenge. He's an actor's actor.
From Rocketeer: "It wasn't lies, Jenny. 'Twas acting." )
Yup, I agree. If he'd wanted stardom (not that he isn't a star, of course he is) he would have taken a different path.
Side note:
Notice how many of Dalton's roles he "inherited"?
Rhett Butler- Clark Gable
Heathcliff- Laurence Olivier
Mr Rochester- Orson Welles
James Bond- Barry Nelson )
But can we be sure ? ( we need a smillie, with a guy rubbing his chin )
Sorry it's getting late.
With Dalton, I think his first/best talent is for stage acting. Much as I think he
Gave a great Bond, that little spark of something wasn't there, as it was with
Sean and Roger.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Much as I think he
Gave a great Bond, that little spark of something wasn't there, as it was with
Sean and Roger.
You're talking about star power. It's a thing true thespians avoid like the plague. Watch Rocketeer to see Dalton do his version of star power (I think it's the only time he ever indulged, and it was for a prick character).
Back on: I see TLD, LTK & GE sort of as a trilogy. But I also see GE, TLD & TWINE as another.
So many people cite GE as a great Bond movie, and I think it's because it's the transitional film. Elements of old, elements of new... a subtle Dalton influence & a new era makeover bound together in a glorious mix...
If it had had a Barry score I think most would call it near perfect.
I think with the Dalton films they were trying something new
Pushing the envelope as it were. With the Brosnan films they fell
back on what had worked in the past.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
I think with the Dalton films they were trying something new
Pushing the envelope as it were. With the Brosnan films they fell
back on what had worked in the past.
Yes, but my point is that GE is the one in the middle! A script for Dalton with Brosnan starring instead and a director making up the tone as he went. That's why it's such an interesting movie.
I remember the time when AVTAK was around, critics heavily criticized Moore's age and the lack of unique and exciting ideas.
Being a relatively new Bond fan and just working my way thru the previous films (in the cinema - Bond on video or DVD did not exist) - I did not entirely agree.
The internet did not exist, so we had to take the bits that we've received from TV news, newspapers and the James Bond Club magazine. Back then it was pretty clear that Brosnan would take over the job and we all were surprised that the other guy landed the role.
I remember that Dalton claimed to stick it closer to Fleming - which was not a good thing as the IF novels were not regarded very highly in the 80s and the audiences and critics where meh at best about him.
LTK was further criticized for it's brutality (which was never an issue for me - I actually liked the Miami - Key West -vibe) and lack of quality compared to True Lies which was the far more successful film.
The legal battles went on and it was pretty obvious that EON lost a bit the excitement with making a new one.
So, looking back the years after the premiere of AVTAK have been a pretty dark era for Bond fans and when it was finally announced that Brosnan would take the role - it was no big surprise - and mostly everyone welcomed it.
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,652MI6 Agent
To once again share my own war stories, the 6-year hiatus was excruciating and updates were spotty without the Internet, depending on what news source one got their hands on, often by happenstance. I was hopeful about TD’s return but missed those updates saying he wasn’t coming back. I think TD was Cubby’s attempt to make honest Bond movies despite the past business decisions he and Harry made in the interest of the series’ success.
Luring back Connery for DAF was glaring proof of EON’s business interest eclipsing their creative interests (though that has sometimes been subtle throughout). I would think Moore’s earliest films were evidence of EON’s willingness to take risks, just as OHMSS can be seen in many ways a similar move despite the attempt to clone Connery for the plain fact that there was a new guy. But as Moore visibly aged, luring him back again and again was proof of their financial interests taking over again. Then we know that the cycle repeated with TD followed by PB’s Bond “mash-up” as Chrisisall termed.
I think that EON lucked out with once again taking the leap with the reboot, but this time instead of giving audiences what they wanted in Bond (the familiar), they gave audiences what they wanted beyond Bond, e.g., post-modern Bond, which ironically, is the “death of Bond” that Lazenby surmised about the immediate future of the series at that time. The other irony here IMO is how the reboot is perceived to be a return to Fleming’s Bond, which is not the case, though that misconception has become a strong selling point most especially with the younger movie-going public. Therefore, Cubby never got to see his heirs striking the perfect balance between both worlds, creative integrity (though I think it’s primarily perception) and phenomenal commercial success.
DC will not be around forever and we can predict the repeating cycle of innovation and conservation taking turns, but because the balance struck in this unprecedented phase of the series, I wonder how they will handle what’s next? At worse, they might have painted themselves into a corner, but at best, the next challenge might cause them to outdo themselves with a new Bond era that will be a pleasant surprise for us all.
"...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.....
The other irony here IMO is how the reboot is perceived to be a return to Fleming’s Bond, which is not the case, though that misconception has become a strong selling point most especially with the younger movie-going public.
As much as I appreciate Dan's Bond, you are correct here. Very early Connery & Dalton were closer...
Dalton was the first Bond transition for me as I was growing up (He also happens to be my favourite Bond). It was about time for a new one as they had flogged poor old Jolly Roger to death!
Timothy was an excellent choice but I was always unhappy with the run he got at Bond, and also the critical negativity that surrounded a lot of it at the time (people probably won't remember much of it now, or have even been around then). I always felt he deserved more, he turned in the best ever performance, and two excellent entries into the franchise (TLD is my favourite Bond film). I think after good ol' Roger people just weren't ready for Dalton's take on it (their loss I say).
I would have loved his tenure to have started with FYEO and continued to GE, then Brosnan take over with TND. But alas...
When Brosnan finally did take over I felt he was passable as JB. I am happy that he enjoyed success in the role and people seemed to like him. but he was not a patch on Timothy and never would be.
i'll have to use another film series to describe this...it's like star wars fans waiting 20 some odd years for another film! what did they get? JAR JAR BINKS!!!!
I
When Brosnan finally did take over I felt he was passable as JB. I am happy that he enjoyed success in the role and people seemed to like him. but he was not a patch on Timothy and never would be.
That's actually my take on Brosnan. Passable.
1. For Your Eyes Only 2. The Living Daylights 3 From Russia with Love 4. Casino Royale 5. OHMSS 6. Skyfall
I quite liked Brosnan, and feel he's taking the blame for weak stories
and not the greatest directors. Given better material, I think he'd have
Been a lot better. -{
Lazenby wasn't an actor but with a talented director and great script he
Was able to Put in an outstanding performance. {[]
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Comments
"On 12 April 1994 Timothy Dalton announced he was quitting the role"
He was 50 (or 48 depending on sources) and may have felt his day as Bond had passed the expiration date. But more probably it was a decision made on all of the factors in play, not just one single one.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
I agree that there was probably more than one factor involved in his decision to quit, his age being one of them (though that never stopped other Bonds!). He had other offers to contend with, of course, and perhaps more than any of the other Bonds Dalton actually liked being an actor rather than a star and to play a range of roles with sincerity.
From Rocketeer: "It wasn't lies, Jenny. 'Twas acting."
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Side note:
Notice how many of Dalton's roles he "inherited"?
Rhett Butler- Clark Gable
Heathcliff- Laurence Olivier
Mr Rochester- Orson Welles
James Bond- Barry Nelson
This is great, a real life mystery to solve .
To the AJB, Mystery Machine, post haste !
Well, to get the part of Bond he'd have had to kill Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore who're all still with us!
Sorry it's getting late.
With Dalton, I think his first/best talent is for stage acting. Much as I think he
Gave a great Bond, that little spark of something wasn't there, as it was with
Sean and Roger.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
So many people cite GE as a great Bond movie, and I think it's because it's the transitional film. Elements of old, elements of new... a subtle Dalton influence & a new era makeover bound together in a glorious mix...
If it had had a Barry score I think most would call it near perfect.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Pushing the envelope as it were. With the Brosnan films they fell
back on what had worked in the past.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Being a relatively new Bond fan and just working my way thru the previous films (in the cinema - Bond on video or DVD did not exist) - I did not entirely agree.
The internet did not exist, so we had to take the bits that we've received from TV news, newspapers and the James Bond Club magazine. Back then it was pretty clear that Brosnan would take over the job and we all were surprised that the other guy landed the role.
I remember that Dalton claimed to stick it closer to Fleming - which was not a good thing as the IF novels were not regarded very highly in the 80s and the audiences and critics where meh at best about him.
LTK was further criticized for it's brutality (which was never an issue for me - I actually liked the Miami - Key West -vibe) and lack of quality compared to True Lies which was the far more successful film.
The legal battles went on and it was pretty obvious that EON lost a bit the excitement with making a new one.
So, looking back the years after the premiere of AVTAK have been a pretty dark era for Bond fans and when it was finally announced that Brosnan would take the role - it was no big surprise - and mostly everyone welcomed it.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Off Topic, but Dalton got to be near a bigger Busted Jennifer Connelly in The Rocketeer {[]
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Luring back Connery for DAF was glaring proof of EON’s business interest eclipsing their creative interests (though that has sometimes been subtle throughout). I would think Moore’s earliest films were evidence of EON’s willingness to take risks, just as OHMSS can be seen in many ways a similar move despite the attempt to clone Connery for the plain fact that there was a new guy. But as Moore visibly aged, luring him back again and again was proof of their financial interests taking over again. Then we know that the cycle repeated with TD followed by PB’s Bond “mash-up” as Chrisisall termed.
I think that EON lucked out with once again taking the leap with the reboot, but this time instead of giving audiences what they wanted in Bond (the familiar), they gave audiences what they wanted beyond Bond, e.g., post-modern Bond, which ironically, is the “death of Bond” that Lazenby surmised about the immediate future of the series at that time. The other irony here IMO is how the reboot is perceived to be a return to Fleming’s Bond, which is not the case, though that misconception has become a strong selling point most especially with the younger movie-going public. Therefore, Cubby never got to see his heirs striking the perfect balance between both worlds, creative integrity (though I think it’s primarily perception) and phenomenal commercial success.
DC will not be around forever and we can predict the repeating cycle of innovation and conservation taking turns, but because the balance struck in this unprecedented phase of the series, I wonder how they will handle what’s next? At worse, they might have painted themselves into a corner, but at best, the next challenge might cause them to outdo themselves with a new Bond era that will be a pleasant surprise for us all.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Dalton was the first Bond transition for me as I was growing up (He also happens to be my favourite Bond). It was about time for a new one as they had flogged poor old Jolly Roger to death!
Timothy was an excellent choice but I was always unhappy with the run he got at Bond, and also the critical negativity that surrounded a lot of it at the time (people probably won't remember much of it now, or have even been around then). I always felt he deserved more, he turned in the best ever performance, and two excellent entries into the franchise (TLD is my favourite Bond film). I think after good ol' Roger people just weren't ready for Dalton's take on it (their loss I say).
I would have loved his tenure to have started with FYEO and continued to GE, then Brosnan take over with TND. But alas...
When Brosnan finally did take over I felt he was passable as JB. I am happy that he enjoyed success in the role and people seemed to like him. but he was not a patch on Timothy and never would be.
AJB007 Favorite Film Rankings
Pros and Cons Compendium (50 Years)
Capitalist pigs!
That's actually my take on Brosnan. Passable.
and not the greatest directors. Given better material, I think he'd have
Been a lot better. -{
Lazenby wasn't an actor but with a talented director and great script he
Was able to Put in an outstanding performance. {[]