77 replies to this topic

[dee-bee-five]

Basically, I think Eon got it absolutely right with the ending that they went with for OHMSS.

I couldn't agree more. Most things we discuss on CBn are subjective. I would submit this is one of the few that isn't...

[Trident]

But this does prompt a question, which I'd be grateful if doublenoughtspy or someone could answer:

Was there ever any serious consideration of using a different ending for OHMSS? For example, Bond and Tracy not actually get hitched, Bond pursuing Blofeld and Bunt after Tracy's death and getting his revenge before the closing credits? Or something else?

Not sure if I'm really qualified to given an answer here. While I've read a lot about OHMSS I'm still far from having read everything there is to read about it. And even if no such hints can be found in print somewhere on this planet, that doesn't really prove there never had been such considerations, does it?

So my view to this is only an attempt to logically answer this question. The very way OHMSS was adapted, i.e. very close to the plotline, in my view really leaves little doubt that there only ever was one realistic option for its ending: the one we got, the one Fleming has used.

Why do I think so? Let's take a look at the other options:

1) take OHMSS title, some elements and knit a whole new story around them in much the same way YOLT was handled.

That would have been a possibility, although it would have meant to dismiss one of the strongest books without any good reason. OHMSS had to take the backseat to YOLT for various reasons. But it would seem the producers never lost the strong plot of OHMSS out of their eyes. Otherwise, they wouldn't have shot their adaptation so close to the original. And the original's strongest moment is the ending.

That brings us to

2) film OHMSS, close to the book, but this time leave Tracy's death out.
Another possibility, once more with the drawback to dismiss the best part of the story without any good reason (apart from not wanting to disappoint audiences with an unexpected very unhappy end). We'd have got at the most a good film that really just barely manages to perform above average and that nobody would remember one year later, let alone 40 years later!

Another twist would be

3) film OHMSS, close to the book, but this time leave the wedding out.
Again a possibility, again cutting a vital part of OHMSS plot. Without becoming Bond's wife, Tracy would only be one of a few hundred. The main thing about her is that Bond cares for her more than for any other woman. So much so that he's ready to commit himself for good. If Bond doesn't marry her, her death would only be the usual sacrificial lamb, regardless if in the same film or only to the beginning of the next.

So the last option would be to

4) drop any plans to film OHMSS, pick up TSWLM instead and continue the era of the giant battlescenes with an entirely original plot by a few dozen writers.


No. I really think the moment OHMSS was picked up by EON the end was already decided upon. A different ending would haven been possible. But entirely pointless. Likewise I cannot see CR ever being adapted without Vesper's death. These moments for both characters are crucial. It's a stage where these characters are objects of their fate and, through their connection to Bond, of Bond's fate. These are moments that defy a 00-license, a bullet, a Whisky or Vodka. Bond is a victim here and has to deal with it. In one of Bond's strongest moments of inner life Fleming writes:

"M looked sharply at Bond. 'How's your coefficient of toughness, James? You haven't got to the dangerous age yet.'

Bond didn't like personal questions. He didn't know what to answer, or what the truth was. He had not got a wife or children - had never suffered the tragedy of a personal loss. He had not had to stand up to blindness or a mortal disease. He had absolutely no idea how he would face these things that needed so much more toughness than he had ever had to show. He said hesitantly 'I suppose I can stand most things if I have to...'

For Your Eyes Only, Ian Fleming 1960, p.41 - 42, Berkley paperback edition 1982

And Fleming realized he could give Bond a whole new dimension if he made him face such a tragedy. The pattern of genre, the formula are broken up. Bond isn't safe any longer, cannot count on being spared the drama real life sneaks up with on ordinary people so often. Previously it were only the others that got killed, maimed, beaten. Now it's Bond's turn and that's what keeps him a cut above many of his fellow literary spies.

To forego this chance to extent the hero's suffering into our own world, and thus his relevance for all of us, would have been utter lunacy.

[Daddy Bond]

Not to get off the OHMSS track, but (point well taken), if this personal loss adds that extra dimension to Bond's character (per Fleming), then CR added that touch to Craig's Bond early on.

[Mr. Blofeld]

I really think the moment OHMSS was picked up by EON the end was already decided upon. A different ending would haven been possible. But entirely pointless. Likewise I cannot see CR ever being adapted without Vesper's death. These moments for both characters are crucial. It's a stage where these characters are objects of their fate and, through their connection to Bond, of Bond's fate. These are moments that defy a 00-license, a bullet, a Whisky or Vodka. Bond is a victim here and has to deal with it. In one of Bond's strongest moments of inner life Fleming writes:

"M looked sharply at Bond. 'How's your coefficient of toughness, James? You haven't got to the dangerous age yet.'

Bond didn't like personal questions. He didn't know what to answer, or what the truth was. He had not got a wife or children - had never suffered the tragedy of a personal loss. He had not had to stand up to blindness or a mortal disease. He had absolutely no idea how he would face these things that needed so much more toughness than he had ever had to show. He said hesitantly 'I suppose I can stand most things if I have to...'

For Your Eyes Only, Ian Fleming 1960, p.41 - 42, Berkley paperback edition 1982

And Fleming realized he could give Bond a whole new dimension if he made him face such a tragedy. The pattern of genre, the formula are broken up. Bond isn't safe any longer, cannot count on being spared the drama real life sneaks up with on ordinary people so often. Previously it were only the others that got killed, maimed, beaten. Now it's Bond's turn and that's what keeps him a cut above many of his fellow literary spies.

To forego this chance to extent the hero's suffering into our own world, and thus his relevance for all of us, would have been utter lunacy.

That's what irks me, though; Bond has suffered a personal loss before, that being the loss of Vesper, which is completely ignored in the subsequent books.

[dee-bee-five]

I really think the moment OHMSS was picked up by EON the end was already decided upon. A different ending would haven been possible. But entirely pointless. Likewise I cannot see CR ever being adapted without Vesper's death. These moments for both characters are crucial. It's a stage where these characters are objects of their fate and, through their connection to Bond, of Bond's fate. These are moments that defy a 00-license, a bullet, a Whisky or Vodka. Bond is a victim here and has to deal with it. In one of Bond's strongest moments of inner life Fleming writes:

"M looked sharply at Bond. 'How's your coefficient of toughness, James? You haven't got to the dangerous age yet.'

Bond didn't like personal questions. He didn't know what to answer, or what the truth was. He had not got a wife or children - had never suffered the tragedy of a personal loss. He had not had to stand up to blindness or a mortal disease. He had absolutely no idea how he would face these things that needed so much more toughness than he had ever had to show. He said hesitantly 'I suppose I can stand most things if I have to...'

For Your Eyes Only, Ian Fleming 1960, p.41 - 42, Berkley paperback edition 1982

And Fleming realized he could give Bond a whole new dimension if he made him face such a tragedy. The pattern of genre, the formula are broken up. Bond isn't safe any longer, cannot count on being spared the drama real life sneaks up with on ordinary people so often. Previously it were only the others that got killed, maimed, beaten. Now it's Bond's turn and that's what keeps him a cut above many of his fellow literary spies.

To forego this chance to extent the hero's suffering into our own world, and thus his relevance for all of us, would have been utter lunacy.

That's what irks me, though; Bond has suffered a personal loss before, that being the loss of Vesper, which is completely ignored in the subsequent books.

Actually, it's not. Read or re-read Fleming's OHMSS...

[Trident]

Not to get off the OHMSS track, but (point well taken), if this personal loss adds that extra dimension to Bond's character (per Fleming), then CR added that touch to Craig's Bond early on.

Definitely. And not taking that opportunity would not have been a serious option IMHO. Neither in CR and much less back in '69. OHMSS without this ending would have been really only half a film. And the weaker half at that. Had CR stopped after Bond and Vesper sailed into Venice, where would the drama have been? Had OHMSS ended with the cutting of the wedding cake, where would the tragedy have had its place? Where would irony, sadness, loss, contempt, rage have had their rights?

No, there is no question in my view. OHMSS ending wasn't just faithful to the book. It was a crucial necessity to the whole story and the Bond character in general.

[Trident]

has[/i] suffered a personal loss before, that being the loss of Vesper, which is completely ignored in the subsequent books.

Actually, it's not. Read or re-read Fleming's OHMSS...

Nonetheless I think it's a good point. I sometimes see CR as a one-off that really has little significance to the series up to OHMSS. Vesper's loss isn't mentioned very often and seemingly didn't have the same impact Tracy's had on him. LALD dismissed Vesper so quickly and efficiently that you really didn't need to have read CR to get into the plot of LALD. That may have been due to the fact that while Bond has made up his mind to ask Vesper to merry him, he never actually had the chance to do so. She killed herself before he could commit himself.

Yet, telling fact, Vesper is not forgotten entirely. When Bond comes to senses in an airplane after he supposedly died in the 'Pressure Room' of Goldfinger's Geneva factory, he mistakes the plane for a kind of afterlife, perhaps on his way to paradise. He wonders if Tilly was on the same trip. And then, with some uneasiness, how he should introduce her to the others, to Vesper for instance.

And finally, in OHMSS, we learn that Bond in some wicked celebration, annually visits her grave in Royale. She has been there all along. We just weren't told.

Of course this only happened at a time when Fleming has decided to discover new territory with his character. The previous books where Bond wasn't really affected by his adventures and remained for the most part intact as character didn't have a need for the element of tragedy.

[[dark]]

Was there ever any serious consideration of using a different ending for OHMSS? For example, Bond and Tracy not actually get hitched, Bond pursuing Blofeld and Bunt after Tracy's death and getting his revenge before the closing credits? Or something else?

Unless I'm mistaken, I believe it was considered to have On Her Majesty’s Secret Service end with Bond and Tracy's wedding, and have her killed during the pre-titles sequence of the following film. Not sure why it was dismissed, but I believe it's discussed during the documentary on the On Her Majesty’s Secret Service DVD.

[Harmsway]

Well, I don't like the idea of that. Surely it would have been a huge blow against the film's (generally impressive) fidelity to Fleming?

Sure. But, IMO, the film had already lost what made that ending work in Fleming's novel. So my idea has more to do with making the most of what the film already is, rather than describing my ideal OHMSS adaptation. My ideal OHMSS adaptation would certainly have that ending, but it also would have earned it.

And the whole point about OHMSS is not that Bond marries Tracy, but that she dies.

It is in the novel, but I don't think it is in the film. Tracy's death, rather than the point of the film, feels like an afterthought, largely because OHMSS doesn't seem like a film that's centered on its characters. If OHMSS had been about Bond, as the past two Craig films have been, then I'd buy it. But I don't think Bond feels like the center of the flick.

I think your idea for Tracy's death to be carried over to the PTS of the next flick is as revisionist, as crazy and as Tamahori-esque as anything I've ever suggested on CBn!

I don't really think it's that crazy. It's been talked about by others, long before this thread.

Was there ever any serious consideration of using a different ending for OHMSS? For example, Bond and Tracy not actually get hitched, Bond pursuing Blofeld and Bunt after Tracy's death and getting his revenge before the closing credits? Or something else?

The happy ending, with Tracy's death as the PTS of the following film, was in consideration during the production of OHMSS. Any plans for that, however, were effectively squelched when Laz decided he wasn't going to be returning before shooting was completed.

[Loomis]

I don't really think it's that crazy. It's been talked about by others, long before this thread. ... The happy ending, with Tracy's death as the PTS of the following film, was in consideration during the production of OHMSS.

Okay, but, as you know, plenty of things have been seriously considered by Eon over the decades: making Dr. No a monkey, all those zillions of ideas for THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, making James Brolin Bond, Tamahori's planned codename theory and Connery cameo, doing a Jinx spinoff, and so on and so on.

There's a reason all those ideas were dropped: they were crazy.

[Harmsway]

I don't really think it's that crazy. It's been talked about by others, long before this thread. ... The happy ending, with Tracy's death as the PTS of the following film, was in consideration during the production of OHMSS.

Okay, but, as you know, plenty of things have been seriously considered by Eon over the decades: making Dr. No a monkey, all those zillions of ideas for THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, making James Brolin Bond, Tamahori's planned codename theory and Connery cameo, doing a Jinx spinoff, and so on and so on.

There's a reason all those ideas were dropped: they were crazy.

This isn't even fit to be in that category, though. It's not at all a zany idea. Using the end of OHMSS as the PTS of the next film is a pretty natural idea, I daresay, and it's not at all surprising that they considered doing it (whether it's the right idea is an entirely different question). I think it would actually be the expected route for a late 1960s EON-produced adaptation of OHMSS. After all, when introducing a new Bond, who wants to close his first film with a miserable punch in the gut, especially when your franchise has been known for grandiose entertainment?

Anyway, I reiterate my stance: ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE is a terrific Bond film in most respects, simply suffering from inconsistency. The final scene, in and of itself, is a perfect one, and one of the most deeply affecting scenes in the Bond canon. It just demanded a different film to truly work.

[Double-Oh Agent]

The happy ending, with Tracy's death as the PTS of the following film, was in consideration during the production of OHMSS. Any plans for that, however, were effectively squelched when Laz decided he wasn't going to be returning before shooting was completed.

That's the way I've heard/read about it. I'm not sure how seriously EON were considering moving the death scene to the next film's PTS, but it was definitely an option. With Lazenby quitting, they were forced to keep the death scene as the finale. Fortunately, they wound up with the correct ending.

[Double-Oh Agent]

With the current film we have, I think Tracy's death would have been best left out of the flick, allowing it to be the generally well-crafted piece of entertainment it is, without that drag of an ending.

With her death, presumably, opening the next film?

Precisely.

Well, I don't like the idea of that. Surely it would have been a huge blow against the film's (generally impressive) fidelity to Fleming?

And the whole point about OHMSS is not that Bond marries Tracy, but that she dies.

Given that Laz had already publicly left the Bond role before OHMSS premiered (unless I'm mistaken), DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER (or BOND 7) would have had to open with John Gavin or Sean Connery or someone replacing Laz for the PTS in which Tracy got killed. Most awkward.

Either that, or Bond would have remained a married man in the one-film Laz alternate universe. Again, most awkward.

Basically, I think Eon got it absolutely right with the ending that they went with for OHMSS.

I think your idea for Tracy's death to be carried over to the PTS of the next flick is as revisionist, as crazy and as Tamahori-esque as anything I've ever suggested on CBn!

I absolutely agree with Loomis. Even non-fans would have known (or would have been informed by reviewers) that Tracy died shortly after the wedding. Leaving the couple married, with the murder impending, would have given OHMSS an unfinished feel and diminished its emotional impact. It was much more emotionally satisfying to experience Bond's tragedy at the end of OHMSS, being left to wonder how it would affect him and how he'd take his revenge in the next film, than to await the next film knowing that the murder was still to come.

If the filmmakers had wished to start the next film with a big emotional whallop, they could have shown a shattered Bond emerging from the Aston Martin spattered with his wife's blood. They could have shown a funeral scene. They could have had a PTS of him bungling a mission because of intrusive memories of Tracy's death. They could, as in the novel of YOLT, have shown him "going slowly to pieces."

I cannot fathom what possible advantage would have been gained by carrying Tracy's murder over to the start of the next film. To end the story with a happy ending would have fatally wounded "On Her Majesty's Secret Service."

I agree as well. Moving Tracy's death to the PTS of the next film would have been anti-climactic and greatly taken away the scene's emotional impact on the audience. Similarly, without the death scene, On Her Majesty's Secret Service would likely be considered only a good film rather than the great film it is today. That's because that little extra something would have been missing that we all know should be there, looming like a large elephant in the room. Omitting Tracy's death scene at the end of OHMSS would forever nag Bond fans with thoughts of "what if?"

No, the correct decision was to follow the novel's ending. The film--and the series (not to mention the perception of Lazenby)--are much better off for it.

[Loomis]

I don't really think it's that crazy. It's been talked about by others, long before this thread. ... The happy ending, with Tracy's death as the PTS of the following film, was in consideration during the production of OHMSS.

Okay, but, as you know, plenty of things have been seriously considered by Eon over the decades: making Dr. No a monkey, all those zillions of ideas for THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, making James Brolin Bond, Tamahori's planned codename theory and Connery cameo, doing a Jinx spinoff, and so on and so on.

There's a reason all those ideas were dropped: they were crazy.

This isn't even fit to be in that category, though. It's not at all a zany idea. Using the end of OHMSS as the PTS of the next film is a pretty natural idea, I daresay, and it's not at all surprising that they considered doing it (whether it's the right idea is an entirely different question). I think it would actually be the expected route for a late 1960s EON-produced adaptation of OHMSS. After all, when introducing a new Bond, who wants to close his first film with a miserable punch in the gut, especially when your franchise has been known for grandiose entertainment?

Anyway, I reiterate my stance: ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE is a terrific Bond film in most respects, simply suffering from inconsistency. The final scene, in and of itself, is a perfect one, and one of the most deeply affecting scenes in the Bond canon. It just demanded a different film to truly work.

I think it does truly work as it is. However, leaving that aside, do you honestly believe it would have worked better as the PTS of BOND 7? I don't.

Who wants to open a Bond film (regardless of whether it's someone's first, and in any case a 007 actor who's on his second flick is still to some extent on probation with audiences) with a miserable punch in the gut, especially when your franchise has been known for grandiose entertainment?

You dislike the fact that the James Bond Theme strikes up right after what you rightly a perfect scene and "one of the most deeply affecting scenes in the Bond canon". You think the James Bond Theme kills the mood. I disagree, but I do see where you're coming from.

Well, just imagine this perfect scene of yours as a PTS. Coming right after would be Shirley Bassey or Paul McCartney or Electric Light Orchestra or whoever doing a big, belting showstopper over silhouetted girls dancing against colourful Maurice Binder visuals. Spoil the sombre mood much? Or perhaps the opening credits sequence should have been something resembling Anton Corbijn's video for Joy Division's "Atmosphere". But you know that not even the Craig era has gone for something so bleak and uncompromising.

And after the opening credits, we'd have had to wade through the usual antics with M, Moneypenny and Q, chases, fights, sacrificial lambs and so on, before getting to any kind of payoff involving Blofeld and/or Bunt.

Unless Eon had made a genuinely gritty film to follow it - grittier even than QUANTUM OF SOLACE - putting Tracy's death at the start would have been to throw it away. Many fans complain that DIE ANOTHER DAY failed to deliver on the promise of its (relatively) gritty opening - well, can you imagine the uproar over a failure to deliver on Tracy's death in a PTS?

OHMSS - while unquestionably one of the very best Bond outings - is not a 100% perfect film in its own right. It has its flaws. However, I do not believe that those flaws include the decision not to hold the tragic ending over to the PTS of the next flick. Broadly speaking, OHMSS got everything right - its flaws lie in little things like, say, a certain slackness of pacing during the Gumbold episode, some moments of badly-dubbed dialogue, and flashes of wooden acting (with Laz by no means the only offender).

What I'm saying is that the execution is a little bumpy at times (which is certainly also true of QUANTUM OF SOLACE, and to a much greater degree). But the overall structure (including placing the tragic ending exactly where they ended up placing it) is sound.

[Harmsway]

However, leaving that aside, do you honestly believe it would have worked better as the PTS of BOND 7? I don't.

Not really, but I've said that they might have done that because it would have made the OHMSS that they shot - in and of itself - a stronger flick. I'm not really thinking about BOND 7 too much.

Who wants to open a Bond film (regardless of whether it's someone's first, and in any case a 007 actor who's on his second flick is still to some extent on probation with audiences) with a miserable punch in the gut, especially when your franchise has been known for grandiose entertainment?

I think it's easier. Especially since the scene, when detached from the original story like that, wouldn't quite feel like the downer it did at the end of OHMSS. I've actually seen mock-ups for the end of OHMSS as a PTS, and I kind of liked it. It wouldn't have pleased the fans, I daresay, and certainly wouldn't have given the moment the emotional due it deserves, but I think it would have been fine with the general public.

If Laz had continued on, and they'd still kept OHMSS' ending with OHMSS, I think it would have been wise to open BOND 7 with a repeat of that final scene.

However, I do not believe that those flaws include the decision not to hold the tragic ending over to the PTS of the next flick.

Well, strictly speaking, I never formulated my thoughts that way. I've stated is that the ending in the EON adaptation of OHMSS feels detached from the rest of the film, almost like a last-minute afterthought. So, that led to my thought that maybe if they'd held the ending over to the next flick, the film wouldn't have that problem. So, really, I see the core flaw as failing to make Bond's character development the center of the film, and then the PTS suggestion as a last-ditch attempt to make the film they made work on its own merits.

[Loomis]

However, leaving that aside, do you honestly believe it would have worked better as the PTS of BOND 7? I don't.

Not really, but I've said that they might have done that because it would have made the OHMSS that they shot - in and of itself - a stronger flick. I'm not really thinking about BOND 7 too much.

Ah, but here's the thing: you'd have to. Some kind of resolution would be necessary, nay, demanded. Unless, of course, you were to have Bond and Tracy stay married, or just not mention the marriage at all in the next flick (leaving the audience to presume that Trace stayed at home while Jimmy went out, saved the world and - all in the course of duty to Queen and Country, you understand - bedded babes).

Which would be.... weird.

If Laz had continued on, and they'd still kept OHMSS' ending with OHMSS, I think it would have been wise to open BOND 7 with a repeat of that final scene.

Dude, it ain't HALLOWEEN II. QUANTUM OF SOLACE got away very nicely without a repeat of the closing scenes of CASINO ROYALE.

[Harmsway]

Ah, but here's the thing: you'd have to. Some kind of resolution would be necessary, nay, demanded.

Well, sure. And that's why the PTS thing came up, which would be a compromise that wouldn't necessarily do justice to Fleming's ending, but just might produce a more consistent OHMSS and a fairly decent BOND 7.

Again, as I've said over and over again, my ideal OHMSS would have the ending the film had. The film before it would have been different, though, in quite a few ways.

If Laz had continued on, and they'd still kept OHMSS' ending with OHMSS, I think it would have been wise to open BOND 7 with a repeat of that final scene.

Dude, it ain't HALLOWEEN II. QUANTUM OF SOLACE got away very nicely without a repeat of the closing scenes of CASINO ROYALE.

Sure. But, again, I've seen mock-ups of the final scenes of OHMSS as a pre-title sequence, and it worked so brilliantly that for a Laz-starring revenge-driven BOND 7 I wouldn't have wanted to see anything else.

[DR76]

I don't think the film does a good job dealing with Tracy as a suicidal individual with real problems (it's talked about in the first part of the film, but never with the necessary weight, and it's soon forgotten afterwards).

Frankly, Tracy's suicide attempt at the beginning of the film, along with her self-destructive behavior at the casino and her reaction to Bond's appearance at her father's birthday party, pretty much told me about her emotional state in the film's first half.

Sure. But, again, I've seen mock-ups of the final scenes of OHMSS as a pre-title sequence, and it worked so brilliantly that for a Laz-starring revenge-driven BOND 7 I wouldn't have wanted to see anything else.

I would have liked to see if EON had allowed Lazenby's Bond to get revenge for Tracy's death. Because I certainly was not impressed by Connery's lame hunt for Blofeld at the beginning of DAF, in which they couldn't even allow Bond or anyone else mention Tracy.

Edited by DR76, 13 December 2008 - 06:35 PM.