53 replies to this topic

[SecretAgentFan]

 

I don't think he and Barbara Broccoli ever saw eye to eye.

 

He is the only Bond to have been effectively sacked, as far as we know!

 

Um, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton?

[marktmurphy]

They all profess to have decided to not do any more themselves. Might not have been the real story, but that's the official line.

[tdalton]

I think it can safely be said that Dalton was fired. You don't stay "the Bond of record" for several years just to resign as a new film is finally beginning to gain momentum towards being made. MGM was never going to allow him to retake the role, regardless of what Cubby and EON wanted to do.

[stromberg]

 

 

I don't think he and Barbara Broccoli ever saw eye to eye.

 

He is the only Bond to have been effectively sacked, as far as we know!

 

Um, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton?

 

Lazenby wasn't sacked. He was offered a contract but followed the advise of a friend not to sign it.

 

Dalton... well, we'll most likely never find out what's really true.

 

Brosnan says he was asked back after DAD was finished, but what he sees as "asked back" may have been the usual idle talk out of politeness. Fact is, he didn't get a new contract, which is a bit different from getting fired.

[SecretAgentFan]

I wonder if Lazenby´s declining to sign a contract for more Bonds was giving EON any headaches.  Seems as if his behaviour on set turned them off working with him in the future.  Heck, they rather invited Connery back.

 

I guess EON thought: the best thing about OHMSS tanking is we don´t have to persuade Lazenby...

[AMC Hornet]

Dalton was five years out of the role when GoldenEye was gearing up; he'd been offered the role of Rhett Butler in the Scarlett mini-series; Barbara Broccoli wanted Sean Bean and UA wanted Pierce Brosnan (the popular choice in ('86). It wouldn't have been hard to walk away at that point.

 

OHMSS didn't tank - it just wasn't as profitable as another YOLT would have been.

[marktmurphy]

I think it can safely be said that Dalton was fired. You don't stay "the Bond of record" for several years just to resign as a new film is finally beginning to gain momentum towards being made. MGM was never going to allow him to retake the role, regardless of what Cubby and EON wanted to do.

 

I think you're very probably right, and also it would have been a bad idea to restart the series with the same lead; but that doesn't alter the fact that the official story is that he was offered it and politely turned it down.

 

Likewise, the official story is that he was first choice for Living Daylights. True? I have my doubts about both, but there we go. Brosnan is the only one who we know for certain was willing to do more and a choice was made to get a new one in.

 

Brosnan says he was asked back after DAD was finished, but what he sees as "asked back" may have been the usual idle talk out of politeness. Fact is, he didn't get a new contract, which is a bit different from getting fired.

 

 

I did say effectively sacked And he was, really. 

[stromberg]

I wonder if Lazenby´s declining to sign a contract for more Bonds was giving EON any headaches.  Seems as if his behaviour on set turned them off working with him in the future.  Heck, they rather invited Connery back.

 

I guess EON thought: the best thing about OHMSS tanking is we don´t have to persuade Lazenby...

 

Not so sure about that. They had just gone through an exhausting process of finding a new James Bond and they certainly weren't keen on doing it again so soon. They were willing to go with him for seven movies. They turned a hardly known actor into a worldwide superstar before, and I guess they were certain that they could do that again. Lazenby being more familiar with the big movie world (and the crew being more familiar with Lazenby's quirks) would have made the next one much easier. They couldn't even do proper marketing with him for OHMSS as it was clear before that it would be his only one. The prospect of having to find and introduce yet another new Bond with the option of an even bigger failure (which would have killed the franchise) made them desperate enough to take loads of money in their hands and throw it at Connery.

 

 

I think it can safely be said that Dalton was fired. You don't stay "the Bond of record" for several years just to resign as a new film is finally beginning to gain momentum towards being made. MGM was never going to allow him to retake the role, regardless of what Cubby and EON wanted to do.

 

I think you're very probably right, and also it would have been a bad idea to restart the series with the same lead; but that doesn't alter the fact that the official story is that he was offered it and politely turned it down.

 

Likewise, the official story is that he was first choice for Living Daylights. True? I have my doubts about both, but there we go. Brosnan is the only one who we know for certain was willing to do more and a choice was made to get a new one in.

 

Brosnan says he was asked back after DAD was finished, but what he sees as "asked back" may have been the usual idle talk out of politeness. Fact is, he didn't get a new contract, which is a bit different from getting fired.

 

 

I did say effectively sacked And he was, really. 

 

Point taken. Must read more carefully.

 

Had a contract existed at the time, he would have been fired (from what I've heard).

[glidrose]

Albert R Broccoli claims he let Moore go from the role. Moore claimed quitting had been his idea but now claims it was a mutual decision.

I agree with Stromberg above that choosing not to renew somebody's contract is a world apart from firing them.

Although, with all due respect to our fine admin Stromberg, I do not believe that EON would have fired Brosnan had there been a contract. Not unless the producers wanted to pay out tens of millions of dollars. Besides from what I've heard - oh, dear, more second hand rumor - the money Brosnan was demanding was the breaking point. I have also heard it said that Brosnan was pushing Quentin Tarantino too hard on EON and - rumor alert again! - BB loathes QT.

Nothing personal to all concerned, but I get very suspicious when I hear people claim that Brosnan was fired. Not a coincidence that 99% of the people who claim this are devout Brosnan-bashers slash Dalton-apologists.

 

Dalton was five years out of the role when GoldenEye was gearing up; he'd been offered the role of Rhett Butler in the Scarlett mini-series; Barbara Broccoli wanted Sean Bean and UA wanted Pierce Brosnan (the popular choice in ('86). It wouldn't have been hard to walk away at that point.

Scarlett was shot in 1994, long before GE would go into production. So much for that theory.

I have heard before this claim that BB supposedly wanted Sean Bean, but I have seen no independent confirmation let alone proof. Again, until I see proof I have reason to believe that it's more Brosnan-bashing fan-mongering.

OHMSS didn't tank - it just wasn't as profitable as another YOLT would have been.

I can't be bothered checking the numbers, but I believe the fall-off between YOLT and OHMSS was percentage-wise the same as the fall-off between TB and YOLT.

[marktmurphy]

Albert R Broccoli claims he let Moore go from the role. Moore claimed quitting had been his idea but now claims it was a mutual decision.

I agree with Stromberg above that choosing not to renew somebody's contract is a world apart from firing them.

Although, with all due respect to our fine admin Stromberg, I do not believe that EON would have fired Brosnan had there been a contract. Not unless the producers wanted to pay out tens of millions of dollars. Besides from what I've heard - oh, dear, more second hand rumor - the money Brosnan was demanding was the breaking point. I have also heard it said that Brosnan was pushing Quentin Tarantino too hard on EON and - rumor alert again! - BB loathes QT.

Nothing personal to all concerned, but I get very suspicious when I hear people claim that Brosnan was fired. Not a coincidence that 99% of the people who claim this are devout Brosnan-bashers slash Dalton-apologists.

 

 

Are you saying the things about the money and Tarantino didn't figure into then? I'm not clear on what you're saying. You seem to say he was given the push for those things, and then have a go at anyone who claims he was given the push.

I think Brosnan was excellent at what he did and Dalton probably is the least effective Bond, but I was the one saying he was effectively given the heave-ho.

 

 

 

 

Had a contract existed at the time, he would have been fired (from what I've heard).

 

 

That's interesting, really? Poor Pierce; when you've just made the highest grossing Bond film ever you could be forgiven for thinking they'd want you back!

[glidrose]

Are you saying the things about the money and Tarantino didn't figure into then? I'm not clear on what you're saying. You seem to say he was given the push for those things, and then have a go at anyone who claims he was given the push.
I think Brosnan was excellent at what he did and Dalton probably is the least effective Bond, but I was the one saying he was effectively given the heave-ho.

Money and Tarantino may have been factors. Brosnan was not given the push. His contract was not renewed. Giving somebody the push and not renewing their contract are not the same thing. Forgive me if I'm being a bit too legalistic.

And I agree with you on Brosnan vs. Dalton, especially Dalton being the least effective Bond.

[Blofeld's Cat]

Brosnan was not given the push. His contract was not renewed. Giving somebody the push and not renewing their contract are not the same thing. Forgive me if I'm being a bit too legalistic.

 

I can remember the furore by a few CBn members (many of them "Broznazis") at the time, that Brosnan was still Bond period, without caring that his 4-picture deal had merely expired.

 

Ah, those were the days.

[tdalton]

I think it can safely be said that Dalton was fired. You don't stay "the Bond of record" for several years just to resign as a new film is finally beginning to gain momentum towards being made. MGM was never going to allow him to retake the role, regardless of what Cubby and EON wanted to do.

 
I think you're very probably right, and also it would have been a bad idea to restart the series with the same lead; but that doesn't alter the fact that the official story is that he was offered it and politely turned it down.
 
Likewise, the official story is that he was first choice for Living Daylights. True? I have my doubts about both, but there we go. Brosnan is the only one who we know for certain was willing to do more and a choice was made to get a new one in.

It definitely would have been a bad idea to bring Dalton back after a six year hiatus. If you take that long, you go ahead and recast, unless the guy in the role is just so overwhelmingly popular. I think the "official story" surrounding Dalton's departure is, according to everything I've read around here, a bit more transparent than the one surrounding his hiring. It's pretty clear that MGM wasn't going to fund GoldenEye with Dalton in the role. The other situation is a bit murkier, IMO, simply because it mostly relies on when one party was asked versus another, whether one conversation amounted to an "official" offer of the role versus just gauging potential interest in the role, etc. Cubby could say that Dalton was his "first" choice for TLD, even if it wasn't true, with a straight face due to the supposed offer of an audition to Dalton for OHMSS.

I will, however, say that I can't get on board with the idea that Dalton is the least effective Bond (surprise ). I get that a lot of people don't like him. That's fine and some of the reasons that people cite for not liking him are valid. But the least effective out of a group that includes a non-actor in George Lazenby. Sorry, but I can't buy it. Lazenby is, at best, wooden in virtually every frame of OHMSS and, at worst, is downright terrible in many stretches of it. Rigg and Savalas (as well as the rest of the supporting cast) are what make that film what it is.

[Tiin007]

I will, however, say that I can't get on board with the idea that Dalton is the least effective Bond (surprise ). I get that a lot of people don't like him. That's fine and some of the reasons that people cite for not liking him are valid. But the least effective out of a group that includes a non-actor in George Lazenby. Sorry, but I can't buy it. Lazenby is, at best, wooden in virtually every frame of OHMSS and, at worst, is downright terrible in many stretches of it. Rigg and Savalas (as well as the rest of the supporting cast) are what make that film what it is.

 

 

Agreed 100%. For some odd reason, it seems very common these days for forum members or film fans in general to praise Lazenby as essentially the "hidden treasure" of the Bond canon. While we can all agree that OHMSS remained underrated for far too long, I am utterly perplexed at the overwhelmingly positive reception Lazenby seems to have garnered in recent years. Dalton was (in my opinion, of course) miles better as Bond than Lazenby. 

[jaguar007]

Nothing personal to all concerned, but I get very suspicious when I hear people claim that Brosnan was fired. Not a coincidence that 99% of the people who claim this are devout Brosnan-bashers slash Dalton-apologists.

 

Scarlett was shot in 1994, long before GE would go into production. So much for that theory.

 

Except Brosnan himself publicly made it seem like he was fired. He talked to the press quite a bit about the phone call saying they were going a new direction (and him being "let go").

 

No, Dalton being in Scarlett was not why he said he was not going to return as Bond. It was during the filming of Scarlett that Dalton announced to the press that "he decided" he was not going to return. EON announced they were searching for a new Bond, then about 2-3 weeks later, Brosnan was announced. It is pretty well known that John Calley refused to green light GE unless Bond was recast.

[SecretAgentFan]

One´s perception of being fired or having one´s contract not renewed is, I would say, pretty much the same.

 

So, for Brosnan - who definitely felt very secure after DAD´s stellar box office performance - it was like being sacked, even if EON might really only have decided on rebooting everything.  But since personal motives always are part of the equasion, there probably was some resentment against him, too, that prompted EON to recast.

 

Dalton, from what I understand, was almost the complete opposite.  As a friend to the family, he was more than a great Bond actor for them, and they were sad to let him go.  If the legal problems had not arisen, I´m sure they would have made a third Bond film with him two years after LTK.  But too much time and too much resentment from the public forced EON to call it quits with Dalton.

 

Moore - oh, well, I could imagine him wanting to do one more after AVTAK.  But he must have known that it was time to stop.  So instead of the usual backgammon-for-salary-round with Cubby, he probably was a bit irritated to be told: step down, Roger.  But then he made his peace with it.

 

Lazenby - a victim of fame and consulting the wrong "friends", coupled with a zeitgeist that seemed to divorce itself from Bondmania.  If he had been sensible he might have been turned into a reliable asset by EON.  He also might have become a total nightmare for them.  There are actors who overestimate their value and let everyone suffer for it badly.  So, in retrospect, EON can be very happy how things turned out.

[Jim]

Not hired; not fired.

 

"Not re-hired" seems closer, albeit that tends to undermine the perception of entitlement.

[Dustin]

Well, there's also that other side effect of the role, numerous jobs in add campaigns that are not per-se Bond but effectively only make sense if you've got the role, like the Omega 'ambassador' - when did Omega reach nation status? Have they a seat in the UN now? - or Brioni ads. Nothing really huge but it helps to pay the rent if you happen to rent a palace. Also, as long as you are the current Bond, your agent gets only jobs of a certain price range offered for you. Once you're out you're no longer within that range. But you may still be too pricey for some smaller productions if you don't adjust. Now, Brosnan was - as far as I, an outsider, can be aware of - never really out of work. But the regular Bond job every 14 months or so no doubt was what made his life a big deal easier. Seeing that go obviously didn't agree with him then. And it seems he's still not entirely over it.

[glidrose]

I think it can safely be said that Dalton was fired. You don't stay "the Bond of record" for several years just to resign as a new film is finally beginning to gain momentum towards being made. MGM was never going to allow him to retake the role, regardless of what Cubby and EON wanted to do.

And I can safely say you are wrong about that. As others have mentioned, TD was close to the Broccolis. MGM (read: John Calley) were in no position to fire Dalton. There are so many conflicting official stories about what did really happen but it seems that according to official sources, MGM would give EON less money to make Bond 17 if TD were still in the role.

I do seem to recall that Albert Broccoli did have a serious heart-attack and/or stroke circa 1993. It may have been the now defunct entertainment magazine Premiere that claimed John Calley was the cause. John Calley wrote a very heated letter to the editor disputing the magazine's claims. The magazine printed Calley's letter but added an editorial note saying that they stood by their story.

My theory? Dalton saw the writing on the wall, saw the toll the studio wrangling had taken on Albert R. Broccoli and so stepped aside.

[Royal Dalton]

I think it was really a mutual decision between Broccoli and Dalton. Dalton only wanted to make one more Bond film, to fulfil his original contract. But Broccoli said he'd have to sign up for another three films. Dalton wouldn't agree to that. So they amicably parted company.

[SecretAgentFan]

Well, there's also that other side effect of the role, numerous jobs in add campaigns that are not per-se Bond but effectively only make sense if you've got the role, like the Omega 'ambassador' - when did Omega reach nation status? Have they a seat in the UN now? - or Brioni ads. Nothing really huge but it helps to pay the rent if you happen to rent a palace. Also, as long as you are the current Bond, your agent gets only jobs of a certain price range offered for you. Once you're out you're no longer within that range. But you may still be too pricey for some smaller productions if you don't adjust. Now, Brosnan was - as far as I, an outsider, can be aware of - never really out of work. But the regular Bond job every 14 months or so no doubt was what made his life a big deal easier. Seeing that go obviously didn't agree with him then. And it seems he's still not entirely over it.

 

Very well observed and put!

 

I don´t recall, by the way, that Dalton did many ads (if any).  Maybe he was not considered popular enough.

[Dustin]

The relatively few ads of the Dalton years may also be due to a general crossroads the series had arrived at. There were hardly any toys to promote then, not a lot of gadgets and Dalton apparently wasn't overly fond of this part of the business anyway. With Goldeneye the producers had made up their mind to return into this market with a huge step, gadget watch, signatory vodka, BMW deal, 'golden' Wilkinson razor and what not. And they stepped up the game with each subsequent film. Compared to this Dalton was practically nonexistent on the map. I seem to remember he even refused them to use his face for the comic adaptation of Licence To Kill.

[jaguar007]

 

 

Very well observed and put!

 

I don´t recall, by the way, that Dalton did many ads (if any).  Maybe he was not considered popular enough.

 

 

While there was certainly product placement During the Dalton years, it really took new heights during the Brosnan era. Previous Bond's really didn't do the product endorsment they do now. It was the 90's before major product placements with major actors doing commericals really became popular in Hollywood. 

 

However there was that Lark cigarette commercial that Dalton did.

[SecretAgentFan]

Ah.  Thanks for pointing that out.

 

I do remember, by the way, that Sir Roger was featuring heavily in advertisements for Seiko watches during the promotion for MOONRAKER.

 

I remember that because I begged my parents again and again to buy me that watch.  They won´t remember that time as fondly, I guess...