22 replies to this topic

[ray t]

we see the dirty communist only once and for 3 seconds...this "villian" is the key to the plot in the fantastic Tomorrow Never Dies - the man who developed the stealth ship...the man who will take over China and get the nobel peace prize...the man in league with the main villian...(THE MAN FROM HA LONG BAY!)

but what happened to the bugger?

did he live to LIE ANOTHER DAY?

looks like this dispicable totalitarian got away scott free....or did he?

thoughts?

[Triton]

That's a very good question and one that is not answered in the film. I presumed that when Wai Lin sent the message at her Saigon safe house to both the Chinese and British governments that General Chang would be placed under arrest. But if that was the case, then why did we almost have a clash between the Chinese and British navies in the film's finale and why wasn't the Stealth ship seized before it could leave Ha Long Bay?

According to a review of Raymond Benson's novelization for Tomorrow Never Dies at universalexports.net:

Benson also fleshed out one of the biggest questions left in my mind after seeing Tomorrow Never Dies: just who was General Chang and what was his purpose. In the movie he was seen for about five seconds and talked about briefly. In the novel we learn that he was a high ranking official who, before he defected, stole a large amount of stealth material. This is what Wai Lin was investigating when she went to Carver's party and met Bond. It was later revealed that he was working for Carver, not with.

Tomorrow Never Dies Review

But if General Chang defected, then how could he arrive in Beijing too late, assume command of the government, stop Chinese retaliation against British nuclear aggresion, and then be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize? So it doesn't look like Raymond Benson's novel is much help in answering this question.

Unfortunately, the first draft screenplay by Bruce Feirstein doesn't even have a character named General Chang, so that doesn't help answer this question either. Anyone have a copy of the shooting script that describes the fate of General Chang?

[ray t]

...but General Chang DID NOT defect...he, as two of the other generals in the bonds (orlov and urumov), is merely deceiving his government and carrying out covert/clandestine operations to ultimately take power...much like the recent colonel moon.

(*formula, anyone?*)

[Qwerty]

Originally posted by Triton
Anyone have a copy of the shooting script that describes the fate of General Chang?

Sorry Triton, I do own a reprint copy of the shooting script, however through meticulous viewing, I have not found the conclusion to this character. (I guess it's just one of those things in Bond films where you just have to accept it. Although no one [myself included] does )

[BONDFINESSE 007]

i have stayed up many a night trying to figure out just what did happen to chang, its frustrating not knowing

[zencat]

The Gen. Chang thing was a weird element to that film. From the way they talked about him, Chang seemed to be a bigger threat than Carver. I would have cut Chang. Or I would have had Chang be the one managing the chaos on the stealth ship while Carver was hold up in his carved out mountain broadcasting hideout reporting on "the crises" (with a captured Wai Lin by his side). Just like in TSWLM, Bond would first deal with the Stealth ship threat (kill Chang), then go in for the final showdown with Carver, etc. But maybe that's just the traditionalist in me.

[Triton]

I guess we could conclude that the fate of General Chang was a casualty of Bruce Feirstein's onset rewriting of the Tomorrow Never Dies script. He could have added a line of dialogue in the scene at MI6 headquarters in which M and Moneypenny receive word that the Chinese authorities had arrested General Chang while they are drafting the press release concerning the death of Eliot Carver.

But I think it is safe to presume that General Chang was relieved of duty and imprisoned. I doubt that the character will show up later in a James Bond film.

[zencat]

Originally posted by Triton
I guess we could conclude that the fate of General Chang was a casualty of Bruce Feirstein's onset rewriting of the Tomorrow Never Dies script. He could have added a line of dialogue in the scene at MI6 headquarters in which M and Moneypenny receive word that the Chinese authorities had arrested General Chang while they are drafting the press release concerning the death of Eliot Carver.

For all we know he did and it was cut.

[Triton]

Originally posted by zencat
The Gen. Chang thing was a weird element to that film. From the way they talked about him, Chang seemed to be a bigger threat than Carver.  I would have cut Chang. Or I would have had Chang be the one managing the chaos on the stealth ship while Carver was hold up in his carved out mountain broadcasting hideout reporting on "the crises" (with a captured Wai Lin by his side). Just like in TSWLM, Bond would first deal with the Stealth ship threat (kill Chang), then go in for the final showdown with Carver, etc. But maybe that's just the traditionalist in me.

I agree with zencat, the character of General Chang is a very weird element of the film. I would have probably replaced the character of Captain Scott with General Chang and had him be in command of the stealth ship crewed by chinese loyal to him. Stamper could have been on board to update Carver on the status of the operation and obtain the video tape of the machine gunned crew of the HMS Devonshire. There was probably plenty of time for Chang to command the stealth ship during the clash of the British and Chinese fleets, launch the nuclear-tipped cruise missle at Beijing, and arrive just in time to take command of the Chinese government and prevent nuclear retaliation by the Chinese against the United Kingdom.

Eliot Carver should have just stayed at the Saigon building of the Carver Media Group Network and monitored the events as they unfolded. Why would Carver want to be on a ship between the British and Chinese fleets? It seems almost beneath Carver to be on board the stealth ship.

The film also doesn't explain how CMGN was covering the battle between the British and Chinese fleets to boost viewership of his network. We didn't see any CMGN news helicopters or video cameras recording the actions of the fleets from the stealth ship.

The script could have used another couple of drafts, it's a miracle that the film wasn't a total disaster with its on location rewrites.

[Double-Oh-Zero]

This is one of the reasons why TND is my least favourite of the Brosnan Bond films. To me, the character itself seems rather pointless in the long run, but there you go. If he is that important, they could have at least given him more screen time.

Sort of unrelated to this topic, but that Chang feller gets around. Apparently, he's worked for Dr. No, Hugo Drax, Elliott Carver and the Chinese Secret Service. Crafty little bugger, isn't he?

[Brix Bond]

5 seconds was probably all he could cope with. He certainly didn't come back for Mao.

[Sensualist]

Originally posted by Triton

But I think it is safe to presume that General Chang was relieved of duty and imprisoned.  I doubt that the character will show up later in a James Bond film.

He probably ended up like his Soviet counterparts, Generals Orlov and Koskov. He was likely executed for treason by the Chinese High Command.

[Brix Bond]

Excuse me but I came up with a wittisism that would make the producers fire P&W on the spot. Some recognition please?

[Sensualist]

really?

[Sensualist]

Originally posted by Brix_Bond_007
Excuse me but I came up with a wittisism that would make the producers fire P&W on the spot. Some recognition please?

I'm certain that P&W just might, however, be able to at least **spell** "WITTICISM". That alone **might** give them the "edge" over you.

[Brix Bond]

Practice what you preach, no?

[Sensualist]

I never preach. I just teach Submissives to serve their Dominant.

[Brix Bond]

"I'm certain that P&W just might, however, be able to at least **spell** "WITTICISM". That alone **might** give them the "edge" over you."

It doesn't exactly take Dusty Springfield to guess you're the son of a preacher. Or something else.

[Sensualist]

Originally posted by Brix_Bond_007
[B
It doesn't exactly take Dusty Springfield to guess you're the son of a preacher. [/B]

I have more in common with Dusty than I do with the son of a preacher.

[Kingdom Come]

What, that you are dead?

[Brix Bond]

You only live twice...

[Sensualist]

Only Gods Live Forever....

[Brix Bond]

And which 'God' are you, exactly?