33 replies to this topic

[Triton]

I'm just objecting to the position that the movie plays better with a new KGB chief. There really wasn't much the film makers could do if Walter Gotell was not available due to health issues or a prior commitment to another project, so I am not holding this against The Living Daylights. Because of circumstances beyond their control, sometimes films don't turn out the way they originally planned, and the film makers are forced to compromise.

By the way, Walter Gotell made several film and television appearances in the remaining ten years of his life since The Living Daylights according to the Internet Movie Database:

Prince Valiant (1997) .... Erik the Old
... aka Prinz Eisenherz (1997) (Germany)

X-Files: The Unopened File, The (1996) (V) .... Victor Klemper

Puppet Master III: Toulon's Revenge (1991) .... General Mueller

Wings of Fame (1990) .... Receptionist


"Nightmare Years, The" (1989) (mini) TV Series .... Gen. Von Fritsch

She Knows Too Much (1989) (TV)

Sleepaway Camp II: Unhappy Campers (1988) .... Uncle John
... aka Nightmare Vacation II (1988)


Walter Gotell died from cancer on May 5, 1997 in London.

[DLibrasnow]

Maybe it was just a temporary health problem back in 1986/87??

[Jaelle]

Just FYI, here are a couple of excerpts from Starlog's interview with John Rhys-Davies from the August 1989 issue.

There's a photo of Davies from TLD and the caption reads "As General Pushkin, the actor survived Timothy Dalton's debut as 007, but passed on returning for License to Kill in a glorified cameo."

The writer discusses how busy the actor is with many script offers and that he now has the luxury to pick and choose. As an illustration of this:

"...another recent Rhys-Davies antagonist was KGB head General Leonid Pushkin in the first Timothy Dalton James Bond film, The Living Daylights. Although his character does not return in this summer's License to Kill, Rhys-Davies doesn't rule out another outing in what could be a recurring role in the 007 series.'

"'They did ask me to do a couple of scenes in the one they've just completed," Rhys-Davies admits, "and my answer was, 'Well if the scene was integral to the story, yes, I would be happy to. But if it's not, let's *not.*' I would like to play Pushkin again, and I would like to make him more a central character, as he was last time.'"

BTW, Triton, you mentioned the mujahedeen at the concert. I was only addressing the M-Kara issue raised by Blofeld's Cat (I think it was him it who raised it). As for the muj being there at the concert, yet it is pretty damned silly and makes no sense. Meant only for a cheap laugh, very much Glen's style. Frankly, it just doesn't bother me overmuch. Bond films are famous for silly endings, I've just become used to them. Lots of fans complain about the silliness of Thatcher and the parrot at the end of FYEO and, yes, it is pretty dum. *shrug* I've just come to expect that sort of cheesiness from endings to Bond films. I kinda like Vaudevillian cutesiness sometimes, cheap tho it is.

As to Triton's other comments re Gogol...

I was wrong to de-emphasize the importance of Gotell's illness being the major factor that caused his role to be diminished in the film. Having read up more about the film since this thread started, I realize now that was the major reason. As to my comments re Pushkin being a younger man to fit together with Dalton....that came from comments from a couple of articles I read in which Glen and Wilson mention how they wanted to change some of the carryover characters from the Moore films into younger ones for Dalton, specifically mentioning the introduction of the new Moneypenny and Pushkin. I recall at one point Glen saying something like Pushkin being a great character for Dalton's Bond to interact in future films and that Pushkin's character would be upgraded (while downgrading Gogol) so that the two younger men would be seen more often as friendly rivals.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by Triton

The audience doesn't know General Leonid Pushkin from Adam.

So? Surely that provides the suspense quotient: when Pushkin is first mentioned, we don't know whether he's a bad guy (as Koskov claims) or really a good guy - we must wait and find out.

Originally posted by Triton

The scenes of issuing the termination warrant and Bond's brutal treatment of the KGB spymaster would have had much more emotional impact had it been Walter Gotell playing General Gogol. We had seen Walter Gotell playing General Aleksei, or however it's spelled, Gogol in five previous films, and I think that fans of the series and audiences would have gasped: "My god, M has just ordered Bond to kill Gogol!"

I'm still not sure that audiences would have bought the idea of Gogol being even a potential villain. Given the way the character had been used in previous films, wouldn't it have been a little like trying to establish Q as a possible traitor?

Originally posted by Triton

Bond's skepticism and objection to the termination warrant would have made much more sense if it had been Gogol. M is also obviously upset that he must issue the termination warrant to Bond.

Well, of course they're sceptical. Of course they're upset. The termination of someone as high up as Pushkin isn't a matter to be taken lightly. Also, Bond knows Pushkin slightly, as does M, who has "dealt with him on several occasions".

Originally posted by Triton

There's no history established yet with the General Leonid Pushkin character and right out of the gate James Bond is ordered to assassinate him.

Again, so what? There's no history established with any of the people Bond is sent off to investigate at the start of each new film.

As a point of series continuity, it's nice that Gogol had a very small role in THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS, but I don't see that the character really merited a larger one, especially as he was a character purely of the Moore era, and TLD was the first chapter of the Dalton period.