39 replies to this topic

[Byron]

Don't get me wrong T D is my favourite Bond however one thing that has annoyed me throughout the years are his comments of being "trapped" and "imprisoned"
in the James Bond role and feeling liberated by giving up the part to P B.
Even in a recent interview for Hercules he mentions something along these lines.

With only two films to his credit i would hardly consider him "trapped". More so i have not heard complaints of this nature from Moore or Brosnan and they have been Bond for longer. I just feel that Tim is in a way letting down his fans by making these comments. It's kind of saying "i never wanted the part and could not give it up fast enough".

Your thoughts?

[David Schofield]

Don't get me wrong T D is my favourite Bond however one thing that has annoyed me throughout the years are his comments of being "trapped" and "imprisoned"
in the James Bond role and feeling liberated by giving up the part to P B.
Even in a recent interview for Hercules he mentions something along these lines.

With only two films to his credit i would hardly consider him "trapped". More so i have not heard complaints of this nature from Moore or Brosnan and they have been Bond for longer. I just feel that Tim is in a way letting down his fans by making these comments. It's kind of saying "i never wanted the part and could not give it up fast enough".

Your thoughts?

I think the essential difference between Dalton and Moore and Brozza is that for Dalton, Bond isn't the bee-all and end-all of his acting career. To avoid being just another TV star from the 60s, Roger needed Bond, ditton Brozza for the 80s. Dalton, on the other hand, seems never to have been driven by the desire for stardow. He is a jobbing actor and considered Bond just another role. Variously, you read that Dalton wasn't sure about taking on Bond for the fear of losing privacy. When he was Bond, I never saw much about him at premieres, in magazines, on chat shows. Brozza is regularly all over the place.

Essentially, Roger and Pierce like the idea of being public figures and the benefits that go with them. Tim is quite happy in obscurity. I think he still feels the need to talk about Bond when he does his limited publicity stuff and is consistently associated with it. Once Bond, always Bond. Now I can also accept that Dalton took on Bond, was paid very well for it (which I sure helped him get other roles and subsidized his life) and that he has traded on being Bond (Looney Toons, anyone?). However, I think it is the intrusion on Bond into Dalton's private life which he can't cope with, unlike Rog and Brozza, about which he is complaining. Perhaps he shouldn't have accepted Bond (we'd all have regretted it), but I think there is also a genuine privacy that he is entitled to (should he want it), that must be respected, regardless.

[Byron]

I think the essential difference between Dalton and Moore and Brozza is that for Dalton, Bond isn't the bee-all and end-all of his acting career. To avoid being just another TV star from the 60s, Roger needed Bond, ditton Brozza for the 80s. Dalton, on the other hand, seems never to have been driven by the desire for stardow. He is a jobbing actor and considered Bond just another role. Variously, you read that Dalton wasn't sure about taking on Bond for the fear of losing privacy. When he was Bond, I never saw much about him at premieres, in magazines, on chat shows. Brozza is regularly all over the place.

Essentially, Roger and Pierce like the idea of being public figures and the benefits that go with them. Tim is quite happy in obscurity. I think he still feels the need to talk about Bond when he does his limited publicity stuff and is consistently associated with it. Once Bond, always Bond. Now I can also accept that Dalton took on Bond, was paid very well for it (which I sure helped him get other roles and subsidized his life) and that he has traded on being Bond (Looney Toons, anyone?). However, I think it is the intrusion on Bond into Dalton's private life which he can't cope with, unlike Rog and Brozza, about which he is complaining. Perhaps he shouldn't have accepted Bond (we'd all have regretted it), but I think there is also a genuine privacy that he is entitled to (should he want it), that must be respected, regardless.

Some interesting thoughts David. I can see the angle you are coming from and mostly agree. However as for privacy he would have known he'd be under the spotlight constantly. Also In my opinion with actors, there has to be a trade off of privacy for fame and riches. They can't be public figures and expect full anonymity.

[/quote]

[David Schofield]

Byron

I agree that on signing for Bond Tim was to an extent signing away SOME of his privacy. I also think he knows that. And I for one don't feel offended when he regularly makes his remarks about being forever tied to Bond, etc. I feel more offended, to be honest, when Sean starts wingeing about Bond...

[Skudor]

Dalton doesn't sound like someone who likes being in the limelight - unlike Brosnan. I think that was his main problem with being Bond - the constant attention.

[doublenoughtspy]

I think one of the things that has aggrivated Dalton the most is the fact that no matter what he is playing or promoting - people won't ask about the new project - they ask about Bond.

I think a perfect example of this too is with George Lazenby. In one interview he said that he gave up Bond because he didn't want to be associated with Bond for the rest of his life - and it ended up happening anyway.

[stromberg]

....

I think a perfect example of this too is with George Lazenby.  In one interview he said that he gave up Bond because he didn't want to be associated with Bond for the rest of his life - and it ended up happening anyway.

Yeah, but that is mainly because (unlike Dalton) he hasn't got that much noteworthy stuff on his record. I doubt that many people come to conventions or signings to talk about his performence in, say, "Kentucky Fried Movie" or "Gettysburg", or bring their highly collectible "Emanuelle" posters for him to sign

I guess that now he's pretty happy that he's still associated with something

[trevanian]

I remember an interview with him where Dalton said the best thing about doing Bond was using the clout to get HAWKS made. That shows he realized the benefits that were coming, and he HAD to know that there was a downside (Connery's press feud in Japan, anyone.)

[David Schofield]

I remember an interview with him where Dalton said the best thing about doing Bond was using the clout to get HAWKS made. That shows he realized the benefits that were coming, and he HAD to know that there was a downside (Connery's press feud in Japan, anyone.)

Yes, I remember the Hawks interview too. As I said, I don't think Dalton is really wingeing: as you say, he's seen Connery's situation and he DID get to have the chance to make movies like Hawks.

[Lady Rose]

With only two films to his credit i would hardly consider him "trapped".

He may have only made two films but he was associated with Bond for 9 years.He carried the Bond torch for nearly 6 years before he finally left and was constantly asked about and was promoting a film he ultimately wasn't in!

Moore and Brosnan are very media friendly,Dalton has never made any secret that he dislikes dealing with the media.This is well documented right back to the beginning of his career.I think it was Micheal G Wilson who said that when Dalton had agreed to be Bond he also agreed to all the publicity and he thought Dalton regretted giving those assurances.Dalton has also said himself that he thought he could control the character but ultimately found he couldn't.

Though he has said he felt liberated I have never thought it has been said with any malice and he also talks very fondly about his Bond days.Look at his support and interviews at the DAD premier and subsequent 40th Anniversary parties.

[Skudor]

I think that sums it up, Lady Rose.

[tdalton]

Here's the way I look at it. Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan NEEDED Bond in order for people to actually remember them. Let's face it, would any of us even know who Pierce Brosnan is right now if it weren't for Bond? I think the only way that he woudl be remembered is by those who were aware of Remington Steele and his string of low budget movies in the 1980s, and those people would respond when asked "Who is Pierce Brosnan?" with "Oh, you mean that d-list actor back in the 1980s. Yeah, I think I remember him, but who cares?" Same with Roger Moore, but maybe not to that extent. I don't think that Dalton needed that kind of recognition to validate his career to himself, as he doesn't seem to care what others think about his career and is only in it to do the things that he wants to do as an artist (I mean that in a good way).

The only thing that bothers me about Dalton is the fact that he seemed to drop off the face of the earth after Licence To Kill. It would have been nice to see him in some more high profile films, but that's his choice to do smaller films and stage work, and I respect that. But he made me sit through that lousy Hercules film just to catch a glimpse of him acting, and that's unacceptable.

[Mr. Somerset]

Here's the way I look at it.  Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan NEEDED Bond in order for people to actually remember them.  Let's face it, would any of us even know who Pierce Brosnan is right now if it weren't for Bond?  I think the only way that he woudl be remembered is by those who were aware of Remington Steele and his string of low budget movies in the 1980s, and those people would respond when asked "Who is Pierce Brosnan?" with "Oh, you mean that d-list actor back in the 1980s.  Yeah, I think I remember him, but who cares?"  Same with Roger Moore, but maybe not to that extent.  I don't think that Dalton needed that kind of recognition to validate his career to himself, as he doesn't seem to care what others think about his career and is only in it to do the things that he wants to do as an artist (I mean that in a good way).

The only thing that bothers me about Dalton is the fact that he seemed to drop off the face of the earth after Licence To Kill.  It would have been nice to see him in some more high profile films, but that's his choice to do smaller films and stage work, and I respect that.  But he made me sit through that lousy Hercules film just to catch a glimpse of him acting, and that's unacceptable. 

I was able to switch Hercules on and catch a Dalton scene immediately. Then I turned it off.
As for him being trapped, I always felt that he signed on to the three picture deal understanding it would end in 1991. When Bond 17 was delayed he was stuck not knowing when there would be a third film, and his contract expired during that time. So he was trapped in a situation where, of course, he was constantly asked about it for years after he probably would've been out.
It's great to see him speak fondly of his days as Bond as he was my favourite while I was growing up.

[Lady Rose]

The only thing that bothers me about Dalton is the fact that he seemed to drop off the face of the earth after Licence To Kill.  It would have been nice to see him in some more high profile films, but that's his choice to do smaller films and stage work, and I respect that.  But he made me sit through that lousy Hercules film just to catch a glimpse of him acting, and that's unacceptable. 

It would be great if he did more high profile films.Its seems such a waste that a talented actor like Tim isn't seen more often.I was fortunate enough to see him in London on stage and he was terrific with great presence.I have been a fan of his since I was a young girl ( thats quite a while!) and I have always felt he was always on the cusp of greatness ( acting wise,obviously) and never quite made it.He now seems to be happier doing projects he choices.I recall him saying after Bond he was offered many similar things and turned them all down.

Who knows,that role maybe still out there to finally give him the recognition he deserves,but in the meantime we will have to continue to watch the likes of 'Hercules' for our Tim fix.

[tdalton]

I was able to switch Hercules on and catch a Dalton scene immediately. Then I turned it off.

Good for you.

I missed the beginning of it and picked it up somewhere in the middle and it took forever to see Dalton. I was amazed, however, that he would even consider signing up for that film. The rest of the acting was poor, and made Dalton's performance look just that much better, even though he wasn't in the movie very much from what I saw.

[ChitownGE2]

Everbody brings up very good points, I just wanted to say that. Like everyone else I only wanted to see Hercules because of Dalton, by the time I remembered that I wanted to watch it, the movie has an hour in. I guess I missed him because I never saw him throughout the rest of the movie.

Edited by ChitownGE2, 20 May 2005 - 11:23 PM.

[hrabb04]

Dalton, while a brave choice as Bond, was the wrong type of personality to have as James Bond. He did not deal well with the media, and he did not exactly endear himself to them. Still, it was the first step on the road to what James Bond should really be, and it was an important step.

[licensetostudy]

Don't get me wrong T D is my favourite Bond however one thing that has annoyed me throughout the years are his comments of being "trapped" and "imprisoned"
in the James Bond role and feeling liberated by giving up the part to P B.
Even in a recent interview for Hercules he mentions something along these lines.

With only two films to his credit i would hardly consider him "trapped". More so i have not heard complaints of this nature from Moore or Brosnan and they have been Bond for longer. I just feel that Tim is in a way letting down his fans by making these comments. It's kind of saying "i never wanted the part and could not give it up fast enough".

Your thoughts?

I don't think Dalton has to think like his fans wish him to. An artist like that should think however they want to about their work. James Bond is not an extremely demanding role, and the cinema Bond is still just a superficial character for the popcorn chewing crowd. I think Dalton had some serious acting training, and in order to express whatever he wants through acting, he can't really do it while playing the same role more than once, especially an action hero like James Bond. Dalton wanted to portray the intellectual Fleming wrote about, but this was impossible with films intended to please action film fans. Dalton probably felt trapped realizing that Fleming's novels and blockbuster movies can not be the same thing. Afterall, Dalton is better off playing a Shakesperian role in some stage production.

Edited by licensetostudy, 27 May 2005 - 02:38 AM.

[Tarl_Cabot]

He was 'trapped' only because he was so damn good as james Bond.

[Taro Todoroki]

I would imagine after five years of delay and lawsuits, Dalton was ready to move on. He may have taken some of the delay personally and decided he didn't need it. I doubt he would have felt trapped after his contract expired.

[Bondian]

After viewing Licence To Kill again last night, I feel in agreement with most of the posters.

I feel Dalton did his darnedest to add some depth of character to a somewhat, and at the time, average screen hero that could be up against anyone, and you knew it would work out fine in the last five minutes. What Dalton gave us ( including the movie makers ) was another route, and a darker side of Bond that we've never seen before, except in From Russia With Love. OK, so this has been mentioned by the Production Company and many fans sites, but he really does give a performance in Licence To Kill but that's what it is...a performance whereby he's acting, and it's that that let's the film down.

Davi and Toro match Dalton with extremely well executed performances. But where they cast to compliment Dalton's acting skills, or was Dalton made to go 'harder' when Glen and the production team knew what they could achieve?.

I love Licence To Kill as it displays an up-to-date take on what was becoming a stagnant series, and it's one of the only Bond films that in my mind is 100% believable. It has all the usual Bond elements, and even 'Q' gets to show some plot development.

If only EON continued down this route instead of going back to the old, old formulae, and worse still, making James Bond a action man.

My answer to Dalton's "I was trapped comment" is it could mean anything. Like, after spending 6 months making the damn thing, it's another few months trying to sell it. Or, because he knew that Brosnan was the overall favourite for the part, or since then, he's been moulded into Bond, and the public just cannot accept him in any other role.

Doing Bond ( and it's been proven now ) is the highlight of any actors career and also it's downfall. Not many Commonwealth actors could earn so much money by displaying such a limited performance in Hollywood.

Cheers,


Ian

[Turn]

I don't think Dalton has to think like his fans wish him to. An artist like that should think however they want to about their work. James Bond is not an extremely demanding role, and the cinema Bond is still just a superficial character for the popcorn chewing crowd. I think Dalton had some serious acting training, and in order to express whatever he wants through acting, he can't really do it while playing the same role more than once, especially an action hero like James Bond. Dalton wanted to portray the intellectual Fleming wrote about, but this was impossible with films intended to please action film fans. Dalton probably felt trapped realizing that Fleming's novels and blockbuster movies can not be the same thing. Afterall, Dalton is better off playing a Shakesperian role in some stage production.

Going by this account, if Dalton was better off playing Shaksperian roles in stage productions, how do you account for post Bond roles such as those in Salt Water Moose, The Beautifican and the Beast, Time Share and Looney Tunes: The Movie? Sure the guy has the most varied career of any Bond actor, but I'd call Bond a little more demanding than playing a dad in a made-for-tv romantic comedy or a Fran Drescher film requiring a funny accent.

Bond is arguably a superficial character, but one that has lasted for 43 years now. That puts a bit of a different spin on things. Besides, Dalton said clear up until '94 he was ready for a new Bond film to start production, remained friends with Cubby and still supports the series every now and then.

So he doesn't have to think like his fans wish hiim to, but at the same time he appears to not take himself as seriously as some think he does as evidenced by some of his role choices and his positive comments about his Bond association.

[SeanValen00V]

Timothy Dalton is the Marlon Brando of the James Bond series, came in, delivered, had a good time, made a impact for flemming fans, then left into the mist, leaving his fans always wanting more, and perhaps as a entertainer leaving the audience hungary is better then possibly bored. When new bond fans discover Dalton, it's the hungar of imagining him in the role longer that'll get their respect, I know Connery and Moore set the bar high with doing loads of films, but 2 films is still alot to explore for a character, Dalton never really made any sequels to previous films he's been in, Bond was the exception. Glad he did two, and if EON don't buckle up their ideas on the future of Bond, Dalton's work will be even more appreciated when fans look back, I keep thinking about new Bond fans who are growing up, they might watch a Dalton film, get hooked, rising Cult of Dalton bond fans, Dalton can't escape it, but it's apart of his life, and I know he enjoys it, otherwise why show up at the DAD premier or bafta bond awards, speaking fondly about it.

Had a great friendship with Cubby as well. But possibly moving on in other projects, he knows Bond questions come up, he's Bond for life really, maybe he didn't quite think of it that way when he signed up, but he never said he regretted being Bond, and that's the most important thing.

[tdalton]

Timothy Dalton is the Marlon Brando of the James Bond series, came in, delivered, had a good time, made a impact for flemming fans, then left into the mist, leaving his fans always wanting more, and perhaps as a entertainer leaving the audience hungary is better then possibly bored. When new bond fans discover Dalton, it's the hungar of imagining him in the role longer that'll get their respect, I know Connery and Moore set the bar high with doing loads of films, but 2 films is still alot to explore for a character,  Dalton never really made any sequels to previous films he's been in, Bond was the exception. Glad he did two, and if EON don't buckle up their ideas on the future of Bond, Dalton's work will be even more appreciated when fans look back, I keep thinking about new Bond fans who are growing up, they might watch a Dalton film, get hooked, rising Cult of Dalton bond fans, Dalton can't escape it, but it's apart of his life, and I know he enjoys it, otherwise why show up at the DAD premier or bafta bond awards, speaking fondly about it.

Had a great friendship with Cubby as well. But possibly moving on in other projects, he knows Bond questions come up, he's Bond for life really, maybe he didn't quite think of it that way when he signed up, but he never said he regretted being Bond, and that's the most important thing.

Very well said. Excellent post.

I especially like your point on there being a growing "cult" of Dalton Bond fans, as it shows that moviegoers are getting a little bit smarter in regards to the types of entertainment that they enjoy.

[Bondesque]

SAltWater Moose, Timeshare, and Beautician and the Beast pay the bills. Dalton is a great character actor but never looked comfortable as Bond.

[right idea, wrong pussy]

No, Dalton's "trapped" comments have never really bothered me. Of the 5 major Bond actors, he has been the only one to not bash the series or criticize the producers at any time. Connery has gotten into major spats in the past and even said once that he wished he could kill Bond. Lazenby blew off the role and the producers when he thought he could just make hippy films for a living. Brosnan gets more rediculous in every succeeding interview (are we now supposed to seriously believe that Brosnan looked at himself in the the mirror when wearing a a tux and wondered "What am I doing here?" or that he thought the one liners were totally stupid. I don't buy it.). Even Roger Moore has his petulant moments and complained about AVTAK, and Roger's been fairly demure about complaining about the Bond years.

Dalton never complained about the producers or the way he was treated. He never said how stupid he thought the Bond character or the movies were. He's never made fun of the fans a la William Shatner in Star Trek. I think, all things considered, Dalton has a right to say that he didn't enjoy the process of making the films and "being" Bond. That's very different then tearing Bond down or belitting the movies or the producers.

And yes, I do feel slighted that Dalton has not made much worth watching since LTK. He's wonderful in "The Lion in Winter" and "Jane Eyre", and I wish I could see him in more serious productions, even if its a supporting role in a Kenneth Branagh Shakespeare film. I understand that he has to do daft nonesense to pay the bills, but you would think that he'd at least take up meatier roles in serious productions of the Merchant and Ivory or "English Patient" sort, for instance. I don't think he would find those roles suffocating in the way that being trapped in the Bond media frenzy was, so why doesn't he do them?

[Problem Eliminator]

rising Cult of Dalton bond fans

Where do I sign up?

[Lady Rose]

I understand that he has to do daft nonesense to pay the bills, but you would think that he'd at least take up meatier roles in serious productions of the Merchant and Ivory or "English Patient" sort, for instance. I don't think he would find those roles suffocating in the way that being trapped in the Bond media frenzy was, so why doesn't he do them?

Maybe he isn't being offered them? His biggest roles recently have been for Hallmark TV productions.Dont get me wrong, I would love to see him in a top notch film.I think he has a lot to offer and has been wasted in the past few years.But what do we know? Maybe he is regarded as box office poison after his less than successful Bond performance (media wise anyway), maybe he was only offered similar roles and has shied away from them or maybe he is isn't interested and prefers to live a quieter life.

All I know is that it is a great shame as he is a great actor and should be utilised more. I am sure I read an interview somewhere ( a while ago) where he said for all the roles he would be interested in Jeff Bridges was thought of before him.

Post Bond hasn't been great. I agree he has to pay the bills and I know he wanted to do more comedy, so hence Timeshare, Beautician and Loony Tunes.

Personally my favourite performances recently have been in Possessed and Cleopatra (though only his role in that).I really think historical roles are his forte but when you look at The Rocketeer, (one of my favourites) he can do comedy villains with great aplomb also.

If anyone is interested , 'The Timthy Dalton Chat Group' has posted an interview with Tim that was given not so long ago were he talks about Bond, the media and particularly post Bond ( and being 'trapped').Scroll down to were it says 'For Your Eyes only - Timothy Dalton Interview'

http://pelicanpromot...newsletter.html

Edited by Lady Rose, 01 September 2005 - 08:41 AM.

[hrabb04]

It is interesting to compare how free and liberated both Dalton, and now Brosnan, admit to feeling once they discovered they were no longer James Bond.

[David Schofield]

It is interesting to compare how free and liberated both Dalton, and now Brosnan, admit to feeling once they discovered they were no longer James Bond.

Not sure, though, whether they both wanted it quite as much as each other...