74 replies to this topic

[K1Bond007]

Live and Let Die
For Your Eyes Only
A View to a Kill
The Living Daylights
Licence to Kill

[pparker007]

And why is that?

Because he almost ended the series.

[Publius]

For Your Eyes Only - It just screams Dalton, more than any other non-Dalton save possibly GE. Keep it the same but swap it with AVTAK, so that Dalton has a continuous tenure.

TLD & LTK - Hey, he's perfect here already, and they're made for him.

Goldeneye - This should have been Dalton's Bond's chance to come to grips with a rapidly changing world, "progressive" new management in his old line of business, and to prove himself and decide exactly where his allegiances lie.

Tomorrow Never Dies - I don't know why. I can just picture this being a great send-off for him.

I think he'd also have been great in many others, such as DN, TB, LALD, and TMWTGG.

And why is that?

Because he almost ended the series.

I'm curious to know why you think that.

[pparker007]

For Your Eyes Only - It just screams Dalton, more than any other non-Dalton save possibly GE. Keep it the same but swap it with AVTAK, so that Dalton has a continuous tenure.

TLD & LTK - Hey, he's perfect here already, and they're made for him.

Goldeneye - This should have been Dalton's Bond's chance to come to grips with a rapidly changing world, "progressive" new management in his old line of business, and to prove himself and decide exactly where his allegiances lie.

Tomorrow Never Dies - I don't know why. I can just picture this being a great send-off for him.

I think he'd also have been great in many others, such as DN, TB, LALD, and TMWTGG.

And why is that?

Because he almost ended the series.

I'm curious to know why you think that.

Nothing personal-I just do not think he was a good Bond-as evidence by is poor Box Office $.

[K1Bond007]

Nothing personal-I just do not think he was a good Bond-as evidence by is poor Box Office $.

Box office doesn't mean . Licence to Kill may be the lowest of the low for Bond, but The Living Daylights was an improvement over A View to a Kill. Bond was obviously falling out of favor in the 80s mainly due to the plethora of other action movie stars, e.g., Arnold, Sly, Willis etc.. and their movies. IMO.

I would never base my opinion on the box office though, nor would I ever use it as evidence of anything related. On Her Majesty's Secret Service didn't perform as well as other Bond's of its time, though still respectable, yet many cite it as the best one. The box office certainly can't support that position.

[Publius]

Nothing personal-I just do not think he was a good Bond-as evidence by is poor Box Office $.

You're entitled to your opinion, it's just that the "Dalton almost killed Bond" myth is all-too prevalent. Sure, he wasn't the most popular Bond back then, but he was unfortunate in that so many other factors compounded his situation: declining box office since Moonraker, piss-poor budgets, tough competition in '89, a crap marketing campaign for LTK, and some others I'm probably missing.

And remember, LTK still made about as much as Moore's last movie, ATVAK, while Dalton's first movie, TLD, made more than Moore's last two movies, OP and AVTAK. I think that's impressive, especially for LTK, given the above factors and the movie's intense violence.

Point is, K1 is right. Box office doesn't mean anything. You might be able to glean something about public preferences from those numbers, but not only would the plethora of variables (external and internal) severely complicate such an analysis, it still wouldn't say jack about quality. People have been known to flock to some garbage before.

Besides, I bet if Dalton had been Bond in the 90s or today (at the age he was when he was Bond) he'd be fairly popular, maybe even a phenomenon. Just look at what critics and the public are saying about Craig, who's widely regarded as being similar to Dalton in several ways. And yes, a lot of that praise is about those very same "Dalton-ish" qualities. Dalton was, if nothing else, a trailblazer and ahead of his time.

[b8amack]

I know this is my first post here, but I don't get the people who are voting for films Dalton already starred in... seems more of a slap in the face than anything, to me. I hated the Dalton films when I was a kid (even though I still watched all of them, and more than once!) for all the reasons that made what Dalton was trying to do with the character awesome. I just didn't appreciate the darkness he was trying to bring to the character as true to the character. I'd grown up on Roger Moore films, after all.


Anyhow, my list:

The Man With the Golden Gun (Dalton would whip the out of Herve Villechaize...)
From Russia with Love (but only if he could somehow go back in time and thus keep Robert Shaw in it)
For Your Eyes Only (Although this is probably my favourite of Moore's films)
Moonraker (nothing could save this film, I think, from its own awfulness, but it'd at least be a girdle-free Bond!)
Casino Royale (2006) (I love this movie, and wouldn't change a thing about it... but as another time travel exercise, I think if we could put Dalton in this film in 2006 still in his prime, I think a lot of people would be surprised at how close the two men's portrayals of Bond were. LTK Dalton, anyhow.)

Edited by b8amack, 23 September 2007 - 03:53 PM.

[byline]

"The Living Daylights" -- Dalton nailed the role. Could've done without the "Moore-isms" the writers scattered throughout the film, though.
"For Your Eyes Only" -- Whenever I watch this, as good as Moore was in it, I still see Dalton and think about what might have been.
"On Her Majesty's Secret Service -- Too early in his career, when it was filmed. Later on? Certainly!
"Licence to Kill" -- I don't think anyone but Dalton could've pulled this off. Just wish it had been written a bit better, with production values more in line with most of the Bond films.
"GoldenEye" -- Would've liked to have seen Dalton do this one shortly after "Licence to Kill" (not by the time Brosnan finally took over the role).

Edited by byline, 24 September 2007 - 03:30 PM.

[avl]

I'm of the view that if history were re-written, we should have a Bond for a Decade.

Connery is synonymous with the 60s, Moore with the 70s. They came to embody/display the cultural traits/mores of those decades.

Dalton should have been the 80s Bond. Bond in the 80s lost focus and impetus because they kept on doing the same thing (with a visably aging Bond) without an injection of new blood, new ideas, which a new Bond would have enabled them to have.

FYEO was the PERFECT stepping on point for Dalton - yes Rog was good in it, but I think Dalton would have been better. The virtues of FYEO - down to earth, less "spectacular", some real tension, a more romantic Bond, in the tradition of FRWL and OHMSS - all foreshadow what Dalton went on to do. It could have been as big a re-invention as CR (well, nearly)

OP and AVTAK would have to be substantially re-conceived for Dalton - but a run that spanned '81 - '89 would have given him an era worthy of his talent and an opportunity to define the 80s Bond.

Handing over to PB for the super-slick 90's version.

80s Bond was largely running on empty until Dalton shook things up - if only he had had the opportunity to do it earlier!

[Tiin007]

1. The Living Daylights
2. Licence to Kill
3. GoldenEye
4. Casino Royale (albeit a much younger Dalton)
5. [film=99]On Her Majesty

[DaltonCraig]

Goldeneye
Tomorrow Never Dies
The World Is Not Enough
Die Another Day

[DaveBond21]

The Brosnan ones, and AVTAK.

[Sbott]

Here's my list in no particular order

Dr No - i think his attitude and ruthlessness would have been great here, although i'm not sure about him singing on the beach: and no i'm also not writing that he would have played it better than Sean just that I think he would have played this part brilliantly, very much in line with the Fleming's Bond.

LTK

TLD

GE (+ all other Brosnan films)

TMWTGG - i think he could have played Bond the assassin against Christopher Lee and made this film much more dramatic and tense.

[DaveBond21]

Dr No - i think his attitude and ruthlessness would have been great here, although i'm not sure about him singing on the beach: and no i'm also not writing that he would have played it better than Sean just that I think he would have played this part brilliantly, very much in line with the Fleming's Bond

Good point. But I can only imagine Connery in that movie now.

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

YOLT(The Spectre trilogy)

Ah, good point! A true-to-Fleming YOLT adpatation would be amazing for Dalton!

Other than that, Goldeneye is the only one I really consider.

[pparker007]

Nothing personal-I just do not think he was a good Bond-as evidence by is poor Box Office $.

Box office doesn't mean . Licence to Kill may be the lowest of the low for Bond, but The Living Daylights was an improvement over A View to a Kill. Bond was obviously falling out of favor in the 80s mainly due to the plethora of other action movie stars, e.g., Arnold, Sly, Willis etc.. and their movies. IMO.

I would never base my opinion on the box office though, nor would I ever use it as evidence of anything related. On Her Majesty's Secret Service didn't perform as well as other Bond's of its time, though still respectable, yet many cite it as the best one. The box office certainly can't support that position.

Box Office is EVERYTHING-it determines if another movie will be made. If Casino Royale bombed @ the B.O. do you think we would be talking about Daniel Craig in Bond 22 right now? I understand your point about OHMSS but again the audience @ large did not approve of Lazenby performance mainly because he was not Connery. Just like Dalton- he has admirers but the PAYING public did not approve of his performance. Which is why MGM told EON that if another Bond film was going to be made Dalton had to be replaced. In fact, I believe about a year ago there was a document released from the Ian Fleming estate from 1990 stating concern that if Dalton continued as Bond the film series may end.

[Royal Dalton]

Just like Dalton- he has admirers but the PAYING public did not approve of his performance.

Says whom?

LTK made virtually as much as AVTAK, even with a higher rating, that excluded half of Bond's traditional target audience. Which is why there was going to be a third Dalton Bond film in 1991.

Nice try, though.

[byline]

Dalton should have been the 80s Bond. Bond in the 80s lost focus and impetus because they kept on doing the same thing (with a visably aging Bond) without an injection of new blood, new ideas, which a new Bond would have enabled them to have.

FYEO was the PERFECT stepping on point for Dalton - yes Rog was good in it, but I think Dalton would have been better. The virtues of FYEO - down to earth, less "spectacular", some real tension, a more romantic Bond, in the tradition of FRWL and OHMSS - all foreshadow what Dalton went on to do. It could have been as big a re-invention as CR (well, nearly)

I agree completely. It really is too bad that the powers-that-be played it safe. But, then again, Moore did well for them throughout his run as Bond, so I'm sure that was the concern. With the backlash that greeted Lazenby's Bond, they had to be worried that any major change would be met with a similar backlash. And, sadly, Dalton experienced a fair bit of that during his short run as Bond. Who's to say if he could've tolerated a decade of that (had that been the case)?

[avl]

Dalton should have been the 80s Bond. Bond in the 80s lost focus and impetus because they kept on doing the same thing (with a visably aging Bond) without an injection of new blood, new ideas, which a new Bond would have enabled them to have.

FYEO was the PERFECT stepping on point for Dalton - yes Rog was good in it, but I think Dalton would have been better. The virtues of FYEO - down to earth, less "spectacular", some real tension, a more romantic Bond, in the tradition of FRWL and OHMSS - all foreshadow what Dalton went on to do. It could have been as big a re-invention as CR (well, nearly)

I agree completely. It really is too bad that the powers-that-be played it safe. But, then again, Moore did well for them throughout his run as Bond, so I'm sure that was the concern. With the backlash that greeted Lazenby's Bond, they had to be worried that any major change would be met with a similar backlash. And, sadly, Dalton experienced a fair bit of that during his short run as Bond. Who's to say if he could've tolerated a decade of that (had that been the case)?

Interesting - thats the risk they took with Craig and CR, the backlash in replacing Brosnan at the height of his popularity (and DAD being the most fantastical film since MR arguably). Paid off in style. Would the same gamble have worked back in 81?

[RazorBlade]

Pparker007;

Neither the IF estate or TD had the power to terminate bond. That power belonged to EON and they didn't want to end it so they didn't.

[HH007]

OHMSS- He was young when they offered it to him, but it would have been interesting to see how he would have tackled it immediately following Connery.

DAF- Could have been a direct sequel to OHMSS, in which Bond goes after Blofeld. Plus it was obvious with this one that Sean was just in it for the money.

FYEO- Nothing against Roger, but this grittier script called for a grittier Bond.

AVTAK- Watching Roger in this movie was downright embarrassing. The man was pushing 60 for God's sake! Now, Timothy Dalton squaring off against Christopher Walken= AWESOMENESS!!!

GE- Originally written for Tim... would have been great if he did it.

[Genrewriter]

The Man with the Golden Gun: I've been working on a just-for-fun script treatment that re-works the story to work not only as a third Dalton film but also as a direct sequel to License to Kill. It could work very well as a natural way for Bond to reclaim his 00-status and good standing within MI6.

Moonraker: No re-working at all, just the film as it is only with Dalton in place of Moore, just because I'm a smart aleck.


Goldeneye: I love Brosnan in it but it would have been neat to see Dalton in it.

Casino Royale: Same reason as Goldeneye

From Russia With Love: It would end up pretty much the same film, but it's still an interesting idea.

[byline]

Interesting - thats the risk they took with Craig and CR, the backlash in replacing Brosnan at the height of his popularity (and DAD being the most fantastical film since MR arguably). Paid off in style. Would the same gamble have worked back in 81?

Good question. Seems that it was a risk Cubby wasn't willing to take, but his children could see the wisdom of taking it. Then again, Craig is the sixth actor to play Bond, as opposed to Moore's successor being the fourth (and many people don't count Lazenby). Having a longer succession of actors, and experience, on which to draw provides a better predictor for success or failure. Cubby's children have seen how hitting the restart button has reinvigorated the franchise on several occasions. They have the perspective that perhaps their father lacked.

Edited by byline, 25 September 2007 - 12:40 AM.

[DaveBond21]

FYEO- Nothing against Roger, but this grittier script called for a grittier Bond.

I actually thought Roger played the role seriously in this one.

[avl]

Interesting - thats the risk they took with Craig and CR, the backlash in replacing Brosnan at the height of his popularity (and DAD being the most fantastical film since MR arguably). Paid off in style. Would the same gamble have worked back in 81?

Good question. Seems that it was a risk Cubby wasn't willing to take, but his children could see the wisdom of taking it. Then again, Craig is the sixth actor to play Bond, as opposed to Moore's successor being the fourth (and many people don't count Lazenby). Having a longer succession of actors, and experience, on which to draw provides a better predictor for success or failure. Cubby's children have seen how hitting the restart button has reinvigorated the franchise on several occasions. They have the perspective that perhaps their father lacked.

I agree. Bu then of course I am a Dalton fan (ironically, as was Cubby!) . Has it come to this, praising Babs and Michael Wlson over Cubby himself! Heresy!

[byline]

Has it come to this, praising Babs and Michael Wlson over Cubby himself! Heresy!

LOL, well, in most cases, I wouldn't. But I think in this particular case, they were the right people at the right time for the franchise.

[B5Erik]

All of them.

OK, seriously, there are several Bond movies that would have had to be rewritten for Dalton to work (Live and Let Die, Man With the Golden Gun, Diamonds are Forever, Moonraker, etc), but there are others that would have required very little rewriting.

A View to a Kill Yes, I know - it's uneven and occasionally silly, but the plot is solid and if you just took out some of the silly stuff and made it a little darker it would be a great vehicle for Dalton.

Goldeneye Almost no rewriting would have been required. The movie plays like a Dalton version of TSWLM.

Both of those could easily have happened without any of the time travel required for the other titles. Of course, I would keep Dalton in TLD and LTK since they are two of my favorite Bond movies.

Now, for a time travel experiment I would go with

Casino Royale Clearly a Dalton-esque movie with a modern feel. A 40 year old Dalton would have ROCKED in this movie.

From Russia With Love Dalton would have fit in this movie perfectly.

Thunderball People don't think Dalton does humor well, but I disagree. He doesn't do SILLY humor well, but when I see Thunderball I can easily picture Dalton saying, "I think he got the point," and delivering that kind of line even better than Connery did. He'd be funny, but have that dangerous edge that makes him so great. Just a hint of anger and irritation at the guy he just killed - it would be a hell of a lot of fun to watch!

And that's why Dalton is the man!

[HH007]

FYEO- Nothing against Roger, but this grittier script called for a grittier Bond.

I actually thought Roger played the role seriously in this one.

True, but he just didn't convince me playing it that way, and even back then he was too old.

[Barbershop Quartet]

Well well well...

Of course TLD and LTK top the list! They're written for him and I know he can execute that sort of Bond picture.

As for the three token movies:

From Russia With Love would suit - Dalton has that quizzical, puzzled look that works with FRWL!

Live And Let Die - no discredit to Roger, but this is the sort of real spying we should see more of... Dalton pulls it of well!

Goldeneye - Originally written with Dalton in mind, tragic he didn't get a shot at it.

[pparker007]

Just like Dalton- he has admirers but the PAYING public did not approve of his performance.

Says whom?

LTK made virtually as much as AVTAK, even with a higher rating, that excluded half of Bond's traditional target audience. Which is why there was going to be a third Dalton Bond film in 1991.

Nice try, though.

According to boxoffice.com AVTAK made $156 million & LTK made $152 but in the USA there was a HUGE difference. AVTAK made $50 million and LTK made $35 million. Losing out on at least $15 million is a ton of money and which is why MGM did not want him back and why I find it hard to buy your argument that he was successful as Bond. Think about it-if he did another Bond in 1991 and the box office results would probably be the same that is a total of $30 million in lost revenue.