256 replies to this topic

[David Schofield]

To briefly address the issue that has been raised that LTK-Bond reacts differently to literary Bond with regard to revenge, consider: Tracy died because of Bond's own stupidity - not waiting to catch and finish Blofeld before getting married (both novel and movie forms). Bond has as much himself to blame and punish, consequently, as Blofeld: hence the heavy drinking, becoming slothful becoming, well, not James Bond. In LALD (novel), Bond is perhaps less vengeful for Leiter BUT Leiter is a professional, and aware of the risks of the work.

However, Della in LTK is a total innocent. Unlike Tracy, Leiter has Sanchez behind bars (so he thinks), so proceeding with marriage is acceptable. Hence, when Dellas is brutalised and murdered, it sets off in Bond, due to different circumstances, different emotions which form themselves in the desire for vengence demonstrated.

So, not out of character, just a different time and place.

[stamper]

Your comment brings up two points, LTK take off where OHMSS stops, it's so similar...

[pgram]

It all has to do with the 'going back to Fleming' approach. The writers wanted a new McGuffin. They went back to unused fleming material, like usual. With Dalton they had a good actor, who could show different and complex characterisation, plus, they had introduced him as the 'dangerous' Bond. The scene from LALD novel with Leiter's decapitation was interesting and very old style Bondish (both Flemingesque and Terence Youngesque). They also wanted to go with the flow of the current films.

It is true that partly it doesn't work. True that Bond-Leiter relationship is not established enough, or Della's similarities to Tracy. When Leiter mentions that Bond was married once, he also does it to let us know that the two men have a more close friendship than the one we see onscreen: Leiter is not in OHMSS, nor did we ever see him discuss about Tracy in any of his other appearances. Hence, the two men have been spending time together, offscreen, and developed a close friendship. That's why Bond is his best man- why would Leiter have someone from abroad that he meets every now and then, on a professional level, on missions, as a best man?

Still not convincing enough...

And I always have believed that the charm of the Bond universe is that noone shows emotion. That's what made bond cool in the sixties. Cool means imply emotions, don't show (remember Lazenby's crying scene was cut, because James Bond doesn't cry. Also remember Brosnan's films' soap-like characterisation of all the characters in all 4 films, including Brosnan's Bond). So, even if Dalton was capable of presenting emotion, he shouldn't have done so to that extent. (Craig managed to balance that very effectively in CR).

It was also not what the audience wanted of Bond. By then Bond was a completely one dimensional cliche. That's where Brosnan's success relied on.

But at the end of the day, this whole revenge thing was just a McGuffin. One that gave us an excellent film, the last good film we had for years, until CR. One of the cleverest Bond films ever, one that required a quantum of intelligence from the audience to appreciate. So, even if there were flaws, the films was, for me, one of the best.

[sharpshooter]

I don't think Bond was portrayed in a bad light in LTK. He was just driven to the brink. Every man has his breaking point, and Leiter's shark incident was that. If anything, it was done well. Bond is shown to stand by his friends no matter what, even in the light of never returning to active duty. He wants justice to be done, and will not rest until it is.

[David_M]

I've always liked GoldenEye's ending better than Licence to Kill's; it's nowhere near as cheesy, and actually kind of cool.

Uh-huh. Because there's no way Bond's going to notice an entire fleet of Marine helicopters hovering over his head, until Wade signals them to dip down into camera range. What in the world was that all about?

When Leiter mentions that Bond was married once, he also does it to let us know that the two men have a more close friendship than the one we see onscreen: Leiter is not in OHMSS, nor did we ever see him discuss about Tracy in any of his other appearances. Hence, the two men have been spending time together, offscreen, and developed a close friendship.

Yes, but here again LTK is let down by the failure of the rest of the series to establish the Bond/Leiter friendship on screen. When Bond is married, Leiter is not only not the best man, he's not even in attendance. It's nice that Bond apparently mentioned to Felix at some point that he was married and Tracy died, but as it all happened off screen, this "moment of bonding" hardly counts. For that matter, how do you KNOW Bond and Felix discussed it? Anya Amasova knew Bond was a widower just from reading his file; surely the CIA has the same information?

I don't think Bond was portrayed in a bad light in LTK. He was just driven to the brink. Every man has his breaking point, and Leiter's shark incident was that.

Yep, kill Quarrel, Kerim Bey, Aki, Vijay, Ferrara, Tibbett and Saunders and you get at worst, a glowering grumble. Kill Tracy and you get a few tears and, when Bond can fit it in his schedule, a bouncy ride in your mini-sub on the end of a crane. But mess with Felix's wife? Watch out, brother! That's when James Bond goes absolutely bat-! AAIIEEEARRRRGGHHH!

[dogmanstar]

Pgram,

It all has to do with the 'going back to Fleming' approach. The writers wanted a new McGuffin. They went back to unused fleming material, like usual.

I think that's the point of my post--the writers specifically tried to go back to Fleming and they made one HUGE mistake that drives the whole film. Wilson and Maibaum and Glen may have got the scenes right, in fact, I'm glad some of those scenes were finally filmed--but they got the response all wrong--the spirit of Fleming all wrong. That's happened a lot in the films, don't misunderstand but since we were told we'd get 'Fleming's Bond' in LTK, I have to state that I think they failed; however valiant the effort.

[coco1997]

I've always liked GoldenEye's ending better than Licence to Kill's; it's nowhere near as cheesy, and actually kind of cool.

Uh-huh. Because there's no way Bond's going to notice an entire fleet of Marine helicopters hovering over his head, until Wade signals them to dip down into camera range. What in the world was that all about?

When Leiter mentions that Bond was married once, he also does it to let us know that the two men have a more close friendship than the one we see onscreen: Leiter is not in OHMSS, nor did we ever see him discuss about Tracy in any of his other appearances. Hence, the two men have been spending time together, offscreen, and developed a close friendship.

Yes, but here again LTK is let down by the failure of the rest of the series to establish the Bond/Leiter friendship on screen. When Bond is married, Leiter is not only not the best man, he's not even in attendance. It's nice that Bond apparently mentioned to Felix at some point that he was married and Tracy died, but as it all happened off screen, this "moment of bonding" hardly counts. For that matter, how do you KNOW Bond and Felix discussed it? Anya Amasova knew Bond was a widower just from reading his file; surely the CIA has the same information?

I don't think Bond was portrayed in a bad light in LTK. He was just driven to the brink. Every man has his breaking point, and Leiter's shark incident was that.

Yep, kill Quarrel, Kerim Bey, Aki, Vijay, Ferrara, Tibbett and Saunders and you get at worst, a glowering grumble. Kill Tracy and you get a few tears and, when Bond can fit it in his schedule, a bouncy ride in your mini-sub on the end of a crane. But mess with Felix's wife? Watch out, brother! That's when James Bond goes absolutely bat-! AAIIEEEARRRRGGHHH!

I always got the impression that Bond had a history with Della...

[David_M]

I always got the impression that Bond had a history with Della...

Haha! That's a new one on me, and yet, the way it's played, also a valid interpretation if we're going to start "filling in the blanks" ourselves.

Further proof they made a hash of the whole thing...

[Double-Oh Agent]

I always got the impression that Bond had a history with Della...

I always did too, but that might be due to John Gardner's novelization. In it he writes that Bond says, "You're marrying an old friend of mine, Felix. Della Churchill and I go back a long way..."

When I first read it, I thought that Bond and Della might have been lovers at one point, but upon further re-reading, I'm undecided as to whether they were indeed lovers or just friends.

[united1878]

I feel that LTK had a great storyline that is always spoiled by the terrible dialogue. I had no problem with Bond's "personal vendetta". They created a pretty decent villian and I liked the use of Fleming-penned scenes. I thought the truck stunts were well done as well.
But with every scene, there are lines that make me cringe. If they'd got the dialogue better, I believe the film would've been far better received.

[quantumofsolace]

This film is a mess yet also a favorite. There is so much to like as a literary Bond fan yet so much to hate
I can understand why the massess didnt take to it

[Licence_007]

I also got the feeling Bond has a history with Della. They seem a lot closer than the usual relationship between wife and husband's friend. I quite liked that touch at the wedding since it made Bond's reaction seem all the more justified (not that it needed much justification after the shark incident) because although he would have obviously been angry that his best friends wife had been raped and killed, the added thought that he had a past with her compounded with what happens to Felix makes his vendetta and rage all the more plausible.

[Hitmonk]

There

[Mr. Blofeld]

[quote name='Hitmonk' post='848308' date='8 March 2008 - 10:18']As Stamper so rightly mentions, LTK takes off where OHMSS stops

[Stephen Spotswood]

I would slightly disagree.

Fleming made Bond a professional, but he only seemed to find his motive to continue as an agent after he made SMERSH his personal enemy for causing the suicide of Vesper in CR.

He attacked M in the beginning of one book, I think The Man With the Golden Gun. But he was brainwashed.

Goldfinger began with Bond regretting the outcome of his last case where he ended up in a street brawl with a South American Indian who was controlling narcotics in his region. So Bond definitely was committed to finishing the job.

Often in the book, Bond would use a knife, like he did on Grant in From Russia With Love, so he had to be rather ruthless.

I sometimes wonder though if Bond's arguing with M, then leaving the Secret Service for his "vendetta" was part of a set-up where M was aiding Bond and the Americans, by making it look as if 007 was acting alone and not officially. However, later sending Q to help made it look official to me.

I almost forgot, toward the end of the book On Her Majesty's Secret Service, Bond was taken off the Blofield case, and on his own raised a private army of mobsters, who worked for his future father-in-law. In the book, it was to wrap up the case, but in the movie additionally because Bloefied was holding Tracy hostage.

[blackjack60]

In the book, Bond is more horrified by the act than blinded by rage. He wants to make them pay but he is still very 'professional' about the whole thing. Or, to take another example, Bond never really becomes consumed by revenge even when it comes to Blofeld in the book YOLT... even after Shatterhand is revealed as Blofeld, Bond still methodically plans, takes pains, step by step; he only becomes really incensed with rage at the very end of their final meeting/struggle.

Yes, but aren't the events in LTK also different? Had M stood in the way of Bond getting revenge in LALD, I have little doubt that Bond would have also defied him. And was Dalton really blinded by rage or "off his nut"? Name some instances please. I didn't see him flying off the handle. He too proceded with a sure hand. And YOLT is a vastly different case--Bond first needs time to grieve, and in grieving he falls apart. He's still recovering from grief when he learns that Shatterhand is Blofeld--and then he lives for revenge. He even keeps Blofeld's identity a secret so that he can have the pleasure of killing him by himself. That's pretty revenge-focused, not to mention totally against protocol! So no, given the differences in context, I think Dalton is being true to Fleming. The events in LTK are more horrible than those in LALD, and justify a more heated reaction, as Publius notes. To say that this wouldn't work for the general public, as David M does, misses the point, since the public would hardly fault the film for supposedly being untrue to Fleming. The parallels between Della and Tracy are the sort of the thing only fans would catch. For the public it;s good enough that Bond;s longtime ally has been hurt and his bride killed--that's a good enough basis for revenge in any action movie.

Part of the problem for us fans is that we can never totally forget the other films. Thus the Bond/Felix friendship is undermined by the fact that we saw a totally different guy play Felix in the previous film

And we've seen multiple actors play Bond too, so what? And we've seen this actor as Felix before. What counts is that general audiences are familiar with Felix because he's popped up again and again, and thus is in the public mind as the one friend of Bond's who's good enough to feature over and over, as a recurring cast member. He's cued in the public mind as a long time friend.

The winking fish and happy ending, just shows how much Brocolli was having problems at this point dealing with the 007 character

I don't think so. Why do people get so worked up about the winking fish anyway? It's a cute throwaway gag that doesn't harm the rest of the movie, and it's a damn sight better than having a parrot flirt with Margaret Thatcher or having Bond making out in front of the marines. And why should LTK have a sad ending anyway? The movie's grim enough, and it's not supposed to be a tragedy. Bond got his revenge, Felix got better, and M came to his senses offscreen. Why make it even heavier-going?

It still have much charm than all Brosnan movies put together thought, but CR was the true Bond movies the fan awaited since OHMSS.

You might want to speak for yourself there. I liked CR a lot, but to me it's nearly as overrated as LTK is underrated. I'd say that whereas CR is truer to the letter of Fleming's work (it waters down the impact of the novel while sticking close to the main plot), LTK may be truer to the spirit (not only of LALD, but also TMWTGG).

Edited by blackjack60, 08 March 2008 - 10:08 PM.

[J.C.D'Arc]

I've rarely seen the Bond from the novels in the Bond of the movies, so I don't much care that it's no different in LtK.

That pretty much sums it all up for me, I'd say.

...It was Hedison and Dalton talking on the phone at the end. Too cheerily, I might add. That was one major mistake I thought the writers made. It should've been two men commiserating over shared pain. Maybe not openly, but that understanding should've been there, as opposed to Leiter laughing breezily like he's just lost a football bet, not a limb and his wife.

That's what I call "The CHiPs Ending." The whole horrible experience is behind the characters now. The survivors meet in the hospital room of the one who has yet to recover from his/her terrible ordeal. Do they say anything worthwhile? Do they make any intelligent reference to their own mortality? Do they discuss lessons learned? No. Someone cracks a joke. (Probably at Hospital Bed's expense.) Everyone laughs. Freeze-frame on all the pretty pearly whites. Cue the disco theme music. Flash end credits.

I think "The Experience of Love" beats "If You Asked Me To" as an end titles song hands down.

Damned by faint praise, I'm afraid...

[Red Barchetta]

LTK went this way- revenge- for Bond, as he just married off his best friend (Felix), though it is not tight in the film, and Della reminds him of Tracy. When Della hands him the engraved lighter you can tell he is very touched by the sentiment. It's when he sees Della dead, that he goes 'over the edge' as it were. That's why he resigned from MI6- this was personal, not professional.

LTK is showing the personal revenge of Bond.

Blofeld is a professional adversary, and Bond treated his revenge on him as such (even after Tracy's death).

Della's death is the trigger which makes it personal to him.

It was good to see Bond on a personal bent, though I don't want an entire series of that.

[Stephen Spotswood]

I never thought of that. The ending with a joke and laughter is rather Quinn Martin of them. Police Squad with Leslie Nelson did a hilarious take-off of this tendency by freezing mid-laugh, so the just arrested crook is looking around like he's wondering what's wrong with everybody before making his escape.

However, as to the LTK script in general, it was always my understanding that it was tailored for Dalton, whereas LD was for Moore, and GE for Dalton.

Edited by Stephen Spotswood, 14 March 2008 - 09:09 PM.

[Chad Cooper]

I've been lurking around here for a while and in reading these great forums I realized what always bothered me about License to Kill. It's been mentioned often on these forums that LTK is more like a Deathwish/Charles Brosnan movie or Miami Vice episode than a Bond film. Though I like Dalton and his performance, I am increasingly wondering about the screenplay.

Is the whole revenge angle wrong for Fleming's Bond? In re-reading LALD, I was struck by how differently Bond reacts to Leiter's maiming in the book compared with the movie. In the book, Bond is more horrified by the act than blinded by rage. He wants to make them pay but he is still very 'professional' about the whole thing. Or, to take another example, Bond never really becomes consumed by revenge even when it comes to Blofeld in the book YOLT. At first, understandably, Bond falls apart with no mention of making Blofeld pay. But even after Shatterhand is revealed as Blofeld, Bond still methodically plans, takes pains, step by step; he only becomes really incensed with rage at the very end of their final meeting/struggle.

When I contrast Bond's reaction in the books--LALD and YOLT--with Dalton's seething rage at M on Hemingway's balcony (look at Dalton's stare--I'd hate to be M at that moment!) and his unremitting persuit of Sanchez, I am left with the question: Did the screenwriters get Bond's reaction wrong?

Any thoughts?

Amazing thriller. Not a 007 film for me, the writers failed to observe the psychology of 007. . But Dalton is great and Robert Davi with Benicio "Loco" Del Toro are probably the best villains of the saga...

[byline]

That's what I call "The CHiPs Ending." The whole horrible experience is behind the characters now. The survivors meet in the hospital room of the one who has yet to recover from his/her terrible ordeal. Do they say anything worthwhile? Do they make any intelligent reference to their own mortality? Do they discuss lessons learned? No. Someone cracks a joke. (Probably at Hospital Bed's expense.) Everyone laughs. Freeze-frame on all the pretty pearly whites. Cue the disco theme music. Flash end credits.

LOL, perfect!

[Spikey]

Reasons for LTK plot:
1. MANY American action or action-comedies due to be released in a similar timeframe
2. Wanting to use some Fleming Bond to create a 'serious movie'
3. Wanting to use Dalton as a 'ruthless' Bond
4. Wanting to recreate the successor to OHMSS
5. etc, etc

We all know these things, and most of the thread unfortunately has been the old hashings over of old arguments. We know the film had competition, that the people involved had been FOR A LONG TIME confused as to what to do with Bond. I mean, some scenes in AVTAK, OP, and other Moore Bonds are pretty loony, even though I like pretty much all of Moore's Bonds.

LTK was a thankfully fresh step. I thought TLD had a lot of very good moments, and was much more Fleming Bond-ish than some older movies. I thought FYEO, OP, AVTAK, TLD had good Fleming/Gardiner moments and got the series going after the run ending in MR which wasn't good at all.

But those 4 had a lot of problems too, a lot of silliness, which LTK was determined to counteract. I think they wanted to set Dalton up as a crowd favourite as well, to generate interest for future Dalton movies- but the death of Maibaum, title change, legal disputes etc. all came in the way.

has anyone watched the special features on disc 2 of the UE DVD? Dalton talks HEAPS about bringing life into Bond, a new direction, the seriousnes etc. I'm sure LTK wasn't some 'once off' and a series ending, but a mini-reboot with more Fleming elements and a gritty Bond which was emerging after TLD.

Unfortunately we got a heavily edited GE (see the original script somewhere on this forum) and Brosnan, although to be fair someone mentioned already the 1-D Bond which was in society, so it's not all EON/Brosnan's fault.


I thought of an amusing way to think of LTK:
Bond films only live twice:
Once when they're concepted
And once when they look death in the face- competition and a faltering concept.



My two main annoyances of LTK was the grisly stuff and the deleted scenes (not the censoring).
I thought the murders were way over the top, and not plot necessary (to be on camera, that is). We see bugger-all of the sex, if you'll excuse the pun, and yet Glen deems it necessary for us to witness the bloody stuff, much less satisfying. Since Dalton's Bond obviously doesn't like seeing Krest's head explode, why didn't he leave when he knew he was going to get it?
Especially this is compounded by slightly feeling sorry for Krest in the whole affair, unlike in the Hildebrand Rarity. They needed to make his character more negative, being helpless doesn't lend well to having the nastiest death in a Bond flick.

Deleted scenes- you can see on the UE DVD many scenes pretty vital to the plot. After M says "my man" to Moneypenny, you would know who he was talking about- except, the scene of Bond's plane arriving, being watched by 'his man' is removed (making the vital later ninja scene much less understandable). And of course the Sharkey 'hat' scene, the Orientals at casino scene, and other near-vital scenes. It's bizarre that those scenes were removed when other pointless footage, especially from early on, is left.
Other scenes seem to have been removed from the later parts of the movie, but aren't included on the UE DVD (scenes around where Krest's ship arrives before the murder).

The other main point is the death of Maibaum. Having a writer's strike, then your writer dying, then another guy taking over is going to screw with the plot. I'd LOVE to know what was Maibaum and what was Wilson. Don't get me wrong, Maibaum was a big hack after a while, but still, I'm sure it would have been more cohesive as a whole if he'd finished it himself. Duh.
But noone mentions ths. The Brosnan years' writers don't have that excuse for their nonsensical, farcical scripts, and people don't criticise those awful movies as much, yet LTK seems to be a favourite target.


Don't get me wrong- the Della/Felix thing is badly done (is she raped? Or is it implied and the 'honeymoon 'was just killing her, BTW?), and M's behaviour is inconsistent (Revoked! Wait, I worry about him and won't do anything after a while, then give him his job back), and the whole Oriental deal is told very badly, and why is Dario missing for so long, and so on.

But it's a damn good movie still, and satisfying. It just needs more than the excellent action sequences (WaveKrest and tankers) and could probably be the best later Bond film (of the prior to CR section of films). My main unhappiness is that it's 3/4 or 1/2 of the film it could have been.

Far too long, sorry, saw LTK today!
- Spike

[Mr. Blofeld]

A bit disjointed, but I get your point.

[Spikey]

I'm terrible when I talk about Bond. But LTK isn't as bad as people say- if any other Bond flick had been plagued by the problems of LTK, combined with Dalton playing a Bond people didn't like as much, they'd have done worse also.

I just think LTK was the wrong movie to make after TLD- TLD had good vibes and strong action, and strong character relationships. LTK has very few memorable characters, Dalton's Bond has good and bad bits, and the two "Bond girls" are forgettable (at least, too much so), much more so than Maryam who seems to get a bad rap.

It's such a negative movie it's bound to put people off, and once you've just got people used to Dalton, it's a bad decision, and it's always puzzled me why they did it. I would have had the Colonel Sun/etc ideas before this sort of movie.

If you changed a lot of the movie before the WaveKrest scenes, I still think the movie could be saved. But unfortunately although there are good scenes and I like the film, it smacks of a major 'film abortion', lots of cuts, lots of pastes, bits missing, music cut in very weird places and tracked in a similar way, a title theme which has little to do with the picture and nothing in common with the music, and a hamstrung musician doing the score.

And also, Bond isn't nearly secret-agent enough. But the rest, everyone already agrees upon. It's just a damn shame it wasn't better and that TD didn't do a 1991 Bond.

- Spike

[dogmanstar]

You know, spikey, I like what you say. You've raised some good points and I wonder if another thing that nags me about LTK is how pedestrian the whole thing seems. The stunts seem rather dull--I know we're talking about a more realistic Bond but is there any stunt that really takes your breath away like the PTS in Moonraker or the crane jumping in CR or TLD PTS sequence.

I agree with you about the women, too. Perhaps all the parts are there, it's just the execution left a lot to be desired.

[tdalton]

I just think LTK was the wrong movie to make after

LTK probably was the wrong film to make after TLD, but knowing the fact that Dalton only got two films, I'm glad that they did follow up TLD with LTK simply because, had they not done so, we wouldn't have gotten LTK at all. But, I do see your point on this.

I think that perhaps using COLONEL SUN could have been a good move for Dalton's second film (assuming for a moment that he was to make more than two), and then perhaps make a two film arc based on Fleming's YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE and THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. I know that the beginning of TMWTGG isn't all that realistic in terms of Bond being allowed to continue in the service, but I think I'd be willing to sacrifice the realism of the sequence at the beginning of that novel in order to see just how it would look on the big screen. If filmed correctly, it could have had a wonderfully creepy atmosphere that would have been very unsettling, especially if the performance from the Bond actor was top-notch, which Dalton would certainly have been capable of. I can just imagine now having the beginning of that novel be the PTS, and seeing the reactions that the general audience would have once the film went into the title sequence.

Anyway, to get back on topic, I do think that, in a sense, the writers did get things wrong with LTK simply by having it follow so closely behind TLD. But, since Dalton only got two films, I think that in hindsight it was a good thing because Dalton really got to bring something new to the franchise with that film. But, the perfect scenario for a full Dalton tenure in the role would have seen the films get progressively darker and darker as his tenure went on, going from relatively lighter fare like THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS and then moving to more serious subject matter like a faithful adaptation of Fleming's YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE and THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN, before finishing things up with a slightly tweaked version of LTK (tweaked in order to fit it in with the Fleming adaptations) and perhaps a Dalton version of GOLDENEYE.

You might want to speak for yourself there. I liked CR a lot, but to me it's nearly as overrated as LTK is underrated. I'd say that whereas CR is truer to the letter of Fleming's work (it waters down the impact of the novel while sticking close to the main plot), LTK may be truer to the spirit (not only of LALD, but also TMWTGG).

I completely agree with this sentiment. LTK certainly is truer to Fleming's work than is CASINO ROYALE. While CR is a good film, it is a bit overrated, and it completely alters the novel in terms of the spirit of it, and it even veers away from the actual storyline of Fleming's novel towards the end in favor of a weaker finale than what Fleming delivered in his novel. LTK, on the other hand, is much more like a Fleming-style movie in the way that Dalton portrays the Bond character and in the way that the world in which Bond is operating is portrayed, although there is not an actual Fleming storyline that the writers are basing the entire film on.

Edited by tdalton, 22 March 2008 - 09:08 PM.

[Turn]

The other main point is the death of Maibaum. Having a writer's strike, then your writer dying, then another guy taking over is going to screw with the plot. I'd LOVE to know what was Maibaum and what was Wilson. Don't get me wrong, Maibaum was a big hack after a while, but still, I'm sure it would have been more cohesive as a whole if he'd finished it himself. Duh.

Maibaum didn't die during production of LTK. He died in 1991 when the series was in limbo. Maibaum was a member of the Writer's Guild and had to walk the picket line during the strike and Maibaum had to complete it on his own. From what I understand, they did a revised treatment of the LTK and Wilson not being a member of the guild had to write it himself.

Maibaum is quoted in The James Bond Encyclopedia (Rubin version) as saying he didn't particularly like the finished LTK because it lacked humor.

[byline]

When Leiter mentions that Bond was married once, he also does it to let us know that the two men have a more close friendship than the one we see onscreen: Leiter is not in OHMSS, nor did we ever see him discuss about Tracy in any of his other appearances. Hence, the two men have been spending time together, offscreen, and developed a close friendship.

Yes, but here again LTK is let down by the failure of the rest of the series to establish the Bond/Leiter friendship on screen. When Bond is married, Leiter is not only not the best man, he's not even in attendance. It's nice that Bond apparently mentioned to Felix at some point that he was married and Tracy died, but as it all happened off screen, this "moment of bonding" hardly counts. For that matter, how do you KNOW Bond and Felix discussed it? Anya Amasova knew Bond was a widower just from reading his file; surely the CIA has the same information?

True, but I do think the fact that Bond was the best man at Leiter's wedding says something . . . and surely not that Leiter simply couldn't find anyone else.

But you're right. In the end, the film rests on that fundamental premise, but one that wasn't established anywhere near clearly enough. I almost saw it as an excuse to film in the States. Who else would Bond have known to create that reason for being there? And it's not a bad idea; it's just that it needed a lot more in the way of fleshing out that relationship to make me believe it. As it is, I always find myself itching to get past that point so that we can get the real heart of the film. Strange, eh?

And I'm not sure it's entirely in the writing. David Hedison's acting just feels too "TV" to me, somehow. He mentioned something in an interview about not getting his script until the day he arrived, or something like that, and so he was poorly prepared. I think that had he performed his role to the same level as Dalton, even if we weren't told why the two men were close, we could have seen it in their interaction (body language, what's behind the eyes, etc.). But that kind of subtlety was sorely lacking on Hedison's part, so we got a kind of "CHiPs" rendering of their friendship (kudos to another poster who made that observation about Bond's telephone conversation with Leiter at the end). To bring in another oft-made comparison, even in the "Miami Vice" pilot episode, Crockett and Tubbs had a more finely nuanced friendship than that.

[Dekard77]

Agreed, the producers were having a lot of problems with keeping the Bond franchise engaging and I blame that on the producers who very conveniently used the same director, writers, photography and title sequence creator Maurice Binder.

Licence to Kill was just to show Bond meant business when it came to killing. His resentment towards M's attitude was that agents should not always be treated like cattle. You can see that in Dalton's eyes when M says "leave it to the Americans".
I never saw the comparison between Miami Vice(thank god) but Bond does not show rage the way its discussed in the forum and he is rather methodical in his scheming.
The biggest problem with this movie was the budget, that summer Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Lethal Weapon, Ghostbusters and the biggest mother of them all BATMAN were all making expensive movies and having publicity that only money can buy.

I saw this movie with the hype that this Bond movie is going to be very different and I was really happy it was. Dalton was super albeit the clothes and hair which worked till GoldenEye came out.

The fish that winkled was very campy even for the 80's but what annoyed me the most was the truck wheeling scenes. It didn't help the sequence at all. I also never understood why Glen always give Bond(Dalton) minimal screen time, I mean with someone like Roger(who has enormous screen presence) it's different but Dalton is person that needs to be seen so we can get used to him instead in both movies he is cut away. The villains layer could have done with better budgets but mostly I think the producers needed new screen writers and a director.

[00Twelve]

You might want to speak for yourself there. I liked CR a lot, but to me it's nearly as overrated as LTK is underrated. I'd say that whereas CR is truer to the letter of Fleming's work (it waters down the impact of the novel while sticking close to the main plot), LTK may be truer to the spirit (not only of LALD, but also TMWTGG).

I completely agree with this sentiment. LTK certainly is truer to Fleming's work than is CASINO ROYALE. While CR is a good film, it is a bit overrated, and it completely alters the novel in terms of the spirit of it, and it even veers away from the actual storyline of Fleming's novel towards the end in favor of a weaker finale than what Fleming delivered in his novel. LTK, on the other hand, is much more like a Fleming-style movie in the way that Dalton portrays the Bond character and in the way that the world in which Bond is operating is portrayed, although there is not an actual Fleming storyline that the writers are basing the entire film on.

Gotta disagree with you, T. I can't personally see how LTK is truer to Fleming's tone and "spirit" than CR, what with the camp that the producers weren't yet courageous enough (or whatever) to abandon. I really don't think Fleming would have written LTK any sooner than you claim he would have written the first and last acts of CR. IMHO, CR captures the tone of Fleming's work much more noticeably than LTK. Show me a scene in CR that's as cheerfully goofy as Q giving Bond gadgets in his hotel room (Exploding alarm clock?! Hey, maybe just another wasted reference to a vastly superior novel, LALD), or a character that is as much a screwball comedic relief as the truck driver that looks like Cheech Marin. Dalton gets the Fleming tone right-- not the film itself. Not that it's a competition, but I really feel that Craig gets Fleming's Bond right as well, and I feel it more strongly from him (but that's just me, and I'm sure we'll simply have to agree to disagree about this). Dalton has the technical advantage of looking more the traditional part and not playing the man as a young, beginning 00 agent (with no disrespect to Dalton-- He's an amazing actor and was an amazing Bond). And while you may say that CR waters down the novel's finale, I feel that LTK equally waters down Felix' near-demise, and really waters down the drama of his recovery during the LTK finale (but I know we're already agreed on that point).

Regarding the point about YOLT and how Bond's AWOL behavior in LTK supposedly matches its tone, I don't think the circumstances allow there to be a fair comparison there. Yes, Bond discovered Blofeld and relished the opportunity to privately take his revenge, but he was no longer in M's jurisdiction at that point (so he didn't defy him) and Tiger let him go. I have to disagree with blackjack about whether Bond would have defied M to take revenge for Felix in LALD as well. He was still fortunately in the same place and had the opportunity to take revenge on the Robber, and after that, the man who was responsible for Felix happened to be the same man he was after, anyway. It's not really fair to say "Well, if he hadn't been chasing Mr. Big, I think he would have deviated from the mission for Felix' sake, anyway" because, well, that's not what happened, so it's pure conjecture. Plus, Bond was out to smash SMERSH in any way he could (and with M's approval) after Vesper's death, so those on whom he exacted revenge for Felix were already, in a sense, targets for which he only needed an excuse to take the opportunity to eliminate.

I don't think LTK got Bond's persona wrong in LTK (although, who am I to judge, anyway?), only the way he turned rogue (and how gentle MI6 was with him after the fact). But they were looking for a sharper edge to fit in with the tone of popular action films of the time, so giving Bond that "outlaw" angle was their best idea for giving him a less predictable, sharper edge.