15 replies to this topic

[DamnCoffee]

I was thinking in the shower (Yes, I know I get thoughts in the most wiered of places ) Anyway... I had a thought about Lazenby doing Diamonds Are Forever and taking his 7 picture contract. Lets just say, If we were given a really dark, hard edged, revenge thriller for Lazenbys second Bond outing would the Craig era have had the same impact?

If Lazenby did Diamonds Are Forever through to For Your Eyes Only would Daniel Craigs portrayal be as cold and dark as it is now?

I know it sounds really wiered but I think that Lazenbys portayal as 007 would be far from comedic so I dont think the grittiness of the Craig era would be as dark, since Lazenby would of been a well established actor therfore his revenge story would of been popular so I guess that the revenge aspects of Quantum of Solace could have been seen as repetitive.

So would the producers of changed Casino Royale and made Vesper just another Bond girl and nothing special or would we have had Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace at all?

[HH007]

If what you described had actually happened, then no, I don't think Craig's Bond would be considered so groundbreaking, and they might not have gone that route for CR/QoS at all. And not to sound like an English teacher, but it's W-E-I-R-D.

[terminus]

I think that, if we had looked at a more hard edged thriller for Lazenby's second film, we may have actually seen Casino Royale produced with very little differences.

Certainly it means that we can make general assumptions about the series - if GL does OHMSS, DAF, LALD, TMWTGG, TSWLM, MR and FYEO, all of which had the possibility of being produced as straight up hard edged spy thrillers, before handing over to Timothy Dalton in OP, AVTAK, TLD, LTK and possibly TPOAL.

We'd have possibly never have seen Roger Moore in the role and the fantastical elements that reached absurdity in TSWLM, MR and AVTAK would never have erupted.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Hey, you stole my idea, Harks!

[Turn]

When you think about the 1970s and all the serious pictures that were the being made at the time, it's interesting that the Bond films got lighter and less serious.

How audiences would have reacted is another matter still. Had they outright rejected it then the series may not have gone on at all. But at the same time, I have to also wonder if this type of film would have been made during a period where those type of pictures were popular it may have set a different tone.

[Safari Suit]

I'm sorry but I don't buy that Lazenby being in, say, TSWLM, would have resulted in it being some kind of hard edged spy thriller. Not to dispasrage the guy but I can't see him holding much sway in the tonal direction of the series.

[Skudor]

I'm not sure they would have gone down the serious route anyway, but that would have been pretty exciting - I for one would have liked to have seen Lazenby in a couple of more Bond films (even at the expense of Connery in DAF - lets face it, not his finest hour).

[DaveBond21]

When you think about the 1970s and all the serious pictures that were the being made at the time, it's interesting that the Bond films got lighter and less serious

.

True, the early 70's was the era for The French Connection, the Godfather, the Conversation, Chinatown.


Although we must remember that the early 70's also had movies featuring anti-heroes too, rather than your typical cool, suave hero. Plus you can actually trace some of the comedy elements back to Lazenby's nod to camera right at the start of OHMSS.

[Mister E]

I was thinking in the shower (Yes, I know I get thoughts in the most wiered of places ) Anyway... I had a thought about Lazenby doing Diamonds Are Forever and taking his 7 picture contract. Lets just say, If we were given a really dark, hard edged, revenge thriller for Lazenbys second Bond outing would the Craig era have had the same impact?

If Lazenby did Diamonds Are Forever through to For Your Eyes Only would Daniel Craigs portrayal be as cold and dark as it is now?

I know it sounds really wiered but I think that Lazenbys portayal as 007 would be far from comedic so I dont think the grittiness of the Craig era would be as dark, since Lazenby would of been a well established actor therfore his revenge story would of been popular so I guess that the revenge aspects of Quantum of Solace could have been seen as repetitive.

So would the producers of changed Casino Royale and made Vesper just another Bond girl and nothing special or would we have had Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace at all?

I doubt it would been that dark and even if it was, Lazenby's acting skills was no where near Daniel Craig's.

[Mr. Blofeld]

I doubt it would been that dark and even if it was, Lazenby's acting skills was no where near Daniel Craig's.

Are you sure? I've watched OHMSS numerous times, and there certainly seems to be a degree of subtlety in Lazenby's performance that was lacking in his predecessor's...

[Mister E]

I doubt it would been that dark and even if it was, Lazenby's acting skills was no where near Daniel Craig's.

Are you sure? I've watched OHMSS numerous times, and there certainly seems to be a degree of subtlety in Lazenby's performance that was lacking in his predecessor's...

Lazenby was a somewhat convincing yet overall wooden actor, not as band as Brosnan though. I think OHMSS was film that was written for a older and more experienced lead, he was too young, too cocky, and just not up to par with the high caliber of the film. Connery didn't have subtlety ? Check out that scene with Domino and Bond in THUNDERBALL. Also his scenes with Tatiana in FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE.

Edited by Mister E, 03 July 2008 - 03:00 AM.

[jaguar007]

Having a darker Bond out for revenge in LTK did not seem to make any difference in CR/QoS so I don't know why OHMSS/DAF would have.

[The Richmond Spy]

Hey, you stole my idea, Harks!

Me too! My answer is that if Laz had returned for DAF and it had been a revenge thriller, then Bond would not be who he is today. Nothing would be exactly how it is today...so it is impossible to speculate.

I'm just hoping that QoS makes up for everything DAF wasn't.

[Bondian]

Have always thought that Lazenby was like the second coming of Connery. If you see what I mean.

On Her Majesty’s Secret Service was a "shock, horror" movie. It's very well made with some pathos, but IMHO came far too soon in the franchise. But maybe I'm wrong. Possibly it came at the right time, but what happened in the next one? I love Diamonds Are Forever which started off with a totally different actor who had hair and was suddenly British. He could have worked with MI5 by supplying the technology to change an agents looks and voice. But Bond decided to screw his operation. Not because of Tracy's death but because Bond took the pre title sequence to find where he was.

Maybe Blofeld had a "code name theory"?

[Richard]

George Lazenby is a natural actor who delivers 100% of himself as Bond. Despite a lack of experience which shows through at unexpected moments, his performance is quite good. He is absolutely right for the part, and it's a tragic shame things turned out the way they did.

Like Connery, Lazenby's dramatic range grew quickly. I wish some producer or director had come up with a parallel spy series for Lazenby in the 1970s. I'm sure it would have been popular.

In 1965, after the completion of Thunderball, Sean Connery thought he was going to make OHMSS with Peter Hunt and Richard Maibaum. If the material engaged him, if it called on his talent as an actor, Connery would have been brilliant. Hunt hoped to direct You Only Live Twice after OHMSS as a direct sequel and planned the ending of OHMSS to be the pre-title of YOLT. We would have seen Bond in a darker, noirish, grittier revenge thriller. But the best laid plains ...

Edited by Richard, 07 August 2008 - 08:06 AM.

[lazenbyland]

This is a difficult one. I would have loved to have seen Lazenby do more Bond films but Peter Hunt said that if Lazenby had continued then the ending of OHMSS would have been the wedding and not Tracy's death which would have defeated the whole purpose of the title of the film. The tragic irony of "We Have All The Time In The World" would never have transpired with a happy ending to OHMSS.

And as for the hard-edged revenge thriller sequel, again that isn't what Fleming wrote about in YOLT. It was Bond on the edge of a breakdown. He wasn't tracking down Blofeld and only came upon him by chance.

If we had a hard edge revenge thriller sequel then OHMSS would still have been a very good film, but without the shock ending, it would not have had the same impact and we'd now be discussing how OHMSS would have been if they had kept Fleming's ending.

I would have loved to have seen more Lazenby Bond films, but not at the expense of the current ending of OHMSS.