27 replies to this topic

[JimmyBond]

The discussion over in the Bond 23 forum concerning the uncertainty of Craig returning for a third film got me thinking about the six year gap between LTK and Goldeneye.

Now if I remember correctly Dalton didn't publicly leave the role until a year or so before Brosnan was announced as Bond (if I'm wrong someone please correct me). In that time was it felt that Licence to Kill was going to be Dalton's final film, or did you guys believe that he'd eventually return for a third film?

I only became a Bond fan a year or so before Goldeneye was even announced, and at that time I pretty much just assumed LTK was the final film in the series (considering how long it had been since it came out). I never even considered another film would come out, let alone with a new actor in the role.

[Dell Deaton]

First off, there was no place like CBn back then. So any "discussion" of Licence to Kill being the last Bond film or the last time for Timothy Dalton, would have had to have been in the context of formal channels and editorial review.

Second, I don't recall any significant discussion of the former.

Eon was in litigation and Albert R. Broccoli would speak out from time to time. In effect, the undercurrent was that "Bond" was a desireable commodity and the question being fought was who would control that. Inherrent in that, then, was that Bond would return.

As to the latter, I think it was a non-issue. Mr. Broccoli liked Dalton and I believe there was general support for him within Eon. While it may have been felt that Licence to Kill went a bit far with a darker 007, I don't recall the sort of negativity toward him that seems to be routine treatment of "past Bonds" today. It was not until things gelled for the next film, that would be GoldenEye, that Dalton was asked to get started and responded by saying that he was stepping down.

This is all off the top of my head. I may well have magazines and clips from the time for reference. As the next few days and weeks unfold, I wouldn't doubt if someone does an extensive summary of that here on CBn, citing sources, as, um, "concerns" about a parallel to today mount.

[David Schofield]

Bond 17 was never considered "off". Delayed, yes. Repeatedly. But never indefinately. Nor was it expected without Dalton - until Tim announced he wouldn't return for Goldeneye AFTER Goldeneye wa given the greenlight.

IIRC, Bond 17 was announced at Cannes to fit in the usual two year cycle for 1991. Further delays ensued with EON's UA conflict but I don't think there was ever a single momement when it was considered that James Bond wouldn't return. Sure, plenty of anti-Bond pessimists thought it was the end, that Bond couldn't compete with the action movies of the early 90s. And yet, EON had survived the 80s competition of Star Wars and Indiana Jones with Grandpa Rog: Bond for the 1990s was in safe hands with Tim, as his Goldeneye would have confirmed.

Pretty much like now, then. Bond 23 has merely been delayed. By a year, two years, who knows. But as day turns to night, there will be a Bond 23, just like there would always be a Bond 17.

[Skudor]

Seeing that B23 was due in 2011, a couple of year's delay beyond that would imply a 5-6 year total gap - similar to LTK->GE.

That's another one or two years with nothing really to discuss re Bond 23... the real question is, what will become of this forum! We'll have to make up our own rumours to discuss!

[Bill]

Ah, the old days before the Internet.

I remember thinking that Dalton would definitely be back. There was no Internet (at least not in wide use), no message boards. There was the occasional trade publication, and rumors abounded about Mel Gibson taking over or Cubby selling the franchise to Jerry Bruckheimer. I remember one of the few concrete stories was in a letter to TV Guide (or Total Magazine before TV Guide took them over) in response to a letter re: the lack of Bond on the screen was that Bond would return, with Dalton, but not yet. I remember seeing a brief piece, also in TV Guide, that Ruddy Morgan Productions, if I remember correctly, was going ahead with a TV series based on McClory's alleged Thunderball rights with Pierce tapped to play 007. Of course, none of this actually came to pass.

Instead, apparently after GE was finally greenlit, it came time to move ahead. Thus, I remember in March of 1994, I just picked up the phone and telephoned Danjaq, asking very simply what was going on with the next Bond film. They put me on hold, and gave me, Mr. Broccoli's spokesman. He asked who I was, and I gave him my name, and he asked, not surprisingly, "Who?" I said I was a big James Bond fan, and he responded. "If all goes well we start shooting in September." I asked what the title was. He said, "There is no title, and NO STAR (emphasis added)." As this was the first official statement that I heard in nearly five years about Dalton not continuing, I then asked, "Isn't Timothy Dalton returning?" He said, "At this point it's doubtful." I asked, "Why is that?" He said, "I really can't talk about that right now." Surprised that I was able to get through to anyone, let alone getting this scoop, I thanked him and hung up.

Literally the next day, and after five years of relative silence, in the Washington Post (I was in DC at the time) there was a story quoting Dalton, stating that he was giving up 007 after being associated with the role for eight years, and appeared grateful for having played it. The story was also on that evening's Entertainment Tonight (that was back before the show was actually substantive and not a half hour of gossip).

Whether Dalton left on his own or was pushed is still a matter of debate, and I know there are different schools of thought on it. Still, he handled it with grace and we eventually wound up with Pierce (who was clearly the favorite to take over at the time) who became the most successful Bond at that point.

Now we are in a similar period, with a few differences. QOS did remarkably well at the box office, making Daniel Craig a more marketable Bond then Dalton was after LTK's theatrical run (not that Craig is necessarily a better Bond, as there are many reasons for LTK doing as poorly as it did, which had very little to do with Dalton). Still, Eon would seem to want to keep Craig around for at least one more film (and depending on his contract, they may be mandated to do so--I think Dalton's contract had expired by the time GE started production.) I guess the length of time this goes on before production resumes will have a lot to do with it.

Truthfully, I am of mixed feelings about this. I remember being dismayed during the dark times between 1989 and Dalton's 1994 announcement, and being disappointed that he would not be Bond again. Still, the sheer excitement of a new Bond film and my first viewing of Brosnan in the tux saying "Bond. James Bond." on Extra in early 1995 gave me real hope. Now, after the reboot, which I am still having trouble with, but have accepted CR as an excellent Bond film and was duly impressed with Craig, and then the worst film in the series with QOS, IMHO, I am not sure I really want to see Bond if it continues in the vein of QOS. A cooling off period of a few years may be exactly what the franchise needs. Maybe the reboot will not be addressed at all. We shall see.

I still think that James Bond Will Return--there does not seem to be any doubt there--the question is When?

[zencat]

It was an article in Variety (weekly edition) on Aug 8, 1990 that announced Cubby was putting the franchise up for sale ("Bond Bombshell: 007 Goes on the Block.") That was THE darkest day in Bondom.

[Bill]

Thanks Zencat!

I did not follow things that closely back then, so, given its source, it was far more then a rumor. Thankfully nobody bought it!

[zencat]

People tried, but I don't think Cubby ever got the price he wanted.

(I'll scan the article for you guys later. Cat is asleep on my scanner right now.)

[jaguar007]

It was an article in Variety (weekly edition) on Aug 8, 1990 that announced Cubby was putting the franchise up for sale ("Bond Bombshell: 007 Goes on the Block.") That was THE darkest day in Bondom.

If I recall Cannon film group expressed interest in Bond, but went bankrupt shortly thereafter.

During the hiatus there one tabloid printed a rumor that Dalton was being fired from the role of Bond (early 90s). Dalton sued the tabloid, and won.

[Jeff007]

It was an article in Variety (weekly edition) on Aug 8, 1990 that announced Cubby was putting the franchise up for sale ("Bond Bombshell: 007 Goes on the Block.") That was THE darkest day in Bondom.

If I recall Cannon film group expressed interest in Bond, but went bankrupt shortly thereafter.

During the hiatus there one tabloid printed a rumor that Dalton was being fired from the role of Bond (early 90s). Dalton sued the tabloid, and won.

Interesting, Jag.

[Royal Dalton]

If I recall Cannon film group expressed interest in Bond, but went bankrupt shortly thereafter.

Cannon did get Bond, in a sense. Giancarlo Parretti's Pathe Communications, which was folded into MGM in 1990 to become MGM-Pathe, was Cannon Films under a different name.

Parretti's ownership of MGM was, of course, the whole reason why the 1991 Bond film didn't get made.

[scissorpuppy007]

It was an article in Variety (weekly edition) on Aug 8, 1990 that announced Cubby was putting the franchise up for sale ("Bond Bombshell: 007 Goes on the Block.") That was THE darkest day in Bondom.

If I recall Cannon film group expressed interest in Bond, but went bankrupt shortly thereafter.

During the hiatus there one tabloid printed a rumor that Dalton was being fired from the role of Bond (early 90s). Dalton sued the tabloid, and won.

Interesting, Jag.

What's even funnier is that article mentioned that Dalton was going to be replaced by Brosnan. Dalton won a nice sum of money, but in the end the article did predict the future in some form.

[The Ghost Who Walks]

It was an article in Variety (weekly edition) on Aug 8, 1990 that announced Cubby was putting the franchise up for sale ("Bond Bombshell: 007 Goes on the Block.") That was THE darkest day in Bondom.

If I recall Cannon film group expressed interest in Bond, but went bankrupt shortly thereafter.

During the hiatus there one tabloid printed a rumor that Dalton was being fired from the role of Bond (early 90s). Dalton sued the tabloid, and won.

I like to think that he went undercover, hunted down the editor after much trouble, and lit him on fire with an overly effective lighter.

[Drax Industries]

It was an article in Variety (weekly edition) on Aug 8, 1990 that announced Cubby was putting the franchise up for sale ("Bond Bombshell: 007 Goes on the Block.") That was THE darkest day in Bondom.

If I recall Cannon film group expressed interest in Bond, but went bankrupt shortly thereafter.

During the hiatus there one tabloid printed a rumor that Dalton was being fired from the role of Bond (early 90s). Dalton sued the tabloid, and won.

I like to think that he went undercover, hunted down the editor after much trouble, and lit him on fire with an overly effective lighter.

But not before finding the guy who sold the story to the editor, chucking him and the money he was paid into a shark tank.

[Trident]

It was an article in Variety (weekly edition) on Aug 8, 1990 that announced Cubby was putting the franchise up for sale ("Bond Bombshell: 007 Goes on the Block.") That was THE darkest day in Bondom.

If I recall Cannon film group expressed interest in Bond, but went bankrupt shortly thereafter.

During the hiatus there one tabloid printed a rumor that Dalton was being fired from the role of Bond (early 90s). Dalton sued the tabloid, and won.

I like to think that he went undercover, hunted down the editor after much trouble, and lit him on fire with an overly effective lighter.

But not before finding the guy who sold the story to the editor, chucking him and the money he was paid into a shark tank.

Actually, there is evidence that would suggest, someone is still hunting down people spreading this kind of word...

[Rufus Ffolkes]

I remember Dalton's "last film" quote, but I could have sworn it was in reference to Bond 17, while it was still in play.

[zencat]

I remember Dalton's "last film" quote, but I could have sworn it was in reference to Bond 17, while it was still in play.

Nope, it was in Bondage magazine in '89, and it was about LTK. "Just a feeling I have," he said.

[Royal Dalton]

You are correct. I think the best, most firm offer for the series came from Joel Silver, who tendered somewhere in the $200 million dollar range. And yes, Cubby thought it was a low-ball offer, and, IIRC, EON tried to quietly suggest years later that the series had never really been up for sale.

To me, the $200 million dollar offer had to be a wake-up call for EON. I'm not sure they realized exactly how far the esteem of the franchise had fallen prior to the attempted sale. It wasn't as if Joel Silver didn't have the cash, nor couldn't raise it if he wanted to. He simply took a look at where Bond was in 1990-92 (can't remember what year he made the offer, but I believe it was 1992; it may have been that he came back and made a private offer after the public sale was discontinued back in late 90 or early 91) and made a fair, market-based evaluation.

Are you sure it was Silver who put in an offer? I remember there was a piece in Empire about it at the time, where he said he'd love to bid for it (and have Mel Gibson play Bond), but he didn't have the money.

[Royal Dalton]

No doubt about Silver

Then it seems Mr Silver speaks with fork tongue...

[Loomis]

However, Michael and Barbara have done an absolutely bang-up job since having taken over full-time producing responsibilities from Cubby back in 1994. They've produced the best, most consistently entertaining 6-film run of the series; the lesser of the entries (TND, QOS) have still been very entertaining and energetic. There hasn't been a complete stinker in the bunch like a TMWTGG or LTK.

The best, most consistently entertaining 6-film run of the series? Eh? I refer you to DR. NO - OHMSS. I defy any Bond fan to claim with a straight face that that was anything other than the best, most consistently entertaining six-film run in 007 history.

And I'd also rank the next six (DAF - FYEO) ahead of GOLDENEYE - QoS.

As for "a complete stinker in the bunch like a TMWTGG or LTK", well, let me just say that both TWINE and QoS, for starters, are infinitely inferior to TMWTGG and LTK. I'd actually cite TWINE and QoS as the two worst films of the whole series, period.

For me, CASINO ROYALE is the only classic of your beloved modern era of Bondage (and incidentally also the best Bond film ever made). GOLDENEYE is also a damn good flick. TOMORROW NEVER DIES has its moments. Otherwise, you can keep the last six.

ETA: Hang on, forgot about DAD - I love that one.

[Loomis]

In that time was it felt that Licence to Kill was going to be Dalton's final film, or did you guys believe that he'd eventually return for a third film?

I remember that by 1992 the film magazines and press seemed to be of the view that not only was LTK Dalton's final appearance as Bond but that there would probably never be another Bond film.

Around that time, the likes of the DIE HARD, LETHAL WEAPON and Jack Ryan franchises, and TRUE LIES, were perceived (wrongly, as it turned out) as having beaten 007 at his own game, providing eyepopping big budget thrills way beyond the ability of Eon.

There was also a lot of talk about Mel Gibson being the Bond series' only hope. It was felt by many (again, wrongly) that Bond could only be successfully relaunched with a major star.

In those dark days of gloom and doom, I myself was convinced that there would never be another Bond film. When GOLDENEYE was announced, I was certain that it would bomb. I'm not normally a pessimist, but it was a very dark time to be a Bond fan, and I guess the lack of faith rubbed off on me.

[Loomis]

But by "entertaining" I also mean up-to-standards, and I hardly think TMWTGG or LTK qualify on that score. TMWTGG was lack-luster, while LTK just looked cheap (and was the worst acted film of the entire series).

Well, I couldn't disagree more strongly. THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN is hands down my favourite film of the entire series, and over the years I've also derived much more pleasure from LICENCE TO KILL than its makers could ever have thought possible. In fact, if I were exiled to a desert island with no Bond films other than those two, I wouldn't complain.

To each his own, though.

[DaltonCraig]

The wait then was exactly like the wait now. There was even an announcement on the news/gossip shows of a future film in 1991 taking place in China.

[bondrules]

I remember being really excited when Brozza was finally hired. As a kid I was a big RS fan. Brozza was supposed to be the one and only true Bond. I even scored free tickets to a special screening thanks to BMW.

Little did I know Brozza was going to be the worst actor to play the part. Then again, I was young back then.

[jaguar007]

But by "entertaining" I also mean up-to-standards, and I hardly think TMWTGG or LTK qualify on that score. TMWTGG was lack-luster, while LTK just looked cheap (and was the worst acted film of the entire series).

Well, I couldn't disagree more strongly. THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN is hands down my favourite film of the entire series, and over the years I've also derived much more pleasure from LICENCE TO KILL than its makers could ever have thought possible. In fact, if I were exiled to a desert island with no Bond films other than those two, I wouldn't complain.

To each his own, though.

As far as GE-QoS being the best six film run depends on ones tastes. I will agree with Gravity however as far as GE-QoS being the only six film run where there was no significant drop in the box office between any of those films.

[TheREAL008]

I can slightly recall an interview with Timothy saying that he resigned on good terms with the producers because he wanted to move on with his career and move on to possibly bigger and better things.

Truth be told I never wanted to see Bronsan in the role as Bond, and I'll never accept him as Bond. Anytime I watch TLD or LTK, I see Dalton's potential as the protagonist and wish for a third and possibly fourth/fifth performance. It's a deep regret that Broccoli and Wilson didn't have much faith in Timothy to carry on in the role and I'll always believe that if Timothy had stayed on, the 90's films might have been radically different.

Edited by TheREAL008, 11 July 2010 - 02:43 AM.

[jaguar007]

It's a deep regret that Broccoli and Wilson didn't have much faith in Timothy to carry on in the role and I'll always believe that if Timothy had stayed on, the 90's films might have been radically different.

Broccoli and Wilson DID have faith in Dalton. They fought to keep him. It was John Calley of MGM who did not have faith in Dalton and refused to finance Bond #17 unless Bond was re-cast.

[TheREAL008]

I stand corrected, thank you.