16 replies to this topic

[quantumofsolace]

http://whatculture.c...othy-dalton.php

[Double Naught spy]

^{Certainly, Dalton deserved a third movie - but I have my reservations about it with a plot (or sub-plot) in which he ends up facing-off against a rogue 006.   Considering that there wouldn't have been a six-year gap between Dalton's 2nd and 3rd movie (so it would've been released around 1992), I can hear the critics complain that "Dalton's 007' is a one-trick pony that has to rely on personal vendettas and such to vainly keep the audience's attention, like the previous LTK."}

 

^{Mind you, I don't personally share this (potential) 'harsh criticism' .... In fact, I've often pretended what it would have been like for Dalton to star in Goldeneye like we've all pretended what Connery would have brought to OHMSS.  However, I do think that the (vague) similarities of the 'vendetta' plot between LTK and GE would've garnered unnecessary criticism during a time in which the franchise was faltering.}

 

^{That being said, I think Dalton would have done very well in Goldeneye.  Of course, the (near) comical scenes with Jack Wade and Zukovsky would surely have to go (or rewritten) ... but having Dalton's 007 tangle with the new M, his interactions with fellow "serious actor' Sean Bean, and the overall 'class' Dalton (if allowed!) would have brought to the table would have made Goldeneye a far better movie than it currently is.} 

 

 

 

[ViperSRT87]

This is a tough one for me. I definitely would have loved to see Dalton in another film, but I do like Goldeneye as is and do like Brosnan's performance. The points brought up here especially relying on Dalton's acting ability have definite possibility. The is why Dalton is the best in my opinion really is his acting ability. I feel his portrayal is the most realistic if someone was in this profession. Plus it also comes down to the entertainment value. Dalton's films balance humor and the dark serious where as Craig's, especially CR and QoS, are nothing but dark and hard edged. To each their own in the end. I like all the Bond's for different reasons of what they bring to the table. But Dalton stands out for me. Thanks for posting!

[Professor Pi]

The scene with M makes sense if Dalton is Bond.  With Brosnan it brings up a continuity problem that cast its shadow even a decade later into the Craig-M scenes.  Also, having Dalton as Bond does bring continuity and a trilogy of sorts given the pre-titles sequences.  It reinforces the TLD-LTK themes rather than discarding them.  But there are still problems with GoldenEye that even Dalton couldn't have fixed.

 

Also, Brosnan in GE was better with the ladies than Dalton.  Notice that is absent from Whatculture's list.  GE might have been a better film with Dalton, but it is a more profitable movie with Brosnan.  The public had been clamoring for Pierce in the role.  Which begs this question:

 

What if Brosnan had been in The Living Daylights instead?  And then Dalton succeeded him in the 90s?

[Rik]

 

 

What if Brosnan had been in The Living Daylights instead?  And then Dalton succeeded him in the 90s?

 

My mind was just blown 

[Hansen]

I find the article hard on Pierce. He does a very fine job in GE (his best Bond IMO) and he is very good in the scene with M. He has that cold look when being called  dinosaur and IMO again I found that Brosnan relationship with M is far better than the one in Craig's (to much Mummy/bad boy relationship).

Last, I honestly cannot imagine Dalton in GE, or it would have had to be 2 years max after LTK. Six years after, we needed a fresh start.

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Watching GoldenEye I find myself imagining how Dalton would've handled particular scenes. It's hard to really enjoy the film for what it is.

[Yellow Pinky]

Anyone who has followed my posts on here knows that I'm no Brosnan fan.  That said, I enjoy Goldeneye the most of any of his.  I think part of it is that I went into it with great optimism that exponentially lessened with each successive film he released.  I was able to be more forgiving of his performance in GE, and while he was still trying to find his proper fit for the role, I grew to realize that I greatly prefer it to the more comfortable portrayal he grew into over the rest of his run.

I also find myself watching GE wondering how Dalton would've been in it.  I would love an alternate world where such a film existed, along with additional Lazenby Bond films as well.

[Guy Haines]

As I understand it, the next film after LTK, had the six year gap not happened, wouldn't have been GE anyway, at least not as we know it. But lets assume that Dalton went on to do "Bond 17" - the one described in "The Making Of The Living Daylights", say - around 1991/92, and connected with the audience in the US (Some say that would never have happened, but given time, who knows?), followed by another Bond in 1994/95. GE would have been an interesting way for him to bow out after five films, around 1997/98.

 

It could have been Dalton's "Skyfall". Alec Trevelyan - a person out of Dalton/Bond's past whom he (Rather than M) has to face down. One of the things that didn't quite ring true with me about GE as we know it was the idea that 006 could go from "loyal" ally to typical Bond super-villain complete with underwater HQ. When Sean Bean was announced as Bond's adversary, I imagined him along similar lines to Scaramanga - the hired help who gets rid of the boss, takes over his evil scheme, but is really interested in finishing off 007. Perhaps 006's efforts could have been restricted not to wiping out the UK economy, but to wiping out his ex-employers in general and 007 in particular, because he felt betrayed by both. It could also have removed the need for the "Cossacks betrayed by Britain" back story. Trevelyan could have simply been what Silva turned out to be in Skyfall - a warped, embittered, psychologically damaged man who should never have been hired by MI6 in the first place.

[Hitmonk]

We were indeed expecting someone else! Absolutely no doubt in my mind that Goldeneye was written for Dalton, and it would have been a better film for it. However in a way I’m glad Tim didn’t have to endure the toe cringing “fairy Bond” moment in the PTS.

As the article notes, Sean Bean did a fine job as 006 (and also potentially a better Bond than Brosnan) but personally I’d have liked the role of 006 to have been played by an older actor – it fits the backstory better and would have made 006 something of a mentor to Bond, underlining his betrayal. Wasn’t Anthony Hopkins in line for the role at one point? Dalton, Hopkins and Dench – with a bigger budget it could have been one of the best films in the series.

[Grard Bond]

Don't think so.

GoldenEye written for Dalton? Was he not already out of the picture by then?

The writer of the article forgot to mention that Dalton was not that good in the so called love scene's (very wooden) and also I think his man to man combat fighscene's are not that great (but I know from an other topic that not everyone agrees with that opinion), which can be a problem, because there is a very intense fight with 006 at the end of the movie.

 

And somehow I can't see Dalton doing the tankchase scene, his Bond is too serious for such a scene, it would look ridiculous.

Edited by Grard Bond, 10 August 2013 - 09:45 AM.

[Hitmonk]

True, the tank chase sequence seems to have been added post Dalton, but the bare bones of the story pre-date Dalton stepping down from the role: http://debrief.comma...st-draft/page-2

[Mr_Wint]

And last but not least, when Bond slips aboard that yacht in Monte Carlo, and has to kick that random dude’s ass he see’s a faint reflection of, would that not have been more convincing with Dalton or the man that wasn’t even a year removed from playing Stuart Dunmeyer in Mrs. Doubtfire? Hmm.

 

This argument is not very convincing given all the crap Dalton did outside of Bond... Sextette, Flash Gordon, Looney Tunes, that film with Fran Drescher etc. etc. In fact, I can't even think of a single watchable film that this "fantastic actor" did apart from TLD and LTK.

[Grard Bond]

Dalton in Nighthawks was realy very, very good.

[Hansen]

btw and not directly related to that topic but it is a pity that the scriptwriters never used 'plantings' when writing a Bond Script - i-e introducing an element that could be used in a subsequent film. Should Tim have played in GE, 006 should have appeared in a previous film to make it more believable.

Continuity is definitely a growth area for Bond

[Grard Bond]

That only could have been if they already had somewhere a script like GoldenEye in the late eighties and that was not the case.

 

But wasn't a 006 killed in one of the earlier movies?

[The Krynoid man]

Although I enjoy Goldeneye and think it's the only Bond film where Brosnan is a somewhat compliant Bond I think this film would have suited Dalton better. The tone almost seems like a hybrid of the Dalton films and the other 3 Brosnan ones. Almost as if they saw how abrupt the change from Moore to Dalton was, so they decided to try and make the change more seemless.