James Bond Will Return In....
crawfordboon
Posts: 126MI6 Agent
I must admit to always liking the feature at the end of the Bond flicks, when they would show "The end of Dr No (for instance), James Bond will return in From Russia With Love."
But I noticed that Octopussy was the last Bond film to specify what its successor would be called. I was wondering why the tradition ended there. OK, so development between the Bonds was now longer than it had been in the past, and they had burnt their fingers announcing FYEO at the end of TSWLM when they instead made Moonraker. Also, they announced 'From A View To A Kill' and later changed the title, so was the increasing unpredictability and shorter-term planning behind the decision to drop announcing the next film and the end of the title sequences?
But I noticed that Octopussy was the last Bond film to specify what its successor would be called. I was wondering why the tradition ended there. OK, so development between the Bonds was now longer than it had been in the past, and they had burnt their fingers announcing FYEO at the end of TSWLM when they instead made Moonraker. Also, they announced 'From A View To A Kill' and later changed the title, so was the increasing unpredictability and shorter-term planning behind the decision to drop announcing the next film and the end of the title sequences?
Comments
DN: exotic locations in a British colony, thereby qualifying for the Eady levy (a way for filmmakers to claim tax from the British government to subsidise the film). Also has a simple, action packed plot which could be quickly filmed.
FRWL: one of Fleming's best novels which Kennedy publicised by saying it was one of his favourites only a year or two previously.
GF: another simple, exciting plot and the chance to film in the USA for the first time, thereby reaching out to the all important American market.
TB: OHMSS was actually meant to be next, as one of the latest bestsellers; and since the filmmakers had been using SPECTRE as villains, it made sense that they would film the novel where Bond and Blofeld meet for the first time; but Kevin McClory held the rights to TB and approached the filmmakers with a proposition to co-produce. The chance to nip a potential rival in the bud could not be denied.
YOLT: again, OHMSS was meant to be next, but from what I have read, the producers mistimed the production schedule; as a result they would have been forced to film in Switzerland during the summer, depriving them of snow! There was also a feeling that OHMSS's reliance on skiing was too similar to TB's reliance on scuba diving, so they went with a recent bestseller that took 007 to his most exotic location yet - a location which, it has to be said, contained some of the most intense and loyal Bond audiences (see GF).
OHMSS: the filmmakers finally film what some say is Fleming's best novel, getting it on the third attempt.
DAF: The producers wanted a more American Bond, and planned to make it entirely in the US; the novel is one of Fleming's weakest, but has extensive US locations and with its diamond smuggling plot, it brings back happy memories of GF.
LALD: another US location, and fortuitously timed to be able to ride the Blaxploitation trend with its Harlem/voodoo plotline. Up until now those elements probably prevented the filmmakers from making it!
TMWTGG: we're running low on novels now - there are three left (plus two short story collections). Eon are forbidden from using elements of TSWLM, and for some, bizarre reason, they seem to hate Moonraker, so they go with TMWTGG.
TSWLM: Eon really, really hate Moonraker as a title. I can only assume that they were scared by the obviously science fiction overtones in the it, which implied huge budgets. So they go with the only other novel title they have, but which, incidentally, give them a completely free reign to do whatever they like plot-wise.
MR: science fiction is suddenly hot property, and Broccoli wants to cash in. Simple as that.
FYEO: We're out of novels, and this is clearly the better of the two short story collections.
OP: And here is the other short story collection to complete the set.
(F)AVTAK: Has the word "kill" in the title. I think this is probably the only reason it was picked.
TLD: The very last potentially thrilling title Fleming wrote (would you go and see a film called Quantum of Solace?), and yet it is, objectively, rubbish; it makes no sense at all unless you've seen the film, and even then, it's only tenuously connected. The fact that AVTAK doesn't announce it as James Bond Will Return in... makes clear that the producers really weren't that keen on it.
It's obvious that by 1987 they were scraping the bottom of the barrel. The only ones still missing are Quantum of Solace (a rubbish title for an action thriller), The Hildebrand Rarity (again, not very Bondian), Risico (which I think is great, and could still be used), The Property of a Lady (ostentatiously referenced in OP, so you could say that it has been placed out of bounds) and 007 in New York (oh, come on).
@merseytart
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
After Licence to Kill and the following legal delay, I always thought they (Eon) would release 'Risico' as the Pierce Brosnan premiere film. As it stands, Poor Pierce is the only one who didn't get an actual Fleming title (the closest he ever got was TWINE).
Maybe SET in the USA, but other than the establishing shots, I don't think there was much else filmed over there, was there?
When EON couldn't secure the rights to TB, they gravitated toward the novels that were most in the news. Dr. No created a sensation in 1958, especially after one critic dubbed it "the nastiest book I've ever read" and similar outrage followed. Goldfinger was the best-selling novel in Britain in 1959; and both OHMSS and YOLT racked up enormous sales in '62 and '63. In the context of the movies, it made no sense whatsoever to film YOLT after TB, but it was a hot book title, and EON no doubt thought they could capitalize on it.
I'm not sure that EON particularly had anything "against" Moonraker, though. Accordingly, Harry Saltzman was eager to film it, so much so that during the production of OHMSS he authorized a script. The plot actually involved a tanker capable of grabbing submarines, so when the author of this unused Moonraker saw his plot device used in the film of TSWLM, some under-the-table payments had to be made. It's also been speculated that Willard Whyte's spacecraft testing facility was left over from the aborted MR project.
Hmm--who would have thought such a simple beginning post would create such an avalanche?
You're right, HB (as per), that there were plans for Moonraker to be filmed after OHMSS with Hugo Drax as the villain, and so on. What struck me when I read about these plans, though, is that the film was going to be called Diamonds Are Forever - even though they were using Moonraker's villain and parts of the plot. It was as though Eon liked the book (and I don't blame them - it's certainly one of my favourites) but for some reason didn't want to actually use the title. (Didn't one of the unused treatments for TSWLM also feature Hugo Drax as the villain?).
Of course, strangely enough, Moonraker then became the first novel to be adapted twice (in 1979 and then again in 2002 for DAD).
@merseytart
Then there's the fact that, between 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) and Star Wars (1977), science fiction films were largely seen as cheesy flicks that could be done on the cheap and would make some money at the drive-ins, or which might attract a cult following, like Silent Running or Soylent Green. I think that EON may have feared that putting out a movie with "Moon" in its title might have given the impression it was a routine sci fi flick (no, the irony has not escaped me!) and not a quality Bond film. Of course, along came Star Wars and Close Encounters, and outer space themes became sexy.
Again, largely speculative on my part, but it's the best I can do!
how could a title like Moonraker not be hot?
I think a bigger problem would be the outdated technology
the novel is about an exNazi building a new improved V2 style rocket right on british soil
thats gotta have had some resonance in 1956, a mere decade after the war
but in the late 60s/early 70s, those exNazi rocket scientists had moved on to much much larger projects
meaning that an uptodate story, esp w the word Moon in the title, would have to somehow involve 007 in the space program
maybe they couldnt afford the budget to do that?
maybe they still thought Bond in space was too preposterous an idea to go there?
still, too bad they never did this one straight
other than trapping Bong and Brand(Goodhead) in the path of the rockets exhaust, the movie used none of the book, and left out all the sociopolitical content (old money vs new money; stillfresh memories fr WWII)
come to think of it, the villain in DaD was also a warcriminal from an enemy country living amongst the english undetected, as a national hero even...
hmm, they really did use more of the novel in DaD than in the Roger Moore movie