What if Dalton Hadn't Gone Dark??
M 'n' M
Posts: 105MI6 Agent
Apologies if this has been asked before, but I was watching The Living Daylights again yesterday and think it holds up very well. I remember it coming out at the cinema and thinking how it breathed new life into the series. I'd loved Moore as Bond, but he was getting far too old and spending less time on screen than his stuntman. So, TLD was a welcome relief and - apart from a slightly flabby second half - great fun. It also increased the box office world wide from the dip of AVTAK
Which begs the question, if the franchise had kept Dalton as a more serious Bond but still in action-entertainment mode and not dipped into dark, serious no-fun Bond (however good that was), would it have worked.
Or - looking at the box office figures again - did Dalton's failure to crack America mean he was doomed whatever he did (I think adjusted for inflation, TLD actually did worse than AVTAK in America)?
Which begs the question, if the franchise had kept Dalton as a more serious Bond but still in action-entertainment mode and not dipped into dark, serious no-fun Bond (however good that was), would it have worked.
Or - looking at the box office figures again - did Dalton's failure to crack America mean he was doomed whatever he did (I think adjusted for inflation, TLD actually did worse than AVTAK in America)?
Comments
Taking over would've had a hard time. With every new actor they get the chance
To " reboot" the series, so perhaps the jolt from light hearted Moore to the more
Serious Dalton was too much for some cinema goers to take.
I do think no matter who had got the gig, the films needed to change tone after
Sir Roger.
But I think TLD "was" a change of direction - less jokey, more realistic, up to date --and more successful than sir rog's last film, so people DID accept the change of bond, but not the subsequent change to grim bond
I totally agree with TP here.
Dalton's fault was not the approach (darker, serious and gritty), it was how he did that imo.
I fail to see anything convincing dangerous or cool in him (contrary to Craig) additionally the weepy eyes are simply pathetic.
LTK box office adjusted: 285 mill.
GE box office adjusted : 529 mill.
That should explain how audiences - not only in the US - felt about Dalton.
TLD box office adjusted: 381 mill.
LTK box office adjusted: 285 mill.
I can see a trend and another Dalton movie would not have been good for the franchiose...
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
So with Brosnan, they went back to the older formula.
... plus they went with an actor that has been accepted by the audiences widely
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
What is it with Higgins and Graphs? :v
I enjoy the Dalton films (especially LTK) but you really don't get that "cool" factor that you do with the other Bonds which is prob his downfall with regards to the box office along with the fact the two films are not really like a typical Bond film (darker)
Absolutely, I think he nailed it personally.
But at that time RM was so well loved that the wider audience were not ready for a "True literary Bond" (Which is what I think TD was). Even if TD had carried on/ been forced to carry on the RM tradition I just don't think it would have worked, he is a totally different kind of actor and character.
Personally he is my favourite Bond, and I hate the fact that he got a bad rap from people who just didn't understand what he was doing. Then DC gets critical acclaim for doing basically the same thing 20 years later ?:)
Especially the spelling.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
I know better - just had a slip of fingers and it looks silly
No offense taken here {[]
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
This. If you got Dalton you got the darkness...
Until he fucked up his own films and they went with Craig
That's anything but what really happened 8-)
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Another urban myth 8-)
Of course people could appreciate a darker tone - there have been some really good serious thrillers in the Dalton age and after
True Lies and some others showed how a more serious tone can be successful.
It was Dalton himself who was the largest obstacle - deal with it.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Pierce Brosnan did not screw up his own films. For sure he had his critics. But as Higgins stated, he was widely accepted, and that was up to and including Die Another Day. At the time, many were perfectly content (including myself) when it appeared he would return for a fifth.
True lies. He's having a laugh surely...
He was passable. But he was not as good as his predecessor and successor
Naaah, Dalton was great. Perhaps people could appreciate a darker tone in other film franchises at the time, but with Bond I just don't think the audience was ready for it after the exploits of old Jolly Roger.
I don't think True Lies had a particularly serious tone either.
Actually True Lies had EVERYTHING BETTER than LTK!
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
*Rambo, Die Hard, Batman, Silence of the Lambs etc - take your pick
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I'm leaving, I've assessed the situation, and i'm going.
However, to address some of my gripes, TD's approach was to try to make audiences believe he was menacing, which was evident to how chose to interpret the role but I just wish they put him through some kind of Royal Marine bootcamp to make his physicality just as convincing. Also, I wish TD had classed up his interpretation more in keeping with Literary Bond's Etonian pedigree with a bearing that's fitting for a RN officer, so for example, that M would feel confident in bringing him along to Blades. I personally expected this more from TD than his predecessors since his intent was going back to the books, but overall, I was extremely satisfied by the darker direction and the circumstances that afforded him the opportunity to have the role when PB became unavailable.