I'll never understand how LTK was poor at the box offices! It's such a good Bond movie!
Bond movies were traditionally released in the fall, but LTK was dropped into the middle of a summer of blockbusters that hogged all the attention (Batman, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Ghostbusters 2, Lethal Weapon 2, Star Trek V, etc.) All of those franchises were newer than Bond and also far better promoted--LTK's ad campaign is legendary for its incompetence and lack of dazzle. The bigger issue is that Bond's box office had been dropping with each film after Moonraker, and despite the quality of TLD, Dalton's debut did not convince audiences to return. Audiences were tired of Moore's Bond but weren't ready for a grim and gritty Bond either (Craig would have done no better in the late 80s).
The Bond series took an involuntary break, due to legal wrangles with MGM--whose owners played musical chairs with lawsuits--and when they returned all the rival franchises were running out of steam. The unholy trio of Schwarzenegger, Stallone, and Willis were winding down, Indiana Jones was gone, Batman was getting Schumachered, and Bond became a welcome breath of nostalgic air, especially since mass audiences were predisposed to Brosnan thanks to Remington Steele, whereas Dalton had been a more obscure choice.
I'll never understand how LTK was poor at the box offices! It's such a good Bond movie!
Bond movies were traditionally released in the fall, but LTK was dropped into the middle of a summer of blockbusters that hogged all the attention (Batman, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Ghostbusters 2, Lethal Weapon 2, Star Trek V, etc.)
Actually, YOLT, LALD and the 7 Bond films from TSWLM to LTK were released in the summer. LTK was just following what was ordinarily done. Since GE, Bond has been in autumn.
People (at least Americans) wanted Brosnan to be Bond and weren't taken by Dalton.
I'll never understand how LTK was poor at the box offices! It's such a good Bond movie!
Bond movies were traditionally released in the fall, but LTK was dropped into the middle of a summer of blockbusters that hogged all the attention (Batman, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Ghostbusters 2, Lethal Weapon 2, Star Trek V, etc.)
Actually, YOLT, LALD and the 7 Bond films from TSWLM to LTK were released in the summer. LTK was just following what was ordinarily done. Since GE, Bond has been in autumn.
People (at least Americans) wanted Brosnan to be Bond and weren't taken by Dalton.
Also when Pierce was announced in June of '94, GE was initially scheduled to be released summer of 95. However additional script rewrites pushed the film back to fall, and Bond has remained a fall release ever since. I actually kind of miss those summer Bond releases.
I'll never understand how LTK was poor at the box offices! It's such a good Bond movie!
Bond movies were traditionally released in the fall, but LTK was dropped into the middle of a summer of blockbusters that hogged all the attention (Batman, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Ghostbusters 2, Lethal Weapon 2, Star Trek V, etc.) All of those franchises were newer than Bond and also far better promoted--LTK's ad campaign is legendary for its incompetence and lack of dazzle. The bigger issue is that Bond's box office had been dropping with each film after Moonraker, and despite the quality of TLD, Dalton's debut did not convince audiences to return. Audiences were tired of Moore's Bond but weren't ready for a grim and gritty Bond either (Craig would have done no better in the late 80s).
The Bond series took an involuntary break, due to legal wrangles with MGM--whose owners played musical chairs with lawsuits--and when they returned all the rival franchises were running out of steam. The unholy trio of Schwarzenegger, Stallone, and Willis were winding down, Indiana Jones was gone, Batman was getting Schumachered, and Bond became a welcome breath of nostalgic air, especially since mass audiences were predisposed to Brosnan thanks to Remington Steele, whereas Dalton had been a more obscure choice.
This is much closer to the reality of the time. I was 21 when LTK came out and in college. It was neither highly anticipated nor joyously received by anyone outside of Bond fandom. Many factors came into play -- Dalton was not particularly popular as Bond with mainstream audiences, there were better action films (Indiana Jones and the first of the Die Hard franchise, for instance), and Bond was perceived as a has-been, at least in the U.S. It didn't help that LTK essentially looked and played out like a Miami Vice episode, which anyone could see for free on television. Movies at the time also looked very much like TV shows, and it was no secret that between pay cable and videocassettes, theater movies would soon be out to watch at home.
I came out of the theater underwhelmed by LTK. Though not as good as its predecessor, it, too, lacked some final ingredient that made it seem a full-fledged Bond movie. I never thought the story about the lawsuits was true so much as people just wanted Timothy Dalton to go away and hoped his contract would run out. That said, I do think Goldeneye would have been better with Dalton.
Audiences were tired of Moore's Bond but weren't ready for a grim and gritty Bond either (Craig would have done no better in the late 80s).
It's certainly not true! Moore was incredibly popular though audiences agreed that he was too old.
Die Hard was very gritty, audiences have certainly been ready for it! Think of First Blood also!
The unholy trio of Schwarzenegger, Stallone, and Willis were winding down, Indiana Jones was gone, Batman was getting Schumachered, and Bond became a welcome breath of nostalgic air, especially since mass audiences were predisposed to Brosnan thanks to Remington Steele,
Mythbuilding at best.
One factor for GE's success may have been the long waiting time, but the change of the main actor was certainly the big one!
Everybody wanted Pierce to do the job! Nobody really wanted Dalton back with the exception of Cubby perhaps.
This Daltonism is practicably only existing in internet fora - a relative new thing!
Mostly made by people who did not live in the 70s and have no idea how cinema was back then without Video, DVDs, etc.
Show random people on the street a pic from Dalton - nobody will even recognize him if he doesn't wear a tux by chance.
And noone will wish him back as Bond or will say that he was an incredible Bond!
This Daltonism is practicably only existing in internet fora - a relative new thing!
It is relatively new, thanks to the wonders of modern home video, streaming and internet downloading. More people than ever are discovering the cinema of the past and reevaluating it. It's a wonderful age to live in, at least in that respect.
Show random people on the street a pic from Dalton - nobody will even recognize him if he doesn't wear a tux by chance. And noone will wish him back as Bond or will say that he was an incredible Bond!
What a silly notion. Who cares what random people on the street think? This may sound snobbish, but most people have terrible taste in movies, not to mention knowing next to nothing about them.
I'll guarantee this, gather a room full of film buffs and most if not all of them will recognize him quite easily, even the ones who aren't fans of the Bond franchise. The Lion in Winter is a masterpiece, and beloved among many critics and classic movie lovers. That role alone has immortalized him, almost 20 years before his first appearance as James Bond.
What a silly notion. Who cares what random people on the street think? This may sound snobbish, but most people have terrible taste in movies, not to mention knowing next to nothing about them.
Oh someone's got manners
The point is more that the Dalton Fanboys find multiple myth excuses (you can see most of them in Revelator's post above) for the bad numbers of LTK - while oversee the main reason for that desaster:
The Main Actor!
Who cares what random people think?
Well those are all people EON want to buy a movie ticket to see one of their movies. They harldy try to cater some diehard fans like we are here on the forum. And all random people on the street influence the Box Office numbers. If they don't approve then the Box Office numbers suck! Simples!
He was not accepted by wide audiences back then, he did not leave a standing impression with people back then (thus barely noone recognizes him today except people on Bond Fora) and nobody was really unhappy when he left back then.
Say again that my remarks are silly and you'll receive some well-deserved spanking by Sir Miles and learn to listen when grown men are speaking
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Some really bold theories, Revelator, most of them have been stressed before to excuse the bad numbers for the Dalton Bonds.
"Explain" is a better word than "excuse."
Matt S gave you a reply on this already.
And the fact that every Bond film after LTK has been released in the fall should be evidence that the producers learned from the past.
Fact is that LTK underperformed and all the competitors where much better accepted by the audience.
Yes, that is a fact. That's why I wrote blockbusters (such as Batman, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Ghostbusters 2, Lethal Weapon 2, Star Trek V, etc.) hogged all the attention.
If there was a "new kid on the block" bonus - Bond would be long dead (we are now seeing Bond 24)
There is a bonus of that sort--Bond films tend to do better after a break (TSWLM, GE, SF) and also often after a new actor assumes the role, as in the cases of Moore, Brosnan and Craig.
Because it's simply not true! Die Hard for example had a very small marketing budget.
And Die Hard 2, which was LTK's competitor, obviously had a bigger marketing budget than its predecessor. Off the top of my head, I don't have figures for LTK's marketing budget, but there's no one around who'd argue--or has produced evidence--that it was as big as Batman's or that its marketing was well-executed.
yep and they where incredibly well back with GE. So what does it say?
It says that the Bond series benefited from a long break, during which Bond's competitors weakened, and from the publicity earned by casting a new actor who was a popular TV star and placing him in a film that pastiched earlier Bond films.
It's certainly not true! Moore was incredibly popular though audiences agreed that he was too old.
And yet the grosses for his movies steadily crept downward after Moonraker.
Die Hard was very gritty, audiences have certainly been ready for it! Think of First Blood also!
And audiences weren't ready for a Bond film to ape that grittiness. Those franchises were partly popular because they weren't Bondian but seemed new at the time.
Mythbuilding at best.
Dalton-bashing at its silliest.
This Daltonism is practicably only existing in internet fora - a relative new thing!
Nope. The internet merely allows people with common interests to find each other and band together. I was around when Dalton's films came out, and everyone in my family liked him. There's no denying that Dalton's fans will always be a small minority compared to those of every Bond actor aside from Lazenby. But it's also silly to deny that Dalton ever had fans.
And no one will wish him back as Bond or will say that he was an incredible Bond!
I've visited most of the Bond message boards and all of them have a large minority of fans who liked Dalton and would have liked to see more Bond films starring him. Unless the members of those boards are completely divorced from the general public, then one can assume that Dalton does indeed have his supporters. Even Roger Moore recently praised him!
Because I called something you said silly? Not exactly an insult. I say silly things all the time, it happens. And you respond to this offhandedly innocent comment by telling me I have no manners? Oh the irony.
The point is more that the Dalton Fanboys find multiple myth excuses (you can see most of them in Revelator's post above) for the bad numbers of LTK - while oversee the main reason for that desaster:
The Main Actor!
Situations like these are complicated, and you're obviously trying to oversimplify it. Yes, Dalton was a factor. A main factor? Maybe, but there's no way to be certain, although you seem to act as if you have some sort of crystal ball.
From what I know, audiences had already decided to dismiss Dalton before even giving him a chance, and this seems to be the general opinion of many who worked on the films at the time, according to interviews and commentaries I've been exposed to. They wanted Brosnan, and weren't willing to accept a substitute, especially one that was so different from what came before.
Who cares what random people think?
Well those are all people EON want to buy a movie ticket to see one of their movies. They harldy try to cater some diehard fans like we are here on the forum. And all random people on the street influence the Box Office numbers. If they don't approve then the Box Office numbers suck! Simples! I never
All true, but that's hardly the point I was making. Anyway, moving on:
You accuse people of mythbuilding, while you do the exact same thing in your attempts to dismiss their theories. Speculation vs. Speculation, what makes your speculations more valid?
He was not accepted by wide audiences back then, he did not leave a standing impression with people back then (thus barely noone recognizes him today except people on Bond Fora) and nobody was really unhappy when he left back then.
Say again that my remarks are silly and you'll receive some well-deserved spanking by Sir Miles and learn to listen when grown men are speaking
Stop being so defensive, I neither insulted you nor was I trying to bait you into a pissing match. And now not only do you tell me I have no manners, you also call me childish. Your hypocrisy is astounding. This conversation is over.
Do you have any proof that Lazenby was offered a 7 movie contract? :v
We are all depending on what various sources are writing and have to pick what sounds credible and which sources are
This is something that just gets thrown around, and it doesn't trace to any reliable source.
I doubt they would offer an unknown a binding contract for 7 films.
Do you have any proof that Lazenby was offered a 7 movie contract? :v
We are all depending on what various sources are writing and have to pick what sounds credible and which sources are
This is something that just gets thrown around, and it doesn't trace to any reliable source.
I doubt they would offer an unknown a binding contract for 7 films.
I thought they said that in the EoN docu and I'm pretty sure he said that in an interview which you can hear in the Bond world on Piz Gloria ?:)
"You see Mr.Bond, you can't kill my dreams...but my dreams can kill you.Time to face destiny" - "Time to face gravity"
Am I correct in believing that Moore's last Bond didn't make very much either compared to what Bond movies usually make?
Perhaps the zeitgeist simply wasn't right for Bond movies?
Am I correct in believing that Moore's last Bond didn't make very much either compared to what Bond movies usually make?
Yes, that's right. It made less than the four which had preceded it.
[scratches head] Even with that amazing 'Keystone Cops' homage with the fire engine ladder??
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
) OMG...I've been mentally blocking that---PTSD, no doubt ;%
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I realise that producing Bond films is a money making business, and it is brilliant to see the franchise is in rude health thanks in no small part to the financial success of the Brosnan films compared to the relatively smaller profits from the Dalton films. But given the choice I would choose to watch any of the Dalton films over any of the Brosnan. -{
I realise that producing Bond films is a money making business, and it is brilliant to see the franchise is in rude health thanks in no small part to the financial success of the Brosnan films compared to the relatively smaller profits from the Dalton films. But given the choice I would choose to watch any of the Dalton films over any of the Brosnan. -{
Both actors were really plagued with some dodgy scripts; I loved Dalton's take on the character, though. Brozzer was at his best in the quiet moments of his term, IMO. Each and any of their six films will do for me when I'm in a Bond mood :007)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Agree. As a Bond fan I can watch any of the films and enjoy them all (yes, even DAD). -{
But a special mention for Dalton who came along at the right time after some of the more outlandish elements of recent films. He stayed true to how Fleming created the character and deserves some credit for that. -{
But a special mention for Dalton who came along at the right time after some of the more outlandish elements of recent films. He stayed true to how Fleming created the character and deserves some credit for that. -{
Most certainly! {[] His respect for Fleming won my heart out of the gate. I just wish they'd gone a bit further when he came on board, gotten a better director and writers (no offense to the great Richard Maibaum, but his best days were past, and someone other than Michael Wilson should have been polishing behind him!). The insistence on lingering Moore-era gags casts a bit of a shadow over Dalton's two, but I just shake my head and let them pass.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
But a special mention for Dalton who came along at the right time after some of the more outlandish elements of recent films. He stayed true to how Fleming created the character and deserves some credit for that. -{
Most certainly! {[] His respect for Fleming won my heart out of the gate. I just wish they'd gone a bit further when he came on board, gotten a better director and writers (no offense to the great Richard Maibaum, but his best days were past, and someone other than Michael Wilson should have been polishing behind him!). The insistence on lingering Moore-era gags casts a bit of a shadow over Dalton's two, but I just shake my head and let them pass.
I think I saw an interview with Dalton in which he says that when he got the part he read the novels to get a better understanding of the character that Fleming created. I just find him to be very believable in the role. -{
I think I saw an interview with Dalton in which he says that when he got the part he read the novels to get a better understanding of the character that Fleming created. I just find him to be very believable in the role. -{
Yeah, I saw that one too, and it was when TLD was being shot! I was just so thrilled that the last fellow had finally retired (long life and good health, Sir Rog!), and here was a fellow who looked the part and actually read the books. What's not to like there? -{ I remember being slightly disappointed that Sam Neill hadn't gotten it, though, having really liked Reilly: Ace of Spies.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I think I saw an interview with Dalton in which he says that when he got the part he read the novels to get a better understanding of the character that Fleming created. I just find him to be very believable in the role. -{
Yeah, I saw that one too, and it was when TLD was being shot! I was just so thrilled that the last fellow had finally retired (long life and good health, Sir Rog!), and here was a fellow who looked the part and actually read the books. What's not to like there? -{
Comments
Bond movies were traditionally released in the fall, but LTK was dropped into the middle of a summer of blockbusters that hogged all the attention (Batman, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Ghostbusters 2, Lethal Weapon 2, Star Trek V, etc.) All of those franchises were newer than Bond and also far better promoted--LTK's ad campaign is legendary for its incompetence and lack of dazzle. The bigger issue is that Bond's box office had been dropping with each film after Moonraker, and despite the quality of TLD, Dalton's debut did not convince audiences to return. Audiences were tired of Moore's Bond but weren't ready for a grim and gritty Bond either (Craig would have done no better in the late 80s).
The Bond series took an involuntary break, due to legal wrangles with MGM--whose owners played musical chairs with lawsuits--and when they returned all the rival franchises were running out of steam. The unholy trio of Schwarzenegger, Stallone, and Willis were winding down, Indiana Jones was gone, Batman was getting Schumachered, and Bond became a welcome breath of nostalgic air, especially since mass audiences were predisposed to Brosnan thanks to Remington Steele, whereas Dalton had been a more obscure choice.
Actually, YOLT, LALD and the 7 Bond films from TSWLM to LTK were released in the summer. LTK was just following what was ordinarily done. Since GE, Bond has been in autumn.
People (at least Americans) wanted Brosnan to be Bond and weren't taken by Dalton.
Also when Pierce was announced in June of '94, GE was initially scheduled to be released summer of 95. However additional script rewrites pushed the film back to fall, and Bond has remained a fall release ever since. I actually kind of miss those summer Bond releases.
I came out of the theater underwhelmed by LTK. Though not as good as its predecessor, it, too, lacked some final ingredient that made it seem a full-fledged Bond movie. I never thought the story about the lawsuits was true so much as people just wanted Timothy Dalton to go away and hoped his contract would run out. That said, I do think Goldeneye would have been better with Dalton.
Matt S gave you a reply on this already.
Fact is that LTK underperformed and all the competitors where much better accepted by the audience.
If there was a "new kid on the block" bonus - Bond would be long dead (we are now seeing Bond 24)
Do you have any evidence for this?
Because it's simply not true! Die Hard for example had a very small marketing budget.
yep and they where incredibly well back with GE. So what does it say?
It's certainly not true! Moore was incredibly popular though audiences agreed that he was too old.
Die Hard was very gritty, audiences have certainly been ready for it! Think of First Blood also!
Mythbuilding at best.
One factor for GE's success may have been the long waiting time, but the change of the main actor was certainly the big one!
Everybody wanted Pierce to do the job! Nobody really wanted Dalton back with the exception of Cubby perhaps.
This Daltonism is practicably only existing in internet fora - a relative new thing!
Mostly made by people who did not live in the 70s and have no idea how cinema was back then without Video, DVDs, etc.
Show random people on the street a pic from Dalton - nobody will even recognize him if he doesn't wear a tux by chance.
And noone will wish him back as Bond or will say that he was an incredible Bond!
And that vvvvvvv is certainly true! {[]
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
And I enjoyed LTK and TLD back then
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I'll guarantee this, gather a room full of film buffs and most if not all of them will recognize him quite easily, even the ones who aren't fans of the Bond franchise. The Lion in Winter is a masterpiece, and beloved among many critics and classic movie lovers. That role alone has immortalized him, almost 20 years before his first appearance as James Bond.
Bond: Pierce Brosnan Villain: Hugo Drax Girl: Pam Bouvier
Oh someone's got manners
The point is more that the Dalton Fanboys find multiple myth excuses (you can see most of them in Revelator's post above) for the bad numbers of LTK - while oversee the main reason for that desaster:
The Main Actor!
Who cares what random people think?
Well those are all people EON want to buy a movie ticket to see one of their movies. They harldy try to cater some diehard fans like we are here on the forum. And all random people on the street influence the Box Office numbers. If they don't approve then the Box Office numbers suck! Simples!
He was not accepted by wide audiences back then, he did not leave a standing impression with people back then (thus barely noone recognizes him today except people on Bond Fora) and nobody was really unhappy when he left back then.
Say again that my remarks are silly and you'll receive some well-deserved spanking by Sir Miles and learn to listen when grown men are speaking
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
"Explain" is a better word than "excuse."
And the fact that every Bond film after LTK has been released in the fall should be evidence that the producers learned from the past.
Yes, that is a fact. That's why I wrote blockbusters (such as Batman, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Ghostbusters 2, Lethal Weapon 2, Star Trek V, etc.) hogged all the attention.
There is a bonus of that sort--Bond films tend to do better after a break (TSWLM, GE, SF) and also often after a new actor assumes the role, as in the cases of Moore, Brosnan and Craig.
And Die Hard 2, which was LTK's competitor, obviously had a bigger marketing budget than its predecessor. Off the top of my head, I don't have figures for LTK's marketing budget, but there's no one around who'd argue--or has produced evidence--that it was as big as Batman's or that its marketing was well-executed.
It says that the Bond series benefited from a long break, during which Bond's competitors weakened, and from the publicity earned by casting a new actor who was a popular TV star and placing him in a film that pastiched earlier Bond films.
And yet the grosses for his movies steadily crept downward after Moonraker.
And audiences weren't ready for a Bond film to ape that grittiness. Those franchises were partly popular because they weren't Bondian but seemed new at the time.
Dalton-bashing at its silliest.
Nope. The internet merely allows people with common interests to find each other and band together. I was around when Dalton's films came out, and everyone in my family liked him. There's no denying that Dalton's fans will always be a small minority compared to those of every Bond actor aside from Lazenby. But it's also silly to deny that Dalton ever had fans.
I've visited most of the Bond message boards and all of them have a large minority of fans who liked Dalton and would have liked to see more Bond films starring him. Unless the members of those boards are completely divorced from the general public, then one can assume that Dalton does indeed have his supporters. Even Roger Moore recently praised him!
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
From what I know, audiences had already decided to dismiss Dalton before even giving him a chance, and this seems to be the general opinion of many who worked on the films at the time, according to interviews and commentaries I've been exposed to. They wanted Brosnan, and weren't willing to accept a substitute, especially one that was so different from what came before. All true, but that's hardly the point I was making. Anyway, moving on:
You accuse people of mythbuilding, while you do the exact same thing in your attempts to dismiss their theories. Speculation vs. Speculation, what makes your speculations more valid? Stop being so defensive, I neither insulted you nor was I trying to bait you into a pissing match. And now not only do you tell me I have no manners, you also call me childish. Your hypocrisy is astounding. This conversation is over.
Bond: Pierce Brosnan Villain: Hugo Drax Girl: Pam Bouvier
Exactly my point!
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
This is something that just gets thrown around, and it doesn't trace to any reliable source.
I doubt they would offer an unknown a binding contract for 7 films.
AJB007 Favorite Film Rankings
Pros and Cons Compendium (50 Years)
I thought they said that in the EoN docu and I'm pretty sure he said that in an interview which you can hear in the Bond world on Piz Gloria ?:)
Perhaps the zeitgeist simply wasn't right for Bond movies?
Yes, that's right. It made less than the four which had preceded it.
[scratches head] Even with that amazing 'Keystone Cops' homage with the fire engine ladder??
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Both actors were really plagued with some dodgy scripts; I loved Dalton's take on the character, though. Brozzer was at his best in the quiet moments of his term, IMO. Each and any of their six films will do for me when I'm in a Bond mood :007)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
But a special mention for Dalton who came along at the right time after some of the more outlandish elements of recent films. He stayed true to how Fleming created the character and deserves some credit for that. -{
Most certainly! {[] His respect for Fleming won my heart out of the gate. I just wish they'd gone a bit further when he came on board, gotten a better director and writers (no offense to the great Richard Maibaum, but his best days were past, and someone other than Michael Wilson should have been polishing behind him!). The insistence on lingering Moore-era gags casts a bit of a shadow over Dalton's two, but I just shake my head and let them pass.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I think I saw an interview with Dalton in which he says that when he got the part he read the novels to get a better understanding of the character that Fleming created. I just find him to be very believable in the role. -{
Yeah, I saw that one too, and it was when TLD was being shot! I was just so thrilled that the last fellow had finally retired (long life and good health, Sir Rog!), and here was a fellow who looked the part and actually read the books. What's not to like there? -{ I remember being slightly disappointed that Sam Neill hadn't gotten it, though, having really liked Reilly: Ace of Spies.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
{[]
And this from the King of Cover-Songs
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!