say I would have liked that.
Very early in Kate's career but she already had a monster hit with her first single so she was a somebody in 1979.
She would have given the song a more ethereal and rather cartoony vibe than Shirley Bassey did, appropriate to the tone of the film I think.
I didn't even know she'd been considered, but Wikipedia says its a fact!
well one can only imagine
but she did write a song about someone named James, who has a gun, on her first album, which was performed in her 1979 Live at Hammersmith Odeon concert film (long out of print) James and the Cold Gun
PPK 7.65mmSaratoga Springs NY USAPosts: 1,253MI6 Agent
I agree that it would have been nice to see another movie in between QOS and SF. I know that if it was up to me, I would have a way to make it happen. If MGM managed themselves better and stopped dumping money into remakes that nobody asked for, then we have gotten a film in 2010.
PPK 7.65mmSaratoga Springs NY USAPosts: 1,253MI6 Agent
@ Number 24, Actually it was MGM that was pumping out remakes of films in their back catalogue. Sorry if I confused you. Additionally many of MGM's non remake films released in 2009/10 performed poorly at the box office so their was not enough money to produce a major feature film like James Bond. The merger with Sony helped get MGM back on their feet, although it seems history is repeating itself again since away from the Bond films, Sony & MGM have not had a lot of hits apart from Spectre and Spider-Man: Homecoming.
I would love to see Ridley Scott's LTK. It could have been one of the best Bond movies ever.
- Fire the costume and hair people and hire someone who understands classic fashion.
- Make the Pam Bouvier character funny. It wouldn't look right if Bond was very funny in this movie, and Dalton't woudn't have handled it very well anyway. Re-cast and hire someone like Geena Davis.
- Remove any Americanisms spoken by British characters
- Place the bar room fight in Thailand. It would have made the movie look more globetrotting and the "ninja" fight would have looked more integral to the movie.
- Rewrite the telephone conversation between Bond and Leiter. that one was simply badly judged.
- Offer the title song to Eurythmics or U2. A song in the style of "Missionary man" or ""With or without you" would hav ebeen much more memorable and it would fit the movie.
Not including the salt mine sequence at the end of DAF which would have allowed proper closure of the SPECTRE / Blofeld arc to the first 7 movies; as we know, the idea was 007 and Blofeld were meant to duel to the death, with the villain plunging to his doom down a disused shaft. As always with Eon elements of this idea were reused (in FYEO and AVTAK). With a bit of savvy dialogue, it would have allowed Bond to avenge his wife's murder - and still leave open the now popular theory that OHMSS is a sort of prequel to the whole saga.
Incidentally, the poster who suggested Roger Moore for DAF has a point, one I'd never considered. As I think on it, the idea of Sir Rog doing his Simon Templar impersonation around the gaudy lights of Las Vegas has an appeal; he'd spark nicely with Jill St John's Tiffany and Charles Gray's Blofeld, be young and tough enough for the rough stuff, and deliver the throw-away line with consummate aplomb.
Hmm. really got me thinking...
The Living Daylights: General Gogol instead of General Pushkin, but we all know that Walter Gotel was sick during the film. What can you do?
A View To A Kill: Barbara Bach reprise her role as triple X for the hot tub scene, but least the current girl was more age appropriate for Moore.
Licence To Kill: More scenes with Caroline Bliss as Moneypenny.
Timothy Dalton doing more bond films, in 1991 and 1993.
Diamonds Are Forever: Lazenby in the lead role and uhhh.. an actual revenge tale instead of this turd!
PPK 7.65mmSaratoga Springs NY USAPosts: 1,253MI6 Agent
edited February 2019
One mistake that I always found interesting was not having Felix Leiter in the film adaptation of The Man With The Golden Gun.
The Energy Crisis of the 1970's was just as much an American problem as it was a British one. I am sure that somehow Leiter could have worked in to the screenplay, and it would have allowed the writers to build on Bond and Leiter's friendship more.
Also part of me wishes that the fight with Scaramanga was a little bit longer, after having seen the deleted scenes on the DVD it made me wish that the duel had gone on longer.
The biggest missed opportunity in my eyes was adapting the books in the wrong order, which lead to lots of problems down the line. The problem started with adapting YOLT before OHMSS and then following up with DAF. This screwed up the adaptation of Bond's most important story arc and deprived the Tracy-Blofeld story of any real closure. Instead we got the botched efforts of DAF and Spectre.
Furthermore, the length and hassles of the YOLT shoot helped prematurely end Connery's tenure by increasing his frustration with the role. That might have been avoided by filming a different book in 1967 in a different locale.
Post-TB they could have waited until conditions were right (perhaps later in 1967 or 1968) to film OHMSS with Connery (who might have given a great performance under Peter Hunt's direction), and then followed it with a Hunt-Connery version of YOLT that ended with an amnesiac Bond disappearing into Russia. A new actor could have then taken over with TMWTGG, where Bond seemingly returns from the dead as a seemingly new man. This scenario would have given Connery a proper send-off and Lazenby a memorable introduction.
Alternatively, instead of filming YOLT in 1967 EON could have adapted Moonraker, whose story lends itself more to space stuff and large-scale action. After Connery's departure, Hunt and Lazenby would make OHMSS and then film YOLT and TMWTGG and so on. All of this of course would have required Lazenby to behave more sensibly than he actually did.
Lastly, even if DAF had to be the follow-up to OHMSS, the filmmakers missed an opportunity by rejecting Richard Maibaum's initial drafts and script ideas and instead insisting on a more comedic direction, which was ultimately completed by Mankiewicz. I realize that a "serious" Bond film would have been unlikely in the climate of 1971, but DAF didn't need to be as frivolous as it was. The script history of that film would make a fascinating book.
... instead of filming YOLT in 1967 EON could have adapted Moonraker, whose story lends itself more to space stuff and large-scale action ...
Revelator do you know why they left Moonraker last to be filmed out of all the novels?
They filmed at least three inferior novels before getting round to that one, and as you say it would have been more appropriate to the space ship plot than YOLT.
I would have liked to see them reach an agreement with Feldman before McClory, and film the Ben Hecht script for Casino Royale in 1965-ish, instead of Thunderball.
Feldman was an actual experienced producer, I suspect Cubby and Harry's experience would have been more positive working with Feldman than it was with McClory, and they might have been willing to risk another co-production if Feldman had got there first. Because they worked with McClory first and that experience soured them, they passed on any deal with Feldman, and instead he produced the "funny" version of Casino Royale on his own, and we never got a proper EON version until long after Cubby Brocolli's death.
My understanding is they filmed You Only Live Twice out of order because they had to wait for the Piz Gloria location to be constructed. Had they made a straight Casino Royale in 1965 instead of Thunderball, they could then have made Thunderball in 1967 while waiting for Piz Gloria to be built, and then filmed the Blofeld trilogy in the correct order.
Revelator do you know why they left Moonraker last to be filmed out of all the novels?
They filmed at least three inferior novels before getting round to that one, and as you say it would have been more appropriate to the space ship plot than YOLT.
That's a very good question, and I wish I had a definite answer. All I can think of is that MR's all-England location worked against it in 1967. The producers wanted to film in Japan, apparently to take advantage of Bond's popularity there--but was Japanese box office that important? I think a bigger reason was that Japan was still a very exotic location to Western audiences.
As for why MR was passed over in 1971--who knows? Perhaps after the film of YOLT the producers felt another rocket plot would be too familiar. Or they wanted the post-OHMSS Bond film set in America, to appeal to what was still the biggest audience. Then LALD was chosen to take advantage of the blaxploitation boom. Why TMWTGG was chosen afterward is still unclear. By then the series had decided to retain very little of Fleming anyway and instead repeat itself, as we see in greatest-hits package of TSWLM.
I would have liked to see them reach an agreement with Feldman before McClory, and film the Ben Hecht script for Casino Royale in 1965-ish, instead of Thunderball.
Hecht's script would have made a terrific adaptation and terrific film. But I also think the script would have been too adult to make it to the screen unaltered. After GF the series was set in a maximalist direction and determined to top itself with each entry. A lower-key story like CR would not have fit that goal, and the producers would have undoubtedly added gadgetry, more women, more explosions, etc. Hecht wrote his script at a time when FRWL was the Bond film in the cinemas. After GF, the public's expectations of Bond changed. Not until Connery's departure did the producers dare to make a lower-key Bond film.
It's because Harry Saltzman had been trying to film this title for years, at least since YOLT. The titles between YOLT and TMWTGG were given precedence for various reasons, including the ones you list above.
Comments
Very early in Kate's career but she already had a monster hit with her first single so she was a somebody in 1979.
She would have given the song a more ethereal and rather cartoony vibe than Shirley Bassey did, appropriate to the tone of the film I think.
I didn't even know she'd been considered, but Wikipedia says its a fact!
-Casino Royale, Ian Fleming
but she did write a song about someone named James, who has a gun, on her first album, which was performed in her 1979 Live at Hammersmith Odeon concert film (long out of print)
James and the Cold Gun
Can‘t win ‘em all.
IG: @thebondarchives
Check it out, you won’t be disappointed
- Fire the costume and hair people and hire someone who understands classic fashion.
- Make the Pam Bouvier character funny. It wouldn't look right if Bond was very funny in this movie, and Dalton't woudn't have handled it very well anyway. Re-cast and hire someone like Geena Davis.
- Remove any Americanisms spoken by British characters
- Place the bar room fight in Thailand. It would have made the movie look more globetrotting and the "ninja" fight would have looked more integral to the movie.
- Rewrite the telephone conversation between Bond and Leiter. that one was simply badly judged.
- Offer the title song to Eurythmics or U2. A song in the style of "Missionary man" or ""With or without you" would hav ebeen much more memorable and it would fit the movie.
Incidentally, the poster who suggested Roger Moore for DAF has a point, one I'd never considered. As I think on it, the idea of Sir Rog doing his Simon Templar impersonation around the gaudy lights of Las Vegas has an appeal; he'd spark nicely with Jill St John's Tiffany and Charles Gray's Blofeld, be young and tough enough for the rough stuff, and deliver the throw-away line with consummate aplomb.
Hmm. really got me thinking...
A View To A Kill: Barbara Bach reprise her role as triple X for the hot tub scene, but least the current girl was more age appropriate for Moore.
Licence To Kill: More scenes with Caroline Bliss as Moneypenny.
Timothy Dalton doing more bond films, in 1991 and 1993.
Diamonds Are Forever: Lazenby in the lead role and uhhh.. an actual revenge tale instead of this turd!
1. Dalton 2. Moore 3. Connery 4. Lazenby 5. Craig 6. Brosnan
The Energy Crisis of the 1970's was just as much an American problem as it was a British one. I am sure that somehow Leiter could have worked in to the screenplay, and it would have allowed the writers to build on Bond and Leiter's friendship more.
Also part of me wishes that the fight with Scaramanga was a little bit longer, after having seen the deleted scenes on the DVD it made me wish that the duel had gone on longer.
Furthermore, the length and hassles of the YOLT shoot helped prematurely end Connery's tenure by increasing his frustration with the role. That might have been avoided by filming a different book in 1967 in a different locale.
Post-TB they could have waited until conditions were right (perhaps later in 1967 or 1968) to film OHMSS with Connery (who might have given a great performance under Peter Hunt's direction), and then followed it with a Hunt-Connery version of YOLT that ended with an amnesiac Bond disappearing into Russia. A new actor could have then taken over with TMWTGG, where Bond seemingly returns from the dead as a seemingly new man. This scenario would have given Connery a proper send-off and Lazenby a memorable introduction.
Alternatively, instead of filming YOLT in 1967 EON could have adapted Moonraker, whose story lends itself more to space stuff and large-scale action. After Connery's departure, Hunt and Lazenby would make OHMSS and then film YOLT and TMWTGG and so on. All of this of course would have required Lazenby to behave more sensibly than he actually did.
Lastly, even if DAF had to be the follow-up to OHMSS, the filmmakers missed an opportunity by rejecting Richard Maibaum's initial drafts and script ideas and instead insisting on a more comedic direction, which was ultimately completed by Mankiewicz. I realize that a "serious" Bond film would have been unlikely in the climate of 1971, but DAF didn't need to be as frivolous as it was. The script history of that film would make a fascinating book.
They filmed at least three inferior novels before getting round to that one, and as you say it would have been more appropriate to the space ship plot than YOLT.
I would have liked to see them reach an agreement with Feldman before McClory, and film the Ben Hecht script for Casino Royale in 1965-ish, instead of Thunderball.
Feldman was an actual experienced producer, I suspect Cubby and Harry's experience would have been more positive working with Feldman than it was with McClory, and they might have been willing to risk another co-production if Feldman had got there first. Because they worked with McClory first and that experience soured them, they passed on any deal with Feldman, and instead he produced the "funny" version of Casino Royale on his own, and we never got a proper EON version until long after Cubby Brocolli's death.
My understanding is they filmed You Only Live Twice out of order because they had to wait for the Piz Gloria location to be constructed. Had they made a straight Casino Royale in 1965 instead of Thunderball, they could then have made Thunderball in 1967 while waiting for Piz Gloria to be built, and then filmed the Blofeld trilogy in the correct order.
That's a very good question, and I wish I had a definite answer. All I can think of is that MR's all-England location worked against it in 1967. The producers wanted to film in Japan, apparently to take advantage of Bond's popularity there--but was Japanese box office that important? I think a bigger reason was that Japan was still a very exotic location to Western audiences.
As for why MR was passed over in 1971--who knows? Perhaps after the film of YOLT the producers felt another rocket plot would be too familiar. Or they wanted the post-OHMSS Bond film set in America, to appeal to what was still the biggest audience. Then LALD was chosen to take advantage of the blaxploitation boom. Why TMWTGG was chosen afterward is still unclear. By then the series had decided to retain very little of Fleming anyway and instead repeat itself, as we see in greatest-hits package of TSWLM.
Hecht's script would have made a terrific adaptation and terrific film. But I also think the script would have been too adult to make it to the screen unaltered. After GF the series was set in a maximalist direction and determined to top itself with each entry. A lower-key story like CR would not have fit that goal, and the producers would have undoubtedly added gadgetry, more women, more explosions, etc. Hecht wrote his script at a time when FRWL was the Bond film in the cinemas. After GF, the public's expectations of Bond changed. Not until Connery's departure did the producers dare to make a lower-key Bond film.
It's because Harry Saltzman had been trying to film this title for years, at least since YOLT. The titles between YOLT and TMWTGG were given precedence for various reasons, including the ones you list above.