This happens with them way too often. The previous move is a massive success so they rush into the next one and then end up having production issues to meet a release date. They ran into problems with Quantum as well obviously the biggest being the writers strike of 07/08 I think they wanted that out around April 08 at first so they would have had a stupidly short production window from Casino premiering at the backend of 2006 through Spring 2008.
I think that's not far off from reality. Moore's films (to me) are really, really badly dated now, likle a bad '70s sitcom. I just made it through Live and Let Die, and my god...
Timothy Dalton was the only person I liked as James Bond. The reasons I liked him were probably the same reasons most people didn’t. He was a little more intense.
Watched Licence to Kill last night. It's a great, tight film in my mind. Still remains one of my favorites for sure. Dalton - Does a good job of playing the vendetta role. Again no frills and not afraid to kill in this one. Pretty high body count. John Glen - I don't understand why people think he isn't a good Bond director? He controls pacing and plot development well. Bond isn't all just mindless action, there's a story there too as Bond tries to unravel what's going on and bring down the bad guy's organization from the inside out. I recognize that there isn't a lot of flair in his directing style but he does a very good job of framing a visual so you can take in what's happening very easily. Q - Best film ever. He's a hell of a field operative. Carey Lowell - Her character seemed a bit wobbly as she bounced between strong and needy but she was a good strong female character which at that time was still a fresh thing for Bond. Robert Davi - An incredibly ruthless, real and believable bad guy. This was quite refreshing in my mind and helps the film tremendously. Writing - Pretty strong overall. There doesn't seem to be many distractions in the story and the pacing seems smooth and even until the final action scenes. And as for that final sequence, the tanker truck chase is phenomenal! There are very few sequences in a Bond film that beat this (Goldfinger DB5 scene and the Live and Let Die boat chase are about it). To this day, it remains an underutilized concept in film. Dalton's hair: Geez. Must have looked that bad from being underwater so much in the film.
I find it interesting that folks are so all over the place regarding which of the two Dalton films is best. To me it's pretty cut and dry.
But I think LD is the better of the two. But reading this thread has made me realize that the LD bad guys are the lamest in the whole film series.
Maybe it is my age talking, but I like Connery the best. Was never crazy about Roger Moore. When he had to take off his shirt his pants were up around his chest. Off topic I know.
To me LTK is the best of the two Dalton movies, & one of the best of the entire series. The very fact that 007 goes rogue, as well as how Dalton portrays him harkens back to the character as created by Fleming. In his own way, the Fleming 007 is extremely loyal, & Dalton captures that to a T in this film, with his loyalty to Felix Leiter. Add in Franz Sanchez as one of the best acted Bond villains thanks to Robert Davi, & Q getting a larger part than usual, & it works well for what it is. True, the drug kingpin villain was a cliché by then, but Davi is great in the role. Dalton is even more assured in his acting in this one, & the overall nastier vibe of the film suits it's plot perfectly. This is 007 as a cruel & focused SOB, just as created by Fleming.
The Living Daylights failed as a movie because it was constructed as wokeness to the traditional James Bond character. Definitely not Dalton's failure to become the James Bond character, which he did quite well.
Its all so personal! I don't think any Bond fight beats George Lazenby and the "gate crasher" in the hotel room.
True that... though again.. the end of Thunderball! Lazenby moves so well in the fight scenes that this quality alone is a mark in his favor although it wasn't enough.
Ugh... that would have been a short lived SHOCK for viewers that would have aged badly. Though I have to admit... that gatekeeper idea for SKYFALL would have brought me to my feet... can you imagine Connery stepping out of the castle with a kilt on saying "You mean you brought that CAR... but you didn't remember to load the ****** ROCKET LAUNCHER?" Wouldn't have helped the film any. I can just see Connery at the dinner scene saying.. "what did he SHAY while you were tied to the chair? I'm going to give that guy a pie-sh of my mind!!!"
I've got the bluray boxset, and I find I watch Timothy Dalton & Pierce Brosnan's Bond movies the least. But I really like both actors as 007, so I'm guessing it's the script's.
License To Kill was treated very poorly when released in the States. I saw it on opening day and the theater had it in one of the smallest rooms in mono! No buzz or anticipation outside of the Bond fans. Just came and went that summer.
The problem with LTK is that it needed the modernism of Goldeneye. Die Hard redefined the map for action films the year before, but LTK was shooting while this happened. It's a good film, but it's too much set, direction wise, in the past 80's Bonds style. What Goldeneye did was bring Bond up to date with modern action films. Now, if done the Die Hard way, LTK would have been rated a hard R. Remember, it was cut to ribbons for the USA and released as a PG-13. I still they if they went all the way, which was get someone like Martin Campbell then and put out a full R rated hardcore film on the US market, they would have made double the US box-office, and kept up with the Lethal Weapons of the times. Of course, Bond then was more regarded as light PG action fare for kids, they would have never done that under Albert Broccoli reign.
Big fan of LTW in a certain sense it stands on its own as a movie much as OHMSS does. To me TLD is a boy of a ramble, moving across countries and characters and villains. LTK is more focused and tougher. TLD is a variation on a Moore movie like Octopussy but LTK feels like it is offering something a bit new.
Timing is everything in life...and Timothy Dalton's sucked. Dalton's two Bond movies were hobbled by an ancient creative team drained dry of ideas, a cash-strapped studio in complete meltdown and increased competition at the summer box office. Dalton was a good Bond during a bad time for Bond - a fresh battery installed within a very old and rusty car. ...and while they have their moments, neither of Dalton's Bond movies were all that remarkable. It's hard holding The Living Daylights against Dalton as it was written before the role was cast (but that scene where Bond intends to send General Pushkin to the boneyard is Dalton in full flight) but Licence To Kill promised more than it delivered. Dalton's James Bond seeking revenge against a drug lord was a hell of a concept, but the end result was sagged down by too many plot lines, too many unnecessary characters and too much damn talk. Oh - and too much graphic violence. Now, I'm down with a harder edged Bond, but the violence in Licence To Kill teeters on slasher-film gratuitous. The violence in the early part of the movie is handled well - Leiter losing his leg to the shark is cleverly staged and shot - but Don Stroud impaled on a forklift? Anthony Zerbe's head exploding in a pressure chamber? All that's missing is horny teenagers. And that ending still kinda nags at me. Bond makes plans to go fishing with the just-recently widowed Felix Leiter, instead of offering comforting and consoling words of wisdom learned from having lost his wife, ending a movie about revenge on a weird note. For me, the other big question is: had Dalton gone on to make a third Bond movie would that have clicked with audiences? EON brought in new writers and developed a script - The Property of a Lady - promising a return to a more traditional Bond adventure (Robots! Hong Kong! A mad industrialist with a cool name!). The Rocketeer proved Timothy Dalton had both a funny bone and movie star charm. I wonder if...
The Daltons (and I love Timothy Dalton) would have made much more money with Brosnan as Bond, even shot for shot. Ditching Brosnan due to the Remington Steele reconduction for a mid-season was a bad decision. The interesting thing is when Goldeneye came out, they had to compete with True Lies, which did the Bond thing the right way it should have been done 1987-1989. I don't think they beat True Lies, but the direction by then, was much more clearer. However, it's Bond, it's a family baked series, so you have to take it, warts and all. And Dalton, and Carey Lowell, have their moments.
