That would make the most sound minded pigeon do a double take
4 Likes
Wait till you see Goodnight in the next film pull off her mask to reveal Kananga uttering: âI always wanted to take a slow boat from ChinaââŚ
5 Likes
So the franchise already was influenced by that other oneâŚ
4 Likes
DAF Blofeld reveal unfortunately explains the Drag and I enjoy the mystery so Kananga Bundt it must be
4 Likes
June 25.
Left to my own devices the other day, using Mrs Jimâs laptop I went for an online ramble in a listless search for some epic filth.
On the way I happened across this YouTube thing and sat agape at the output of several Bond âinfluencersâ, although given the content, âbinfluencersâ might work equally well. Not so much YouTube as WatchMeeeeee, the insecurity was equal to the inability. And the vanity. Dear oh dear.
Anyway, it did set me thinking about genuine, meaningful influence on the Bond series, not least by those with a one-and-done input.
Which of these had more influence on the rest of the series?
- George Lazenby
- Roald Dahl
0
voters
2 Likes
Lazenby, definitely.
Dahl was rewritten many times, so who knows whether his ideas were used or even contained hollowed out volcanoes (Cubby and Harry did have other outlandish ideas and also the final say, so⌠letâs trot out elephant shoes again as exhibit A).
Lazenby, however, influenced the franchise with a different take (hey, no trained actor necessary!) and openly distancing himself from the role (ânot gonna slash my wrists but these films are so overâ) - and nothing he did hurt the series at all.
Lazenby showed Bond is bullet proof (unless fired by Safin). And his annoying behaviour allowed many more actors to flourish in the role. So, Kudos!
Also, I have grown fond of him in OHMSS.
9 Likes
https://www.peterharrington.co.uk/manuscript-first-draft-screenplay-for-you-only-live-twice-158820.html
OnlyÂŁ175,000
I do think that Dahlâs script set the template and itâs influence is there right up until DAD.
Resonant in Spectre also though they chickened out with Bellucci.
6 Likes
This is a classic Sideswipe, in that you can debate both sides and sound a genius (or in my case a hack and a fool).
Like the esteemed SAF it was Laz proving that Bond was bulletproof, butâŚis that Laz alone, or is the jump from Laz to SC and then to Sir Rog that proved Bond was bulletproof. We have for long pondered what a Laz-DAF would look like and weâll never know whether it would have been huge. Or a bomb.
Itâs Dahl by an edge. There had always been sci-fi elements in Fleming, but Iâd offer it was Dahlâs sense of the unbridled fantastic which allowed Bond to move beyond the text and survive a multitude of iterations. Sure - was he re-written and added to? Of course, but if you look at his bibliography itâs hard not to come to the conclusion that the framing was his.
After Dahl, a Bond could be anything - outrageous, down-to-earth, what-have-you. Dahl took the character away from itâs creator; and at that moment ensured that both would survive the test of time.
9 Likes
Not sure where I read it - Some Kind of Hero? A Tesche book? The net? - but supposedly it was really mostly Dahl who was responsible for YOLTâs script, with Bloom contributing only the fake death and ninjas while Dahl was asked to involve that cold volcano the scouts had found. No way of telling for sure without the script versions though.
At any rate it seems difficult for them to rewrite Dahlâs efforts on a lager scale when they commissioned a full script in something over 20 weeks and Dahl started out towards early to mid-1966 - effectively scripting as the shooting was already underway. Looking at the result Iâm not sure much rewriting took place. Just think of the bizarre, overcomplicated way Brand tries to kill Bond, that would be an easy target for rewriting.
But I would argue Dahlâs other work to me suggests plenty of the YOLT script breathes âWay Outâ bizarreness, the swallowing rocket might be thought up by the Gremlins and the whole attempt to get US and Russia into a nuclear war is just up their alley - while the schemes of The Witches or Uncle Oswald could easily be Blofeldâs next big enterprise.
Therefore I think Lazenby surely influenced the production side of things in various ways. But the public image of Bond films as that of the super-fantasy-agent battling the super-fantasy-villain was mainly styled after YOLTâs iconic Adam set and brought to hilarious OTT life by Dahl.
9 Likes
Iâm giving it to Dahl, since YOLT begat other forays into OTT excess in general, and two essential âremakesâ in the form of TSWLM and MR.
Having said that, itâs more of a nod to YOLT overall than Dahl in particular, in the same way that itâs not Lazenby himself or any special qualities he arguably has that put him in contention, so much as the fact that he existed and was the guy tapped to fill the tux post-Connery. Also, in both cases thereâs âinfluenceâ in the sense of âhow do we recapture that magicâ as well as in the sense of âhow do we get as far from that as possible?â In Lazâs immediate wake came a collection of films apparently aimed at course correction and designed to make us forget heâd ever been there, then in time other films aimed at steering back in his direction and trying to recapture the âgravitasâ and groundedness of his film (in NTTDâs case, rather desperately). Thatâs true of YOLT, as well: subsequent films either embraced or rejected its OTT approach but in either case they were reactions to it. The series would likely have been a lot different without either of these guys, but Iâm still giving it to Dahl because I think he had a more active hand in determining the direction of things.
10 Likes
June 26.
Apparently one only lives twice.
Hopefully mâsecond life has less putting out the bins in it. Unless this is my second life and the bin-based misery is penance for something in the first; presumably the retreat from Moscow in 1812.
So which of these characters who returned had the more effective second go?
- Zukovsky
- Mathis
0
voters
2 Likes
Coltrane was a national treasure. But his Zukovsky was a one trick pony character wise. Of course, Coltrane could play anything, even ponies.
Still, Mathis was more effective in his second film, getting a real character arc with that wonderful ending. No, really. He was a faithful ally for Bond who first considered him a traitor, then used him on a dangerous rogue mission which killed him while Bond was not looking, and then Bond put him in a bin. As that Amazon lady said: âI donât think James Bond is a real hero.â Yes! Exactly. And QOS boiled that down to its essence. Mathis was the perfect way to go. (Not his way to go, though, so donât try this at home if youâre not a professional. Or if you are.)
5 Likes
I had to think there for a moment where it was Zukovsky came back for a second time. Then I wasnât sure where he appeared for the first time. Itâs all one big blurry FitzâŚ
3 Likes
Zukovsky/Coltrane was never given enough to do in either appearance - a couple of days work at best. And with him being the actor he was, a real waste of a casting, as if it was felt enough to have him appear, rather than actually flesh out the part. Like a few others along the way (Tanaka etc) itâs as if EON never moved on from their Jack Lord position that this was a âBond showâ not a sidekick show.
With all the conversation about how much screen time the MI6 gang have gotten of late, itâs a crying shame we never got more of the likes of Coltrane.
5 Likes
How quick were people to click that it was Coltrane being back that made it fun rather than the character?
4 Likes
Instead of that bumbling fake Russian I would have loved Coltrane to been either M or a main villain.
5 Likes
A waste of great Scotch indeed.
6 Likes
June 27.
They returned. Probably unnecessarily. However, which was a better second go?
- Jack Wade
- J. W. Pepper
0
voters
2 Likes
I had completely forgotten about Wade in TOMORROW NEVER DIES. In GOLDENEYE he was at least partially amusing, a rare example of the secret intelligence proletariat slogging away and giving exposition. Not sure what he did in TND, possibly fetching Bondâs shoes.
Pepper meanwhile had the important lightning conductor role in LIVE AND LET DIE, giving the audience a real life caricature racist to balance Bondâs mission that might otherwise be seen as a racist one. Taking that figure out of its habitat, running into Bond again in Asia and talking to HQ/Goodnight* and the local law enforcement is far more entertaining. Heâs there for nothing more but silly fun, an audience member briefly on Bondâs passenger seat.
*What must she think? How fast Bond replaced her with a redhead?
4 Likes
Wade did little more than call James Jimbo.
Pepper was obnoxious in the Everglades and the Khlongs, but the joke was on him, as it was supposed to be. Iâm not sure whether audiences thought so back then - we were all laughing at or with him in the cinema during the 70âs. (I was a kid back then, for my defense.)
But he actually had a character to play in both films, so - more tabacco for his cheeks.
I still donât know why they cast Baker again after he played the main villain. Did he have the same agent as Maud Adams?
5 Likes