Cubby Broccoli Interview - 1987

Uploaded this video, since I couldn't find it elsewhere. To give it context, it's about the situation regarding Brosnan not getting the Bond role back in 1986. In the US, there was a lot of hype about Brosnan taking over from Moore, that he seemed to be not only the perfect choice but the "only choice", as described in the cover article of People Magazine (a cover article they decided to do rather than a cover story on Dalton getting the role). Since Dalton got the role, tabloids would constantly put up stuff about how the studio wanted to get rid of Dalton so they could hire Brosnan. The US media was clearly batting for Brosnan to the point that in this interviewer is trying to have Cubby admit whether Brosnan would have been in the role instead of Dalton, but Cubby stuck to his guns with Dalton.

Makeshift Python wrote:

Uploaded this video, since I couldn't find it elsewhere. To give it context, it's about the situation regarding Brosnan not getting the Bond role back in 1986. In the US, there was a lot of hype about Brosnan taking over from Moore, that he seemed to be not only the perfect choice but the "only choice", as described in the cover article of People Magazine (a cover article they decided to do rather than a cover story on Dalton getting the role). Since Dalton got the role, tabloids would constantly put up stuff about how the studio wanted to get rid of Dalton so they could hire Brosnan. The US media was clearly batting for Brosnan to the point that in this interviewer is trying to have Cubby admit whether Brosnan would have been in the role instead of Dalton, but Cubby stuck to his guns with Dalton.

It's painful to watch because you know that everything Cubby is saying is patently false. I'm sure Cubby would rather be talking about the current Bond film than a contract negotiation that broke down 12 months prior, but it is what it is. He seems woefully unprepared for the question; he's in a tough position trying to drum up publicity for the film and reassure a skeptical public and media that he wasn't forced to go with Brenda Starr's sloppy seconds; you'd think he would've anticipated such a line of questioning and had a better set of talking points. The idea that Brosnan was actually 2nd choice because they couldn't get Timothy when they first wanted is pure spin. I mean, we've all seen the photos of Brosnan on the TLD set, so we know they had more than just a passing interest.

From what I understand, they couldn't get Dalton initially because he was busy doing BRENDA STARR, so Pierce Brosnan was the next guy they went with and it got very close until NBC ruined it. Because of that fiasco, production was forced to be postponed so that they could have more time to find somebody, and luckily that coincided with Dalton just finishing BRENDA STARR.

I would write off the idea of Dalton being the first choice as a spin too, but I have doubts on that because they did approach Dalton as early as 1968 for the role, so he clearly was in EON's sights for a long time.

Makeshift Python wrote:

From what I understand, they couldn't get Dalton initially because he was busy doing BRENDA STARR, so Pierce Brosnan was the next guy they went with and it got very close until NBC ruined it. Because of that fiasco, production was forced to be postponed so that they could have more time to find somebody, and luckily that coincided with Dalton just finishing BRENDA STARR.

I would write off the idea of Dalton being the first choice as a spin too, but I have doubts on that because they did approach Dalton as early as 1968 for the role, so he clearly was in EON's sights for a long time.

And YET in 1994 they brought Brosnan on board, so it's hard to accept Cubby's version at face value. He's trying to convince others, and perhaps himself, that he rejected Brosnan because Timothy was really their man all along, when in fact Cubby didn't want a guy doing television to also be his 007. The interviewer asks such a simple question, yet Cubby can't bring himself to tell the truth; do we really, really believe that if NBC hadn't renewed Remington Steele, that EON would have not hired Brosnan? If so, how fortunate for Cubby that NBC ruined the deal, because he ultimately gets the actor he claims he always wanted instead of being pushed into hiring a man that the media, and fans, overwhelmingly had been lobbying for.

I remember that magazine cover. I remember where I first saw it. It was the first time I'd heard anything about a new 007 movie since Roger had retired. Without the Internet (and I wasn't a member of any fan club yet) information was hard to come by (although back then, Entertainment Tonight used to actually cover movie news, and they eventually aired a report on Dalton and showed him on the set of Brenda Starr).

God I feel old!

TLD is my favorite movie. Dalton gives the best Bond performance in that movie (with Roger's performance in Octopussy being the second best portrayal of 007), but even I am fair enough to admit that Dalton was a risky choice at the time and they knew it, which is why they were opting for the safe alternative until NBC forced their hand.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

And YET in 1994 they brought Brosnan on board, so it's hard to accept Cubby's version at face value.

Because Dalton left the role, Brosnan was the next obvious person to approach, and he needed it then as he was stuck doing TV movies at that point. Cubby probably should have admitted that had it not been for NBC, Brosnan "might" have gotten the role but at the same time make it clear that the bottom line is that Dalton has always been in their sights as far back as the late 60s and they're glad to finally have him on board. I do think think it's unfair that it was brought up at all in that interview, as it was clearly the US media wanting to bait Cubby into admitting "Dalton is our second choice, we'd rather have Brosnan", because that's how US audiences felt at the time and sadly Dalton never seemed to get a fair shot.

For those outside the US and have lived around that time, was Dalton easily more accepted by the international audiences?

Yeah you can so tell Cubby wanted Brosnan more than Dalton. The micro expressions and eye fucking give it away!

Makeshift Python wrote:

Because Dalton left the role, Brosnan was the next obvious person to approach

I've always felt Dalton was too much of a gentleman to let Cubby, at his old age, try and fight MGM on his behalf. Dalton knew it wasn't going to happen, so he graciously stepped aside so that EON could move forward with a fresh start. I've not one second of doubt that MGM would've refused to move forward on a new film if EON insisted on Dalton. Notice EON didn't exactly fight hard to keep him from leaving.

Quote :

and he needed it then as he was stuck doing TV movies at that point.

Which made his childish, petulant, antagonistic attitude towards EON after having been told he'd not get a chance to do a 5th film all the more reprehensible. Bond was a privilege, not a right, but he acted like a spoiled child in the media towards EON because they wanted to move forward. I wasn't really happy with EON's decision to can Brosnan, but he should've acted like a mature adult all the same.

Quote :

Cubby probably should have admitted that had it not been for NBC, Brosnan "might" have gotten the role but at the same time make it clear that the bottom line is that Dalton has always been in their sights as far back as the late 60s and they're glad to finally have him on board.

Precisely, but he didn't. He used some sort of weird, convoluted logic to make it seem like Brosnan was never going to be Bond, even if the contract talks hadn't fallen through, but that makes absolutely no sense. Why were they even talking to him or dealing with him or letting him on the set of TLD if they weren't seriously considering using him?

Makeshift Python wrote:

From what I understand, they couldn't get Dalton initially because he was busy doing BRENDA STARR, so Pierce Brosnan was the next guy they went with and it got very close until NBC ruined it. Because of that fiasco, production was forced to be postponed so that they could have more time to find somebody, and luckily that coincided with Dalton just finishing BRENDA STARR.

I would write off the idea of Dalton being the first choice as a spin too, but I have doubts on that because they did approach Dalton as early as 1968 for the role, so he clearly was in EON's sights for a long time.

Dalton had clearly been under consideration previously, but the notion that he was first choice for TLD seems to be false. He wasn't cast in Brenda Starr until after May 1986. According to Cubby's autobiography, Dalton had been approached after Moonraker and said he wasn't interested. That seemed to be that, and he wasn't approached again until after Brosnan was forced to drop out.

Ffolkes wrote:

Dalton had clearly been under consideration previously, but the notion that he was first choice for TLD seems to be false. He wasn't cast in Brenda Starr until after May 1986. According to Cubby's autobiography, Dalton had been approached after Moonraker and said he wasn't interested. That seemed to be that, and he wasn't approached again until after Brosnan was forced to drop out.

So that begs the question: what caused Dalton to change his mind? If he wasn't interested the first time that EON was going to try and ground the series in reality, what changed? I haven't heard that he was approached after Moonraker, but he did go on to do FLASH GORDON and BRENDA STARR, so it's not like he's above doing this sort of thing for money.

Dalton is a fan of the Fleming novels and EON approached him right after doing the most absurd Bond film in the series at that point. He likely didn't have much confidence in EON returning to the spirit of Fleming.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

So that begs the question: what caused Dalton to change his mind? If he wasn't interested the first time that EON was going to try and ground the series in reality, what changed? I haven't heard that he was approached after Moonraker, but he did go on to do FLASH GORDON and BRENDA STARR, so it's not like he's above doing this sort of thing for money.

This was Dalton's response:

"I was not approached for "Live And Let Die", but there was a time in the late 1970s, when Roger may not have done another one, for whatever reason. They were looking around then, and I went to see Mr. Broccoli in Los Angeles. At that time, they didn't have a script finished and also, the way the Bond movies had gone - although they were fun and entertaining - weren't my idea of Bond movies. They had become a completely different entity. I know Roger, and think he does a fantastic job, but they were different kinds of movies. Roger is one of the only people in the world who can be fun in the midst of all that gadgetry. But in truth my favourite Bond movies were always "Dr. No", "From Russia With Love", and "Goldfinger".

http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/dalton_bond_era.php3

It was after MOONRAKER. My father auditioned for the role of 007 in FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, as did thousands of other stage, TV and screen actors. Barbara Broccoli was screening them.

It's too bad Dalton turned it down then, because I think FYEO would have made a healthy start for him and the reaction to his casting might have been different in the US compared to how it turned out with Brosnan's ghost looming. I do wonder if John Glen would have taken the job if Dalton accepted, cause apparently he didn't feel up to having his directorial debut also have the responsibility of introducing a new Bond.