3rd Dalton film always questionable

Look, I liked Dalton. Over time TLD has become my favorite film. But I'm not really here to review TLD or LICENSE REVOKED. I'm pointing out that even before LICENSE REVOKED was finished filming, Dalton knew the series was in trouble.

According to BONDAGE Magazine #16, he gives what appears to be a direct interview with then-club President Richard Schenkman on the set of the film. I'm lifting the relevant quote from page 23: "My feeling is this will be the last one. I don't mean my last one, I mean the end of the whole lot. I don't speak with any real authority, but it's sort of a feeling I have. Sorry!"

Well, his feeling was more or less spot-on. Clearly he sensed the turmoil that was taking place behind the scenes. Quite honestly, this is a period of the Bond series (1989-1993) that doesn't get as much analysis as I'd like. I think it was probably one of the darker time periods in the history of the series, filled with uncertainty, and it seems like Babs and Michael never want to give some insight into what was going on other than to blame MGM and talk about the lawsuit Danjaq/EON filed against Paretti/Pathe. What did Dalton know back then? What was he sensing?

You see, Dalton's hunch....his instinct....about problems in the series predates the filing of the lawsuit, so the lawsuits that came later can't be the sole reason why the 3rd Dalton film was delayed.

In Tom Soter's book "BOND AND BEYOND: 007 And Other Special Agents", he quotes Saul Cooper, a spokesman for Broccoli (at the time; this was published in 1993): "We're finding more and more people who feel that if we get the tone of the films right, he (Dalton) makes for quite an acceptable Bond. Among the many intangibles we're currently facing, he isn't one of them. He will definitely be in the next one and the ones after that."

"Quite an acceptable Bond" is hardly what I would consider a ringing endorsement. I remember back in 1994 when the new film was officially announced, but not yet cast, people were asking who would be Bond, and Cubby said Dalton was "the Bond of record." Now, I'm sorry, but that's a very lawyerly way of saying something. It says a lot (probably more than was meant to be conveyed), but anyone that can read between the lines could tell it hardly was a full-throated endorsement of Dalton. I think Dalton knew all this and understood it back in 1989, so why did Cubby have to be basically pushed into admitting this to himself only in 1994? If Dalton could face the truth, why was it so hard for Cubby to?

Thing is, the six year gap probably helped the series out in ways they couldn't have known going in. It gave them a chance to come back with a clean slate for everyone involved.

Maybe someone can help explain the functional difference between putting Danjaq up for sale (which Broccoli did in 1990) and turning EON over to Barbara at the same time. Danjaq holds the rights to the Fleming stories, but what does EON do then? If the sale of Danjaq would have gone through and UA would have bought it, how would EON have still been able to make movies?

Soter's book also touches on the August 1990 dismissal of John Glen and Richard Maibaum that Variety called a "bloodless coup", with extensive details about what might have been Dalton's third film involving nuclear power plants, Hong Kong/Scotland, robots, and a CIA operative named Connie Webb (some of the work seems to have made it into later Bond films). It sounded pretty awful. "Broccoli and Co. have had more time for preproduction than they've ever had, and this very lack of pressure to deliver by a certain date had paralyzed the production team." (makes you wonder if they couldn't have just gone ahead and made a 3rd film during this period involving the lawsuit, or were they using the lawsuit as cover to stall on making another film for a while?).

Time Warner was also rumored to be interested in buying MGM-Pathe and that Broccoli  would be partnered with Joel Silver. EMPIRE Magazine reported: "Close associates conceded that Silver's old LETHAL WEAPON pal Gibson is, indeed, first in line to fill the coveted role, and has, in fact, already agreed to star in three Bond films."

It's certainly an interesting period. I have no doubt EON stuck to their guns with Dalton until the day he walked, and that MGM clearly didn't want to let a third film with him as the star happened. I actually have the original Michael France draft of GOLDENEYE and I can say it was definitely written as a follow up to what Dalton had already done. It's arguably the closest we'll ever imagine what a third film would have been like bad EON got their way. Of course, it's still a draft and would have still gone through rewrites, but it's still a pretty interesting read. I would have liked to see that version of GE.

When I get around to it, I'll post give a link to the Michael France draft.

Makeshift Python wrote:

It's certainly an interesting period. I have no doubt EON stuck to their guns with Dalton until the day he walked, and that MGM clearly didn't want to let a third film with him as the star happened. I actually have the original Michael France draft of GOLDENEYE and I can say it was definitely written as a follow up to what Dalton had already done. It's arguably the closest we'll ever imagine what a third film would have been like bad EON got their way. Of course, it's still a draft and would have still gone through rewrites, but it's still a pretty interesting read. I would have liked to see that version of GE.

When I get around to it, I'll post give a link to the Michael France draft.

Yes, please do link to it, because I've never read it. I'd like to read first drafts of TLD if anyone knows where to find it.

It appears that Dalton had to live with the shadow of Brosnan AND Gibson hanging over him this entire time. Not an ideal situation to work in.

Here's the first draft, dated January 1994 (just three months before Dalton walked out).

http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/Goldeneye.pdf

I've always assumed Dalton was paid off or his contract expired. Either way, I agree that MGM didn't want him and that things were not well at Danjaq. Anyone remember James Bond Jr.?

The real problem with the Bond franchise at this time was that the production team as a whole was caught in a rutt, Dalton was also always tainted by being the second pick when Brosnan fell out of the running albeit imo a better choice and the best choice we've had since Connery. I think LTK was a decent attempt to shake up the formula but it needed a more classic follow up to resonate....ironically I think Goldeneye with a more grounded Dalton twist might well have been the perfect film to do so.

As good a place as any to share this. Damn.

Dalton had everything except an audience.

There was a lengthy and detailed article on the state of the Bond series between 1989-1994 written in the now-defunct American edition of Premiere magazine, I think, around the time of Goldeneye's release. I've never been able to find it anywhere online, but I remember a number of things from it.

It stated that the relationship between EON and MGM had been strained from the start, the moment MGM took control of United Artists. Apparently, Cubby wanted to follow the outgoing UA execs and set up shop at Orion pictures, but was contractually prohibited from doing so.

MGM was lukewarm on the Bond series throughout the 80s, and effectively shrank the budgets of the films. Licence to Kill cost around $30 million, about the same amount as Moonraker had a decade earlier, despite huge increases in production costs over that time. And although still successful, the films themselves were taking longer to show a profit, something the perpetually cash-strapped studio was less than enthusiastic about.

They spent a fair amount marketing The Living Daylights and the series' 25th anniversary in 1987, but it didn't really pay off. While TLD made about $40 million more than the previous entry internationally, in the crucial US market it made about the same, and effectively made less than AVTAK once inflation was factored into account. I suspect that's why they pulled back and gave LTK such a lackluster marketing campaign. There was also speculation around this time that MGM was looking to unload its stake in the series, but probably wouldn't have been able to get the price they wanted for it. I'm sure Dalton would have been at least somewhat aware of this situation, which would account for him saying that he thought LTK might be the last film.

Ffolkes wrote:

There was a lengthy and detailed article on the state of the Bond series between 1989-1994 written in the now-defunct American edition of Premiere magazine, I think, around the time of Goldeneye's release. I've never been able to find it anywhere online, but I remember a number of things from it.

It stated that the relationship between EON and MGM had been strained from the start, the moment MGM took control of United Artists. Apparently, Cubby wanted to follow the outgoing UA execs and set up shop at Orion pictures, but was contractually prohibited from doing so.

MGM was lukewarm on the Bond series throughout the 80s, and effectively shrank the budgets of the films. Licence to Kill cost around $30 million, about the same amount as Moonraker had a decade earlier, despite huge increases in production costs over that time. And although still successful, the films themselves were taking longer to show a profit, something the perpetually cash-strapped studio was less than enthusiastic about.

They spent a fair amount marketing The Living Daylights and the series' 25th anniversary in 1987, but it didn't really pay off. While TLD made about $40 million more than the previous entry internationally, in the crucial US market it made about the same, and effectively made less than AVTAK once inflation was factored into account. I suspect that's why they pulled back and gave LTK such a lackluster marketing campaign. There was also speculation around this time that MGM was looking to unload its stake in the series, but probably wouldn't have been able to get the price they wanted for it. I'm sure Dalton would have been at least somewhat aware of this situation, which would account for him saying that he thought LTK might be the last film.

I'll look through my stash and see if I have that PREMIERE article. I tended to hold on to all of that stuff back then, but I've got so much Bond memorabilia, it could take a while to find it.