Michael France & GoldenEye

Screenwriter Michael France died in 2013, but gave a few interviews in which he mentioned his work on GoldenEye. He thought he was given insufficient credit for his work:

Quote :

"My agent lobbied hard for [GoldenEye]," French says. "It's not like your agent just calls up and suggests you, and somebody says: "Great idea, we'll take him.' For the Bond film there were, like, 30 other writers campaigning to get the job. You have to show up and really give them something."

France met several times with Bond series producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson about his 007 ideas. They took him to meet "Cubby" Broccoli.

"If the whole thing had stopped there, that would have been a definite thrill for me, to go to his house and meet him," France says. "I convinced him that I would take an approach they would like that would take the characters seriously but still have fun with them."

France got the job, wrote the screenplay and then got his first taste of Hollywood's curious approach to crediting screenwriters. Names that moviegoers see listed as authors in film credits aren't always the ones who wrote first, and perhaps not those who wrote the most. Writing credits are determined by the Writers Guild of America, a process with a built-in arbitration system because of the disputes that often erupt.

For example: France's GoldenEye script was reworked by Jeffrey Caine and Bruce Feirstein, who eventually shared screenplay credit by Writers Guild decision. France got credited only for the story. "My thinking is that I got seriously under-credited on that one," he says.

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/06/20/Floridian/Flexing_his_writer_s_.shtml

Quote :

"In Goldeneye we were kind of reintroducing Bond. It was Pierce’s first Bond movie, it had been six years since another Bond movie had come out, and that sort of bombed, so arguably it had been eight or 10 years since anyone had taken notice of Bond.

"I wrote a script that played up all of my favourite things about Bond – all the classic elements, his sophistication balanced by his ruthlessness, the way he is either repelled by his job or thrilled by it, depending on the situation… and I wanted to do something I hadn’t seen in the movies. It occurred to me that we’d never really seen Bond interacting with another 00 agent. In the rest of the series, they are nameless, faceless characters…M says, “003 got killed in Malaysia but he sent us this expository note” or something, and the story would move on with just a slight reaction from Bond, if any at all. That seemed false to me. I thought Bond would have very good friends in the sector – that they’d be as tight as men who go into combat together — and I thought it would really be something to build up that kind of relationship and make a Double O agent the villain. Just figuring out that character relationship – that Bond would torture himself because he blames himself for the death of his friend, then learning that the whole thing was a set-up allowing that same “friend” to betray him — gave me a great deal of the story and screenplay for Goldeneye.

We’ve read that you felt you were under-credited on Goldeneye. Can you give us a bit of insight into what happened and, more importantly for struggling writers out there, how the crediting process works in relation to getting story credit?

"I wish I could give you more insight into what happened in this case, but just about everything in a credit arbitration is kept very secret by the WGA. The producers proposed that I would receive first position “written by” credit on Goldeneye. But it went to arbitration at the Writers Guild, and at least two out of three arbiters did not agree with what the studio proposed. I wound up with just a story credit, despite the fact (and I very comfortably use the word “fact”) that I wrote more of the screenplay than anyone else involved. I’m not knocking the writers who did receive credit when I say that – both of them have told me privately that they thought I should have received screenplay credit. I don’t know what to tell your readers, except that the Writers Guild credit arbitration process is unavoidable and unpredictable. I believe the process generally works, but every working writer has a disappointment in dealing with that system, and Goldeneye is definitely mine."

The above is an extract of an interview conducted by UnderGround Online. UGO folded in 2013.

Quote :

Which project do you feel didn't live up to what you envisioned?
"I'm not knocking the movie, but my biggest personal disappointment is Goldeneye. I was a little undercredited on that movie – I wrote most of the screenplay but somehow got the booby prize "story" credit when it was arbitrated – and that stung, but that's not what I mean by disappointment. I wrote a script that had bigger dramatic moments between Bond and Trevelyan, and a great many different action moments (which the producers have basically put in the bank – they pulled moments of my script out to use in The World Is Not Enough, and I suppose we may see more later), and I didn't think that the substitutions made during production were any improvement on what I wrote. In other words, standard first draft writer whininess."

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2003/06/19/10-questions-mike-france



France was just 51 when he died. The obituary in his local paper makes sad reading:

Quote :

In 2007, Mr. France purchased St. Pete Beach's landmark Beach Theatre for $800,000 cash, prolonging the survival of a decades-old, single-screen venue where he watched movies as a child. For five years, he presented classic, independent and foreign films generally unavailable at multiplexes, along with current hits to "pay the bills," as he often said. Eventually the bills couldn't be paid.

Beach Theatre closed its doors to business in November, 2012, after Mr. France claimed attendance had declined and efforts failed to obtain not-for-profit status that would reduce tax liabilities. Mr. France also faced the necessity to convert the theater's projection system to an expensive digital format, in order to continue showing new releases as Hollywood phases out film distribution.

Around the same time, Mr. France was sued by local small-business owner Brenton Clemons, who alleged he defaulted on a loan with the theater used as collateral. That case is still pending, as are divorce proceedings between Mr. France and his wife Elizabeth that he told the Times thwarted his bid for not-for-profit status.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/obituaries/michael-france-screenwriter-and-beach-theatre-owner-dies/2115065

Interesting read, could explain why subsequent use of Bruce Feirstein seemed to lack something.

I'm currently reading France's first draft of Goldeneye. It's been on my to-do list for quite some time. It's must-read material for a James Bond fan, and quite a few welcome surprises. At the time of writing this sentence, I'm about 38 pages in, and I've decided to add some thoughts along the way. I recommend reading the draft first (click http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/Goldeneye.pdf to avoid spoilers.)

- The first 25 pages or so is all out action. I'm not sure how this would have stuck, as one wouldn't be too emotionally invested in it. It's not unlike the beginning of FYEO, where Bond features in the PTS, and then we have two scenes to set up the narrative. However, this is double what features in FYEO, and I can see why this draft was rewritten. It's 25 minutes of seemingly unrelated events.

- The train/DB5 stunt didn't quite make sense, but sounds like good old James Bond escapism. Perhaps it's too OTT, but it's an alternate universe anyway. I would have thought Bond would have thrown the bomb up to the helicopter instead of destroying the prototype train, but it's a minor gripe.

- Augustus Trevelyan is revealed all too early, but some of his dialogue sticks to the final product - the often criticised dialogue that's attributed to Feirstein was actually a France line; the one about the vodka martinis silencing the screams etc.. I do like our villain's full name, but more on him later.

- Some of the dialogue would require a skilled actor to pull it off, and pull it off convincingly.

- France is clearly well versed in Bond, as evidenced with the involvement of certain characters.

- I don't like how Bond is detected too early, whether it be through Trevelyan, Xenia, Pushkin, etc. And on that, Pushkin seems uncharacteristically bitter.

- Heh, I remember the electronic day planners. Both my brother and I had one. And I think it's nice to see the return of the acidic ink from OP. Wonder if this was a conscious decision. --- And to see it fail on him... Nice touch. The GF nod perhaps is too much.

- I've come across a second instance where France notes that Bond must assimilate in a crowd of Russians. Another reason why Idris Elba wouldn't be right for Bond.

- The scene where Bond kicks the door and screams in Russian to gain access makes me wonder how and if Dalton could have pulled it off.

- I'm assuming this file room sequence was the seed to the archives shootout we got later on, which I have to say is a big improvement on France's concept. The mini helicopter attack seems extraneous, and it doesn't help that he actually writes "as if this were a video game". Still, it's an interesting sequence - how Bond enters, Trevelyan's idea behind setting up the "pest control", the espionage work Bond undertakes in the file room, and the Soviet Russia setting - it's good stuff.

- With the journey to Kazakhstan, one can see why TWINE has a noticeably positive post-Soviet influence and ambience to it. Likewise, the Cold War feel of GE bleeds off this early draft as it does off the screen in its final form. Also, I knew the buzz saws were from France's draft, but thought it was only that - not that I've reached that yet in the screenplay yet.

- Alexei is supposedly Boris, and Marina would perhaps be divided into Natalya and Christmas. I'm not warming to Marina, though.


________

That's all for now... Will continue reading and posting thoughts soon!

Continued:

- Interesting take on the defection. I do like the idea of the mountain top cottage in snow Russia amongst the strawberries. It seems a bit redundant having the defection take place in such a remote location, and it seems very elaborate. But I'm assuming it's elaborate for a reason, and that it was a trap to lure Bond and the other 00s in to sell the "defection" it to them?

- Lots of love for helicopters... And shooting at people through buildings.

- And it just clicked that strawberries are a firm favourite for the Goldeneye crew.

- And yes, it was a trap.

- The ski chase is thrilling, but the main stunt where Bond dives onto the chopper to destabilise it was a bit much.

- Bond has just been picked up from Pushkin, and I'm wondering why, since Bond knows that Trevelyan is playing Russia and England off against each other, Bond doesn't just explain his case to Pushkin. Evading Pushkin couldn't be doing Bond all that good. Seems like a precursor to Bond in QOS, who doesn't defend himself against the accusations that he's gone rogue. At least it was remedied here. Side note, it reminds me of TWINE, when Bond confronts M when she meets him in the field that he doesn't trust Elektra. He does it then and there... He doesn't beat around the bush.

- I like the setting of the Russian festival with the militia and period piece costumes. It's an excellent backdrop for the action.

- Glad Zukovsky Romaly wasn't killed off.

- Two FRWL homages in one scene - the garrotte and Bond girl shooting the female villain during a scuffle.

- I do like the earrings garrotte, so hope they make a return. But, I'm glad we go the Xenia we have the final product. This feels very prototypical and she developed into a fully fledged character in the final product. Also, there are lots of characters which have been reworked successfully for the film, which I'm very appreciative for because GE boasts one of the finest collection of villains, maybe only rivalled by FRWL and LTK.

- I remember reading previously that Trevelyan was initially Bond's mentor, however it seems here that he was M. While it's not an ideal relationship for Bond to have with the villain (perhaps in retrospect, considering the recent array of traitors within the service) it makes more sense to have a superior as Bond villain then a mentor. How would that have worked? Would Bond have shadowed his mentor in missions? I highly doubt that would have happened.

- The horseback stuff would have been excellent had Campbell directed this draft. I was always impressed with how he handled the sequence in The Mask Of Zorro, when Zorro destabilises the villain's men on horseback on the way to the mine.

- I do like the silent explosions in space. A more accurate depiction of space.

- More helicopter action. Christ--- Seems to have inspired the aerial action in QOS.

That's all for now. It's an interesting read! Will be back in due time with more commentary.

- I like the Ken Adam reference when describing Trevelyan's complex. What we ended up getting was perhaps Ken Adam-lite, but the rock/cave walls certainly pays homage to him.

- I don't like how NY was the target. I prefer that London was the target in GE - hits closer to home, for Bond anyway.

- Heh... I like the Rasputin comparison. Hopefully this turns up in another Bond film, preferably one set in Russia with a (perhaps rogue) Russian villain.

- Hopkins would have nailed that speech about the Soviet Union and the British empire coming to a halt.

- Shades of this Trevelyan may have made it to Carver, I think. Which isn't a bad thing. Charm in a Bond villain is always good.

- Bond gets shot! Wasn't expecting that! A++

- This portion appears to play out quite similarly, despite a few cosmetic changes - and character changes. Technician is Boris, and this Savatier is young Trevelyan fighting Bond.

- Hmm... A dangling Bond, the lightning storm, a wounded arm... My visualisation makes it seem OTT. Maybe in execution it might have been different.

- That's a terrible line: "Tell me, James, do you ever tire of watching the women you love die?"

- I'm not sure how Bond managed all of that with a shot arm. But that's coming from someone who buys/excuses Bond's injury in TWINE.

- I do like the final scene, save for the final line. Hope a similar exchange happens in a future Bond film.

Overall

As it stands, I'm glad Jeffrey Caine and Bruce Feirstein did the rewrites. It's no secret GE is one of my favourites, and there's very good reason for the film's popularity for Bond fans and the general public alike. I am quite surprised, actually. The way some people talked up France's contribution to the series, I thought that his draft was superior to the film we got. It's the barebones of a good story, and the reworking of the narrative has improved on it tenfold. The best bits obviously stuck (and if they didn't, the next best bits reached TWINE) - the premise is fantastic, and I understand France's 'story credit'. It's his story, albeit told different, and in a much more fleshed out and effective manner. The villains become more identifiable and eclectic, including Trevelyan and his motive. The Cossack backstory is also a brilliant addition by either Caine or Feirstein, even if it's harder to buy with Sean Bean in the role - and rings true to something Fleming may have written.

The other thing to note is the action. It's excessive, and not particularly varied. Lots of helicopters, and a lot of it feels more fitting for a video game than anything else. I don't think it got more exciting than the opening, and even that wasn't all that strong. Actually, the ski chase and the bunker business were better. But as I said, the best parts either made GE or TWINE. The aerial dogfight wasn't that great, but I suppose QOS wasn't going for greatness, so it adopted the mediocre sequence from the draft for that film.

I'm a little surprised. Given the pedestal Michael France was on, I was expecting a lot more. It's still an interesting and enjoyable read, to learn of the film's seeds, but the film is infinitely better.

lachesis wrote:

Interesting read, could explain why subsequent use of Bruce Feirstein seemed to lack something.

Perhaps it's Jeffrey Caine's input.

Not that I oppose Feirstein's contributions. I've always thought there was a reason why he kept getting called back: TND for the first draft, then again for the final draft, then for TWINE. Why they dumped him for DAD is beyond me. Though Tamahori probably would have rewritten his draft anyway.

FieldsMan wrote:

lachesis wrote:

Interesting read, could explain why subsequent use of Bruce Feirstein seemed to lack something.

Perhaps it's Jeffrey Caine's input.

Not that I oppose Feirstein's contributions. I've always thought there was a reason why he kept getting called back: TND for the first draft, then again for the final draft, then for TWINE. Why they dumped him for DAD is beyond me. Though Tamahori probably would have rewritten his draft anyway.

Indeed the writing process...the probability that some ideas get shelved and trolled out the following film some are nixed (for the best reasons) just before shooting.... makes direct credit difficult to pinpoint likewise sometimes its easy to criticise a prominent name (or pair of names) but find they were overwritten at the last moment by the director or producer etc. The Bond franchise has become a dish built up over a long long time-scale with many fingers in the pot.

Have you read the Michael France draft, lachesis?