Do you think the Bond girls should have switched?

I feel that Andrea Anders was a much better Bond girl. It's not saying much cause I think that Mary Goodnight might be my least favorite one in the series possibly, but Andrea is a lot better, with a more interesting backstory, and I feel that Bond should have saved her from her predicament, and that Goodnight should have been the one to die instead.

But what do you think?

No one wants to see the ditsy blonde die. I mean, except maybe the ice cream-licker in FYEO.

It had to be Goodnight that survived. 'Anders, Sir!' would've been a lacklustre final gag.

Or the filmmakers could have just switched the characters' surnames around if they really wanted that final gag.

Mary Goodnight is lifted from Fleming's novels and she works for MI6, initially as Bond's secretary before assisting him in the field in TMWTGG. Though Ekland's Goodnight deviates from her literary counterpart (as does the film in general), I assume the filmmakers wanted to ensure some things stayed faithful to the novel.

Have you tried reading the novels yet, ironpony? Some of your answers might be there, and they'd also give you something else to discuss here.

Well since the novels are so different from the movies, I didn't think I should use them to justify certain decisions made in the movies, if that makes sense.

Luckily for you, the decisions have already been made.

Like a lot of Moore's films, they simply used concepts and names of characters, then went into whatever direction they wanted, which is fine if it pays off. I like the idea of Bond and Goodnight already having a history and how he's kind of not all that into her. It's a fresh dynamic, though they drop that mid-way when Bond decides he can probably sleep with her. In the end TMWTGG feels like two different screenplays conflicting with each other, which was the case behind the scenes with Mankiewicz and Maibaum having totally different approaches.

It's been said that the screenplay's inclusion of the then-current energy crisis has badly dated the movie in ways that other Bonds don't suffer from as much.

I thought that the energy crisis that Scaramanga wanted to cash in on, was not very well explained. Like he is the worlds greatest assassin, but then all of a sudden he is interested in this energy crisis. Was it really explained why all that much, or did I miss something?

It's Maibaum trying to make Bond relevant for the 70s, as there was the fear that Bond films wouldn't last beyond the 60s. This is why Bond has hopped on so many trends since then as a way of keeping up with the times to remain appealing to audiences.

Undoubtedly yes since Goodnight was thrown away as a horrible buffoon character who is so horridly written that even her bum becomes a plot point. That said Andrea's death pose is still iconic to me and hauntingly striking-and her demise establishes Scaramanga's coldnesss-AND has an element of classical Greek tragedy to it.

The energy crisis is still with us in ways and I've always felt this aspect of TMWTGG has never dated. It would still work as a money making scheme in today's world because there has never been proper advancement of alternative energy sources. What wasn't detailed well was the whole Scarmanaga-Hai Fat connection and the exact nature of their business dealings.

hegottheboot wrote:

The energy crisis is still with us in ways and I've always felt this aspect of TMWTGG has never dated. It would still work as a money making scheme in today's world because there has never been proper advancement of alternative energy sources.

This is true. Every second day we get phone calls about installing more solar panels on our roof.

Quote :

What wasn't detailed well was the whole Scarmanaga-Hai Fat connection and the exact nature of their business dealings.

Yep. What could have been if they decided to release TMWTGG in '75. Another year would have ironed out a lot of crinkles.

Even more enticing is the unused Maibaum TSWLM draft with the usage of modern day terrorists overtaking SPECTRE. Now that would have been a departure and a darker turn long before FYEO.

Indeed. Does a treatment/script exist? I've only read about the original drafts/outlines but not the manuscript itself.

I have no idea. I know Maibaum wrote something that was rejected and it sounded like a whole draft since they were doing almost a writer's submission lottery for TSWLM.
It would be a godsend to be able to pour over any collections that might exist in archive libraries but I don't know if EON has ever allowed any drafts to see the light of day.

It's hard to imagine a Moore Bond so overtly political as that TSWLM proposal.

I think that was why it got ultimately rejected. Cubby likely would have felt it was too political and ultimately the standard SPECTRE proposal was accepted only to be changed to Stromberg when McClory started making noises.
I did always hate that Roger never got to face Blofeld.

What's the big deal about Blofeld anyway? I mean sure he killed Bond's wife, but is this the only reason why so many think of him as the best villain of the series, and kept wanting him to come back after?

I think it's because he's had his hand in so many of the films, his elusiveness and the striking - and now iconic - image of Pleasance's version in addition to his murder of Tracy.

The Craig era has done him a disservice so I'm not sure many are craving his return anymore. Personally, Blofeld has never been one of my top three villains - they're reserved for Klebb, Zorin and Carver.

Yes, the series has had its share of far more engaging villains.

The iconic status of Blofeld would have more to do with his recurring presence in the first few films which, after all, were the entries that gave birth to most of the enduring pop culture Bond tropes.

As originally staged, Blofeld is one of the most iconic and powerful screen villains. The genius was in not showing him and using an actor with a knack for stillness-AND not being afraid to combine this with a dubbed voice of someone with an entirely different sound and tone. The combination of Anthony Dawson and Eric Pohlman is an absolute knockout but the change to reputedly Joseph Wiseman through the voice distortion is absolutely inspired. This increases Blofeld's menace to an insane degree...until he is woefully revealed as a simple man with a scar about to inaugurate a little war. As iconic as that will forever be, and as great as Pleasance always is-it just doesn't match the intensity of the unseen or Fleming's version.

The bigness/importance comes from building up the entire run of films to his reveal since SPECTRE was substituted in every film for SMERSH to make them less political. Thus after seeing them all on release, the suspense would be there to finally see him revealed. This is why he is kept hidden until the finale of YOLT as well.

ironpony wrote:

What's the big deal about Blofeld anyway?  I mean sure he killed Bond's wife, but is this the only reason why so many think of him as the best villain of the series, and kept wanting him to come back after?

Do many think he's really the best? Where do you get that?

He does stand out from other villains just by the default of the combo of being a recurring villain and that the confrontation with Bond becomes personal, but I never see him cited as much of a fan favorite like Goldfinger.

Just when I read top Bond villains list on google, a lot of people pick Blofeld as the best.

Just when I read top Bond villains list on google, a lot of people pick Blofeld as the best.