Can anyone confirm this theory on the ending to be true?

I've always felt that the ending with Bond and Stacey is the shower, was a last minute shoot, and that a different ending was in mind before.

It's just that for most of the movie, it seems that Bond is much more of a father figure to Stacey and doesn't try to bed her at all, and they have a father figure type relationship, which I really like at first, and felt it was a nice change.

But then all of a sudden they are in the shower at the end. I feel like it was probably the director and writer's intention not to have them get together at all, and completely own the father figure relationship, with no romance in the end whatsoever. But then when the producer Cubby Broccoli saw it, he said you have to have an end love scene... and then forced them to film one, even though it was not originally intended.

But I'm only going by how the scene feels forcibly tacked on at the end, and this is just my theory therefore. I cannot find any confirmation on this, but wonder if anyone can confirm it?

I used to wonder about that, but I kinda have to go with the assumption that there was no attempt at a father/daughter dynamic because that just doesn't seem like the kind of thing that any of the filmmakers would have gone for from that era. Perhaps it's just that Moore looks so ancient in the role and Tanya Roberts was so young that it's hard not to see a father/daughter dynamic, especially with bits like Bond tucking her at night and keeping guard of her, rather than sleeping with her.

I think it's just a product of its time, when older male stars besides Moore were still treated as if they were in their 30s and always slept with women who were much younger than them. It still happens today, only not as predominant as films from the 20th century. The most modern example is Tom Cruise, who still plays the same type of roles he would have from over 30 years ago and is paired with women who are rarely above the age of 40. Which will make me curious about his TOP GUN sequel, as I can't imagine him pretending to be anything other than his own age.

In fact, Tom Cruise in MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - FALLOUT is actually OLDER than Sean Connery was in NSNA, yet I don't remember if the film ever bothers addressing that his character is aging.

Considering Bond comes onto Stacey at Chantilly, there was always a definitive attraction to her. I'm sure he was certainly hoping to sleep with her at her home, but she fell asleep waiting for him. He wasn't going to wake her just to get off.

Connery and Lazenby would have slipped into bed, hoping she'd wake up as he did, ready for a bonking.

Interesting, MP. Tom Cruise is the same age as Moore was in AVTAK! He's still quite baby-faced for a 57 year old, I suppose.

And yeah, I'd suggest Bond was always gonna slip one in. This was the era where Bond films stuck to the fundamentals of the formula.

At 57 year old, Moore was blasting off in icebergs, French chateaus, hot tubs and showers.

Tom Cruise is blasting off into space for his next film.

Not sure which is more unbelievable.

Got to be Moore.

The things Cruise believes in sounds unbelievable.

Scientology is batshit-crazy and even in this day and age he's still allegedly so deep in the closet he can see Narnia ... but I just can't dislike the guy.

Blunt Instrument wrote:

Scientology is batshit-crazy and even in this day and age he's still allegedly so deep in the closet he can see Narnia ... but I just can't dislike the guy.

I'm in this boat. He gives his movies his everything.

Good and dedicated movie star, but also a horrible human being. I pretty much have that same attitude towards Mel Gibson and Michael Jackson.

Ditto. Never been a fan of his sadly. Generally avoid his movies.