How the Bond film history should have been?

General Bond discussion from Sean Connery to Pierce Brosnan
Post Reply
User avatar
Count_Lippe
Agent
Posts: 755
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 2:15 am

How the Bond film history should have been?

Post by Count_Lippe »

Maybe this is how the Bond film history should have been:

Dr No (1962) = Same as the film we know.

Live and Let Die (1963) = Fleming's book is very action packed and the story would have made a great second film in the series. Mr Big works for Spectre instead of Smersh in the film version. There is the train ride with Solitaire to Florida instead of the Orient Express in FRWL. The ending scenes with the dragging of Bond and the girl after Mr Big's boat would have been nice to see in the proper story instead of popping up in FYEO in 1981. The gang of black criminals is a forerunner to the Koreans in GF.

Goldfinger (1964) = Same as the film we know, maybe with Young as director though.

Thunderball (1965) = Same as the film we know.

OHMSS (1966) = With Connery as Bond and probably Young as director.

YOLT (1968) = Connery's last film as James Bond. Young left after the first five films in the series so there is a new director. Some sort of space race plot since the space race hasn't yet culminated with the moon landing in 1969, it's still an up to date topic. Not the comic book story of the real YOLT film though. Bond avenges the death of Tracy.

Casino Royale (1970) = The 1967 parody doesn't exist and this will be George Lazenby's first film. Loosely based on Fleming's novel, but having the feel of a younger James Bond at the start of his career.

Diamonds Are Forever (1972) = Lazenby as Bond, set in America and having the Spang brothers as villains and not Blofeld. (Blofeld was killed by Bond in YOLT).

The Man with the Golden Gun (1975) = Lazenby dropped after his films are less commercially successful. Saltzman goes leaving Broccoli as sole producer. Some time passes before production commences on the new film. Roger Moore is hired as the new Bond. The film is set in South America instead of South East Asia. It's filmed in scope and has a pre-credits scene involving 007 unlike the real Golden Gun film. The early 70s Bond films in this alternative history is not influenced to the same degree by other popular action films of the same period, American car chase movie, blaxploitation, kung fu.

The Spy Who Loved Me (1977) = Same as the film we know.

Moonraker (1979) = Same as the film we know, maybe not as much over the top humour though, Roger Moores third and last Bond film.

From Russia with Love (1981) = Timothy Dalton is the new Bond with a more serious approach. Loosely based on Fleming's novel and having Soviet characters that are both friends and foes. The film does not feature Spectre but rather Smersh, like in The Living Daylights and in Fleming's novel.
Image
User avatar
Count_Lippe
Agent
Posts: 755
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 2:15 am

Re: How the Bond film history should have been?

Post by Count_Lippe »

Count_Lippe wrote:
Dr No (1962) = Same as the film we know.

Live and Let Die (1963) = Fleming's book is very action packed and the story would have made a great second film in the series. Mr Big works for Spectre instead of Smersh in the film version. There is the train ride with Solitaire to Florida instead of the Orient Express in FRWL. The ending scenes with the dragging of Bond and the girl after Mr Big's boat would have been nice to see in the proper story instead of popping up in FYEO in 1981. The gang of black criminals is a forerunner to the Koreans in GF.

Goldfinger (1964) = Same as the film we know, maybe with Young as director though.

Thunderball (1965) = Same as the film we know.

OHMSS (1966) = With Connery as Bond and probably Young as director.
These five first films are more even then the real series of Bonds, all have the same director Terence Young with his trademark mood and atmosphere.

OHMSS is not quite as far out as the real film version, it doesn't have the same bling bling tasteless luxury or the same outrageous action scenes and it doesn't have an avalanche, it also has an entirely different cast.

YOLT does not have a script written by Roald Dahl but it could very well be directed by Lewis Gilbert.

I'm not sure about Guy Hamilton's contribution to the real Bond series, it was probably a collaborative effort from the whole filmmaking team and the wish of the producers to make the real GF more spectacular than the preceding two films.

That GF was more humorous than the other two films is not true either since FRWL had a lot of humour as well. It's only DN that was really serious and tough, although it also had some humour.

Hamilton's three other efforts in the real series are definitely not much to write home about. We could probably do without Hamilton altogether.
Image
Post Reply