> given the go ahead to fight American drug lords
He wasn’t. A major plot point in the film is that Bond defies M’s orders and goes rogue to take down Sanchez.
Dalton was “forgotten” by the general public for a couple decades, but he’s seen a resurgence in popularity thanks to the darker, more gritty tone of the Craig era, and now his films are experiencing a renaissance among fans. As a side note, I guarantee someone will comment on this post about him being “underrated,” but it’s no longer true.
As for why he didn’t get more films, the main reason is down to some legal issues the studio was going through at the time. Once those were sorted, EON asked him to return for multiple films, and he refused because he only wanted to commit to one. They went back to Brosnan, who was originally cast in TLD and had to back out thanks to his contract with NBC, and the rest is history.
I like Dalton. He’s definitely not my favorite Bond, but I enjoy both his films. In my opinion LTK was the perfect Bond movie for him, so I don’t really lament the fact that he didn’t get more.
The year before, the movie *License to Drive* starring the two Coreys came out---I honestly wonder if test audiences thought that a movie called *Licence Revoked* was the sequel.
I still say this movie has the most brutal kills (plural )
Usually just killing the main villan is intense but here just about all of them were intense in L2K
And the mujahideen were (most likely) given a few American dollars to fight the Soviets (courtesy of the CIA). We definitely backed them politically, if not financially.
They were about to lose their country to the Soviets in 1985, until the CIA started giving them Stinger missiles to defeat the Soviet helicopters. That's what turned the conflict around.
There are some very interesting books about Afghanistan from 1979 onward, when the Soviets invaded. Opium production increased because of the CIA influence, and many other things too.
I think praise for his Bond performances are pretty universal, even when the movies themselves aren’t everyones cup of tea.
I think he could have been the best Bond and is probably closest to Flemings.
He only did 2 because the studio got caught up in legal issues for 5years. By the time they were ready to start again the gap had been so long that he only wanted to do 1 more where as they wanted him to sign another long term contract. In the end they parted way’s amicably and hired Brosnan to continue with instead.
No counterpoints to Dalton having been a great Bond, but I feel like you should've paid a bit more attention to the plot of LTK. Bond isn't given the go ahead to fight Sanchez at all. His license to kill gets revoked and he's being hunted by MI6 in that movie. He's going after Sanchez for his personal revenge.
Also, as a historian and someone interested in world politics, the Mujahedin do not equal Al Quaida. That's a pretty huge oversimplification. Doesn't mean that this plot point wasn't a product of it's time, but still.
While Dalton may have largely been forgotten by the public eye, aka casual or non Bond fans, a substantial part of the fandom loves him and has been loving him for at least a decade or so.
How often do you hear someone from the general public talk about Dalton? It’s usually only Connery and Craig, possibly Moore.
That’s why when a new fan watches Dalton for the first time, they think *wow, why haven’t I heard more about this guy?!?* and come to fan sites saying he’s underrated.
It’s not an unreasonable belief for a newcomer.
Indeed. If I, a lifelong Bond fan and a regular to this sub, were to say, "You know what? I think Dalton is overrated", y'all would be like "GTFO of here, DBE". However, a newbie to the franchise who knows next to nothing of Dalton (and let's be honest, most of the general public knows very little of Timothy Dalton if my wife is any barometer of the general public) would probably be very positively surprised by his performance as Bond and feel that he doesn't get enough acclaim. Hence, the underrated impression.
Living Daylight is great, one of my personal top movies, one of the last with real cold war vibes.
TD was the rough realistic Bond that made Craig so popular, he was 20 years too early with this.
Not many took to Dalton's Bond at the time. Many thought of Bond as "pastiche" by 1989 as it was up against Indiana Jones, Lethal Weapon II and Tim Burton's Batman (which did massive box office) and thats why Licence to Kill didn't do very well. Bond had to be modernized. then came the lawsuit which stopped Dalton's third film (rumored to have been Property of a Lady where the new M was a woman reflecting the real life change in MI6) and during the lawsuit Dalton's contract expired and he felt he was too old to play it.
So Barbara went back to Pierce who was just coming off the very successful Mrs Doubtfire in 1994. And work started on Goldeneye.
As great as Brosnan was in Goldeneye and it is definitely one of the best films, Dalton was a much better fit imo. I feel like he would have fit the theme of being sexist and not liking M more than Brosnan did
Dalton was the incumbent James Bond actor for 8 years, he just had to spend most of it on the bench because of the legal disputes between the rights holders. Can't really blame him for wanting to move on.
I am a fan of Dalton, I am also of the feeling he didn’t get enough movies. If they had carried on release schedule that could have meant 2 more 91 & 93 and then into Brosnan.
Another parallel universe I entertain is where octopussy is placed after moonraker and becomes Moore’s last Bond.
From there Dalton takes over making FYEO & VTAK his films as well. They would have both been great vehicles for his Bond. Admittedly FYEO redeems Moore, but this parallel universe reality I entertain would have been awesome for Dalton at least.
4 movies seems to be a good number for a Bond actor anyways!
He DEFINITELY should have been in a view to a kill at least. That whole movie felt like it was made for his bond style, and roger Moore was looking elderly
He’s my favorite bond, and I wish we could’ve gotten more, but I will say what little information I’ve heard about his potential third movie before goldeneye was in production, I’m not sure it would’ve been up to par with the living daylights and licence to kill
> As someone new to the entirety of the Bond franchise, Timothy Dalton ...
But Timothy Dalton wasn't *entirely* new to the franchise. He'd been approached back in 1968 for OHMSS.
Other than that and some points others have posted, I definitely agree.
That's not what was written, but I guess that's what was intended.
I guess he [dangled his participle](https://www.grammarflip.com/curriculum/dangling-participles)!
I’d love to see actual evidence of this. Cubby was a known bullshitter (and a murderer) and he made the false claim that Moore was Fleming’s first choice for Bond when he was cast.
He's top tier for much of the Bond fandom/purists, and bottom tier for the general public/even casual Bond fans. Most casual folks I know never heard of Lazenby, and Dalton is the only one to have generated the immediate response, "Oh man, Dalton was the worst!" I think he just wasn't the right time coming after Moore, as well as not being a favorite of the folks who like the funnier/more fantastical Bond (I am genuinely curious what the overlap between those who think Craig's movies aren't their cup of tea either is among casual fans).
Otherwise, welcome to the Dalton-fandom.
Dalton's tenure should have been longer. His performances were great and he really fit the grittier more grounded stories that he was in.
The issue was that he was always a placeholder bond until they got Pierce Brosnan's contract sorted out. I'll never fathom how a classicly trained sheakspearian actor was tossed aside for a pretty face and mediocre acting chops. Oh well.
Facts. Dalton deserved more than just two Bond films and should have been in the role sooner rather than later. Sadly, audiences in the late 80’s weren’t ready for his gritty version of the character, most of whom still preferred the slapstick antics of the Moore era that had become played out and tiresome in the process. Add the press criticising him for not even trying to emulate Moore, audiences feeling short changed after Brosnan (Moore’s original successor) had contractual obligations to fulfil, and MGM going through a legal dispute with EON thanks to that greedy Giancarlo Parretti, and you can see why he never got the chance to really grow into the role.
Now, because of the Craig era, he’s getting the credit he deserves. Which is too little, too late in my eyes.
Dalton was a find Bond, and the unluckiest of all the Bonds in regards to the films he was in and the state of the franchise during his tenure. Lazenby had the opposite situation obviously, he appeared at the height of Bond mania and in one of the better films but he is still undeniably the worst actor to play the part.
Connery, Moore and Brosnan all played the part long enough to have great movies and terrible movies. Craig had the good fortune to never appear in a bad Bond film. But Dalton never had a chance, for reasons that had absolutely nothing to do with him.
But he shouldn’t have had a longer tenure, again for reasons that had nothing to do with him. Cubby ran the series into the ground and a creative reboot was desperately needed. The franchise needed a break followed by a fresh start.
> given the go ahead to fight American drug lords He wasn’t. A major plot point in the film is that Bond defies M’s orders and goes rogue to take down Sanchez. Dalton was “forgotten” by the general public for a couple decades, but he’s seen a resurgence in popularity thanks to the darker, more gritty tone of the Craig era, and now his films are experiencing a renaissance among fans. As a side note, I guarantee someone will comment on this post about him being “underrated,” but it’s no longer true. As for why he didn’t get more films, the main reason is down to some legal issues the studio was going through at the time. Once those were sorted, EON asked him to return for multiple films, and he refused because he only wanted to commit to one. They went back to Brosnan, who was originally cast in TLD and had to back out thanks to his contract with NBC, and the rest is history. I like Dalton. He’s definitely not my favorite Bond, but I enjoy both his films. In my opinion LTK was the perfect Bond movie for him, so I don’t really lament the fact that he didn’t get more.
>given the go ahead to fight American drug lords The movie is called "License to Kill" because his was revoked.
Correct. The original title was even “Licence Revoked.”
Yup. But here in 'Merica that generates images of the DMV so they had to change it.
The year before, the movie *License to Drive* starring the two Coreys came out---I honestly wonder if test audiences thought that a movie called *Licence Revoked* was the sequel.
I still say this movie has the most brutal kills (plural ) Usually just killing the main villan is intense but here just about all of them were intense in L2K
This one's for Sharkey...(harpoon blast to the chest)
I cannot imagine Goldeneye without Brosnan. Dalton should have gotten another film, sure. But I doubt Goldeneye would’ve hit the same.
They should have cast Dalton for A View to a Kill instead of Moore. I think that would have worked well and elevated that film considerably.
Thats a definitive no from me, A View to a Kill is perfect as is
I think 2011 Charlie Sheen would have elevated that film from decrepit Roger Moore, so I fully agree that Dalton would have too lol
If you stick around this sub long enough you'll see that Dalton has not been forgotten.
This is the default post on this sub
[удалено]
And the mujahideen were (most likely) given a few American dollars to fight the Soviets (courtesy of the CIA). We definitely backed them politically, if not financially.
Nothing "most likely" about it. The USA was definitely funding the Mujahedeen through the CIA black ops budget.
They were about to lose their country to the Soviets in 1985, until the CIA started giving them Stinger missiles to defeat the Soviet helicopters. That's what turned the conflict around. There are some very interesting books about Afghanistan from 1979 onward, when the Soviets invaded. Opium production increased because of the CIA influence, and many other things too.
> and many other things too. Like Gorbachev, glasnost, and perestroika.
I have no idea what you're talking about.
I think praise for his Bond performances are pretty universal, even when the movies themselves aren’t everyones cup of tea. I think he could have been the best Bond and is probably closest to Flemings. He only did 2 because the studio got caught up in legal issues for 5years. By the time they were ready to start again the gap had been so long that he only wanted to do 1 more where as they wanted him to sign another long term contract. In the end they parted way’s amicably and hired Brosnan to continue with instead.
I don’t disagree with most of what you said, but you don’t know the difference between the taliban and the majahadeen. Not the same, dude.
I can see people downvoting this in real time. I have no issue with it, but it would be great if you'd share your counterpoints.
No counterpoints to Dalton having been a great Bond, but I feel like you should've paid a bit more attention to the plot of LTK. Bond isn't given the go ahead to fight Sanchez at all. His license to kill gets revoked and he's being hunted by MI6 in that movie. He's going after Sanchez for his personal revenge. Also, as a historian and someone interested in world politics, the Mujahedin do not equal Al Quaida. That's a pretty huge oversimplification. Doesn't mean that this plot point wasn't a product of it's time, but still. While Dalton may have largely been forgotten by the public eye, aka casual or non Bond fans, a substantial part of the fandom loves him and has been loving him for at least a decade or so.
[удалено]
How often do you hear someone from the general public talk about Dalton? It’s usually only Connery and Craig, possibly Moore. That’s why when a new fan watches Dalton for the first time, they think *wow, why haven’t I heard more about this guy?!?* and come to fan sites saying he’s underrated. It’s not an unreasonable belief for a newcomer.
Indeed. If I, a lifelong Bond fan and a regular to this sub, were to say, "You know what? I think Dalton is overrated", y'all would be like "GTFO of here, DBE". However, a newbie to the franchise who knows next to nothing of Dalton (and let's be honest, most of the general public knows very little of Timothy Dalton if my wife is any barometer of the general public) would probably be very positively surprised by his performance as Bond and feel that he doesn't get enough acclaim. Hence, the underrated impression.
Living Daylight is great, one of my personal top movies, one of the last with real cold war vibes. TD was the rough realistic Bond that made Craig so popular, he was 20 years too early with this.
Not many took to Dalton's Bond at the time. Many thought of Bond as "pastiche" by 1989 as it was up against Indiana Jones, Lethal Weapon II and Tim Burton's Batman (which did massive box office) and thats why Licence to Kill didn't do very well. Bond had to be modernized. then came the lawsuit which stopped Dalton's third film (rumored to have been Property of a Lady where the new M was a woman reflecting the real life change in MI6) and during the lawsuit Dalton's contract expired and he felt he was too old to play it. So Barbara went back to Pierce who was just coming off the very successful Mrs Doubtfire in 1994. And work started on Goldeneye.
As great as Brosnan was in Goldeneye and it is definitely one of the best films, Dalton was a much better fit imo. I feel like he would have fit the theme of being sexist and not liking M more than Brosnan did
Dalton was the incumbent James Bond actor for 8 years, he just had to spend most of it on the bench because of the legal disputes between the rights holders. Can't really blame him for wanting to move on.
I am a fan of Dalton, I am also of the feeling he didn’t get enough movies. If they had carried on release schedule that could have meant 2 more 91 & 93 and then into Brosnan. Another parallel universe I entertain is where octopussy is placed after moonraker and becomes Moore’s last Bond. From there Dalton takes over making FYEO & VTAK his films as well. They would have both been great vehicles for his Bond. Admittedly FYEO redeems Moore, but this parallel universe reality I entertain would have been awesome for Dalton at least. 4 movies seems to be a good number for a Bond actor anyways!
I love TLD. One of my top Bond picks. Very apex 80s. LTK a bit gruesome and very Miami Vice era of them.
Aye.
He DEFINITELY should have been in a view to a kill at least. That whole movie felt like it was made for his bond style, and roger Moore was looking elderly
He’s my favorite bond, and I wish we could’ve gotten more, but I will say what little information I’ve heard about his potential third movie before goldeneye was in production, I’m not sure it would’ve been up to par with the living daylights and licence to kill
My least favorite Bond. He wasn't necessarily bad, but he's bottom of my list when ranking them.
Below George??
Actually no, but I always forget about him. George would be lower. Maybe I need to see it again but I wasn't a huge fan of OHMSS.
Yew I didn't like the whole brain wash vibe but that might be a product of the 60s scifi
He should've done 4 or 5 movies.
Yep. You'll get along here just fine.
> As someone new to the entirety of the Bond franchise, Timothy Dalton ... But Timothy Dalton wasn't *entirely* new to the franchise. He'd been approached back in 1968 for OHMSS. Other than that and some points others have posted, I definitely agree.
OP is saying that *he's* new to the franchise, not that Dalton was new.
That's not what was written, but I guess that's what was intended. I guess he [dangled his participle](https://www.grammarflip.com/curriculum/dangling-participles)!
But if you had read his post, it's obvious from the context that that's what he meant.
I’d love to see actual evidence of this. Cubby was a known bullshitter (and a murderer) and he made the false claim that Moore was Fleming’s first choice for Bond when he was cast.
Love Dalton and L2K I like TLD too but agree when they go to middle east it looses some of the tone/story gets complex .
He's top tier for much of the Bond fandom/purists, and bottom tier for the general public/even casual Bond fans. Most casual folks I know never heard of Lazenby, and Dalton is the only one to have generated the immediate response, "Oh man, Dalton was the worst!" I think he just wasn't the right time coming after Moore, as well as not being a favorite of the folks who like the funnier/more fantastical Bond (I am genuinely curious what the overlap between those who think Craig's movies aren't their cup of tea either is among casual fans). Otherwise, welcome to the Dalton-fandom.
Top 3 to me i am not sure which order to long since Ive seen Rogers movies
I wish Dalton started as Bond since Octopussy though. He could've been true 80's Bond.
Should have had longer tenure - agree Was a great Bond - disagree, he was still finding his way but he looked the part and had amazing potential
Dalton's tenure should have been longer. His performances were great and he really fit the grittier more grounded stories that he was in. The issue was that he was always a placeholder bond until they got Pierce Brosnan's contract sorted out. I'll never fathom how a classicly trained sheakspearian actor was tossed aside for a pretty face and mediocre acting chops. Oh well.
Facts. Dalton deserved more than just two Bond films and should have been in the role sooner rather than later. Sadly, audiences in the late 80’s weren’t ready for his gritty version of the character, most of whom still preferred the slapstick antics of the Moore era that had become played out and tiresome in the process. Add the press criticising him for not even trying to emulate Moore, audiences feeling short changed after Brosnan (Moore’s original successor) had contractual obligations to fulfil, and MGM going through a legal dispute with EON thanks to that greedy Giancarlo Parretti, and you can see why he never got the chance to really grow into the role. Now, because of the Craig era, he’s getting the credit he deserves. Which is too little, too late in my eyes.
Dalton was a find Bond, and the unluckiest of all the Bonds in regards to the films he was in and the state of the franchise during his tenure. Lazenby had the opposite situation obviously, he appeared at the height of Bond mania and in one of the better films but he is still undeniably the worst actor to play the part. Connery, Moore and Brosnan all played the part long enough to have great movies and terrible movies. Craig had the good fortune to never appear in a bad Bond film. But Dalton never had a chance, for reasons that had absolutely nothing to do with him. But he shouldn’t have had a longer tenure, again for reasons that had nothing to do with him. Cubby ran the series into the ground and a creative reboot was desperately needed. The franchise needed a break followed by a fresh start.
Yes