That's what happens when you hire people who are too famous.
You just don't give ralph fiennes a 5 minute role.
They got themselves into that situation. To underutilize them would be a crime.
John Cleese. City of Death.
That's what happens when you hire people who are too famous.
You just don't give ralph fiennes a 5 minute role.
They got themselves into that situation. To underutilize them would be a crime.
That's what happens when you hire people who are too famous.
You just don't give ralph fiennes a 5 minute role.
They got themselves into that situation. To underutilize them would be a crime.
I don't completely disagree, but that's where Moneypenny has always been, and at least this way MP is seen to be a competent agent who's been in the field (and jokes about shooting 007 apart she's really good in both Shanghai and the London shootout) and being the personal assistant of the head of MI6 is no mean feat. If anything I'd like them to drop Tanner and elevate Moneypenny into more of that kind of role, that would be good.
Part of my problem with Spectre, and if anything Moneypenny isn't the worst offender, is that all of Bond's support staff get shoehorned into the action in some way. The franchise needs stripping back, and fine if there's a way to insert M and co into the action, but don't do it for the sake of it. Really I just want Bond to get on with his mission after a quick bit of banter with Moneypenny, some hurumphing from M and after Q tells him to return his exploding underpants in one piece...
Not quite - Yeoh's character would have been a cameo, in place of the Chinese secret service guy running the hotel in Hong Kong, who gets Bond a passport and a ticket to Cuba.
Earlier, Teri Hatcher's character in TND was originally meant to have been Natalya from Goldeneye...
You could say the same about Dench though?
It's from the Radio Times so a step above Tabloid gossip and it would be nice to get someone different for a change, even if they're only around for a single series.
http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2016...-thakrar-join-doctor-who-as-the-new-companion
John Cleese at least is known for sketch comedy. Some of which are quite short, so he might only be on the screen for less than five minutes and get the job done perfectly.
There was a City of Death novelization? Was it just 12 pages of plot and 100+ pages of trying to find new ways to describe The Doctor and Romana pointlessly wandering around Paris? Or was it just a 12-13 page book that repeated the line "Then, The Doctor and Romana walked around Paris a bit more" between every few paragraphs![]()
There might have been a novel for every episode. I know I had a couple dozen of them back in the 80's.
At this point, everything from the original run is novelized except for Eric Saward's two Dalek stories.
No, it's a hefty hardcover novel by James Goss. Came out... two years ago? I think it was two years ago.
At this point, everything from the original run is novelized except for Eric Saward's two Dalek stories.
Actually, a problem I had with the City of Death novelization is that the author tried too hard to imitate the Douglas Adams style of prose which in the end proves one thing: you shouldn't try to write like Douglas Adams unless you are Douglas Adams. And even he couldn't always pull it off.There was a City of Death novelization? Was it just 12 pages of plot and 100+ pages of trying to find new ways to describe The Doctor and Romana pointlessly wandering around Paris? Or was it just a 12-13 page book that repeated the line "Then, The Doctor and Romana walked around Paris a bit more" between every few paragraphs![]()
It depended on the writer, mainly. I think those novelisations written by Terrence Dicks were largely straight from the script. Sometimes the novelisation was based on a script that was changed. The later releases were largely faithful to the episodes.What I don't remember, were there major differences in the novels vs the episodes?
Like a Star Trek movie vs it's corresponding novel, with all the unfilmed dialogue and whatnot.
What I don't remember, were there major differences in the novels vs the episodes?
...yes, it is the one who wrote a bunch of Trek novels in the 90s.John Peel's* various Dalek story books have a lot of retroactive continuity references added.
...
*Not that one.
It depended on the writer, mainly. I think those novelisations written by Terrence Dicks were largely straight from the script. Sometimes the novelisation was based on a script that was changed. The later releases were largely faithful to the episodes.
Sometimes the book is a significant departure. The novelisation of The Daleks, one of the first three released in the 70s, was written in the first person from the POV of Ian, and was written as the first meeting with the Doctor.
"The Daleks" pretends "An Unearthly Child" never existed. (The opening of the book is homaged at the start of "An Adventure in Space & Time")
"Colony in Space" is renamed "The Doomsday Weapon" and acts as if it's Jo's first meeting with the Doctor.
"Frontier in Space" published as "The Space War" doesn't lead into "Planet of the Daleks" even though the two books were released only a month apart.
John Peel's* various Dalek story books have a lot of retroactive continuity references added.
Malcolm Hulke and Ian Marter's books are much more adult than most of the rest. (Until the last few years when pretty much all the books went more in-depth than the original stories; "Remembrance of the Daleks" being the ultimate expression of this.)
Donald Cotton's turned his three historicals into full-on comedies.
*Not that one.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.