Pierces Brosnan’s Tenure as James Bond…
- Thread starter TedShatner10
- Start date
Why they don't own the rights to SPECTRE do they?
Why they don't own the rights to SPECTRE do they?
Yeah, they do. The James Bond owners do not own the rights to SPECTRE and that's why they haven't appeared in decades.
It's too bad, too. I think that if Quantum had been SPECTRE, it would have made the films much more interesting. They should have worked out a deal.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
I'm sure McClory's heirs would appreciate that.
Why they don't own the rights to SPECTRE do they?
Yeah, they do. The James Bond owners do not own the rights to SPECTRE and that's why they haven't appeared in decades.
It's too bad, too. I think that if Quantum had been SPECTRE, it would have made the films much more interesting. They should have worked out a deal.
Get yourself up to date, the bond people DO now own the rights, have for several years, unfortunately, since the guy who should have had the rights didn't have big enough lawyers
Wow. Hostile much? I hadn't heard that; thanks for the update.
Well, I don't want them to explain what the acronym means -- it'd be better just to have it as a name and not an acronym. But I would like to see how they could take a concept that was cheesey in its original form and bring a new, dark, serious twist to it.
What I don't get is how there could be a rights issue concerning SPECTRE. Spectre is a word that already exists, so you're hardly going to be able to copyright that.
And just the combination of the word 'spectre' and some kind of evil organization isn't enough to protect it by copyright, is it?
Or is it enough because it would be within the fictional universe of Bond?
Anyhow, I really don't mind what the organization is called. The Bond universe keeps re-inventing itself. It did with CR, so why not just have an organization with a different name?
And just the combination of the word 'spectre' and some kind of evil organization isn't enough to protect it by copyright, is it?
Or is it enough because it would be within the fictional universe of Bond?
Anyhow, I really don't mind what the organization is called. The Bond universe keeps re-inventing itself. It did with CR, so why not just have an organization with a different name?
Re: Pierces Brosnan’s Tenure as James Bond…
Not this week. Check back later. Who owns "Superboy?"
Why they don't own the rights to SPECTRE do they?
Not this week. Check back later. Who owns "Superboy?"
Re: Pierces Brosnan’s Tenure as James Bond…
Why not go back to what Fleming used in his original novels: SMERSH? It was a real organization, so I doubt McClory's family or whoever can claim that they own the rights to it.
Why not go back to what Fleming used in his original novels: SMERSH? It was a real organization, so I doubt McClory's family or whoever can claim that they own the rights to it.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Eon has always been soft-pedalling russia vs west stuff, that is why SPECTRE was so important to the films in the first place. Whenever there is a soviet threat, it is usually a lone nut like in Octopussy.
SMERSH would put this in an even more alternate universe, and you'd probably have to do them as period pieces from the 1950s.
EDIT ADDON: McClory owned SPECTRE and everything in the novel of THUNDERBALL because it was all recycled from an unmade screenplay. He agreed to not do anything with the rights till 10 years after THUNDERBALL, but then as soon as his rights could be asserted, Eon jumped all over the place with their bigass lawyers. Classic case of biggest guns and loudest mouths winning, regardless of rightness of cause.
Last edited:
Bond as 'blunt instrument'. The phrase definitely occurs in 'License Renewed' by John Gardner, but I have a feeling it was somewhere in the Fleming books first, but it's been so long since I read them that I can't recall.
Which reminds me, I must get 'Devil May Care' from thr library.
Which reminds me, I must get 'Devil May Care' from thr library.
Brosnan's main problem to me (certainly in his later films) is that he didn't seem to believe in the role. There was almost a sigh in his voice when he delivered a one-liner. Yes, most of the one-liners were crap (Purvis and Wade were terrible writers, IMO) but that's not the point - it was Brosnan's job to sell them, and he didn't. Even Connery at hish mosht cshynical "I'm only here for the money" at least delivered them with an "I'm James fucking Bond, bitch" edge.
That said, Goldeneye is still one of my favourite Bond films, for all its faults. TND was a bit generic (probably what you get for hiring a workmanlike but uninspired director like Roger Spottiswoode) but entertaining enough, while TWINE was, outside the stunt sequences, just plain dull. "Let's hire a guy most noted for his documentaries and intimate character dramas to direct our big action blockbuster!" Uh, okay.
As for DAD... the swordfight was pretty decent, and Miranda was an attractive ice queen, but beyond that, the less said the better. Brosnan had a "why am I here?" look on his face through the whole thing - at least when it was him on screen and not a rubbery CGI replacement.
That said, Goldeneye is still one of my favourite Bond films, for all its faults. TND was a bit generic (probably what you get for hiring a workmanlike but uninspired director like Roger Spottiswoode) but entertaining enough, while TWINE was, outside the stunt sequences, just plain dull. "Let's hire a guy most noted for his documentaries and intimate character dramas to direct our big action blockbuster!" Uh, okay.
As for DAD... the swordfight was pretty decent, and Miranda was an attractive ice queen, but beyond that, the less said the better. Brosnan had a "why am I here?" look on his face through the whole thing - at least when it was him on screen and not a rubbery CGI replacement.
SPECTRE was good for it's day but it seems to be hamstrung by convoluted legal bullfuckery, because Fleming, EON, and McClory were all ridiculously obstinate, and nobody will take Ernst Stavro Blofeld seriously ever again after Mike Myers mercilessly parodied him.
Quantum seem like a more convincing and relevant evil cabal for the 21st century and there seems to be more creative leeway with them.
Quantum seem like a more convincing and relevant evil cabal for the 21st century and there seems to be more creative leeway with them.
I can't take him seriously after he offered Bond a delicatessan, in stainless steel!
No that that was Blofeld of course
The only male villains in the Brosnan movies that were worthwhile was Alec Trevalyan and Elliot Carver, the rest were very meh, especially that pretentious fop, Renard (although Elecktra King had all the hallmarks of sociopathy without spiriling into high camp and Xena Onatop was a ridiculously hot S&M maniac).
Even though she was cold bitch I was wondering whether Bond could actually shot her in cold blood. Should of remembered that when it comes to killing in cold blood, Bond won't hold back because the person is female.
