Never say Never Again

 
Old 06-17-03, 12:57 AM
  #1  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 187
Never say Never Again

Is Never say Never Again part of James Bond Collection, or is it some renegade rogue movie that sean connery made. if it is not then is Kim Bassinger a bond girls or not???

Thanks
MarcinL is offline  
Old 06-17-03, 01:14 AM
  #2  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 293
It's an authorized remake of Thunderball.

Here's some quoted information from the IMDB:

This film is a remake of "Thunderball"(1965), with some differences. Auger, Claudine played "Domino" in the original movie, while Kim Basinger plays the character, now remained "Domino Patachi". Celi, Adolfo, played "Emilio Largo" in the original, while Klaus Maria Branduer played the character in this film, now remained "Maximillian Largo".

This "Bond film" was not part of the franchise produced by MGM and Danjaq. Kevin McClory, who was producer and co-writer of Thunderball (1965), won a legal battle against Ian Fleming to make his own Bond movie. The settlement stipulated that it had to effectively be a remake of Thunderball.
http://us.imdb.com/Trivia?0086006
Joseph B is offline  
Old 06-17-03, 01:21 AM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 293
Here's some additional information from a DVD Review posted over at DVD Verdict:

If you are a Bond fan, you probably already know the tangled web of rights, credits, lawsuits and such that led to the genesis of Never Say Never Again. For the rest of you, let me briefly summarize. Around 1960, the "father" of Bond, Ian Fleming, and Kevin McClory collaborated on a screenplay which was eventually abandoned, but not before Ian Fleming wrote "Thunderball." To Kevin McClory, the book seemed a direct rip-off of the screenplay, and out came the flesh-eating lawyers.

When the dust settled, Kevin McClory retained the rights to the story, which he soon licensed to the Broccoli/Saltzman production team for their Thunderball film. However, he retained the right to make his own Bond film based on his story, which after much legal wrangling with the dynamic Broccoli/Saltzman duo, he was allowed to do. Released in competition with Octopussy in 1983, Never Say Never Again made a respectable box office showing against its canon competitor. Sadly, the upshot of this legal fracas was that SPECTRE faded out of the Bond canon, as it was considered to be a part of McClory's story.

Other than for purely mercenary reasons, I have never have clearly understood why McClory couldn't leave well enough alone and insisted on remaking Thunderball. The situation gets even weirder when you learn that since Never Say Never Again was released, Kevin McClory has periodically announced plans to mount yet another variously-named remake. Fortunately, he has apparently never found financial backing for another remake, for I fear that a remake of a remake could never be more than superficial Hollywood guano.

On its own terms, Never Say Never Again is still only one generation away from the original, and fortunately employs the original and still unparalleled Sean Connery (Entrapment, The Hunt for Red October, Outland) in his final appearance as the gentleman-spy. He is as charming as ever and still possessed of a rugged, macho persona, despite his age, but he seems caught in transition. Not as young and dashing as he used to be, but not quite yet the wise, finely matured man he is now; he looks a bit too much like the creaky Roger Moore of A View to a Kill.
Here's a link to the entire review:

http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/bondnsna.shtml

Hope this helps!
Joseph B is offline  
Old 06-17-03, 01:26 AM
  #4  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Unique New York
Posts: 4,241
Slight hijack

Did Eon ever get the rights back from McClory?

/Slight hijack
JoeyOhhhh is online now  
Old 06-17-03, 07:43 AM
  #5  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 9,334
I know MGM has picked up the video rights to the Never Say Never, however I don't think they have picked up rights back from McClory though
chanster is offline  
Old 06-17-03, 08:14 AM
  #6  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 2,199
Originally posted by JoeyOhhhh
Did Eon ever get the rights back from McClory?

Actually, Sony (who bought the Thunderball rights from Kevin McClory) was in a heated legal dispute with MGM over (what I consider) ludicrous intentions to create an entirely new Bond series based on just one film constantly remade over and over and over! They finally decided it was more trouble than it was worth, and for a measley five million dollars from MGM ended up selling the rights to Thunderball AND Casino Royale to the true Bond family where it should have been for the past 40 some years. Since this has been such an ongoing headache for the Eon since the 1960s, I'm sure they felt five million dollars was a bargain. (And probably a lot of Bond fans like myself are relieved a company with really no interest in Bond except to exploit it for money can now potentially ruin the series.)

Here's a link to what I found. (It mentions MGM acquired certain specific rights to Casino Royale. Not sure what "certain specific rights" means exactly.):

http://www.universalexports.net/00Warhead.html



Sony Abandons Bond Ambition--March 30, 1999
It's official: Sony Pictures Entertainment won't ever say Never Again, and Pierce Brosnan is the only James Bond who'll be coming to a theater near you this Christmas.

The studio announced plans for a rogue James Bond film franchise in October 1997, and had hoped to kick things off with a remake of the 1965 Bond film Thunderball famously remade once already by Warner Bros. as 1983's Never Say Never Again later this year.

Just weeks following Sony's initial announcement, however, lawyers for MGM claimed their studio had exclusive rights to the James Bond character through its proprietorship of United Artists and filed a $25 million infringement suit against Sony.

The case was set to go to trial next month, but the Associated Press reports that legal reps for Sony and MGM have resolved the matter out of court and Sony will no longer pursue a Bond film or franchise.

"Essentially," said Sony attorney David W. Steuber, "we have given up the universal right to make a James Bond picture."

Details of the settlement include payouts from both studios. In addition to laying aside its Bond ambition Sony will fork over $5 million of the damages MGM was seeking. For its part, MGM has agreed to pay Sony $10 million to shore up its exclusive international rights to the James Bond franchise and for certain specific rights to the 1967 Bond spoof Casino Royale.

Sony obtained the remake rights to Thunderball from producer and screenwriter Kevin McClory, who collaborated with Bond creator Ian Fleming on material that eventually became the script for Thunderball. Both Sony and McClory had argued that the sum of his contributions amounted to his having co-created "an original cinematic Bond character."

McClory was also a driving force behind Never Say Never Again the title is a winking reference to the presence of original Bond Sean Connery, who'd vowed after completing 1971's Diamonds Are Forever that he would "never again" play the role after winning limited remake rights to Thunderball in a legal battle with Fleming.

Sony had reportedly offered its initial Bond project to Dean Devlin and Roland Emmerich, the creative duo responsible for Independence Day and 1998's Godzilla, with Liam Neeson potentially attached to star as the suave superspy.

The beginning of the end came last July, when a federal court substantiated MGM's arguments by issuing a preliminary injunction to prevent Sony from starting production on a Bond film until the matter had been resolved in court.
rennervision is offline  
Old 06-17-03, 10:27 AM
  #7  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Boston
Posts: 11,154
Originally posted by rennervision
(And probably a lot of Bond fans like myself are relieved a company with really no interest in Bond except to exploit it for money can now potentially ruin the series.)
Yes, better that the series be ruined by the production company that is officially authorized to exploit the character for money.
Josh Z is offline  
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.