Why James Bond’s biggest ‘failure’ was actually a trailblazing moment for the 007 franchise

by

Most Bond fans don’t consider Licence to Kill (1989) one of the best films in the series. Timothy Dalton’s second time playing 007 is often ranked low, seen as a failed effort to match the style of overly violent action movies from the 1980s.

Many critics felt the film departed too much from the traditional James Bond style, which contributed to its disappointing reception with viewers. Adding to its troubled legacy, the Bond franchise then took an unusually long six-year break, and when it returned with ‘GoldenEye’ in 1995, a new actor had replaced Dalton in the lead role.

The film represents a noticeable shift in tone and style from previous installments. Unlike more recent Bond films, it closely follows the storylines of Ian Fleming’s original novels, reminiscent of the early Sean Connery movies. In Licence to Kill, Bond isn’t working for MI6 – he’s on a personal quest for revenge against drug lord Franz Sanchez (Robert Davi), who brutally attacks Bond’s friend, CIA agent Felix Leiter (David Hedison), and is also responsible for the death – and implied assault – of Felix’s wife, Della (Priscilla Barnes).

The Man with the Golden Gun, this ain’t.

The movie received a mixed reaction when it first came out. While some critics praised Dalton’s acting and the effort to update the James Bond formula, others weren’t impressed. Reviews ranged from The Guardian calling it lacking in style, to the Daily Express describing it as boring and tedious. The Sunday Times went further, suggesting that the sophisticated spy created by Ian Fleming had been lost, replaced by a Bond who was more of a vengeful crime fighter, similar to the character in that year’s Batman film.

  • Read more: How to choose the next James Bond, with casting boss Debbie McWilliams

Despite making over four times its production cost, Licence to Kill remains the lowest-grossing Bond film when accounting for inflation.

Want to see this content?

This page uses a security feature called Google reCAPTCHA. Before it loads, we need your permission because it might use cookies. If you want to see the content, please select ‘Accept and continue’ to enable reCAPTCHA.

Despite claims that the film was considered a failure and led to a pause in the Bond series until Pierce Brosnan took over, this isn’t true. Planning for the 17th Bond film, with Timothy Dalton returning as 007, actually started in May 1990, and a poster for the sequel was even shown at the Cannes Film Festival that year.

A long legal battle between MGM, the company distributing the James Bond films, and Danjaq, which owned the rights to the films, caused production to stop for several years. Timothy Dalton’s contract as Bond expired in 1993, and in April of the following year, he announced his difficult decision to retire from the role. He explained that although he had been asked to return, he felt it was time to pursue new challenges and leave the iconic character behind.

Looking back, Licence to Kill doesn’t seem so different from other Bond films. It actually feels ahead of its time. The idea of Bond going off on his own, driven by personal revenge rather than a government order, is something we also see in the later Bond films starring Daniel Craig, starting with Casino Royale in 2006.

The parallels continue. Like the earlier novels, this story has a somber tone, avoids excessive humor, and downplays Bond’s romantic conquests. Importantly, the two main female characters – Pam Bouvier, a former pilot and informant, and Lupe Lamora, Sanchez’s girlfriend – are actively involved in the plot, rather than simply being romantic interests.

Bond’s dynamic with Sanchez is interestingly layered. He subtly manipulates Sanchez psychologically, a tactic he’d later use against villains like Le Chiffre in Casino Royale and Raoul Silva in Skyfall. This foreshadows the complex psychological battles Bond would become known for.

Licence to Kill definitely feels like an ’80s action movie – it features Frank McRae (from 48 Hrs) as Bond’s ally, and actors from the previous year’s Die Hard as both the villain and a supporting character. However, if you look past that ’80s style, the film actually fits well with the more recent, grittier, and more personal Bond movies starring Daniel Craig, which have been very popular with both critics and audiences.

Timothy Dalton’s portrayal of James Bond arrived at a difficult moment. The Bond films were struggling in the late 1980s to transition from the lighter, more playful style of Roger Moore’s films to the grittier, more action-packed style that was popular at the time, like the violent thriller Lethal Weapon.

Sticking too closely to the old Bond formula could have made the films seem stale, but changing things too much risked alienating fans who loved the franchise’s unique style. Surprisingly, Daniel Craig actually had an easier time than some might think. The success of the Bourne films had already shown audiences were open to spy thrillers with flawed and relatable heroes, which paved the way for his more vulnerable portrayal of 007, despite initial criticism of his casting.

It’s understandable why Dalton admired Daniel Craig as Bond. In a 2012 interview with the Los Angeles Times, Dalton suggested Craig might be the best Bond ever, or at least the best in decades. He contrasted this with his predecessors, noting that the Roger Moore films became overly comedic, and Pierce Brosnan’s films didn’t allow him to explore the darker, more complex character he seemed to want to portray.

As a huge Bond fan, I think Daniel Craig’s films really feel like Bond for today – they’re totally modern. But what’s cool is they don’t just reinvent things; they genuinely feel like a continuation of the spirit we first saw in the very first Bond movies, Dr. No and From Russia with Love. They feel like a natural evolution of those classics.

Okay, let’s be honest, Licence to Kill didn’t exactly wow audiences or critics at the time, and it certainly didn’t make a ton of money. Maybe people weren’t ready for Timothy Dalton’s grittier, less flamboyant take on Bond. But looking back, what’s fascinating is that the film actually laid the groundwork for the success Bond would eventually have with Casino Royale. It took 17 years, but Dalton’s vision – a more raw, vulnerable 007 – was ultimately the direction the franchise needed to go. It just took a while for everyone to catch up.

It’s strange, but the future of the James Bond series feels more unclear than it has in decades – even more so than after the break following ‘Licence to Kill’. With Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson, who’ve guided the franchise for a long time, taking a less direct creative role, and Amazon becoming more involved, the series is at a critical turning point, similar to the one it faced in the late 1980s.

Early indications suggest filmmakers are remembering what worked in the film Licence to Kill and the grittier style later seen in the Daniel Craig Bond movies. The choice of Denis Villeneuve to direct the next Bond film suggests they’ll continue with that more realistic and complex approach. Villeneuve, known for visually stunning and thought-provoking films like Dune and Blade Runner 2049, has called Bond a “sacred territory,” implying he wants to respect the franchise’s history while also finding a fresh direction.

Based on his previous films, the next Bond movie could be a more thoughtful and visually striking experience, focusing on characters, atmosphere, and impactful imagery rather than just jokes and action. This approach seems to be shared by the film’s screenwriter, Steven Knight, who sees Bond as a legendary figure, indicating a desire to explore the deeper meaning and symbolism of the character instead of solely relying on superficial excitement.

Timothy Dalton believes the James Bond franchise should evolve, but stay true to its original spirit. In a recent interview with TopMob, he said, “It’s a fantastic series, and while the films have changed over time, the essence of the original is really strong. I hope Amazon recognizes that and delivers a film that captures the excitement and enjoyment fans have always loved.”

For a long time, Licence to Kill was seen as an unusual Bond film. But looking back, it seems ahead of its time. As the series prepares to change again, the things people once disliked about that movie – its darker tone, focus on Bond’s feelings, and departure from tradition – now appear to be the foundation for future success.

  • Every James Bond movie ranked, from worst to best

Authors

Morgan JefferyDigital Editor

Morgan Jeffery leads the editorial content for TopMob across all its digital platforms as Digital Editor. Before joining TopMob, he worked as TV Editor at Digital Spy and has appeared as a television expert on programs like BBC Breakfast, BBC Radio 5 Live, and Sky Atlantic.

  • Visit us on Twitter

Read More

2026-04-02 11:36