Was Tim Dalton ahead of his time?

245678

Comments

  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    But remember when TLD was released Dalton was actally quite popular. It was LTK that turned some people off.

    Indeed. I am old enough to remember the Dalton era and TLD was quite a breath of fresh air after the tired AVTAK. TLD's and Dalton's reviews were quite positive and it grossed $191 million(in 1987 standards, a perfectly acceptable and respectable hit). I was quite looking forward to his 2nd one and found it somewhat disappointing next to TLD due to the absence of John Barry, the whiny teenage personality of the lead Bond girl, and the "Miami Vice" feel although I found it enjoyable and was looking forward to a 3rd Dalton Bond film that we sadly never got. Dalton's easily the most underrated Bond of them all.

  • But remember when TLD was released Dalton was actally quite popular. It was LTK that turned some people off.

    Indeed. I am old enough to remember the Dalton era and TLD was quite a breath of fresh air after the tired AVTAK. TLD's and Dalton's reviews were quite positive and it grossed $191 million(in 1987 standards, a perfectly acceptable and respectable hit). I was quite looking forward to his 2nd one and found it somewhat disappointing next to TLD due to the absence of John Barry, the whiny teenage personality of the lead Bond girl, and the "Miami Vice" feel although I found it enjoyable and was looking forward to a 3rd Dalton Bond film that we sadly never got. Dalton's easily the most underrated Bond of them all.

    Very true. I believe had Dalton done a 3rd film that was a more traditional Bond film and retired with that he would be more fondly remembered amongst the general public.
  • Posts: 2,341
    I loved LTK and I hate to see why so many folks were turned off by it. When violence on the big screen (and TV screen) was so accepted. I guess people like their Bonds dainty with tongue in cheek.
    I think that Dalton is better appreciated nowadays, whereas Brosnan...lets just say that history has not been kind to him.
  • OHMSS69 wrote:
    I loved LTK and I hate to see why so many folks were turned off by it. When violence on the big screen (and TV screen) was so accepted. I guess people like their Bonds dainty with tongue in cheek.
    I think that Dalton is better appreciated nowadays, whereas Brosnan...lets just say that history has not been kind to him.

    The Bond aficionados such as myself and most of the members of this site all adore Timothy Dalton but Pierce Brosnan is still inexplicably popular amongst casual viewers. I believe that will change over time as it did with Moore but as of now he's probably the third most popular James Bond in the public's eyes whereas Dalton along with Lazenby have pretty much been forgotten.
  • Posts: 11,189
    I thought u said u were only 23 @DoubleOhhSeven? How can u remember TLD?
  • Posts: 1,492
    [as of now he's probably the third most popular James Bond in the public's eyes whereas Dalton along with Lazenby have pretty much been forgotten.

    Well, ITV schedulers dont seem to have forgotten him. His films seem very popular on ITV4 at the moment being shown twice in two weeks. So he must be getting the ratings.
  • edited January 2012 Posts: 11,189
    I remember LTK was shown on New Years Day on Itv1 - at 11am.
  • BAIN123 wrote:
    I thought u said u were only 23 @DoubleOhhSeven? How can u remember TLD?

    I don't but I know plenty of fans who were old enough and their answers are almost always the same. TLD was well recieved but LTK kinda flew under everyone's radar. After TLD alot of people were saying Dalton was the best Bond since Connery but after LTK Moore had kind of reverted back to that position.
  • edited January 2012 Posts: 11,189
    OHMSS69 wrote:
    I guess people like their Bonds dainty with tongue in cheek.
    I think that Dalton is better appreciated nowadays,


    They like their Bonds to be fun and not too po faced.
  • Posts: 6,601
    I remember quite well, that I was shocked to find a Bond film that dark and serious. I love and loved Moore and his ways - yes - and didn't find the pleasure with those films I expected. Plus Dalton didn't appeal to me and that was it.

    In a way, I had the same problem with CR ( I never read the books). It seemed too brutal, too dark in a way. The difference was, that I fell for DC, so now I am loving it.

    Still - for whatever reason, the Moore films are THE Bond films for me. I tried to watch the Connery ones again and felt, they just are so outdated with those action scenes, that look sorta ridiculous by now. I know, I gonna be grilled for that.

    The Moore ones are better to watch, because they are more modern in their approach (of, course, they ARE more modern).

    Pierce was so so for me. I watched them once in the cinema and forgot all about them.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    I still believe the answer to the question 'was Dalton ahead of his time?' is a resounding 'No'.

    He wasn't exactly the first serious action actor in movies, so therefore he didn't create the no-nonsense, grim avenging loner role. Bronson, Eastwood and others came before him.

    Was he ahead of his time in his portayel of Bond? No. Having a serious Bond wasn't new. Connery was every bit as serious on occassion, but Connery had the big screen charisma to lead such a massive franchise. He was a true movie star. Dalton's tormented Bond was a first for the franchise, yes, but at the time it wasn't seen as ground breaking (I saw his films on release - he had the benefit of the doubt for TLD after years of Moore, so people were intrigued. He also had the right chemistry with Maryam d'Abo. By the time of LTK he was less than convincing to the public but it had nothing to do with him being 'ahead of his time' and everything to do with him being an unconvincing leading man.)

    Dalton at best is a support player (he managed to get a couple of scenes in the average Jonny Depp flick The Tourist). He is a decent film actor, a splendid theatre actor and a charasmatic and excellent TV actor.

    I don't mean to dis the man because he is hugely popular on here and there aren't many nay-sayers on the site. I just don't rate him as high as some of the others. %-(
  • Posts: 11,189
    I know it's only his opinion but I do think it's interesting that Sean Connery apparently said fairly unfavourable things about Dalton - yet seems to appreciate Craig.
  • Posts: 1,052
    In hindsight, in line with the current films then you could say that Dalton was ahead of his time. I've often wondered why after 7 films from Roger why Dalton and the new films weren't greeted with much more enthusiasm, surely it's a similar situation as going from Brosnan to Craig?

    I do like Dalton but as has been previously stated is he really a big screen leading man, does he have a big enough personality to keep the attention for 2 hours?
  • BAIN123 wrote:
    I know it's only his opinion but I do think it's interesting that Sean Connery apparently said fairly unfavourable things about Dalton - yet seems to appreciate Craig.

    What did he say? I've only heard one interview and it was pretty favorable.
  • edited January 2012 Posts: 11,189
    He said (apparently) he thought Dalton underestimated the role. Google total film Sean Connery to get the link.

    Who knows if it's actually true though.
  • Posts: 1,492
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I know it's only his opinion but I do think it's interesting that Sean Connery apparently said fairly unfavourable things about Dalton - yet seems to appreciate Craig.

    To be honest Craig seems to be the only one he Connery has praised. He was a little disparaging about Moore, and not mentioned Brozzer or Laz.

  • actonsteve wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I know it's only his opinion but I do think it's interesting that Sean Connery apparently said fairly unfavourable things about Dalton - yet seems to appreciate Craig.

    To be honest Craig seems to be the only one he Connery has praised. He was a little disparaging about Moore, and not mentioned Brozzer or Laz.

    Do you guys have links to these? Im really curious. Connery and Craig are my two favorites so Im glad they appreciate eachother.
  • Even though I loved Dalton I'll admit he had flaws. Of the darker Bond's I prefer Craig. But remember when TLD was released Dalton was actally quite popular. It was LTK that turned some people off. Probably because just a few years earlier Roger Moore was snow boarding to the beach boys and now we had a Bond movie where people's heads were exploding and drug dealers were being thrown into meat grinders. The transition was too drastic. I loved it but the general public didn't.

    haha - what a wonderful transition that was - i was 10 when LTK came out - and the only one of my peer group who coerced my mum to take me to see it at the cinema - charactor forming stuff!

    equally - seeing GE at the cinema 6 years later was one of the biggest disappointments i've ever had :s

    ps - i prefer to get stock smashed by Quarrel than "wrastling" these days... sohowzaboutit???
  • edited January 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Seeing people's heads explode and throwing drug dealers into meat grinders sounds like something from Lethal Weapon though - not Bond.

    It's that "ultra-violent" trend of the late 80s.
  • edited January 2012 Posts: 1,778
    Pussfella wrote:
    Even though I loved Dalton I'll admit he had flaws. Of the darker Bond's I prefer Craig. But remember when TLD was released Dalton was actally quite popular. It was LTK that turned some people off. Probably because just a few years earlier Roger Moore was snow boarding to the beach boys and now we had a Bond movie where people's heads were exploding and drug dealers were being thrown into meat grinders. The transition was too drastic. I loved it but the general public didn't.

    haha - what a wonderful transition that was - i was 10 when LTK came out - and the only one of my peer group who coerced my mum to take me to see it at the cinema - charactor forming stuff!

    equally - seeing GE at the cinema 6 years later was one of the biggest disappointments i've ever had :s

    ps - i prefer to get stock smashed by Quarrel than "wrastling" these days... sohowzaboutit???

    GE to me has been an interesting viewing experience over the years to say the least. When I first saw it when I was 10 or 11 I immediatly thought it was one of the best. As I grew into a adulthood each time I rewatched I liked it less and less. Now I'd proabably rank it 14th or 15th on my list. LTK has been the exact opposite. My intial reaction was lukewarm. But over the years I've found more reasons to love it. It's on my top 7 favorite Bond films.
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Seeing people's heads explode and throwing drug dealers into meat grinders sounds like something from Lethal Weapon though - not Bond.

    It's that "ultra-violent" trend of the late 80s.

    I'll admit they went alittle far with that. Plus with it's lowered budget it looks dirty and cheap in areas. Luckily the films strengths make up for it imo.

    Dalton just seemed to be there at the wrong time. Budget cuts were happening, John Glen was directing, and the series was stuggling to find it's footing again after Moore had stayed on for too long and overdid the comedy.

    Again I never said Dalton was perfect. Craig succeeds where Dalton wavered in that he has a bit of that Connery mischief in his performance. Whereas there were times where Dalton looked like he thought he was playing Hamlet.
  • edited January 2012 Posts: 11,189
    LTK was an odd experience with me. As I've said b4 I recently saw Majesty's and LTK back to back. One was a lucious, exotic yet fairly grounded adventure, the other was a greusome revenge flick. before that I'd considered it one of the best too.

    GE may be cheesey at times but at l it has a sense of fantasy and a quirkiness about it. The characters fit into the bond universe like a glove.
  • BAIN123 wrote:
    LTK was an odd experience with me. As I've said b4 I recently saw Majesty's and LTK back to back. One was a lucious, exotic yet fairly grounded adventure, the other was a greusome revenge flick.

    GE may be cheesey at times but at least it has a sense of fantasy and a quirkiness about it. The characters fit into the bond universe like a glove.

    Yes the GE characters are all great it's just Bond I don't like in it. If Bond doesn't work than the film doesn't work. GE just feels really dull and boring in areas and Brosnan's lightweight performance just adds to that. Connery and Moore atleast almost always looked like they were having fun.
  • Posts: 1,492
    GE was the first one without Cubby Broccoli and at the time I was grateful it wasn't an embarassment.

    But I remember it not rocking my world like the Dalton and late Moore Bonds used to.

    Nowadays I think it is my least watched. Last time I sat down to watch it on ITV I flicked over after half an hour. Its just too safe, too by numbers, too formulaic to hold my interest.

    Its Bond for kids.
  • edited January 2012 Posts: 1,778
    @Actonsteve. My problem with GE is it's not serious enough to be a gritty Craig/Dalton/Early Connery Bond film but at the same time it's not light enough to be a Moore/Later Connery Bond film. I'm not sure what they were aiming for at times. It def would've benifitted from a better musical score but I've spoken enough about that.

    And as some other user pointed out before, Im not sure who Brosnan's Bond is in this film. He's just so generic and boring he becomes hard to get behind. I never connected with him in GE. But I will give Brosnan some rare praise coming from me in that he improved in that respect with TND.
  • Posts: 1,052
    The last time I watched Goldeneye, i was suprised how Moore-ish it was, some of the one liners were very Roger like and also the bit in, I think Monoco or somwhere like that with the demonstation of the jet, Brosnan even seems to wearing some of Moore's old wardrobe (blue blazer and beige trousers).
  • I recently rewatched GE for the first time in years and I actually quite liked Brosnan's performance - it was nicely restrained after being used to his "smug, self-satisfied smirk" persona from his other films (or his pushing himself trying too hard to "act" performance from TWINE).

    As for Dalton, I don't think that he was ahead of his time as much as it was too much too soon. The Moore years (and there were a lot of them) were fairly fresh in a huge number of people's minds. The leap from them to TLD seemed okay to people but the leap to LTK was just too great. Having said that I think that a different actor could have carried the audience along with him as Craig did with CR.

    I think that Dalton gets a bit too much blame for LTK - it wasn't marketed well (I was in the prime demographic when it came out), it looked cheap, and it was released amongst the biggest films of the year in the summer. I still think it's a splendid film but it had a lot going against it. Part of it is also's Dalton's performance - I really love him but he showed little charm in the film. When he and Pam get together on the boat after the bar fight it just seems to come out of nowhere because the script demanded it.

    I found Dalton to be very charming in TLD and thought he did indeed show a nice light touch with the lines. But the only women who found him attractive (at least out of the ones that I spoke to) were women over 40 and some artsy girls. Other than that the women I spoke to just didn't seem to take to him. It's funny because he's more classicly handsome than Craig but all the women I know love Craig to death. Which is actually good news for us guys because it shows how personality can overcome unconventional looks. And yes, it is personality even more than the swim trunks...

    I loved Dalton in his initial run and I still love his interpretation of Bond. But I agree with others above who say that he just wasn't a "movie star". But I really do believe that we have him to thank for a lot of what happens today - he showed other actors what could be done with the role and they felt more comfortable pushing in that direction than they might have otherwise.
  • Posts: 1,492
    I". But I really do believe that we have him to thank for a lot of what happens today - he showed other actors what could be done with the role and they felt more comfortable pushing in that direction than they might have otherwise.

    Actually, thats a very good point. He was the first one to break the mould. That you could actually do more with the role then wear a tuxedo and do a few oneliners.

    That puts him up with Connery Imo. Connery created the role but Dalton proved you could improve on it.

  • BAIN123 wrote:
    SaintMark wrote:
    Did not care for Dalton then and still do not.
    I do not think he was the 007 the general audiences wanted and you know that the customer is right in the end since he/she/they pay the bills.

    Did you read any of the books? It seems that people who read the books liked him more or at least appreciated what he wanted to do.

    Dalton has always been my favourite bond. I never read any of the books until CR was released, then I decided I should probably read the book so I could see what people meant when they said craig was being close to the original character. I pictured dalton all the way through, I don't know why, but I did.
  • edited January 2012 Posts: 11,189
    actonsteve wrote:
    GE was the first one without Cubby Broccoli and at the time I was grateful it wasn't an embarassment.

    Its Bond for kids.

    I remember adults saying they liked it too ;)

    I agree with Haphazard that its a "film for everyone", people who like their more serious spy flicks and people who like the campy larger than life stuff.

    IMO TND is the one strictly for kids.
Sign In or Register to comment.