It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I'm not sure on the figures but he seems the tallest.
Despite this though, I don't think he looks as alluring on camera. It's probably something to do with a lot of his more casual attaire but i don't think he grabs the screen in the way Connery/Lazenby/Moore and even Brosnan/Craig did.
With feet
Roger maybe a bit too light-haired and somewhat frail.
But Dan is definitely the least convincing on that account. Too blond is obvious but also lacking refinement and way too much of a muscleman.
Roger looked increasingly plastic in his later years (especially AVTAK).
Craig mainly looks ok I think. During the Skyfall showdown for example he looked tough with that machine gun and could have been trained by the military (IMO at least).
Dalton looked pretty good during his films, if rather unremarkable.
Laz looked great.
Brosnan's fights were more convincing, if anything because he was younger and had the advantage of superior film technology. He was clearly starting to age in DAD but was still more believable than Roger in his later movies with the girls. And of course his lightness has been mentioned; not particularly convincing as a killer but still moreso than Moore in my opinion.
Craig looks fine, in my opinion. Sure, he's shorter and blonder, but he looks like a believable killer and had more menace than anyone other than Dalton. And he could actually pull off more charming features as well.
Lazenby had the height and looked like someone who could beat you up, but I don't think he looked as convincing as a killer, and there wasn't as much diversity in his expression. So probably a tie with Craig there.
So Connery and Dalton take the top spots for me. Dalton definitely hits Fleming more accurately and looks most like a killer, while Connery has more of the cinematic good looks.
Brosnan has th same problem. Bond should keep his emotions and his actions in two sperate rooms. I think Craig portrays that perfectly, as did Connery and Moore. Moore may not be the most convincing fighter (the least of them all) but he's capable of that division.
Yeah- his hair is pretty dumb- the rest is fine though.
Who would win in a fight though.
Dalton or brosnan
Fleming's Bond however, I would caracterize as more of an emotional type. Be genuinly falls for many of the girls through out the novels, and he has a long standing relationship with Tiffany Case for instance, who leaves him not the opposite. There is often genuine romance in the novels. Although I understand where you are coming from, I don't think it is necesarrily wrong to depict him that way. It is just a different interpretation.
The work he did in the TLD PTS is superb.
That was the scene I was mainly thinking about. Be deserves more recognition for this than he gets.
I don't think Brosnan struggled, because in order to do that, he would have had to have tried something. If y
And Connery?
I think he started of in top shape, but come DAF, he no longer cut that lean figure.
Yes, Moore was more casual about it, and Brosnan was more emotional. But there's something else, and that is that Moore, even with those cruel moments in his record, always came across as eminently likable. Brosnan, intentionally or accidentally, gave the role a hint of nastiness; it's that arrogance that is most clearly at display in TND, and that Gustav Graves reflected and exaggerated in DAD. When I was a kid, I didn't mind it, then it bothered me, and now once again I don't mind it; in fact, I like it. That's the harder edge Brosnan had, a hint of a dark side and the feeling at times he sort of dared you to continue to root for him. I don't get that so much from the other Bond actors; I remember thinking when Craig is tied to the chair in Skyfall ("resurrection"), I got that same vibe. Now that I think about it, that, combined with his emotiveness, are the unique qualities Brosnan brought to the role.
Apart from that, I think he was a balanced Bond, in terms of portraying all the quintessential aspects of the character (in other words, he was the greatest hits Bond, as you say). That does not necessarily make him better than the others, but it makes him different from them, interesting in his own way. He was more balanced than Moore and Dalton, because he was more physically imposing and more alpha male than either; more balanced than Moore, because he was not as lighthearted; more balanced than Lazenby, Dalton and perhaps Craig, because he was more charismatic (I agree they all have charisma but I think Brosnan beats them); and more balanced than Craig, because he was less physically imposing. Of course, in terms of balance, Connery beats him, but he fares better than the others.
While I can definitely see a lethal aspect to Dalton --as if he was an animal in the wild, always ready to attack-- in my view, he was less alpha male than Brosnan. Apart from that-- and maybe I'm projecting because of how underrated he is, but when I watch Dalton, I root for him in a way I don't for the other Bonds. He seems more human than the rest, as if unsurmountable odds were stacked against him. I don't get that from Brosnan, or anyone else, really. So, interestingly, I find Dalton less formidable, but I enjoy watching him precisely because of that.
@BAIN123, well noted about Brosnan's "stern" look. He did that well.
I personally didn't get an especially harder edge from Brosnan though, particularly in comparison to the other actors. The emotive aspects definitely.
We disagree here. I never found Brosnan physically imposing or alpha male at all, and perhaps that is one of the primary reasons I found it difficult to take him credibly in quite a few sequences in his films. I found him a bit slight as noted before, despite his height. In terms of screen charisma, I think Moore and Connery were off the charts and the rest are pretty much on par, but they all have it.
Yes, I agree here. Dalton is the most 'human' Bond for me too. Quite accessible also, in a way that Craig isn't. I'd go so far as to say real and genuine. It's a testament to his skill as an actor that he was able to convey that element, for me at least.
--
What this discussion shows @mattjoes is that we can each see the same thing and have different impressions of it based on our own frame of reference and preferences.
He's also pretty much the only Bond whose safety I genuinely fear for. It might just be other Bonds being more "alpha male" like Connery or just being too superhuman (Moore, Brosnan) to ever feel like they're genuinely under threat with a few exceptions, but Dalton's the one Bond who constantly feels and seems to be in danger.
But there is much of Fleming Bond in Sir Rog's two first films...
That's because Brosnan's Bond scripts were shite.
As he aged, he started to bring a lot of emotion into his portrayals, including in The November Man. It was there in his Bond depiction as well post-GE. Thankfully (for me), he dialled it back for DAD and I really liked his performance there despite the dreadful script.
Craig is an actor and Brosnan is a star.