Controversial opinions about Bond films

1360361363365366707

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    peter wrote: »
    Was he the tallest Bond? 6'4 or something like that?
    I don't know if he was that tall, but he certainly looked taller than the stats they have for him (6ft 2), which is unusual (normally they are shorter than what they say, from what I can tell):
    Kcgrbmn.jpg
  • edited September 2017 Posts: 11,189
    peter wrote: »
    Was he the tallest Bond? 6'4 or something like that?

    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.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    edited September 2017 Posts: 7,582
    Dalton always appears taller than the othersw, although Roger had probably shrunk a bit in later years.

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT14oFPVV3FRVC0r-RDVDUxjPXLzZ5yO3PeUtmFmy4ypbZx9JAP

    With feet

    pierce-brosnan-85899-epqz.jpg
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    You're right-- he wasn't dressed very well at all. And what they did to his hair in the LTK casino scenes; a real disservice since he does have a great look (the one closely resembling a cruel Hoagie Carmichael??)
  • Posts: 11,189
    I've always argued that Dalton looks like he should be in a drama on television.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,112
    Talking about Bond's looks, I think Connery, Lazenby, Dalton and Brosnan looked perfect.
    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.
  • edited September 2017 Posts: 11,189
    Brosnan did look a bit too lightweight at times, his skinny arms towards the end of GE and also when he's sneaking onto Carver's stealth ship in TND.

    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.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    edited September 2017 Posts: 1,984
    Yeah, Sir Roger was unfortunately the least physically convincing in my opinion. A combination of his age and having the most lackluster fight scenes. He felt more like a detective than a spy most of the time; certainly not a killer. Part of why I rank him so highly comes down to the fact that he was able to play Bond so well in spite of that. Regarding good looks, he was obviously quite handsome but age hurt his credibility in the later Bonds. Kind of laughable to have girls straining their necks to look at someone in their mid-fifties.

    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.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,249
    I think the main problem with Dalton is that he's very convincing in the darker moments ('don't you want to konw why?") but the lighter moments are on and off. With Kara I like it when he poses as a friend, but not much later, with the balloon, it's just not Bond. He's too emotional.
    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.
  • edited September 2017 Posts: 11,189
    Showing Bond's emotional side isn't necessarily the problem. There have been glimpses of Bond's vulnerability since the start. It's more to do with how it's written and acted.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    bondjames wrote: »
    Dalton could intimidate. Personally, I found him to the be the most intimidating Bond actor. There is a certain underlying cruelty to his look imho (not unhandsome though).

    Brosnan in contrast seemed like a pretty boy imho.
    Exactly spot on
    peter wrote: »
    You're right-- he wasn't dressed very well at all. And what they did to his hair in the LTK casino scenes; a real disservice since he does have a great look (the one closely resembling a cruel Hoagie Carmichael??)

    Yeah- his hair is pretty dumb- the rest is fine though.

    Who would win in a fight though.
    Dalton or brosnan
  • edited September 2017 Posts: 11,189
    Neither Dalton or Brosnan seem particularly tough, but I'd say Dalton has the edge. Hence he would win in a fight. The bar fight isn't exactly one of the highlights of LTK but the way Dalton punches Del Toro is great.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Dalton beats Brosnan in a fight with one of his headbutts and the same straight right that he gave to one of Whitaker's guards at the end of TLD.
  • Posts: 7,507
    Dalton is also the more agile and explosive, probably more than all the other Bonds in fact. Some of the stunt work is really quite impressive and should not be overlooked.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I think the main problem with Dalton is that he's very convincing in the darker moments ('don't you want to konw why?") but the lighter moments are on and off. With Kara I like it when he poses as a friend, but not much later, with the balloon, it's just not Bond. He's too emotional.
    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.
    Absolutely in agreement on all counts.
  • Posts: 7,507
    I think the main problem with Dalton is that he's very convincing in the darker moments ('don't you want to konw why?") but the lighter moments are on and off. With Kara I like it when he poses as a friend, but not much later, with the balloon, it's just not Bond. He's too emotional.
    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.


    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.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    jobo wrote: »
    Dalton is also the more agile and explosive, probably more than all the other Bonds in fact. Some of the stunt work is really quite impressive and should not be overlooked.

    The work he did in the TLD PTS is superb.
  • Posts: 7,507
    RC7 wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    Dalton is also the more agile and explosive, probably more than all the other Bonds in fact. Some of the stunt work is really quite impressive and should not be overlooked.

    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.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2017 Posts: 23,883
    RC7 wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    Dalton is also the more agile and explosive, probably more than all the other Bonds in fact. Some of the stunt work is really quite impressive and should not be overlooked.

    The work he did in the TLD PTS is superb.
    I'm pretty sure he rappelled down the building face in Isthmus (in LTK) too. Same with climbing out of the top the elevator in the same film and some of the stunt work on the truck during the finale.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I honestly didn't see Dalton having a charisma problem as Bond. He pretty much commanded every frame he was in during TLD & LTK. Sure, his acting may have been a bit overdramatic at times, but I think that humanized his iteration. This guy felt for real.

    I found Brosnan, despite his more pronounced fame, less commanding on screen as Bond. It's like he had to try harder to compete (via a bit of overacting of his own) with his co-stars (particularly the female ones like Scorupco, Marceau and Pike), who tended to chew the scenery around him with their more confident and assured screen prescence. He only seemed in control around the lesser ones (Berry, Richards, Yeoh and Hatcher).

    When I saw Craig's first scene as Bond in Dryden's office in Prague, I knew this new guy would own it once again.

    That's just my perception.

    Thats just it re Brossa. He was outclassed by other actors (and actresses) Bond shouldnt have to compete. He should hold his own against the rest of the cast. Dalton did it easily. Brossa struggled.

    I don't think Brosnan struggled, because in order to do that, he would have had to have tried something. If y
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Brosnan did look a bit too lightweight at times, his skinny arms towards the end of GE and also when he's sneaking onto Carver's stealth ship in TND.

    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.

    And Connery?

    I think he started of in top shape, but come DAF, he no longer cut that lean figure.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    bondjames wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I wouldn't say that Brosnan continued Moore's approach though. Moore was in a different league as far as I'm concerned. Unique and genuine. Brosnan didn't give me that vibe. Rather, he projected as a greatest hits amalgam.
    Brosnan had a harder edge to him.
    I never quite got that to be honest. I thought Moore was a far harder edged Bond throughout his tenure. Examples include his treatment of Rosie & Andrea in the first two outings, his deflowering of Solitaire, his dismissal of Goodnight, his approach with the likes of Sandor, killing of Stromberg, Grishka, Loque etc. etc.

    He was cooler about it perhaps. More nonchalant, whereas Brosnan tended to emote more. It is that undertone of 'emotion' which I wasn't too keen on although I can see from comments here that some like it.

    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.
    bondjames wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Brosnan wasn't perfect as Bond, but he was pretty damn good, and endlessly watchable and charismatic. He filled the screen with the presence; a star in the true sense of the word.
    He is charismatic, but I've thought that of all the Bond actors cast to date.

    In terms of holding the screen as Bond, I've always personally thought Dalton was far more formidable however. There was something lethal about his presence. It's in the look.

    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.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2017 Posts: 23,883
    mattjoes wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I wouldn't say that Brosnan continued Moore's approach though. Moore was in a different league as far as I'm concerned. Unique and genuine. Brosnan didn't give me that vibe. Rather, he projected as a greatest hits amalgam.
    Brosnan had a harder edge to him.
    I never quite got that to be honest. I thought Moore was a far harder edged Bond throughout his tenure. Examples include his treatment of Rosie & Andrea in the first two outings, his deflowering of Solitaire, his dismissal of Goodnight, his approach with the likes of Sandor, killing of Stromberg, Grishka, Loque etc. etc.

    He was cooler about it perhaps. More nonchalant, whereas Brosnan tended to emote more. It is that undertone of 'emotion' which I wasn't too keen on although I can see from comments here that some like it.

    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.
    Yes, I certainly thought that Moore was always likable even when killing, but it appears that some members found his treatment of Andrea a bit difficult to stomach. It's one of my favourite scenes of his along with many others in TMWTGG.

    I personally didn't get an especially harder edge from Brosnan though, particularly in comparison to the other actors. The emotive aspects definitely.
    mattjoes wrote: »
    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.
    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.
    mattjoes wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Brosnan wasn't perfect as Bond, but he was pretty damn good, and endlessly watchable and charismatic. He filled the screen with the presence; a star in the true sense of the word.
    He is charismatic, but I've thought that of all the Bond actors cast to date.

    In terms of holding the screen as Bond, I've always personally thought Dalton was far more formidable however. There was something lethal about his presence. It's in the look.

    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.
    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.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    Yeah, Dalton was the most huamnised of the Bonds, because he didn't have all the superhuman physicality of a Moore or Brosnan who can tank hits from goliaths and then proceed to win a fistfight, and he didn't have the legitimate savagery of Connery/Lazenby/Craig in a fight either. So he was somewhere in between, and the fact that he was always struggling in hand-to-hand combat probably contributes to that.

    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.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    RM in LALD and TMWGG, was a man on a mission (much like Fleming Bond); yes he was on the nasty side; and arrogant (I love how he says Bond, James Bond in LALD, like he's mocking the point of his introduction).

    But there is much of Fleming Bond in Sir Rog's two first films...
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    I probably don't disagree with you @Birdleson (what an awkward statement, but tells the truth at the same time!)
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,287
    bondjames wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I would have liked to see Brozzer play Bond more closer to the role he had in THE FOURTH PROTOCOL. The man was ice in that. He was deadly. Unfortunately, I didn't get this same sense when he played Bond.
    I couldn't agree more @peter. Brosnan was outstanding in The Fourth Protocol.

    That's because Brosnan's Bond scripts were shite.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2017 Posts: 23,883
    echo wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I would have liked to see Brozzer play Bond more closer to the role he had in THE FOURTH PROTOCOL. The man was ice in that. He was deadly. Unfortunately, I didn't get this same sense when he played Bond.
    I couldn't agree more @peter. Brosnan was outstanding in The Fourth Protocol.

    That's because Brosnan's Bond scripts were shite.
    For me, it's more than that. There was little of the 'emotive' element in his earlier roles, like The Fourth Protocol or The Noble House. He was icy cold in those parts and I prefer him that way.

    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.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,287
    Better, yes. Much better? Let's not exaggerate.

    I love Pierce to bits, I'll say this. But, he's no dramatic actor. He's a leading actor who makes the film he's starring in likable and watchable for the audience. But, he's no dramatist.

    Craig handles that better, sure. But, he's nowhere near the groundbreaking dramatist most of the people here are talking about. You're singing his praises like he's the messiah of the Bond films. Sure he's good, but not all that great. On that front, he's like Lazenby, but his acting range is also limited. Sometimes you'd just see him walk the scene and be done with it with little to no facial expressions. In the case of Brosnan? He overdoes it.

    But, all in all, I will also say this... Bond isn't supposed to be an artsy drama that should be played by some Academy Award winning actor to legitimize its entity. Just have a look at Connery and Moore, you'll see they were no theatrical dramatists but suited the role perfectly without overacting or showing extensive emotions to buy the liking of the audience.

    Craig is the Bond of today and earned the franchise a lot of money. But, it isn't the case that he brought it back on the larger market radar. Vice versa happened.

    Craig is an actor and Brosnan is a star.
  • edited September 2017 Posts: 11,189
    People have already said on these boards that Moore was the best at acting the widow and I'm inclined to agree. Having had an impromptu viewing of TSWLM last night, there's a sincerity to his performance in the scenes when his wife was mentioned. Perhaps it's a bit of a stretch to call Moore's Bond vulnerable, but he was definitely convincing when he had to show that aspect of the character.
  • edited September 2017 Posts: 1,469
    He does do well in that scene @BAIN123. I also think of him with roses for Tracy in FYEO. Similarly, since I just watched SP (again), I like how Craig handled the scene with Vesper's interrogation tape.
Sign In or Register to comment.