The TIMOTHY DALTON Appreciation thread - Discuss His Life, His Career, His Bond Films

1161719212264

Comments

  • edited January 2014 Posts: 12,837
    Germanlady wrote:

    We all want it to happen. B-)

    Not sure, you people are serious, but if so...
    why do you think, people will like his older version any better then the younger one?

    We were having a bit of fun discussing an idea that we thought was a good one. No it's not going to happen and no it probably wouldn't go down well with audiences, but so what?

    And he might not have been as popular as Connery, Moore, Brosnan or Craig, but lots of people liked the younger one (and still do as you can see from this thread). If he was as unpopular as you're claiming then the producers would've ditched him after TLD.
    But I would settle for Timothy Dalton reading Bond audio books

    I never understood why they didn't do this. Instead of having Toby Stephens doing the audios, why not have Dalton, Lazenby or Moore (Brosnan is probably too big a star)? I'm sure they would be up for it.
  • edited January 2014 Posts: 11,425
    I was being entirely serious, obviously.

    I could see the Dalts coming back and doing two or three more Bonds, easily.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,159
    As much as I love Dalton, I seriously can't see him do any Bond films today. At age 67 (some sources say 69), it simply wouldn't work. I would have settled for the entire Brosnan era being assimilated by Dalton - till 2002. But certainly not past that point. Come on, fellas, A 67 yr old actor?
  • edited January 2014 Posts: 11,425
    I was actually joking. I thought we were just stringing GL along... I know how she enjoys being teased. Why else does she check into the Daltonites thread other than to get wound up?
  • Posts: 6,601
    Getafix wrote:
    I was actually joking. I thought we were just stringing GL along... I know how she enjoys being teased. Why else does she check into the Daltonites thread other than to get wound up?

    Bingo, old friend.. ;;) let this old Lady have some fun, too.
  • edited January 2014 Posts: 12,837
    DarthDimi wrote:
    Come on, fellas, A 67 yr old actor?

    Just one more! He can do it!
    DarthDimi wrote:
    I would have settled for the entire Brosnan era being assimilated by Dalton - till 2002.

    I think lots of people forget how successful Brosnan was in the part. GE needed to be a massive hit to get the franchise back on track after all the legal bollocks that put the series on hiatus. Like him or not, Brosnan was popular, and he made GE the success that it needed to be. I do love him but Dalton didn't have the star power to do that.

    Plus, after the mixed reception that Dalton's world weary spy got, Brosnan was just what the series needed: a likeable, charismatic action hero.
  • edited January 2014 Posts: 11,425
    With hindsight it's bizarre they took the route with Brosnan that they chose. Austin Powers and the 80s and 90s action blockbusters had made Bond seem redundant and yet rather than trying to pursue a new direction they chose to stick to the self parody and OTT nonsense. I have always said that I don't have a problem with Brosnan - just his take on Bond and the awful films he was in. For me one of his strenghts as an actor is actually playing more ambiguous, slippery characters, not the straight up action hero Bond that he tried to portray. His take on the character is the least interesting of the lot. If he and the directors he'd worked with had brought out even a inkling of that side of Brosnan in the Bond movies I might have been a little more interested.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Though I'd have LOVED a third or fourth Dalton Bond, I can't imagine the series without Brosnan...
  • Posts: 11,425
    I guess Brosnan was the reaction to the new direction they'd taken with Dalts - i.e. they decided to play it safe.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited January 2014 Posts: 17,789
    Getafix wrote:
    they decided to play it safe.
    Fine with me- GE & TND are awesome IMO. I mean, not nearly as great as Dalton's two, but then Dalton's two are my favourite two...
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    I never understood why they didn't do this. Instead of having Toby Stephens doing the audios, why not have Dalton, Lazenby or Moore (Brosnan is probably too big a star)? I'm sure they would be up for it.

    Onscreen, we'll never see Dalton return, but I don't see what would stop him from returning in another medium. Imagine <a href=http://www.bigfinish.com/>Big Finish Productions</a> making James Bond audio dramas like they do for Doctor Who. 'Classic Bonds, Brand New Missions'. They could either write new stories, or adapt the continuation books. Maybe then I could have my ideal MI6 Team of Dalton as Bond, Ken Stott as M and Jaime Murray as Miss Moneypenny.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,159
    DarthDimi wrote:
    I would have settled for the entire Brosnan era being assimilated by Dalton - till 2002.

    I think lots of people forget how successful Brosnan was in the part. GE needed to be a massive hit to get the franchise back on track after all the legal bollocks that put the series on hiatus. Like him or not, Brosnan was popular, and he made GE the success that it needed to be. I do love him but Dalton didn't have the star power to do that.

    Plus, after the mixed reception that Dalton's world weary spy got, Brosnan was just what the series needed: a likeable, charismatic action hero.

    Well my comment certainly isn't meant to blame Brosnan for anything but rather to express my deeper desires to see more of Dalton, albeit in an appropriate age range. ;-)
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    Bond was a lucky break for Dalton. His career had reduced to guest roles on bad TV shows and supporting Mae West in her last film. Now why would that be?

    The fact the USA didn't take to him (notice I say 'him' and not 'his Bond'), was a major factor for the shakeup of actors in the 90s. I don't buy it that he jumped rather than being pushed. He was up for his third, then suddenly he 'moved on'.

    And this stuff about being ahead of his time and Craig got lucky in the current era. Well, a serious Bond was very welcome in the late 80s believe you me. I was there and we couldn't wait. Dalton..simply didn't light the screen up, he really didn't. TLD was a fine film in spite of him. Craig has got star quality, and will remain a star. Dalton, after Bond, went back to where he was and can currently be heard voicing Mr Pricklepants.

    Can I add this is just my opinion. ;-)
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    NicNac wrote:
    Well, a serious Bond was very welcome in the late 80s believe you me. I was there and we couldn't wait. Dalton..simply didn't light the screen up,
    I was there too, and I couldn't wait for serious Bonds either. But two things here: first, we were all revved up for our man Remington Steele as Bond for the movie after AVTAK, when he didn't (couldn't) do it, any actor in his place was going to be unfavourably compared, and second, after decades of OTT bad guys, wink-wink, nudge-nudge, and Moore's light touch, a switch from fifth gear to reverse was quite a jarring thing, even for those of us who thought we wanted it. Dalton brought emotional weight to a previously near weightless character. No, he did NOT light the screen up, because his Bond was a human Bond. To see him light the screen up, watch The Rocketeer where he chews scenery up as a cartoon bad guy.
  • edited January 2014 Posts: 11,425
    NicNac wrote:
    Bond was a lucky break for Dalton. His career had reduced to guest roles on bad TV shows and supporting Mae West in her last film. Now why would that be?

    The fact the USA didn't take to him (notice I say 'him' and not 'his Bond'), was a major factor for the shakeup of actors in the 90s. I don't buy it that he jumped rather than being pushed. He was up for his third, then suddenly he 'moved on'.

    And this stuff about being ahead of his time and Craig got lucky in the current era. Well, a serious Bond was very welcome in the late 80s believe you me. I was there and we couldn't wait. Dalton..simply didn't light the screen up, he really didn't. TLD was a fine film in spite of him. Craig has got star quality, and will remain a star. Dalton, after Bond, went back to where he was and can currently be heard voicing Mr Pricklepants.

    Can I add this is just my opinion. ;-)

    Isn't the truth that most of the Bond actors have struggled outside of the series? DC's efforts outside of Bond have hardly been roaring successes. Every attempt to create new franchises using DC in the lead role seem to have hit the dust. TGWTDT was a big disappointment IMHO and the Golden Compass was apparently abysmal (haven't seen it). I watched Cowboys and Aliens once on a long haul flight - I think Dalt's apppearance in Flash Gordon is less of an embarassment.

    Prior to Bond DC was a character actor in a few big Hollywood flicks and lead in some decent but unspectacular Brit-flicks. Post-Bond, who knows what he'll manage to do? I wouldn't be surprised if we saw him doing a lot more stage work.

    Of all the actors I think Brosnan has had one of the most impressive careers outside of Bond. He's a limited and lightweight actor, but has made the most of his celebrity and looks and turned in some decent performances - extending his longevity and maintining his profile. Dalton's post Bond career has, I agree, been abysmal. But so has Laz's, but I still rate his performance as Bond above Brosnan's.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    chrisisall wrote:
    NicNac wrote:
    Well, a serious Bond was very welcome in the late 80s believe you me. I was there and we couldn't wait. Dalton..simply didn't light the screen up,
    I was there too, and I couldn't wait for serious Bonds either. But two things here: first, we were all revved up for our man Remington Steele as Bond for the movie after AVTAK, when he didn't (couldn't) do it, any actor in his place was going to be unfavourably compared, and second, after decades of OTT bad guys, wink-wink, nudge-nudge, and Moore's light touch, a switch from fifth gear to reverse was quite a jarring thing, even for those of us who thought we wanted it. Dalton brought emotional weight to a previously near weightless character. No, he did NOT light the screen up, because his Bond was a human Bond. To see him light the screen up, watch The Rocketeer where he chews scenery up as a cartoon bad guy.

    Crikey yes, I remember The Rocketeer. He does, but it isn't exactly what I meant.

    Timothy Dalton is the actor more than any I would love to see on stage. It's his medium. Cinema is different. Great film actors understand that less is more. Dalton does tend to bring a bit of his stage craft to film, IMHO. His fans think his performance as Bond is subtle, but I see it differently. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. Jack Nicholson can play 'human', so can Jeff Bridges, and many other actors. But as great film actors they still light the screen up.

    @Getafix, it's a point I thought about, and hoped no one would bring it up! But Craig is a successful film actor, as Connery was before him (another one who suffered from endless flops). They both have the charisma and skill to have careers as leading stars.

    I'm in the minority I know, and it really doesn't matter what I think. Having said all this though, I'm pleased as punch that Dalton has such strong support.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    NicNac wrote:
    Dalton does tend to bring a bit of his stage craft to film, IMHO. His fans think his performance as Bond is subtle, but I see it differently.
    Oh, I don't think it's subtle in the least. His Bond is intense. Not all smooth & easy going. Can you imagine Connery popping the balloon in TLD?
    Didn't think so...
    ;)
  • edited January 2014 Posts: 11,425
    For me the issue of careers outside of Bond is irrelevant. In the context of this forum it's only really how they perform as Bond that matters. I love Sir Rog as Bond, but do I seek out his other films? Not likely.

    I have to admit I did watch Layer Cake before DC was announced as Bond and that's what convinced me that he was good casting. For me though his actual performance as Bond has been a little disappointing. Not bad, but slightly less nuanced than I was hoping for.

    I've not really seen Dalton in much else, but have always thought his performance as Bond was excellent. I'm not even a particularly big fan of LTK, but still think he turns in a good performance. For me he nailed Bond right from the first moments of TLD.

    The role brings an extra stature to the actor when the casting is right. EON saw this in Connery and the results attest to one of the most inspired casting decisions of all time. But it took Connery a long time to find other roles that came close to matching his strengths. May be DC will suffer the same issue. Has he done anything outside Bond since CR that has been particularly well received? Not that I'm aware of.

    Unlike Sean, I don't regard Dalton as great star material, I just think he was excellent in the role. I don't personally think any actor since Sean has quite the same presence or star quality. May be it was just a generational thing - the actor's from that generation just had something extra about them. Roger had it to an extent, but much less so.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    chrisisall wrote:
    NicNac wrote:
    Dalton does tend to bring a bit of his stage craft to film, IMHO. His fans think his performance as Bond is subtle, but I see it differently.
    Oh, I don't think it's subtle in the least. His Bond is intense. Not all smooth & easy going. Can you imagine Connery popping the balloon in TLD?
    Didn't think so...
    ;)

    Hey now, you answered for me! [-X
    Could I imagine Connery popping the balloon..well yes I could.

    Connery brought so much cool subtlety to the role that is often missing from other actors. Watch him in the scene with Robert Shaw when they dine together in FRWL. Just watch Connery when heisn'tspeaking. That's what I mean about great film acting.

    I think Dalton suffered from maybe not getting the opportunity to work with a great film director, because the promise he showed in Wuthering Heights and one or two early roles was huge.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Totally agree. Connery's screen performance in the first 3 films is incredible. Brilliant.
  • edited January 2014 Posts: 12,837
    Craig I think had a good career before Bond (Our Friends In The North, Layer Cake), but since he's taken the part his other work has gone downhill. He's much more successful than he was before but apart from the Bond films, he's making much crapper films than he used to imo.

    Brosnan is the opposite. Didn't do much before Bond apart from Remington Steele but he's made some really good films since he took the part.
  • edited January 2014 Posts: 11,425
    Craig I think had a good career before Bond (Our Friends In The North, Layer Cake), but since he's taken the part his other work has gone downhill. He's much more successful than he was before but apart from the Bond films, he's making much crapper films than he used to imo.

    Brosnan is the opposite. Didn't do much before Bond apart from Remington Steele but he's made some really good films since he took the part.

    Yes. They seem to have inverse career trajectories. I can't personally see DC going on to great things after Bond. I'm sure he'll do fine, but his non-Bond flops suggest he will struggle to match his current success. Like I say, the stage beckons. Pierce on the other hand has done his best work outside of Bond.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Getafix wrote:
    Unlike Sean, I don't regard Dalton as great star material, I just think he was excellent in the role. I don't personally think any actor since Sean has quite the same presence or star quality.
    Exactly! And IMO star quality is just what a Bond actor doesn't need to bring to the party. It's why Craig's Bond is so good, and also why Lazenby worked as well as he did. Star quality inevitably turns Bond into a cinematic super spy. :-??
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    chrisisall wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Unlike Sean, I don't regard Dalton as great star material, I just think he was excellent in the role. I don't personally think any actor since Sean has quite the same presence or star quality.
    Exactly! And IMO star quality is just what a Bond actor doesn't need to bring to the party. It's why Craig's Bond is so good, and also why Lazenby worked as well as he did. Star quality inevitably turns Bond into a cinematic super spy. :-??

    This is an interesting point and I always thought the same. Nowadays I'm not so sure, because the point about Bond is that he is a cinematic super spy. The series is all about excess.

    Bond of course made a reasonably well known actor (Craig) into a star, and his star has continued to rise because of it. Just as it did Connery.

    Both Moore and Brosnan were more famous pre-Bond because they had Internationally successful TV shows. With Bond their stars rose even more, and their film careers took off in a way they never would have without Bond.

    All four of them became big stars as their Bond careers progressed, so they did bring star quality to the role.

    Lazenby and Dalton had much shorter tenures so it was never so easy to say what effect the series had on them (other than the fact they became famous for playing the part).

    The Bond films themselves are the stars. They are bigger than any individual actor, but that doesn't mean the wrong actor won't bring the whole thing crashing down.
  • Posts: 11,425
    NicNac wrote:
    chrisisall wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Unlike Sean, I don't regard Dalton as great star material, I just think he was excellent in the role. I don't personally think any actor since Sean has quite the same presence or star quality.
    Exactly! And IMO star quality is just what a Bond actor doesn't need to bring to the party. It's why Craig's Bond is so good, and also why Lazenby worked as well as he did. Star quality inevitably turns Bond into a cinematic super spy. :-??

    This is an interesting point and I always thought the same. Nowadays I'm not so sure, because the point about Bond is that he is a cinematic super spy. The series is all about excess.

    Bond of course made a reasonably well known actor (Craig) into a star, and his star has continued to rise because of it. Just as it did Connery.

    Both Moore and Brosnan were more famous pre-Bond because they had Internationally successful TV shows. With Bond their stars rose even more, and their film careers took off in a way they never would have without Bond.

    All four of them became big stars as their Bond careers progressed, so they did bring star quality to the role.

    Lazenby and Dalton had much shorter tenures so it was never so easy to say what effect the series had on them (other than the fact they became famous for playing the part).

    The Bond films themselves are the stars. They are bigger than any individual actor, but that doesn't mean the wrong actor won't bring the whole thing crashing down.

    Presumably you're impying that Dalton brought it crashing down? Is that fair? Moore had his share of wobbly moments, especially during the early years. And did AVTAK leave the audiences begging for more? Hardly. My understanding is that TLD was pretty well received and that actually the vast majority of reviewers welcomed his performance after Moore's last outing. LTK is another story, but for a whole range of reasons, most of which have nothing to do with Dalton himself or his performance.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Getafix wrote:
    Presumably you're impying that Dalton brought it crashing down?
    I think he's saying that if you did pick the wrong actor, it could happen.
  • Posts: 11,425
    I like the one from the Guardian in 2006:

    For me the name is Dalton, Timothy Dalton.

    He was dark, he was ruthless, and he managed to show precisely what Bond was all about: a merciless, calculating, professional assassin. Is it inappropriate to mention that he was also unbelievably good-looking and charismatic?

    Sure, Connery was the coolest and Brosnan brilliant. But following on from Moore's orange tan, Dalton was a huge step up. So why is he still treated as though he massacred the role? Timothy Dalton was a great 007.

    People did go and see The Living Daylights when it came out in 1987: it apparently earned more money than the two previous Bond films put together, and more than Lethal Weapon and Die Hard, which were released at around the same time. Fair enough, License to Kill put less bums on seats. But surely 007 should be allowed to fail an assignment once in a while (Moonraker, anyone?).

    Ironically, the very characteristics that got Dalton slammed are the very same things that the Bond producers are praising Daniel Craig for.

    On and on, they have said they want Bond to be closer to the original Ian Fleming character. They want him to be grittier, darker and less jokey. What they really want, it seems, is to have Dalton back.

    Watching the trailer for Casino Royale, Craig reminds me of his Welsh-born predecessor, only blonder and buffer. I am sure Craig is going to be great. Just like Dalton.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,159
    Great links, @MajorDSmythe!
  • Posts: 11,425
    Although I think he's good, I still don't think DC has matched Dalt's take on the character.
Sign In or Register to comment.