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
Here is the irony of Dalton. In non-Bond films like Brenda Starr or Sins, he can play the smoothy almost cinematic James Bond style. He did not want to be a Connery clone as 007 though and so went in a different direction. Yes Dalton was theatrical but it does not mean he was incapable of doing the cinematic style Bond we all know had he wanted to. He could have pulled it off.
For instance in Skyfall when Daniel Craig says "You're joking!" to Q, it is nowhere near as cool as Connery was and a copy. And for any actor playing Bond using elements of Connery's personality, you are consigning yourself to never be equal with him. You can play a Beatles song but does not mean you can write one as an example.
I keep saying that Craig has the benefit of knowing what audiences will not accept. And damn, but did he have some of the best directors in Martin Campbell and Sam Mendes. Let's be fair to Dalton too is all I am saying.
But it is acting and not Craig's real personality. I have seen Daniel Craig in interivews and he is nothing like the Bond persona. He is just acting and an actor of Dalton's calibre could do it but chose not to.
Of course. I feel maybe I'm being a bit hard - especially as I was too young to remember the period first hand.
I'm interested to know when Campbell said he wasn't a fan of Dalton.
Hmmm... weird. I didn't see him "trying". I saw a cynical, burnt out secret agent at the end of his rope, cold and merciless and so appealing women fell for him without him even trying. But it's good there are six Bonds out, one for every taste. Glad you found your cuppatea with Craig.
But it is acting and not Craig's real personality. I have seen Daniel Craig in interivews and he is nothing like the Bond persona. He is just acting and an actor of Dalton's calibre could do it but chose not to.
Its DC, who is the first to say, that he is as far removed from Bond as he can be. So, becoming the caracter instead of just acting it, is the difference.
So now, Dalton CHOSE to not BE Bond. Oh mei..
You want fairness? How about being fair to others as well? Dalton and Craig are always compared in ways of approach. You agree, but at the same time, Craig avoided all the mistakes made by the Dalton films. So now what is it now? Isn't it true, tha DC had to be successful first to get all the benefits, you are talking about all the time. CR was ALL about him. With him, the ship would sink or float. Its less on his shoulders for example now with this excellent cast. But you cannot deny, that DC being the first rate, serious professional he is, is attracting all these people.
.and visa versa ;)
Indeed sir! Do you know the film magazine Cinefantastique? Well in the issue perhaps a month or two before Goldeneye's release there was a huge hype feature about Goldeneye. And in it everyone was basically calling Dalton a bad Bond. And Martin Campbell was saying how great Pierce was because he plays the classic Bond.
His quote because I never forgot it is : " To me Dalton was not a good Bond. Not because he is not a fine actor, because he is, but he was too damn angry about the whole thing. ". That @Bain123 is Martin Campbell's assessment and I think he was wrong.
Cubby screen tested all the actors for Bond and they had to deliver or not get the part. Cubby was interested in Dalton since 1968 and having seen him in the theatre as well as films, was impressed. Dalton is a wolf and can play the sexual predator like he did as Heathcliff in Wuthering Heights.
I say this with total honesty, but I loved Roger Moore's personality and he was my childhood Bond. Had Tim been as bland as some say, I would be the first to say he sucked. I love Bond's cool as much as anyone. I mean I can watch a Connery Bond and then a Dalton getting the same enjoyment but in a different way.
I haven't... but I'm dying to! I think there's a link to the full thing floating around the internet though I have to go search for it... I will give you that Dalton is intense, alright. That's just how he comes across. Anybody that's watched him in Jane Eyre would say so too.
(By the way, and just because it was mentioned before in this thread, I have gone and fetched me the 4 original release UK episodes of Framed. I have only watched the first two epis so far, but by god does it make me cry for the fact that we didn't get a third Dalton film. It was made around the time his next flick would have come out. He really pulls off the sleazy, suave, charmer in that one although admittedly it's not a 007 type role so some of it comes off as devious and half-evil. He's more of a bad guy with dubious sexual tastes and so attractive even the detective who catches him starts falling for his charms. The homoeroticism in some scenes is off the charts and made me fan myself.)
Do you have difficulty in reading by any chance? Where did I say Dalton chose not to be Bond? Please find it and put my quote up.
All I will tell you is that I never said that. I said he wanted to play Fleming's Bond and not so much the cinematic Bond. He is a trained actor and they will always go back to the book source to study the character. Just like how Anthony Hopkins went back to the book Silence Of The Lambs and not copy Brian Cox's blueprint in Manhunter.
You clearly have it in for Dalton and it is so obvious. You get angry if someone speaks well of him and knows the history as to why he played Bond in that way. I guess you are saying you know better than Cubby what makes Bond. Because he did not share your assessment.
Indeed sir! Do you know the film magazine Cinefantastique? Well in the issue perhaps a month or two before Goldeneye's release there was a huge hype feature about Goldeneye. And in it everyone was basically calling Dalton a bad Bond. And Martin Campbell was saying how great Pierce was because he plays the classic Bond.
His quote because I never forgot it is : " To me Dalton was not a good Bond. Not because he is not a fine actor, because he is, but he was too damn angry about the whole thing. ". That @Bain123 is Martin Campbell's assessment and I think he was wrong.
[/quote]
That's very interesting indeed. Don't know if I agree about Dalts being a "bad Bond" per se but maybe there is an element of truth about him being "too angry" - especially in LTK.
I've always felt he was a tad too "stagey" - I've said that several times on here. His performances are very visual. You can see everything he's thinking.
I rememer a quote "...but once you put Dan on film, you see, he is a great Bond"
So - seems he is not easily convinced.
acapolla - I don't get angry at all and certainly not, if someone talks well about him, but like I said before, I dislike, how you try to argue against all proof and fact. That's all.
Also, you never really answer to my argumets. I wonder wy that is. Instead you keep repeating the same ole over and over...
Indeed sir! Do you know the film magazine Cinefantastique? Well in the issue perhaps a month or two before Goldeneye's release there was a huge hype feature about Goldeneye. And in it everyone was basically calling Dalton a bad Bond. And Martin Campbell was saying how great Pierce was because he plays the classic Bond.
His quote because I never forgot it is : " To me Dalton was not a good Bond. Not because he is not a fine actor, because he is, but he was too damn angry about the whole thing. ". That @Bain123 is Martin Campbell's assessment and I think he was wrong.
[/quote]
That's very interesting indeed. Maybe there is an element of truth about him being "too angry" though - especially in LTK. [/quote]
Well in LTK it is a revenge story. Bond's best friend is maimed and his wife killed. You have to understand that there was a lot of movie studio politics and the anti-Dalton backlash made Brosnan an easier sell. It is a sad time in the franchise's history where like Barbara Broccoli said in Everything Or Nothing that Dalton was "Unfairly criticised and was ahead of his time!".
His quote because I never forgot it is : " To me Dalton was not a good Bond. Not because he is not a fine actor, because he is, but he was too damn angry about the whole thing. ". That @Bain123 is Martin Campbell's assessment and I think he was wrong.
[/quote]
That's very interesting indeed. Don't know if I agree about Dalts being a "bad Bond" per se but maybe there is an element of truth about him being "too angry" - especially in LTK.
I've always felt he was a tad too "stagey" - I've said that several times on here. His performances are very visual. You can see everything he's thinking. [/quote]
he had a lot to be angry about. would you have prefered it if he'd played it like a cartoon character as with PB in DAD? lock him up and torture him for years and what happens - absolutely nothing, bar piling on the pounds and growing a beard. Those N Korean prisoner camps must be a right laugh!
Neither was Sam Mendes - and I HAVE heard that
Craig was angry too in QoS and (occasionally) CR but he did it with a bit more subtlety. With Dalton it was often quite obvious. He'd look away, he'd tense up his face. At least Craig isn't quite so...exaggerated.
Why bring up Brosnan? We are talking about Dalton here.
Daniel Craig has acted in roles where he's charming and yet you have people claiming he doesn't know how to be charming. People say Connery couldn't have done the ending to OHMSS but have these people seen the likes of Marney?
He did not want to be a Connery clone as 007 though and so went in a different direction.
A Connery clone? Before Dalton took on the role there was George and Roger that separated him from Sean. Granted, George only did 1 film, I never once got the impression he was a Connery clone and as for Roger, he was as far removed from being like Connery as can be. So, the way I see it Dalton not wanting to be a Connery clone is a pretty poor excuse.
Yes Dalton was theatrical but it does not mean he was incapable of doing the cinematic style Bond we all know had he wanted to. He could have pulled it off.
But he didn't and that's kind of the problem. No one is doubting Dalton's skills as an actor but as a cinematic Bond he doesn't quite make the positive impression that Craig makes. Put it down to an unfortunate decision from Dalton or the producers, ultimately the Dalton era is nowhere near the same financial and cultural impact as that of the Craig era.
For instance in Skyfall when Daniel Craig says "You're joking!" to Q, it is nowhere near as cool as Connery was and a copy.
I disagree. There was nothing cool about the way Connery said it imo. He just delivered the line with genuine surprise, like a schoolboy finding out that classes have been canceled for the rest of the week. Craig's delivery of the line was under a different circumstance. His was more of a subdued dissapointment at the thought of some "kid" being his new quartermaster.
And for any actor playing Bond using elements of Connery's personality, you are consigning yourself to never be equal with him. You can play a Beatles song but does not mean you can write one as an example.
But then that means, no actor will be equal to him because if you think about it, cinematic Bond is largely the creation of Terrence Young and Connery. Cinematic Bond as you pointed out is very different from literary Bond and the major differences are what Young and Connery infused into the character and every Bond actor including Dalton has tried to at varying degrees implement some of the young/connery characteristics, it's what the world has come to accept and identify as being who and what Bond is. However, I feel that Craig is the only actor who's managed to implement more Fleming into the character whilst still retaining those all important cinematic Bond characteristics, especially in SF.
I keep saying that Craig has the benefit of knowing what audiences will not accept. And damn, but did he have some of the best directors in Martin Campbell and Sam Mendes. Let's be fair to Dalton too is all I am saying.
You keep saying that but that's not a solid argument for me, simply because any actor before Craig and after Connery could say the same thing. Hell, the casting of Craig alone caused anarchy but Craig's performances were that damn powerful, people's senses returned to them, mostly and gave credit where it was due. Case in point, QoS was quite the let down but one thing that has always remained largely consistent was Craig's performance. So, irrespective of material, how the lead performs is also crucial. Look to OHMSS for another example. The film is a masterpiece imo but many can argue that the film's weakest link was Lazenby himself. Despite having the best people aroun him and one of the best scripts, it was his lack of ability that was a let down.
As for Campbell's comments, I have nothing to say on that as I'm unfamiliar with him makaing such comments.
But it is acting and not Craig's real personality. I have seen Daniel Craig in interivews and he is nothing like the Bond persona. He is just acting and an actor of Dalton's calibre could do it but chose not to.
Obviously it's acting but the point I was making was that, compared to Connery and Craig, Dalton's acting never felt natural. His acting was great but he simply doesn't have the natural swagger to make his performance as Bond feel organic. I really couldn't care less what he's done in other movies. I'm interested what's going on in Bond and your excuse, ultimately falls on the supposition that Dalton simply chose not to act even though he could. Dude, I get that you clearly love Dalton and I respect that, I like the guy too and think he's a great Bond but your excuses for him aren't going to convince me otherwise, in fact in your quest to defend and prove Dalton's "excellence"you've probably done more harm than good.
In my estimation, the Dalton era needed a change of director. Dalton is an amazing actor whose first film was a Roger Moore in the middle script. What would Craig do with that and he would not be as good as he was in CR.
CR was totally written for Craig from the beginning. And he benefitted from a fresh Martin Campbell who had 9 years away from the franchise.
I hope my argument is reasonable. But I am looking at this objectively. Craig himself said things can go wrong even if the actor is great.
Dalton was praised too for The Living Daylights but more in Europe. It was well received. But what fuels the debate is what had Dalton been like in his third film?. He would have changed approach and said he wanted to do the more traditional Bond in that with more flirting.
They had the script ready for the third and were ready to start and then the legal issue came on. Everyone says Craig nails it in his third. Many hated Craig in Quantum though I thought he was great as I like that approach.
But to me I loved the Dalton Bond in his own right. There is nothing wrong with him being different. That's why we are talking. I mean LTK was a shock for the franchise.
Why do Bond actors on one hand have to be different and yet the same when it comes to basic qualities? Roger Moore is nothing like Connery. Lazenby is not an actor. Cubby said you hire the actor for his approach and it makes sense. He knew what Dalton was doing. He had 23 years of the other Bond style and maybe wanted some fresh approach.
You mean me? I have to say, I think my arguments are strong but do not fit everybody's agenda. I stick to my guns. I even read Cubby's book as to why he hired Dalton and that will do me! He hired Connery after all.
I would have loved to see a 3rd Dalton movie as I think his 2 movies are great and I actually can't decide which is the better movie but I do think his performance in LTK is better than in TLD. I think with the proposed direction for his 3rd it would have been interesting to see, just for the fact of his character showing a variation from what we had seen in his last 2 but ultimately, Dalton was a great Bond and as a massive Bond fan, his entries are more than worthy to be in the series.
And to all those who keep berating and castigating Dalton, it's not going to make any difference - Face facts, he was the best James Bond and only Connery comes close to what Fleming originally intended
I haven't seen Skyfall yet, and while Craig is a good Bond, simply can't stand up next to the aformentioned names yet
I just personally happen to enjoy Dalton's interpretation of the character more and there are a heck of other people who share that opinion too, that have revisited his movies and understand Dalton's approach and how good it was for the franchise and ultimately for calibrating the Craig reboot. As to who has more swagger, who is more "Bond" whatever the heck that may be? What is Bond to people? Bond is different things to different people. I don't know... the internet never agrees on any of this. Neither does the general public. I can tell you a friend of mine still doesn't buy Craig in the role, doesn't see enough swag in him, and the only one for him, the perfect marriage of all he likes is Brosnan. Will SF change his view? Only November 8th will tell.
I respect @acoppola's responses because they are intelligently put, not because he is a Dalton fan, by the way. It doesn't seem to me that he is trying to convert anyone (are you?) just defending his views with as much substance as possible.
Here's the thing @Germanlady. I happen to have a circle of friends in my real life that have met all the Bond actors and know the whole history. The Bond fans that read Fleming generally appreciate and love Dalton. I do admit that those who think Roger Moore is the real James Bond think Dalton is boring. I understand that.
I do try and answer you. But I take it as an insult that you think I am not factual. I go to great lengths. As for proof, please read Cubby Broccoli's book When The Snow Melts and he seems to think the opposite of you. Read the book if you have not yet.
Craig is a success in the role but I felt his era was better handled than Dalton's. Tell me where I am wrong? And many Bond experts love Dalton but admit his approach was too shocking for a 1980's audience used to 12 years of Roger Moore.
Had there been a four year hiatus to reinvent Bond between 1985 and 1989 with Dalton, then the time elapsed may have worked to Dalton's advantage. There was a 4 year wait between DAD and CR. Or are my facts wrong here too?:)
Thank you so much @Regan If I cannot accept Dalton as a good Bond then by the same logic I should hate Craig. I love Craig in the role and understand the context of his aims for the character.
Not all Bonds have to have the champagne bottle in one hand and their private parts in the other when they meet a woman. Yes, the mass audience likes that, but to me it is not the real Fleming Bond. I can enjoy it too but it is not the only way to make the character viable.
And I am a huge Connery fan too and see Dalton as an extension of him but in his own way. Dalton has similar rugged features and the chiseled facial look. Looks wise he is the closest to Connery. No, he does not look exactly like him before some kill me.:)
But If I want Connery style Bond, then I will watch Connery for that. He does it the best as it is his persona. But some want the carbon copy Bond which is fine because they are casual fans and I have met many.
But I like true individuality in an actor.When Gary Oldman played Dracula, he was a million miles away from Bela Lugosi or the image of Christopher Lee's Dracula. And that is what I am talking about. Many casual Bond fans like generic Bond and some casual horror fans like the generic Dracula. But read the Dracula novel by Bram Stoker and his true image is different.
Dalton made me look into Bond deeper.
Thank you! You are very reasonable and at least appreciate Dalton for being original. Sure he is not everyone's cup of tea and the reason I am writing so much here is because of the "what if" factor as in a 3rd as well as 4th movie from him.
Dalton not coming back for a third gutted me and when I saw Goldeneye, I assumed Tim was in it as my girlfriend at the time bought tickets but I totally missed the hype. I went into the cinema without seeing the poster because it was a surprise from her. I was so out of the loop Bond wise because it had been dormant for years and I did not read magazines or newspapers.I had no idea Pierce was Bond. Strange but true!
Why did I assume Tim would be in it?. Because I took it for granted at the time that all Bond actors did many films before recasting. And after 15 minutes in the film, I ask my girlfriend where is Tim. And then it sunk in that Tim was no longer Bond. I smoked 20 cigarettes that night afterwards like a family member had died.
I would have preferred that the hiatus had happened between 1998-2002 instead of 1990-1994, because like Craig now and Dalton back then, we were really onto something.
As well as the acting, I think Connery and Dalton to me are the perfect Bond image. They are my two total favourites. Father and son! I like the darker featured Bond look as in Byronic stereotype.
I mean the airport scene alone in Diamonds Are Forever is a tour de force of Connery's personality as well as dry humour. And the funeral parlour is so witty!
Craig's acting is fantastic but his Bond image bothers me. I am just too used to the Connery blueprint as in the look. Not my fault. Blame Cubby and Harry!:)
I make no pretence in saying I would have liked to see Clive Owen as Bond. He is a damn good actor too!
Framed is excellent and when he robs the bank he looks perfect Bond. Dalton has this dirtiness about him but it is so concealed. The scene in LTK where he is captured and says "Piss off!" is an example. Very sparingly used but effective.
And he was in his prime and Bond gets halted. Cubby gets the guy after all these years and the studio politics halts production leading to the falsehoods about Dalton being a failure as Bond. Disgusting and the media were as bad to him as they were to Craig.