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
Dalton was fabulous in both films. The press have tried to omit the Dalton years out when discussing Craig's era because they want Craig to be seen as revolutionary whereas he is in fact a poor man's Dalton (the comparisons between Craig and Connery are insulting to the great Scotsman). Dalton is far superior and why he is so superior and more memorable than Craig will ever be will be because he kept the Bond elements. Just a tweak of the gunbarrel music in LTK was enough to convince you that this would be a different film whereas Craig has to strop around, brood, change the whole franchise structure just because he has limitations as a 007 actor. Craig is better than Brosnan and Lazenby I'll give you that. But Dalton beats Craig in every single way. I believe Dalton more than Craig
I understand. I actually thought QOS was not as terrible as made out. Kind of like what Licence was for Dalton at the time. Though Licence is a better movie in my opinion.
I liked the Q scene in LTK and it added some humour. Plus the set up of Pam Bouvier refusing to sleep with Bond was actually humorous in a sophisticated way.
I believe that had the legal issue been resolved quicker, Cubby would have done the same thing for Dalton he did for Moore after TMWTGG. He would have made sure the next film gets the balance for public expectation right and would have promoted the suaver side of Dalton more. And Dalton can do suave very well.
Cubby was super smart and knew how to change tactic as proved by the success of TSWLM in 1977. Ironically Roger Moore could have not survived in the role if it was not for Cubby's belief. Because Moore's second entry was considered far below financial return compared to LALD.
I agree though believe Craig is excellent in his own way and at least avoids the parody the series went in to. Dalton was excellent in the role and I found it hard to agree with how he was unfairly criticised. I grew up with Moore but was intelligent enough to understand Dalton was going back to Fleming. Some forget Bond was a Commander in The Royal Navy and Dalton certainly had that believebility.
The Bond of the books is not likable and Dalton certainly mastered that. Dalton played Bond at times like the villain. In the novel Casino Royale, Bond and the villain are almost mirror images of each other. With Roger Moore, Bond was a little on the too nice side to be a credible cold blooded killer.
And apart from Connery, every time a Bond is replaced by another actor, the predecessor will get criticised for what he was once praised for. Ironic but true.
And when Craig exits the role, he will get the same backlash. I bet if Clive Owen got cast, some will say he has the better image for the role. Shallow but I know how people are.
Limitation as a 007 actor, this coming from someone who's a Moore fan? I guess we better wait till Skyfall to see how limited Craig is?
He's also completely outshone by Robert Davi who gets the best lines and has more of a presence.
Not to say Dalts delivered a bad performance but I do feel that in TLD he's more reserved. He tries a tad too hard in LTK I feel.
Moore's a decent actor. Not a great one but a decent one. I saw FYEO and he was fine as a more stripped down Bond. In fact I'd argue his car kicking scene was just as effective as anything Dalton ever did.
I think it is contextual to the revenge theme and the fact that Sanchez is a brutal villain so the stakes for Bond are high. If he played it too relaxed the tension would not be there. But Dalton is in command in the casino and is certainly the alpha male Bond should be.
Plus in LTK, Bond is overcome with pure hatred over what happened to his friend and the portrayal makes sense. Bond wants blood and it is personal. He even leaves the secret service to get the revenge complete at great cost.
He has been limited thus far, yes. Was Moore limited? yes he was. Moore did everything we know he did but Moore also did dark tense moments and gave some terrific performances for which he never gets credit for. I point to it continuously but the whole Germany sequence in Octopussy is tenser and darker than anything Craig has done.
But Craig does the same kind of thing but in a less theatrical way. He's superb in the final couple of scenes in QoS (where he's confronting the person effectively responsible for a loved ones death) and doesn't resort to overly dramatic movements.
I think Dalton was good in other scenes in LTK (the "make a sound...and you're dead" line is very effective) but there I just felt he was overplaying it a little bit.
That like mine is an opinion and I'm sure you'll get a few that would definitely disagree with that.
Tenser at a stretch you might be able to argue you that but it won't wash me but Moore darker than Craig, that is laughable.
I didn't say Moore was darker...I said the Germany sequence in OP was darker than anything Craig has done. Overall, ofcourse Craig is darker than Moore. But let's not deny Moore his dark moments of tension and great acting. His seven films are littered with it, more of them appearing in his final three outings admittedly.
Tarzan and the Gorilla costume were rare bad shouts in OP. The chase through the jungle was equally tense as Germany. A View To A Kill Moore is just as serious and straight faced surely (and no jokes about the facelift please:P )
Well said. Everyone forgets that Rog was on shaky ground after TMWTGG. Dalts deserved a 3 rd film to balance out his legacy. People drone on about him being the 'dark', ' serious' Bond but TLD is actually a late Rog vehicle with a bit of tweaking. LTK is much darker but there is humor and Dalton actually said he felt the seriousness went a bit too far. In those days the actors were just handed the script and expected to get on with it and Dalts was no different. He got the script for LTK ten days before filming began. He is also on record saying he wanted the next one to be a bit more lighthearted.
Thank you very much. I agree with your facts too! I hate Dalton bashing because he is a wonderful actor and I find it an insult to Cubby who went to great lengths to hire him. Cubby discovered Connery and knew what he wanted at the time he cast Dalton. Brosnan looked too young to play Bond in 1986 and it would have backfired. Goldeneye benefitted from an older Brosnan. Cubby's book praises Dalton's research and hard work to update the character by studying Fleming.
And the casting of Dalton showed you need a lot more than just good looks to play Bond and that the character has depth as well as current appeal.
I actually appreciate the Bond actors for their quirks. Sometimes this best Bond business turns me off the franchise. I enjoy the changes and find unfair comparissons pointless.
I mean in the same way. Are we to compare the special effects of a 1960's Bond to a 2012 Bond? That would be stupid. How can Craig be better than Connery if he is following his blueprint for Bond? Where do the mannerisms come from?
For F sake, Craig even had to have the 1964 Aston Martin which reminds me of how powerful Mr Connery's legacy still is and will be. When I saw that Aston in both Brosnan's and Craig's films, I knew who was boss. Who did it first? Sometimes the media think we are morons and know little about the history.
And that is not putting Daniel Craig down. He is very fine but in his own way. Let's enjoy Bond without having the need to put every actor down if you know what I mean. And had Clive Owen been the new Bond, I feel he too would have done a great job.
I am cringing at reading, DC is not a Ladies man, when all the femals went nuts after CR - as much as probably others faint at the thought of Dalton not being attractive and not standing a chance never mind what portrayal he had put on. Its the way it is...there will never be an answer that is universally right. Not even, where it concerns Connery. I prefer Moore as Bond.
I see your point but I always try to be as factual as I can. Very true that there is incredible subjectivity with Bond. I have met many stunning women in my life who had a crush on Dalton's Bond. I also met many women who do not like Craig's looks and miss Brosnan. Not my opinion but the way it is. I once met an ugly woman who thought Dalton was ugly but then again I met a stunning half Indian/English woman who wanted to meet Dalton and marry him. Good for Dalton and poor Sean in the context of this paragraph!:)
I will say this for Dalton, he has some beautiful female admirers who were not born when he played Bond. It comes down to preference.
Bond is also very generational. The younger kids who see Craig as their first Bond will love him the most. It is understandable.
..but what? I think some here want for Dalton to get a white veste and find all sorts of reasons, why he didn't make it. I love DC, but I didn't go into the cinema with the wish, it should happen or even the expectation. Same with Dalton. Only here, I got out and neither he nor the film did anything for me. IMO, it has nothing to do with the darker approach. Its always all about the leading actor. If you like HIM, you will come to like the film, if you don't, the best film will be trown into the garbage can. Who ever it is has to sell the film.
I hit the post button accidentally!
To be honest, I'm yet to meet a girl/woman who think Dalton or Craig are good looking where as they rave (looks wise) about Connery and Moore (back in the day).
Horses for courses
To be honest I did not like Daniel Craig initially but grew to like him. It was his acting that did it for me and I understood where he was coming from. Let's not make the mistake, but for some he is an acquired taste and a serious challenge to the traditional Bond image. And Brosnan to many was the ideal Bond in terms of look. I know what people have told me over the years and how they think.
Really? I've always felt Dalton was good looking. I actually find him better looking than Connery.I just didn't like his personality.
I was being general naturally. Wow you don't like Craig or Brosnan? I tell you this objectively, but Dalton is a handsome man and no one has called him ugly that I know. And I met hundreds over the years. And if Dalton is not good looking then God help most men is all I can say!
For me, Dalton is NOT good looking and without charisma. That's what put me off and I am not alone. Just saying, and that not as a DC fangirl because back then, he was not on the plate yet.
Well as I am 21, most of them are girls my own age. But my Mum and Nan love Sir Roger (looks wise) and that's it. Brosnan is "ok". As a man, I would say Dalton is better looking than Craig and Brosnan but it is subjective
Honestly, neither of them do anything for me. Craig is a poor man's Dalton and Brosnan is a very poor man's Moore. As I would say, forget the press/Barbara Broccolli/Moore bashers, a lot of Non-Bond fans do not like Daniel Craig or his films. I know Non-Bond fans who much prefer AVTAK to CR/QOS. But some would dismiss that as "disgusting"
Dalton is fairly good looking, I just think Connery and Moore are better looking