›

CAN DALTON COME BACK INTO THE ROLE OF 007 AFTER CRAIGS DEPARTURE?

1235»

Comments

  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited November 2012 Posts: 1,243
    No question, but Dalton is gaining a new fan base and popularity. I think his controversy makes him even more intriguing in the role. I see people who were not born until the nineties appreciate what he did with the role.

    Dalton's greatest contribution to the series is that he did not play to the fashion of the time or the expectation of the time. He did right by following Fleming and most importantly truly made the role his own.

    Dalton's contribution is a slow burner in the sense that it was overlooked at the time. Whilst Brosnan was a quick explosion of excitement whose flames diminished with the passage of time.

    Brosnan was a fine Bond but a prisoner of what was expected and he was in a straight jacket in terms of true freedom of exploring the character.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    acoppola wrote:
    No question, but Dalton is gaining a new fan base and popularity. I think his controversy makes him even more intriguing in the role. I see people who were not born until the nineties appreciate what he did with the role.

    Dalton's greatest contribution to the series is that he did not play to the fashion of the time or the expectation of the time. He did right by following Fleming and most importantly truly made the role his own.

    Dalton's contribution is a slow burner in the sense that it was overlooked at the time. Whilst Brosnan was a quick explosion of excitement whose flames diminished with the passage of time.

    Brosnan was a fine Bond but a prisoner of what was expected and he was in a straight jacket in terms of true freedom of exploring the character.

    Well put. It is one of the greatest shames of the franchise that Pierce didn't get to play Bond like he wanted.
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited November 2012 Posts: 1,243
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    acoppola wrote:
    No question, but Dalton is gaining a new fan base and popularity. I think his controversy makes him even more intriguing in the role. I see people who were not born until the nineties appreciate what he did with the role.

    Dalton's greatest contribution to the series is that he did not play to the fashion of the time or the expectation of the time. He did right by following Fleming and most importantly truly made the role his own.

    Dalton's contribution is a slow burner in the sense that it was overlooked at the time. Whilst Brosnan was a quick explosion of excitement whose flames diminished with the passage of time.

    Brosnan was a fine Bond but a prisoner of what was expected and he was in a straight jacket in terms of true freedom of exploring the character.

    Well put. It is one of the greatest shames of the franchise that Pierce didn't get to play Bond like he wanted.

    Thank you @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 ! Dalton got the sledgehammer in terms of weapon of approach. Brosnan got the feather duster.

    And I will say this, but had Dalton in his younger days got script writers like Paul Haggis and directors in Mendes league, then he would be unstoppable. Watching SF, I could not help think that Dalton would have truly been in his element.

    I think he did phenomenally well considering all the opposition at the time especially from United Artists management who took the franchise for granted and were not thinking of the future. Cubby's book talks about making LTK whilst the film studio was "dying a death by a thousand cuts!".
  • oo7oo7
    Posts: 1,068
    Is it not true that dalton is still the official bond, he is just waiting for the right script?
  • ReganRegan
    Posts: 173
    Master_Dahark wrote:
    Just browsing the net and came across this:

    tumblr_mamycb0Itb1rn9u6vo2_500.gif

    He's definitely still got it

    Well... hello there, Mr. Bond

    :>
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited November 2012 Posts: 28,694
    acoppola wrote:
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    acoppola wrote:
    No question, but Dalton is gaining a new fan base and popularity. I think his controversy makes him even more intriguing in the role. I see people who were not born until the nineties appreciate what he did with the role.

    Dalton's greatest contribution to the series is that he did not play to the fashion of the time or the expectation of the time. He did right by following Fleming and most importantly truly made the role his own.

    Dalton's contribution is a slow burner in the sense that it was overlooked at the time. Whilst Brosnan was a quick explosion of excitement whose flames diminished with the passage of time.

    Brosnan was a fine Bond but a prisoner of what was expected and he was in a straight jacket in terms of true freedom of exploring the character.

    Well put. It is one of the greatest shames of the franchise that Pierce didn't get to play Bond like he wanted.

    Thank you @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 ! Dalton got the sledgehammer in terms of weapon of approach. Brosnan got the feather duster.

    And I will say this, but had Dalton in his younger days got script writers like Paul Haggis and directors in Mendes league, then he would be unstoppable. Watching SF, I could not help think that Dalton would have truly been in his element.

    I think he did phenomenally well considering all the opposition at the time especially from United Artists management who took the franchise for granted and were not thinking of the future. Cubby's book talks about making LTK whilst the film studio was "dying a death by a thousand cuts!".

    Interesting. What were United Artists's problems?
  • GuillaumeGuillaume
    Posts: 25
    agree with lewisblake.
Sign In or Register to comment.