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
Seriously, I love them both, albeit in very different ways. If I absolutely have to choose, however, I will have to go with Tim by a photo finish.
It should be well known by now that Rog is my favrouite but Tim has slowly worked his way up to second over the years, replacing Connery as I think his performances declined steadily towards the end.
As mentioned earlier, despite all the the hype, I still think TLD and LTK are streets ahead of the three DC films.
Dalton was a no-nonsense, straight faced and determined Bond. Possibly the finest ever to portray the iconic character. Minimum on humor. Roger Moore deviated so far away from that, so often enough, that I simply can't hold him in the same regard
Dalton was James Bond. As much as Connery was Bond in his first two appearances. Sometimes it's so hard to call them apart, in those four appearances (1962, 63, 87, 89) as to what Fleming truly intended. Moore may go down well with those who want Bond to act the fool or get up to some crazy antics or ass around, but some like their Bond serious, so will always go with Dalton on this
;)
Dalton gave us some great memories in his short 2 film run, and in a way, the brief time he was Bond has only helped to increase my appreciation of those films. Like something to be savoured due to the rarity of it,
In summary, I love them both, but Moore gets the win from me, for redefining film Bond for a generation and for never giving a bad performance in all the time he was James Bond.
Daniel Craig and Roger Moore were the extremes
Daniel overly serious and gritty and Moore way too comedic to the point of looking like a Bond parody.
Whether it be on the big screen or on a bluray player Sir Rog had a certain larger-than-life movie star quality whereas Dalton could never quite carry a film as effortlessly as Moore.
On top of that it's obvious that Moore's strengths were comedy where as Dalton's were in the serious dramatic department but when reversing the two I'll say that Moore could pull off a serious scene better than Dalton could pull off a comical one. There were scenes in FYEO, OP, TMWTGG, and TSWLM were Sir Rog had me totally convinced that his Bond had a dark side that he kept under wraps. Whereas Dalton, as phenomenal an actor as he was, looked so awkward and uncomfortable in the more lighthearted moments. In that respect (and I know I'm going to get hell for saying this) Moore's Bond was more diverse than Dalton's. But than again Dalton only had two shots at the role so who knows. But my vote still goes to Moore.
He did and he could be good. But, by his own admission, that wasn't his forte.
With Dalton you get an actor immersed in the role of Bond; with Moore, you get an actor who always seems to playing the role of Bond, but never inhabiting the role. He may have had the longest tenure as Bond, but he never owned the role. He was comfortable with the role no doubt, but his hammy, preposterously unflappable portrayal of Bond never got much beyond light comedy. The moment most often cited as 'his' Bond at his most lethal and serious is his kicking the Mercedes over the side of the mountain. I gather the opening shot with Moore at Tracy's grave is supposed to telegraph how serious both he and the film will be, something immediately derailed by the comedy of the dumping Blofeld scene. Moore was much better suited for films like the Derek Flint series or Matt Helm.
Dalton is a Bond who bleeds and relies on his wits, not wit. You see him thinking and, even though you know he'll be around for a sequel, you sense he is in danger.
I don't fault Moore for the direction of the series, DAF did that with a performance phoned in by Connery. With Dalton you get actor who plays Bond from the inside out. Moore is all exterior, relying on the same old bag of external techniques, but never seeming to have anything going inside.
One of the most telling features of a Bond actor is how he announces himself.
Does he convince you or does he appear to be delighted he is playing the role now?
Who's greater/meant more to the Bond franchise? Moore (obviously).
Hard for Dalton to compete with 7 films. Agree with @doubleohhseven, Moore's Bond was comedic while Dalton was more dramatic. When Glen gave Rog a chance to grit his teeth and grind through a Bond, it produce Roger's best effort, FYEO, imo. A couple more films like that, and Moore vs. Dalton wouldn't be a serious discussion.
Rog, by comparison, is just too old to be taken seriously with his ladies after LALD (XXX being the exception). By 1985, he's in full-on Dad mode - cooking meals and tucking chicks into bed at night.