›

Dalton & Craig; the Intensity factor

chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
edited June 2013 in Bond Movies Posts: 17,803
What I love about both Dalton & Craig is their 'intensity factor', that is, the thing no other actors brought to the role as well as they did (do in Craig's case). The other four, as great as they were, never achieved that electric sense of urgency to Bond, that feeling that they could snap at any moment.

Thoughts on this?
«1

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I love this aspect of their interpretations, but they aren't the only to do it in my view.

    Sean's Bond had plenty of moments where he was visibly raging inside, my favorites being his reaction to Quarrel's death, Kerim's death and Jill's death. There are plenty of others, but these I like the most performance-wise.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited June 2013 Posts: 17,803
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    I love this aspect of their interpretations, but they aren't the only to do it in my view.

    Oh, of course, not exclusively, just the most consistently IMO. Connery's Bond could get there, but he didn't live there.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited June 2013 Posts: 28,694
    chrisisall wrote:
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    I love this aspect of their interpretations, but they aren't the only to do it in my view.

    Oh, of course, not exclusively, just the most consistently IMO. Connery's Bond could get there, but he didn't live there.

    I see your point.

    If all the Bond's had a party, I think Tim and Dan's Bond are most likely to take a moment or two away from the crowd. I that feeds in a lot to their darker more real takes.
  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    chrisisall wrote:
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    I love this aspect of their interpretations, but they aren't the only to do it in my view.

    Oh, of course, not exclusively, just the most consistently IMO. Connery's Bond could get there, but he didn't live there.
    This is true, and it's a good thing too. I don't want Bond living there.
    I find both Dalts and Craig to be a mixed bag. Dalts I thought overplayed Bond's humanity a tad, enough that I noticed, whereas Craig is almost too intense or bothered by whatever is haunting him from film to film.
    All told, I prefer Dalts, probably because I prefer his two films, but but when Craig is on, he can be damn good. The Komodo Dragon fight is worthy of anything from the classic era. Not only the fight, but also the very Bondian manner in which he starts and concludes it.
    Put it all on red. Best line in the film and lifted straight from Fleming too.

  • The_ReaperThe_Reaper
    Posts: 1,092
    Damn I wish Dalts had gotten a third! That's my biggest cinematic regret.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    I think both are great Bonds but Caig's physicality brings more brutality to his Bond. Craig's fighting style adds a lot to his potrayal.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited June 2013 Posts: 13,355
    You do feel, as good as Connery was, he's wasn't able to emulate this facet of Bond on screen, as well as these two.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    edited June 2013 Posts: 12,837
    Definitely the most intense of the Bonds. EG- Dalton when Saunders dies or when he finds Della and Felix's bodies, and Craig in any of the CR fight scenes.

    I prefer Dalton overall.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Yeah when Saunders dies, Dalton looked like a mad man, hell, when Sharky is killed the way Dalton interacts with Lupe, you almost fear for her life because of how pissed off Bond was. That being said, Connery is the effing king. Bond isn't supposed to be living in intensityville, he shows it at times but the man is supposed to be cool and keep his composure. Connery for me was the perfect balance of all types of emotion without going overboard at least for his first 4 or 5 movies.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    doubleoego wrote:
    Yeah when Saunders dies, Dalton looked like a mad man, hell, when Sharky is killed the way Dalton interacts with Lupe, you almost fear for her life because of how pissed off Bond was. That being said, Connery is the effing king. Bond isn't supposed to be living in intensityville, he shows it at times but the man is supposed to be cool and keep his composure. Connery for me was the perfect balance of all types of emotion without going overboard at least for his first 4 or 5 movies.

    Well put. Connery's interpretation did reflect that of how you would expect an agent to act, but his Bond still had amazingly well acted moments where you say the anger flame in Bond almost overflow, my favorite being when he finds Kerim dead, and knows Grant is behind it. Connery's intense expression conjures up the sound of a sizzling pan in my mind, and his mastered composure despite the pain is spot on in the scene. Bond's final fight with Grant is for these reasons that much more intense because you realize for 007 this isn't just another fight, it is vengeance for Kerim.
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    This also applies to the fight in the elevator in DAF where 007 fights for his life against an villain who realises that it is indeed a fight to the death. I saw it recently and while I might not have a great love for DAF the movie sure has it dark and very well acted moments. Another one is Bond waking up in the casket that is on fire, there is a sense of dredd and desperation.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,803
    Samuel001 wrote:
    You do feel, as good as Connery was, he's wasn't able to emulate this facet of Bond on screen, as well as these two.
    Oh, he could do it as well, I'm just saying that Dalton & Craig made & make it a part of the continuity of how they play Bond. Connery was cool & alpha male & stuff, and that was great for the cinema Bond of his time, but I like the edgy "if I get to thinking too much about my feelings here I'll KILL someone" attitude I like my Bond to have. Even Pierce conveyed a 'broken-ness to the character that Connery never did, although Broz was clearly a fan of the cool part.
    Strangely, I remember a time recently where I was not a big fan of Craig's Bond. This has changed over time & viewings of his work.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited June 2013 Posts: 28,694
    chrisisall wrote:
    Strangely, I remember a time recently where I was not a big fan of Craig's Bond. This has changed over time & viewings of his work.
    It is quite remarkable how our opinions can vary so much over so little a time. There was a period where I was first getting into Bond, and had watched Connery, Connery, Connery, Connery. I ate, slept and breathed him, and nobody else was good enough for me as I was bowing at his throne. At the time there was tons of other Bond films on TV, namely the Moore films, and I remember desperately trying to get through them, but couldn't stand the jokiness of his Bond and the tone of the films. I was put off, swore hatred of his era and never looked back. It was only through revisiting his era after I had delved into other Bond eras, read some Fleming and came here to see a varied opinion and acceptance of the different eras (though we may not care for all of them) that I learned to respect Roger as Bond. He is far from my favorite, as I like my Bond's like yours, but I do have extreme reverence for Roger through and through. His films, though lacking the tone of the Bond films I love are great rides, amazingly composed spectacles, and you could clearly see how much fun Moore and the lot were having making them. He is a class act all around, and any man that dedicates so much time and energy to the franchise through not only his acting in the films, but also in his appearances all around the globe for Bond related media since then is a great man in my book. I sometimes see my vitriolic Moore posts from a couple years ago and laugh at how much anger I released on his era. I thank this place and its members for showing me that all interpretations-no matter how detached from Fleming-are important, because they were what kept the lifeblood in the franchise alive and are ultimately why we are here today, 50 years on.

    Cheers!
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited June 2013 Posts: 17,803
    Error?
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited June 2013 Posts: 17,803
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    I learned to respect Roger as Bond.
    His films, though lacking the tone of the Bond films I love are great rides, amazingly composed spectacles, and you could clearly see how much fun Moore and the lot were having making them. He is a class act all around, and any man that dedicates so much time and energy to the franchise through not only his acting in the films, but also in his appearances all around the globe for Bond related media since then is a great man in my book.
    Yeah, Rog is great, and I enjoy his movies SO much more now than when they were in theatres... still, my favourite performances were in his first two, when Hamilton got him to be a bit of a ruffian, and Roger, possibly feeling a little uncomfortable with that, exuded at times in those films a touch of reserved apprehension that I feel worked for his Bond better than later efforts where he was allowed to be more 'himself'.

    Here are the actors' portrayals on my 'nitroglycerine' scale:

    Connery: Caution- may go off if shaken or stirred vigorously.
    Lazenby: Shaken or stirred, danger is relatively low.
    Moore: Explosion is not imminent in most cases.
    Dalton: Extreme caution advised during handling.
    Brosnan: Stir but do not shake too much.
    Craig: Explosion imminent.

    :P
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited June 2013 Posts: 17,803
    Double post- error message?
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    It is quite remarkable how our opinions can vary so much over so little a time. There was a period where I was first getting into Bond, and had watched Connery, Connery, Connery, Connery. I ate, slept and breathed him, and nobody else was good enough for me as I was bowing at his throne. At the time there was tons of other Bond films on TV, namely the Moore films, and I remember desperately trying to get through them, but couldn't stand the jokiness of his Bond and the tone of the films. I was put off, swore hatred of his era and never looked back. It was only through revisiting his era after I had delved into other Bond eras, read some Fleming and came here to see a varied opinion and acceptance of the different eras (though we may not care for all of them) that I learned to respect Roger as Bond. He is far from my favorite, as I like my Bond's like yours, but I do have extreme reverence for Roger through and through. His films, though lacking the tone of the Bond films I love are great rides, amazingly composed spectacles, and you could clearly see how much fun Moore and the lot were having making them. He is a class act all around, and any man that dedicates so much time and energy to the franchise through not only his acting in the films, but also in his appearances all around the globe for Bond related media since then is a great man in my book. I sometimes see my vitriolic Moore posts from a couple years ago and laugh at how much anger I released on his era. I thank this place and its members for showing me that all interpretations-no matter how detached from Fleming-are important, because they were what kept the lifeblood in the franchise alive and are ultimately why we are here today, 50 years on.

    Cheers!

    That was really nice to read. I'm glad that you found an appreciation for all of the different eras, especially Sir Roger's.
    I would like to make a confession as well. Before I came here I was never really a fan of Dalton. I always knew he had a rabid underground fan base but I was shocked to see how many people admired him. I have to admit, after reading all of the great conversations on this board, that he's really growing on me. On a daily basis. So thanks to everyone here for helping me to appreciate his era of Bond.
    Ok, glad I got that off my chest.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    chrisisall wrote:
    Connery: Caution- may go off if shaken or stirred vigorously.
    Lazenby: Shaken or stirred, danger is relatively low.
    Moore: Explosion is not imminent in most cases.
    Dalton: Extreme caution advised during handling.
    Brosnan: Stir but do not shake too much.
    Craig: Explosion imminent.

    :P

    I love that! :))
  • actonsteveactonsteve
    Posts: 1,492
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    n of how you would expect an agent to act, but his Bond still had amazingly well acted moments where you say the anger flame in Bond almost overflow, my favorite being when he finds Kerim dead, and knows Grant is behind it. Connery's intense expression conjures up the sound of a sizzling pan in my mind, and his mastered composure despite the pain is spot on in the scene.

    At that point,he didnt know grant was behind it. He thought it was the russians.

    kerim dies before nash climbs aboard. The audience knows grant has been on board all along but bond doesnt.

    However, the interrogation of tania is very intense as is bond telling Domino of her brothers death in tb.

    Connery is excellent in both scenes


  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    actonsteve wrote:
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    n of how you would expect an agent to act, but his Bond still had amazingly well acted moments where you say the anger flame in Bond almost overflow, my favorite being when he finds Kerim dead, and knows Grant is behind it. Connery's intense expression conjures up the sound of a sizzling pan in my mind, and his mastered composure despite the pain is spot on in the scene.

    At that point,he didnt know grant was behind it. He thought it was the russians.

    kerim dies before nash climbs aboard. The audience knows grant has been on board all along but bond doesnt.

    However, the interrogation of tania is very intense as is bond telling Domino of her brothers death in tb.

    Connery is excellent in both scenes


    Good lord I need to pop in FRWL again. #-o

    Of course, when Bond does see that Grant was a fake, he then realizes how Kerim really died and avenges him by killing Grant, so I wasn't far off. Still, I really need to re-watch the film again if I am that fuzzy on things...
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I also like when Connery sees Grant slip Tanya the pill in her drink. Instead of jumping up and causing a ruckus, Connery just sits there eating his food calm and composed, letting things play out until he confronts him in the cabin car.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited June 2013 Posts: 11,189
    doubleoego wrote:
    I also like when Connery sees Grant slip Tanya the pill in her drink. Instead of jumping up and causing a ruckus, Connery just sits there eating his food calm and composed, letting things play out until he confronts him in the cabin car.

    Oooo yes brilliant stuff. The whole train sequence in that film is flawless IMO.

    ooo, a great "intense" moment from Craig in SF comes when he's disecting Severine. Love the dead, "shark eyes" he has.

    You put on a good show...but ever since we sat down you haven't stopped looking at your bodyguards. Now three of them is a bit excessive...they're controlling you...they're not protecting you. The tattoo on your rist...is Macau's sex trade you belonged to one of the houses, what were you? 12? 13? I'm guessing he was your way out? Perhaps you thought you were in love? Well that was a long time ago.

    You know nothing about it!

    I know when a woman is afraid and protecting not to be!
  • actonsteveactonsteve
    Posts: 1,492
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:

    Good lord I need to pop in FRWL again. #-o

    Of course, when Bond does see that Grant was a fake, he then realizes how Kerim really died and avenges him by killing Grant, so I wasn't far off. Still, I really need to re-watch the film again if I am that fuzzy on things...

    Thats the great thing about frwl bond is dupef from the word go. He is led to believe it is the russians all the way through by spectre. He is never in control. Also i think he is more concerned with staying alive then avenging kerim.

    Apart from the poisoning its the closest bond has ever come to death
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    BAIN123 wrote:
    doubleoego wrote:
    I also like when Connery sees Grant slip Tanya the pill in her drink. Instead of jumping up and causing a ruckus, Connery just sits there eating his food calm and composed, letting things play out until he confronts him in the cabin car.

    Oooo yes brilliant stuff. The whole train sequence in that film is flawless IMO.

    [/i]

    I do have a tiny gripe with this moment.

    Bond has clocked the poison in Tanyas glass and confronts Nash and actually has his gun on him but then cheerfully just laps up Nash's bullshit, puts his gun away and turns his back on him?

    With Kerim just having been murdered and God knows how many other Russians on the train does he really believe 100% that Nash is kosher? I think I would hedge my bets and keep him in sight at all times.
  • actonsteveactonsteve
    Posts: 1,492
    "My escape route is only for one. What do you want the girl or the lektor?"

    Maybe he thought the pill was a convenient way of leaving the girl behind? And also at this point nash hasnt revealed himself yet - bond still thinks the opposition is still russian.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Yes, I agree. There's certainly something in this and something very unpredictable about both of them! this is what makes both of them at the top of Bond. I would have to add Sean Connery to your list, though. In DN and FRWL I found him pretty unpredictable, too.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited June 2013 Posts: 17,803
    Dragonpol wrote:
    I would have to add Sean Connery to your list, though. In DN and FRWL I found him pretty unpredictable, too.
    Well, 'unpredictable' could be any Bond given the story- but prolonged intensity, both immediately realized & thinly under the surface, is what sets Dan & Tim apart IMO.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited June 2013 Posts: 11,189
    My favourite intense moment from Dalton btw has to either be the interrogation of Pushkin or "make a sound and you're dead". He reallly sells those two scenes for me
    actonsteve wrote:
    "My escape route is only for one. What do you want the girl or the lektor?"

    I love how he switches from a posh stuffy agent to a ruthless killer in the space of a few seconds.

    Damn I want to resurrect Robert Shaw :(

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Robert Shaw was giving away a masterclass of free acting lessons in FRWL. His performance was nothing short of magnificent.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    doubleoego wrote:
    Robert Shaw was giving away a masterclass of free acting lessons in FRWL. His performance was nothing short of magnificent.

    Agreed. He played the part with great venom. He really stole the show in FRWL. Shaw was a playwright, too, but he died too young in 1978.
Sign In or Register to comment.