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
You could start by spelling his name correctly. ;)
Actually Dalton was first considered to play Bond in TLD... He first refused because he was busy filming another movie... Many others were considered until Glen and Broccoli settled for Brosnan and the rest well... Is history
CONNERY: 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965
LASENBY: 1967, 1969 (OHMSS before YOLT)
MOORE: 1971, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1979, 1981 (FYEO is before MR, and Octopussy is in 1981)
DALTON: 1983, 1985, 1987, 1989, 1991, 1993, 1995, 1997, 1999 (FYEO is in 1983)
BROSNAN: 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010 (CR is with Brosnan, and Tarantino is directing)
CRAIG: 2012, 2014, 2016 (maybe 2018 but he might look too old by then)
I am with you some of these, but I love Moore in FYEO and I wouldn't change CR a bit.
I bet if Tarantino would have directed DAD - even with that script - it would have been much, much improved (and at least for sure different and interesting.).
Definetly. But I put him in CR because he apparently suggested the idea in the first place, and he said if he'd done it he would have cast Pierce Brosnan.
http://www.listal.com/list/my-ultimate-james-bond-timeline
:-\"
But then I'd still want the same Craig CR after Brosnan's run.
I meant sunk in a good way, like we were lucky that EON got him...in the hoop...I just don't want to come off as hating Dalton, because I like his Bond.
I got it, that you meant it in a good way (sunk the basket. like in sports) but only after a 2nd read. I was just saying - unlike many here - I rather enjoy most of the Bonds.
Well good for you. That is quite an accomplishment, and I am not being sarcastic. Not an easy feet by any margin, at least in the case of myself.
I can't see previous answers from here but whoever decided to cast Brosnan in the first place made a sensible and suitable decision. But - sometimes when I watch anything from 1995-2002 I sometimes wonder what he's doing as James Bond, seems a bit inappropriate sometimes. That said, he seemed almost tailor made for the part every now and again, Goldeneye had some classic Bond moments and Brosnan looked and sounded the part, as with TWINE, but every now and again, despite the obvious talent and fitting capacity of playing Bond, I would watch on and think 'is this man really suitable for the role', it's a bit of a mixed bag with the Irishman sometimes, I was happy enough when he got the part after Dalton and you can see why at times whenever he's on screen, the man is an established and well recognized actor (and was at the time of casting) and presents himself well enough as Bond, and I was quite impressed, but every now and again, just find him wholly inappropriate, not the Best James Bond we will ever see, and by far from the worst with it
I agree however his better performances lie outside Bond. The Thomas Crown Affair, The Matador and Seraphim Falls all featuring Brosnan at his best. Seraphim Falls in particular is great, he even outshines Liam Neeson. There's a scene where he removes a rifle slug from his arm, and it is really a great performance by him, he conveys the pain of it brilliantly. (and no 'pain face' ;) )
He was also very good in The Greatest.
I also read that Broccoli also had Dalton and Sam Neil in mind too
I accidentally hit "e" instead of "a", sue me. They are close together.
I think it came down to money and Dalt's unwillingness to fight to keep the role. He could have made GE a decent movie if he'd stayed.
I think it came down to money and Dalt's unwillingness to fight to keep the role. He could have made GE a decent movie if he'd stayed.[/quote]
Agreed. Goldeneye would have been Dalton's masterpiece.
His loss was out gain.
O:-)
DAltons departure lost us a uncharismatic actor who failed to woe the large audiences, it is only some fanboys that really like him and have dozens of excuses why he failed to perform.
The next four movies gave us much more 007 for our money. And while EON states that they are looking for the essence of 007 they are actually in it for the money. If Bond23 underperforms you can be sure that they will really look at some different performers for the title role. Essence my foot, Roger Moore gave us that as did Connery and Brosnan but Dalton never gave the BO that essence-vibe.
;)
The part in bold is true, but I disagree on Dalton. I thought he was charismatic and was a great Bond. He was ahead of his time.
Don't forget about Craig! He has outperformed Brosnan at the BO so far so his "essence-vibe" must be through the roof!
Or am I misunderstanding "essence-vibe"? I just presumed it meant big money...
More money, yes. As for the 007, I have not seen any 007 since 1989, and i'm still waiting. Though in that time, we've had plenty of smarm and pouting.