Too long, too short or just right? - Your opinion on the length of each actor's reign as James Bond

13

Comments

  • edited May 2012 Posts: 11,425
    Samuel001 wrote:
    So what's your opinion, I'll start:

    <b>Connery</b> - the right amount of time. It was great he did as many films as he did, though perhaps he should have left for good after <i>You Only Live Twice</i>.

    <b>Lazenby</b> - far too short. I wish he'd have stayed on to have a much longer time in the role.

    <b>Moore</b> - too long and it didn't help that he was 44 when he started either. I think Moore firmly established that 7 films is also just too many, he should have left one film earlier. Your early 50's is when you should pack it in as Bond in my opinion.

    <b>Dalton</b> - again, too short. He should have got what Lazenby needed and deserved to be the Bond actor of the 90's.

    <b>Brosnan</b> - A bit too short. I would've liked him to have stayed for the two extra films he wanted, then have on his own accord left. Also we may have seen more from Brosnan in a different style Bond film - I think he did alright in <i>Die Another Day</i>.

    <b>Craig</b> - too short at the moment. EON need to not let this man go anywhere for the foreseeable future. At last we have a very wothy actor that should take the mantle and equal Connery's run of six films and be hold up by the public alongside Connery and Moore.

    What do you think?

    I agree with you on most of these.

    Sean should have just finished after YOLT as he was clearly getting bored. Although, he came back strong with NSNA and as someone else pointed out, in a way, you could see him pulling it off even now!

    I would have been happy to see Laz do at least one more. Although I think his freshness was the secret of his success - had he done another it might not have worked so well.

    I would have been equally happy for Rog to start earlier and end earlier. But that doesn't mean we had too much of him though. As with Sean, but to a lesser extent, Rog had a certain something that meant you were happy to keep watching, even as he entered his golden years!

    Dalts should have done another one or two. One of the best Bonds.

    I seem to be the odd one out here, who wishes Brosnan had never got the role in the first place. A lovely guy, but so, so wrong for Bond.

    And I am very happy with DC and look forward to one or two more outings from him. My gut instinct is that he will do one more and then walk away, although his ego and the money may by then mean that stays on longer! I mean, what else is he gonna do now?!
  • edited January 2013 Posts: 546
    Sean Connery-Just right
    Goerge Lazenby-Too short
    Sir Roger Moore-Too many (Though his Bond films were enjoyable)
    Sir Timothy Dalton-Too short
    Pierce Bronsan-Just right (Even though Pierce Bronsan deserved one more Bond film)
    Daniel Craig-Just right
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,827
    I think it mostly all worked out for the best with the exception that Dalton should have had 2 more films in '91 & '93.
  • Posts: 82
    Connery: 1 too many
    Lazenby: 1 too short. Diamonds are forever should have been a revenge movie.

    Moore: 2 too many.

    Dalton: 1 too short. Although Pierce was great in Goldeneye i could really see Dalton in this and he wouldve done it better.

    Brosnan: Just right
    Craig:would like to see him do 2 more
  • as before doubtless, but can't look beyond -

    Sean Connery - should of quit after Thunderball 1965. Even though You Only Live Twice is a decent watch, and Connery is just about plausible still, the previous release was the best time to depart and thanks for the great service

    George Lazenby - If not for his agent getting involved, should of done at least another release, but I wouldn't swap with Moore in 1973 for LALD, but George could easily have done DAF

    Roger Moore - should of finished after For Your Eyes Only. It'll never change

    Timothy Dalton - should and could of, done another release at the very least, in the early 1990s if not for the ongoing legal disputes of the time. But I think by about 1995, was too old for the part by then, but could of worked a few years immediately before it

    Pierce Brosnan - Should of quit after TWINE. There's no way I can buy into the fact he should of made more appearances after Die Another Day either

    Daniel Craig - still capable for another two releases at least, but I don't want him to embarrass himself as a once decent Bond, such as Connery or Moore, by staying too long in the part, but I don't think that will occur
  • edited January 2013 Posts: 4,813
    <center>TooHigh_zps666cd799.jpg</center>
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited January 2013 Posts: 1,243
    Sean Connery - About 5 films. I love DAF! Some of the kinkiest humour ever.

    George Lazenby - Great film but not an actor at the time.

    Roger Moore - Way too long. Caused the franchise to be misinterpreted as a spoof rather than gritty thrillers as intended by Fleming. Went overboard with the comedy which is something that Connery never did. Plus Roger was showing his age. FYEO is where he should of got off.

    Timothy Dalton - Way too short. Total waste of huge potential and he would have surprised us all.

    Pierce Brosnan - Stopped at 3 films. DAD did him no favours. He was very fine in his first two.

    Daniel Craig - 3 is good. Quality over quantity. Leave on a high. I sure would love Clive Owen to put on the tuxedo. Those who say Owen is too old, should look at Mr Craig. But I guess we have another two films left now after the success of SF with Craig. I saw Michael Fassbender and nearly threw a brick at my tv set. No thanks!

    Yes, I prefer a Bond to have darker features. The Connery mould is the best!

    Women love Owen and I would get another Dalton. Almost the same height too. I spoke to my friends and they think Owen would be a super Bond. Owen is a cool f**ker and like Dalton does not care if you like him.
  • I think that Connery should have left after TB. If he had, his run of films (and performances) would have been tremendous. I feel that his bored performance in YOLT somewhat dilutes his legacy, but his turn in DAF is rather sad. When I saw the Designing 007 exhibit there was a screen showing clips from several of the films, and in it there was a jump from FRWL to DAF. So sad to see '62 Connery and '71 Connery like that - the change was horrifying!

    After an abbreviated Connery run everything becomes muddled. Lazenby showed the potential to give a great second performance; I would have loved him to have a 5 or 6 film run. However, would he have worked as well in YOLT? Moore certainly should have had a much shorter run; FYEO was a good sendoff to an already too-old actor. I'd love for Dalton to have had another three to four films but that would have sank the franchise. I feel that Brosnan worked well in GE; after that film he was the "adequate Bond" with big box office appeal that was needed to re-establish the franchise's earnings after LTK so I guess we needed him. I'm hoping Craig fulfills his contract for five films; I can't imagine he'll want to continue with a sixth due to not being able to do anything new with the character, and also aging out of the role as well.
  • Connery: Two too many.

    Lazenby: I would have liked to see him in YOLT and DAF. That way he gets two more, and Blofeld will sort of be his personal villain.

    Moore: Way too many. At least one or two less.

    Dalton: WAAAAAAY to few! I would have liked to see him start at around the time of OP, and continue up until Brosnan took it over in '95.

    Brosnan: Probably the right amount, even though his movies weren't all the best.

    Craig: I would like to see two more from him, in order to finish up the Quantum storyline.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Connery - two too many.
    Lazenby - Should have done more at least one
    Moore - Two or three too many, should have quit after FYEO or MR
    Dalton - Too short, should have done at least one more
    Brosnan - Four too many.
    Craig - Hopefully 5 but a 6th might be possible.
  • Major_BoothroydMajor_Boothroyd Republic of Isthmus
    Posts: 2,722
    I think five is a great number for a bond reign.

    Connery left at the right time. If they hadn't had the Lazenby leaving debacle Connery wouldn't have come back.

    Lazenby should have done at least three. I think if he'd done four that'd be great.

    Moore did at least two too many. Should have left after FYEO.

    Dalton needed to do at least two more. The third film is often the charm GF, TSWLM, SF - I believe the third Dalton film would have been his best and financially successful.

    Brosnan's four were fine. I don't really know where they could have gone with Brosnan after DAD. Rebooting was the right idea at that time. He couldn't have done CR so you're left with another outlandish film or an attempt to turn an established bond gritty.

    Craig for two more and that looks like it will happen. But I think only two. More than that will be too many.
  • Posts: 414
    Connery - Too short. Being 2 or 3 years younger than Roger Moore, could conceivably have stayed in the role until at least For Your Eyes Only.

    Lazenby - One too many. I feel he didn't really bring anything new to the role.

    Moore - Too many, but not by much. I like Octopussy and A View to a Kill, but he was visibly older than the mandatory retirement age Fleming established for Double-Ohs. Probably wouldn't have hurt for him to bow out gracefully after For Your Eyes Only.

    Dalton - Too short. By far. In my opinion, Dalton is second only to Connery, and deserved to have a slice of the Bond series more comparable to Moore's and Connery's.

    Brosnan - Just right. I think he still had a Bond movie or two left in him, but probably better to leave the series too soon than too late like Moore.

    Craig - To be determined . . .
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,827
    SlyFox007 wrote:
    Brosnan - Just right. I think he still had a Bond movie or two left in him, but probably better to leave the series too soon than too late like Moore.
    Brosnan is the Samson of Bonds- the shorter his hair, the worse his movies, heh heh .

  • Connery - He left at the right time (YOLT), although I admit, his return in NSNA was great.
    Lazenby - He should have done at least one more (DAF).
    Moore - Too long. Octopussy was already a stretch.
    Dalton - Too short.
    Brosnan - Too long. TND should've been his last one.
    Craig - He's too good to leave for the moment.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    Connery- Should not have done DAF. I guess it was a necessary evil at the time but...
    Lazenby- Should have done DAF. Although if he had Tracy's death would have been at the beginning of DAF and not at the end of OHMSS. I can't imagine that movie ending any other way now.
    Moore- This is a tough one for me. He was probably too old at the end of his run but I really don't need any more films with Dalton so I guess it all worked out?
    Dalton- I see that I'm in the minority here but two films with him is just fine.
    Brosnan- Four is perfect. Sucks going out on DAD though.
    Craig- So far so good.
  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    Posts: 2,044
    Connery- He shouldn't have done DAF, neither should he have done NSNA
    Lazenby- Well he should atleast have done DAF, it would have been interesting to see him in LALD though
    Moore- His era was way too long, he should have ended with OP. OP was like " a best of " from his era. It would have been a perfect ending with the boat sailing away at the end of OP.
    Dalton- His tenure was waaaayyy to short. He had such a great potential, he should have atleast done AVTAK and the unnamed film in 1991.
    Brosnan- His tenure had a good length.
    Craig- Hopefully he does 2 more films.
  • edited January 2013 Posts: 12,837
    Connery- Too long. Probably should've dropped out after TB. YOLT is my favourite Connery film but I still think I'd rate it highly with Lazenby.

    Lazenby- Too short. Should've done YOLT and Diamonds.

    Moore- Too long. OP was a brilliant film and he should've gone out on a high instead of staying on with AVTAK, which had some good scenes but also some really cringe worthy, embarassing moments.

    Dalton- Way too short. Should've done AVTAK, and should've carried on into the early 90s with films in 91 and 93.

    Brosnan- Too Short. DAD wasn't his fault. EON f***ed up and then decided that a change of direction was needed. But instead of doing a back to earth, FYEO type film so Brosnan could go out on a high note, they ditched him and rebooted the whole series.

    Craig- 1 or 2 more then that's it. He definetly has another one in him. It really all depends on how quickly the films come out. If they get a film out every 2 years he should do two more, if Bond 24 doesn't come out until lets say 2015, he should probably hang up the walther after that.
  • Posts: 161
    Connery- Too long. Probably should've dropped out after TB. YOLT is my favourite Connery film but I still think I'd rate it highly with Lazenby.

    Lazenby- Too short. Should've done YOLT and Diamonds.

    Moore- Too long. OP was a brilliant film and he should've gone out on a high instead of staying on with AVTAK, which had some good scenes but also some really cringe worthy, embarassing moments.

    Dalton- Way too short. Should've done AVTAK, and should've carried on into the early 90s with films in 91 and 93.

    Brosnan- Too Short. DAD wasn't his fault. EON f***ed up and then decided that a change of direction was needed. But instead of doing a back to earth, FYEO type film so Brosnan could go out on a high note, they ditched him and rebooted the whole series.

    Craig- 1 or 2 more then that's it. He definetly has another one in him. It really all depends on how quickly the films come out. If they get a film out every 2 years he should do two more, if Bond 24 doesn't come out until lets say 2015, he should probably hang up the walther after that.

    I like AVTAK maybe cause its my first Bond viewing but that Duran Duran Song is worth the film alone plus seen a clealy past it Moore been doubled badly by stuntmen who look 20 years younger then him is great fun. Patrick Mcnee and Moore scenes ar great andi felt it went downhill after he was killed but Walken was a great villian.

    Brosnan had his run and frankly too long for me. The guy lacked that something for me (he lacked that charamisa Connry Dalton and Craig had plus he came across far too smug to me) Goldeneye was the first Bond film i owned but its aged very badly.

    Craig has two left in him. I wished Craig was five years younger cause i do think he's made the role of Bond his own and has given the Franchise The great Bond its been missing since Connery's early years.
  • Posts: 15,229
    Connery-At least one too many, maybe even two. YOLT is such a drop in quality compared to the first four movies, but I hesitate to say it is one too many as there may have had to be one movie where he knew he'd had enough. Part of me wishes he would have done OHMSS, had he been enthusiastic about finishing strong.

    Lazenby-I really don't know. He was clearly inexperienced as an actor, his performance suffers from it, on the other hand he was a natural fighter and he could have grown in the role.

    Moore-At least one too many, maybe two. Again, I hesitate because I like OP a lot, it is one of my favourite Moore, but he was already too old to play a MI6 operative.

    Dalton-At least one too few, but in 1991, NOT to take the role again in Goldeneye. GE was tailored for a new Bond. I would have LOVED to see a Bond movie showing the transition from the Cold War to the modern era with Dalton. With GE, the transition already happened.

    Brosnan-One too many because of DAD. He was already showing his age then, and there was nowhere to go on. Maybe, MAYBE he could have pulled off a FYEO kind of Bond in 2004, but he was not suited for CR and the franchise badly needed a reboot.

    Craig-Too early to tell, but I think he has at least one, maybe two, Bond movies to play.

  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    Connery - I find TB and YOLT terribly boring, but while the former has a great plot, the latter is just an insult to Fleming's beautiful novel. You'd argue that's not Connery's fault about that, but he looks really bored in YOLT and DAF, so I'd say Connery should have stopped after Thunderball

    Lazenby - I can't really say how far Lazenby could have gone, but after his performance in OHMSS, I really really wished his signed that damn contract for 7 Bond movies.

    Moore - He started looking really old since FYEO, which in my opinion should have been his last (and that would have been a great ending).

    Dalton - Should have done at least 2 more.

    Brosnan - Brosnan is my favourite Bond actor, therefore, if it was for me, he'd still be Bond!

    Craig - Five is enough for Craig, but that depends on how old he'll look in Bond 25.
  • LicencedToKilt69007LicencedToKilt69007 Belgium, Wallonia
    Posts: 523
    Connery : He should have stopped after Thunderball IMO, even if I liked DAF.

    Lazenby : 3 films would have been great considering he should have been in YOLT and DAF (as a revenge film like written before).

    Moore : Must have stopped after Octopussy.

    Dalton : 3 films including AVTAK. Maybe a 4th as a 91's CR (in an ideal world)

    Brosnan : 2 more. One before GoldenEye (probably, a 93 CR) and one after a dreamed well-made DAD.

    Craig : 3 then leave after the Skyfall peak. It looks great too.
  • Posts: 2,402
    Connery - Too long. He should've left after Thunderball. He stopped caring after.

    Lazenby - WAY too short. He would've grown into Bond, would've been excellent. I would've loved to see Lazenby do at least six or seven.

    Moore - He should've left after Spy. He was too old at the end.

    Dalton - Shouldve had WAY more films. Imagine he starts with a Moonraker that's closer to the book in '79, does FYEO - AVTAK, the same TLD and LTK, and GE, possibly TND with Pam Bouvier taking the place of Paris Carver.

    Brosnan - Ehh. I would've been okay with Dalton doing his entire tenure to be honest. I suppose give him TWINE, a better DAD, and EON as a movie instead of a video game.

    Craig - Too short right now. I want him to do three more.
  • Connery- about right
    Lazenby- about right
    Moore- about right
    Dalton- too short. I'd have liked to have seen a film in '91-'93
    Brosnan- one too short
    Craig- I'd like to see at least three more.
  • Connery About right, although if I had to choose a direction, it would be less.

    Lazenby In my dream world, Lazenby would be OHMSS - MR and then Dalton onwards.

    Moore He made about seven Bond films too many in my opinion.

    Dalton Should have done FYEO onto GE or TND

    Brosnan If Dalton had left from LTK, I'd say about right, although if it meant more Dalton, then less or nothing for Brozzers.

    Craig The two more we're going to get seems about right to me.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Connery (I'm including NSNA because wether we like it or not, it's a legitimate Bond film): 2 films too many

    Lazenby: should have done more

    Moore: should have ended his run with FYEO

    Dalton: should have done at least 2 more

    Brosnan: right amount

    Craig: is contracted to do Bond 24 and 25. I think he could get away with doing Bond 26 and then call it a day
  • Posts: 2,402
    Connery About right, although if I had to choose a direction, it would be less.

    Lazenby In my dream world, Lazenby would be OHMSS - MR and then Dalton onwards.

    Moore He made about seven Bond films too many in my opinion.

    Dalton Should have done FYEO onto GE or TND

    Brosnan If Dalton had left from LTK, I'd say about right, although if it meant more Dalton, then less or nothing for Brozzers.

    Craig The two more we're going to get seems about right to me.

    My dream is Connery 62 - 65, 4 films, Lazenby 68 - 81, 9 films, Dalton 83 - 02, 10 films, and Craig 06 - 18, 5 films.
  • edited February 2014 Posts: 12,837
    I'm a bit torn really. I'd have loved to see more Dalton films but I quite like Brosnan. I'd have had Dalton carry on into the early 90s (with a film in 91 and 93), bow out with GE, and then have Brosnan do TND, TWINE, DAD and one more in 2004.
    and EON as a movie instead of a video game.

    See I've heard this a lot and I don't get it. Everything Or Nothing was pretty much Die Another Day 2. The bad Bond girls, the incredibly OTT storyline, the invisible car(s!), the techno/pop theme song, sci fi elements, etc.

    I think it's one of the best Bond games (amazing how much effort went into it) but if it was a film then it would be the worst one, by far. Brosnan deserved a better send off than DAD but I don't think EON would give him that.
  • Posts: 2,402
    and EON as a movie instead of a video game.

    See I've heard this a lot and I don't get it. Everything Or Nothing was pretty much Die Another Day 2. The bad Bond girls, the incredibly OTT storyline, the invisible car(s!), the techno/pop theme song, sci fi elements, etc.

    I think it's one of the best Bond games (amazing how much effort went into it) but if it was a film then it would be the worst one, by far. Brosnan deserved a better send off than DAD but I don't think EON would give him that.

    Yeah but he would've had a fantastic villain, some great setpieces, a very traditional film. It's miles better than DAD was. I think DAD should've been gritty a la LTK and EON should've been "fun".

    Besides, Bond films have survived bad Bond girls before (TSWLM, LTK, TWINE).
  • edited February 2014 Posts: 12,837
    I liked the main girl (the one from American Pie), but I hated Heidi Klum. Didn't find her convincing at all (and this is coming from someone who doesn't mind Denise Richards in TWINE).

    I just think it's too OTT to make a good film. The finale involved Platinum tanks invading Moscow with a Willam Dafoe statue being placed in Red Square. One set piece involved a secret sci fi base complete with a force field. They get away with this because it's a game but if they'd put it in a film I think we'd be slagging it off today.

    I think some stuff could've been used (Dafoe's villian, some of the gadgets, some of the set pieces, the one liners, the locations and the main girl) but for it to work as a film, you'd have to change it a lot.

    I actually think Nightfire would make a much better film. Just get rid of the space bit at the end and you're golden.
  • Posts: 7,653
    Connery - DAF too many
    Lazenby - one DAF too short
    Roger Moore - perfect score
    Timothy Dalton - Two much
    Pierce Brosnan - Should have started with TLD, LTK, PoL up too the one after DAD.
    Daniel Craig - 4 is enough, or he'll look older than RM.
Sign In or Register to comment.