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
The actor’s change and the role must retain its integrity with most of its traditions, there is the process of inevitable evolution though, and for each new Bond you get a diverse and very personal interpretation of who the legendary screen icon can be.
Every actor cast into the role is shouldering the world audience expectation of an innovative depiction, which can marry the past success with future direction; this will automatically become the mapped route to new and exciting film experiences for today’s and tomorrows James Bond audiences.
Eon productions have created and through setting their own records are now always faced with bettering the past and embracing the ever-changing world challenge of how to bring a stylish James Bond film to the cinema, whist satisfying the now very individual and personal expectations of the intelligent viewer.
In a way each James Bond is a time capsule with the performance and the production married into the events taking place within that space and time, this on reflection gives credit to all who have been brave enough to where the tuxedo as being in their rightful place at the correct moment in time.
All of them convey aspects that some will like and others will feel could have been done differently; this though is probably to do with the viewer’s as individuals, and in personal way, how they would like to see Bond manage his on screen confrontations.
The aspiration to crown the “No 1.” is going to be a perpetual thread, so the debate must go on……….
While you may be a Connery fundamentalist which is fine don't start dictating to the rest of us that we cannot criticise him.
In DN and FRWL his performances are spot on but even as early as GF the laziness was starting to creep in and he began playing Sean Connery rather trying to play Bond. This increased through TB and YOLT and culminated in DAF where he really couldn't give a toss.
I'm veering away from saying Sean is the best as his performances really start to deteriorate with the second half of his tenure. At the moment, head to head with Craig over 3 films Sean shades it (but that's probably because he had an untapped seam of Fleming to mine) but only just. I suspect Craig will surpass him in films 4 and 5 though as I don't think he will drop off in his performance like TB and YOLT. So Babs may well end up being right.
I was an image conscious teen when Dalton debuted, and I can confirm that his hair looked fine at the time. Not too far into what the cutting edge style was, but not too "square" and uncool either. In fact, when he wears the "brushed back" look in LTK that was indeed very much in style at the time (especially as he had a little bit more sideburns as well). With a little research you can find pics of a lot of stars at the time with the same haircut, even stars that didn't generally seem as concerned with style such as Harrison Ford!
As for Craig's looks/height they don't bother me in the least. Of course when he was first cast I thought that EON was crazy, but he won me over completely. He has far more presence (IMHO) than taller actors and is much more manly, recalling Connery's "two-fisted" agent. He may not be classically handsome like Dalton, but the women I know are WAY more attracted to him (and no, not just because of his body). Like Moore, he looks nothing like Fleming's Bond except for the blue eyes and the idea that he would be handsome except for his "cruel-looking eyes and mouth". But given his presence, acting chops, and charisma I'd much rather have him in the role than any of the other actors that were considered at the time.
Getting back to aging, it was incredible to see Dalton on Chuck - he had hardly aged a day! Put a better toupee on him than he wore on Chuck and he could still play Bond today! Oh how I wish I had his bone structure...
She might have had a glance or two. ;)
But thing is - those or many, who like and prefer him are guys and don't see it from the women point of view, where Dalton falls short. Sure, DC has his haters, who don't rate him lookwise AT ALL, but he has even more women, who do find him very attractive in his special way, whereas, I believe, Dalton is nothing to hate but nothing to love either in terms of looks. I think, problem with him was, that he was sorta uninteresting in that department and with Bond, that is a problem. Has nothing to do with him being a good or bad Bond, just IMO with people not finding him interesting enough in the role.
Please mark, that this post is NOT meant as bashing the man. I haven't said anything neative about him in a long while and don't intend to now.
I for one think Craig's is better then Connery. Doesn't mean Connery sucks i just feel Craig gives the character of Bond more depth. DAF and YOLT are awful Bond films clearly Connery couldn't wait to finish them. Thunderball is average. Dr No is ok but Connery is brillant. FRWL and Goldfinger are excellent Bond films. OHMSS is the best Bond film from the 60's. Your opinion that Connery is the best is your Opinion. While mine is Mine and Barbara's is her's. No one is wrong.
Are you telling me Dalton has a Casino Royale or Skyfall even a QOS in his Bond Canon. I think Dalton is always the choice of Bond fan's who will never take to a Blonde Bond.
Or, maybe, just maybe, some people actually think he's a better Bond? Just a thought.
I was one of the few who was actually defending Craig when he was cast and I prefer Dalton. So your argument is invalid.
He has a TLD and a LTK, which I think are the best movies of the series.
And although I can maybe understand why you'd rate Skyfall or Casino above Daltons era, you really think QOS is better than the Dalton movies? I enjoy it more than I used to but really?
Bond killing Sanchez, the Pushkin hotel room scene, TLD's PTS or the whole sniper bit after the theme song, all these are just some of the moments from his era that rip anything in QOS to shreds.
My girlfriend and mother both find Craig distinctly ugly. My girlfriend actually finds Dalton the most attractive Bond. Craig's physique is his biggest selling point to most women, although naturally there are those who find his face and demeanour his big selling point. It's all subjective. Personally, as a bloke, I would rank Craig 5th in attractiveness. Connery has electric charm, Roger - an unequivocal suaveness and class, Dalton - a brooding, mysterious and enigmatic presence and Brosnan - the archetypal handsome and borderline beautiful Bond. Craig would slot in after this as 'the bit of rough' for me. With George 6th - good physique but nothing much going on upstairs.
First signs for Craig's Bond yes.
But if you mean for the first time in the series? Dalton beat him to it. The whole stuff my orders bit in TLD shows a Bond who isn't sure about his job.
To clarify my point, though, I'll add this: I think all the Bond actors have been rather good looking - or at least none certainly have been bad looking. Sean looked good in his earlier films, but I never found him attractive - but at least Sean was interesting. George was about as interesting as a plank of wood. A rather good looking plank of wood, but a plank of wood nevertheless. Roger looked kinda boring, but was charming somehow despite being (as Bond) such a sexist jerk a lot of the time. Tim looked good, but wasn't attractive (to me!)... admittedly I haven't seen his movies in ages, and I'll need to see them again to check if my view has altered at all in the last decade or so. Pierce was maybe the best looking of them all, when at his best - again just in my opinion, of course. But attractive? Not to me. Just pretty, that's all. There's a cliche that all women want Bond. That's hardly true. But at least watching Daniel as Bond has made me understand that cliche. And no, it's not the body. Heck, male models with better bodies tend to be decidedly uninteresting. He's got a great presence and depth, and if he wasn't such a good actor he wouldn't be so attractive. Amazing eyes. He's the most attractive Bond to me in big part surely because he plays the most interesting Bond in many ways, and he does it very well. But what really makes anyone attractive to somebody and not somebody else is pretty much a mystery. A mystic quality of that special something, always highly subjective.
Most of you here are male, so I'll add a few thoughts on the Bond "girls" and women to hopefully further clarify what I'm trying to say. I can easily understand those of you who find, say, Vesper or Severine or Tracy attractive, I thought that they were interesting characters and well acted and all (all were indeed women, not "girls"). But someone like Christmas Jones for me is like George's Bond - looks kinda good, but if skin deep is all there is, well... yawn... I just don't think that's attractive - not more than some inanimate object like a nice piece of furniture or decoration. I'm sure some do, I just don't understand it. Actually, that has always puzzled me about the Bond "girls" - why would men find them attractive when most are... nothing much, really? I'm under the impression that many or most men do, however. Feel free to enlighten me. Even if you disagree with my opinions about the actors/characters, I hope my examples still make sense.
Agreed completely but I think that shows my point well. Bond going against orders shows that he isn't some mindless grunt and that he's not always sure about his job and the orders he's given.
I think it's different though to CR. In CR Bond was unsure about hhis job because of killing in general. In TLD Bond was unsure about his job because of what he's sometimes asked to do/who he sometimes has to kill.
Well TLD is basically a CR for the 80s- it introduces him perfectly and the thing about is that Dalton can Act better than Craig
LTK is a far superior version than QOS
and SF is basically a Brosnan Bond Movie with Craig in it...(which isnt a bad thing)
Beauty is and always was in the eye of the beholder.
@RC7 - all of us do know by now the opinion of your relatives and friends about DC and its fine, they find him ugly, but giving this as answer to the fact, that Dalton wasn't found equally attractive by females, is silly and rather desperate. We cannot compare the Dalton and Craig times in all fairness, because the Dalts time was minus the net etc, but I do believe, we would have heard, if he arroused a "falling in love head over heels" as it was the case when CR was released. Being a "victim" myself (as we all know) I followed the aftermath of CR closely and he had made a huge impression on the female AND male audiences. The world was ready to love him (even more so after the beating he had gotten), but DC wasn't ready to BE loved. To this day, he is running away from it, because he would go nuts.
@royale - yes, I meant in the Craig Bond.
Dalton - no
Connery was attractive, because of being manly and having an interesting face and then my good ole Roger - a great looking charmeur of the old school and manly in his own way.
What's rather desperate?
..is, when you bring arguments, that don't prove the case.
Thank-you.
I'm not proving any case. I suggested how I would rank the Bond's, I didn't say anywhere that it was fact. I was also stating that the two women closest to me find Craig unattractive. That bit was fact. I thinks it's our duty as Bond fans to bring balance to threads, as and where we can.
I say there are many better looking actors out there , I even say DC isn't the most handsome looking bond, but she is adamant that he is her man , he definitely is attractive to woman. I think his body does it.
Interestingly she calls dalton the ugly bond . All though I don't think dalts was ugly , I agree that he isn't as handsome as the others. And he doesn't have charisma.
She has rog as her her 2nd favourite.
I guess we're all different and we all find different things attractive!
Also, @Sandy, I agree about Roger being attractive in a charming kind of way, but not in the sensual kind of way. (And I see what you mean about Sean even tho I don't share your view).
These are meant as friendly comments, so please don't take offence. :)
I dare say you don't understand this issue from women's perspective. Men usually don't seem to. Obviously I can't speak for your girlfriend, but I still very much doubt your comment that it's his body that does it. If she agrees with you on that, ok, but if not (and it sounds like not), then please believe me it's not that simple. Besides, surely there are other actors with as good or better bodies out there, right? A nice body never hurts, I'm sure, but it's not decisive, either - it alone doesn't make any man attractive, IMO. Your arguments are the same men always bring up: there are guys who are better looking and yeah, it must be the body. Did you read my post above? If you did, then I guess you didn't believe a word. *sigh* The women seemed to understand. Some of us (like me) basically agree with your girlfriend's view on Daniel, and I can tell you that the counter arguments that men always (always!) come up with are the ones you use as well, and personally I find it very frustrating that it always comes down to that.
I'm trying to understand why it is so, and that's why I mentioned the women in Bond movies, too. I hope men don't think that what makes a woman attractive is just a pretty face and a nice body - none of the women I know think that way about men, that's for sure. But considering men's comments on why women find (or shouldn't find) a man attractive one gets a bit pessimistic about the possibility of most men and women ever understanding each other on this issue.
It is of course always highly subjective. There's nobody everyone would find attractive, for instance. Some women find, say, Pierce very attractive, and it seems men have no problem accepting that. Maybe he looks the right way (from the male perspective), and therefore it's thought that "oh, it's his looks". While Daniel apparently looks the wrong way (from the male perspective), and therefore it's "oh but why"? :P