› ›

Timothy Dalton or Daniel Craig?

1…3738404243…48

Comments

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Craig is the only Bond who had an abysmal predecessor, and that accounts for something. Dalton impressed me in 1987, but Craig even more so in 2006.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I'm not putting Craig down. After Connery, I have a hard time choosing
    Between Dalton and Craig. I think it's simply because for me at least
    Dalton looks more like Fleming's description, but Craig is a wonderful
    Contemporary Bond. :)
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited January 2015 Posts: 15,723
    @bondjames What I meant was, IMO Bond actors are not interchangeable with 1) other's movies and 2) other time periods.

    If you remove the character of James Bond out of all 23 movies, even someone with limited knowledge of the franchise can tell which of the 6 Bond's was removed from each film. You can't put a Bond in another's movie without him looking out of place.

    Also, I think the 6 Bond's are a product of their time. If you build a time machine, travel to 1977, bring the Sir Rog you see to the year 2015, and you make a film specificly made for him, it just wouldn't work. I can't see Moore's Bond driving a modern car, or dealing with cellphones, computers, etc.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,344
    Timothy Dalton for me.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2015 Posts: 23,883
    I agree with you on that @DaltonCraig007. Their portrayals are definitely a product of their time and would not have worked in another actor's era. That is definitely true.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Except for Connery and Moore in the early seventies, perhaps?
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,723
    There is something very 60's-ish about Connery's Bond that I can't picture in the 1970's. Sure he did DAF in 1971 but that film has a 1960's feeling iMO.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    Craig, by a long shot
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,830
    bondjames wrote: »
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Dalton (in his prime mind you) stuck into a Craig era Bond film would have been masterful.

    I disagree. I couldn't picture Dalton's Bond with all the modern technology like the overuse of cellphones, etc. Just like I can't see Craig's Bond in the late 1980's era. While both are quite similar, I think they both wouldn't fit in the other's period of time.

    The trouble with questions like this is they are impossible to answer. The times are different. If Dalton was 20 years younger, and made CR in 2006 for example, and Craig was the one who was 20 years older, and made LTK in 1989 for example, then Dalts would have been able to learn from Craig's mistakes, just like Craig has inevitably been able to learn from the mistakes of all the actors before him. There is a collective learning that has to be accounted for, as well as EON's learning.

    Craig no doubt studied Dalton, saw what worked and adjusted - including retaining the humour.

    Dalton only had Moore to go from (in the past 12 years) when he took over. What he was able to acheive in his two movies was very impressive, especially with the supporting cast he was given (nowhere as good as Craig).

    Plus, when Craig made Bond, serious was in and Bourne was around (not all that different from Bond in the sense that he was a spy - if a US based one) and successful. When Dalts made LTK, buff r-rated American superheroes were in (Willis, Sly, Arnie, Gibson) - something Bond could never be - so Dalts was already disadvantaged. Plus it was the 80's (which had its share of cheese).
    @bondjames this is a VERY good analysis.
    =D>
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    chrisisall wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Dalton (in his prime mind you) stuck into a Craig era Bond film would have been masterful.

    I disagree. I couldn't picture Dalton's Bond with all the modern technology like the overuse of cellphones, etc. Just like I can't see Craig's Bond in the late 1980's era. While both are quite similar, I think they both wouldn't fit in the other's period of time.

    The trouble with questions like this is they are impossible to answer. The times are different. If Dalton was 20 years younger, and made CR in 2006 for example, and Craig was the one who was 20 years older, and made LTK in 1989 for example, then Dalts would have been able to learn from Craig's mistakes, just like Craig has inevitably been able to learn from the mistakes of all the actors before him. There is a collective learning that has to be accounted for, as well as EON's learning.

    Craig no doubt studied Dalton, saw what worked and adjusted - including retaining the humour.

    Dalton only had Moore to go from (in the past 12 years) when he took over. What he was able to acheive in his two movies was very impressive, especially with the supporting cast he was given (nowhere as good as Craig).

    Plus, when Craig made Bond, serious was in and Bourne was around (not all that different from Bond in the sense that he was a spy - if a US based one) and successful. When Dalts made LTK, buff r-rated American superheroes were in (Willis, Sly, Arnie, Gibson) - something Bond could never be - so Dalts was already disadvantaged. Plus it was the 80's (which had its share of cheese).
    @bondjames this is a VERY good analysis.
    =D>

    Yeah, bang on the money.

    I also see what you're getting at @DaltonCraig007, I think you're both roughly singing from the same sheet.
  • JohnBarryFanJohnBarryFan
    Posts: 1,405
    I love them both, but Timothy will remain the best Bond for me.
  • TrentDarbyTrentDarby
    Posts: 2
    Dalton. Hands down.
    Then Brosnan.
    Then Craig.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    Craig. Hands up!
  • icsics
    Posts: 33
    TD
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    If pushed? It would be DC.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2015 Posts: 23,883
    RC7 wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Dalton (in his prime mind you) stuck into a Craig era Bond film would have been masterful.

    I disagree. I couldn't picture Dalton's Bond with all the modern technology like the overuse of cellphones, etc. Just like I can't see Craig's Bond in the late 1980's era. While both are quite similar, I think they both wouldn't fit in the other's period of time.

    The trouble with questions like this is they are impossible to answer. The times are different. If Dalton was 20 years younger, and made CR in 2006 for example, and Craig was the one who was 20 years older, and made LTK in 1989 for example, then Dalts would have been able to learn from Craig's mistakes, just like Craig has inevitably been able to learn from the mistakes of all the actors before him. There is a collective learning that has to be accounted for, as well as EON's learning.

    Craig no doubt studied Dalton, saw what worked and adjusted - including retaining the humour.

    Dalton only had Moore to go from (in the past 12 years) when he took over. What he was able to acheive in his two movies was very impressive, especially with the supporting cast he was given (nowhere as good as Craig).

    Plus, when Craig made Bond, serious was in and Bourne was around (not all that different from Bond in the sense that he was a spy - if a US based one) and successful. When Dalts made LTK, buff r-rated American superheroes were in (Willis, Sly, Arnie, Gibson) - something Bond could never be - so Dalts was already disadvantaged. Plus it was the 80's (which had its share of cheese).
    @bondjames this is a VERY good analysis.
    =D>

    Yeah, bang on the money.

    I also see what you're getting at @DaltonCraig007, I think you're both roughly singing from the same sheet.

    Thanks guys. I'm a big fan of Craig and I think he's done a bang up job so far, but I think he did actually have an easier go of it than Dalton, precisely because Dalton came before him. He had Dalton to study and improve upon. It didn't hurt to be working from a Fleming novel with a deep meaningful relationship at its core when you're trying to turn in a more Fleming'esque performance either. Dalton didn't have such luck. Babs also was full on in favour of the new approach while I think Cubby tried to straddle the old and the new, less successfully. If Dalts had all that in his favour, we'd all be singing his praises now imo. Timing is everything, as they say.
  • TrentDarbyTrentDarby
    Posts: 2
    People are giving Craig too much credit for 'learning from Dalton's mistakes'.
    Craig didn't learn anything. The producers did and they told him what to do and what not to do.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,589
    DC could read the phone book, cover to cover, and it would be cool.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,830
    TripAces wrote: »
    DC could read the phone book, cover to cover, and it would be cool.
    *Man crush*

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Some people keep talking about how Craig has this and that and take them away then things would be different... well duh! Obviously. That's something that could be applied to any of the actors. Just give credit where credit is due and Craig most definitely deserves it. If one's preference is Dalton then fine; that's what it comes down to. End of. Craig is a fantastic in his own right and irrespective of what material he's given for Bond he still manages to shine and QoS is a shining example of this. A movie based on a shirt story that ultimately deviates a great deal from the source material not to mention the shooting script was a cobbled together, barely there screenplay and yet Craig still managed to be a contributing factor as one of the film's too few saving graces.
    Dalton is great. We can all sit here and surmise how different and better things could have been for him if things had gone differently but the facts and the truth are out there to see and are resigned to history. Craig doesn't need to study any of the actors. Obvious he's aware of the cinematic heritage and has seen the movies but to claim he's only good because he's studied and learned from his predecessors is a massive disservice to his craft and contribution to these movies and again it takes a very capable actor to achieve the valued and respected performances that Craig has conveyed in all 3 of his movies.
  • LeonUtrechtLeonUtrecht
    Posts: 30
    Dalton had the face and, particularly, the voice. (Boy, what a voice!) Craig has the body. And he moves really well.

    Off topic: am I the only one who finds Connery's body not a pleasant sight to behold, to put it mildly? It's bearable in Dr No, but it goes downhill pretty fast after that. He has a suspicious-looking blueish mole the size of Kent on his left or right hairy arm (I forget which) and - worst of all - thick black hair on his back.

    I know the 'smoothification' of the male torso is a recent cultural trend, but surely thick forests of back hair cannot have been appealing even in the 1960?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2015 Posts: 23,883
    LeonUtrecht wrote: »
    I know the 'smoothification' of the male torso is a recent cultural trend, but surely thick forests of back hair cannot have been appealing even in the 1960?

    In Japan, apparently it was quite the thing, particularly in 1967 ;)
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,830
    bondjames wrote: »
    LeonUtrecht wrote: »
    I know the 'smoothification' of the male torso is a recent cultural trend, but surely thick forests of back hair cannot have been appealing even in the 1960?

    In Japan, apparently it was quite the thing, particularly in 1967 ;)
    Hair on chests was considered slightly sexiful generally. Hence Tarzan & Captain Kirk having shaved, beautiful bare skin on television for family viewing at that time.
  • ml94ml94 Finland
    Posts: 88
    Dalton.
  • TigerTanakaTigerTanaka Welcome to Japan, Mr. Bond
    edited January 2015 Posts: 50
    Dalton. And like Barbara Broccoli said in an interview he was way ahead of his time :)
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2015 Posts: 23,883
    That's very well said by Babs. Daniel Craig is a man of his time for his time imo. Timothy Dalton was a man ahead of his time.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Ahead of your time=out of synch.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,999
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Ahead of your time=out of synch.

    Not necessarily and Craig isn't exactly a trailblazer. The current era owes an incalculable debt to the Bourne films.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Ahead of your time=out of synch.

    Not necessarily and Craig isn't exactly a trailblazer. The current era owes an incalculable debt to the Bourne films.

    ...and the Bourne films owe a debt to Bond.

    -Government trained killer
    -Same initials
    -Pulled out of the water with no memory (You Only Live Twice novel)
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited January 2015 Posts: 13,999
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Ahead of your time=out of synch.

    Not necessarily and Craig isn't exactly a trailblazer. The current era owes an incalculable debt to the Bourne films.

    ...and the Bourne films owe a debt to Bond.

    -Government trained killer
    -Same initials
    -Pulled out of the water with no memory (You Only Live Twice novel)

    True, but Bourne didn't take it's style from Bond. Not unlike the the Bulldog Drummond books that Fleming read in his youth. Fleming would go on the write the Bond books, which were turned into films, which in turn influenced the two 1960's Bulldog Drummond films.
Sign In or Register to comment.