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
1. Timothy Dalton
2. Sean Connery
3. George Lazenby
4. Pierce Brosnan
5. Daniel Craig
6. Roger Moore
I realize that Brosnan was not the most Fleming-esque of the Bonds. However, Brosnan was a very elegant Bond. His attire, the way he walked, how he talked, ... . The man was born to wear a suit. He was given some terrible puns, but when the lines were well written his delivery was spot on.
Craig's films are better in terms of quality, however I like Brosnan's 007 more. Craig, while a fine actor, does a great job with all the angst but he's not very elegant and has a working class edge to him that I don't think the character requires. On the contrary.
Moreover, Brosnan was the Bond of my younger years so he gets some points purely for nostalgic reasons.
Just my two cents of course.
And yes, Brosnan is believable as Bond when it comes to the strutting and the tie-fixing. However, he isn't believable in actually delivering any of the lines that came close to being Fleming. Just look at TWINE, which I often advocate for not deserving to be in the bottom four. But you can't deny how strained and forced some of his deliveries are.
Brosnan was my childhood Bond as well, so I have a soft spot for him. But he's really just an action hero of the days where Bond was moving into the blockbuster world.
2. Craig
3. Dalton - His films are the best of the 80's mind and both top tenners!
4. Moore
5. Lazenby
6. Brosnan
Agreed.
Two aspects obscure the question:
1) the number of times they played Bond. Dalton and Lazenby only had two and one shots to portray their Bond. The others had more shots, but more shots also means more possibilities set a foot wrong.
2) for most who answer here, it's not just a question of which actor you prefer - it's a question of which Bond you prefer.
I personally am more in favor of the hard-edged Bond, the calculated killer. I think the best Bond actors should be able to give you a look that makes you fear for your life.
In that sense, Dalton, Connery and Craig are in my top half. I wouldn't want any of those on my tail.
And I do enjoy Brosnan, Moore and Lazenby. I think they all brought something to the character which worked for them at that time. Moore and Brosnan deliver irony with such ease - they make me smile.
1. Dalton & Connery (both give very gripping performances, keep me tuned in)
2. Craig
3. Moore
4. Brosnan (below Moore, because in dramatic scenes I see Brosnan act)
4. Lazenby
Lazenby is very hard to rank - after only one movie it seems unfair to put him here, but I do find him a bit 'wooden' at times. Obviously not in his action scenes, but in some dialogues, his acting is too visible for me. I think the ardent fans of Lazenby compensate somewhat for the fact that 1° he had to let people forget Connery 2° he was quite young 3° he had no acting experience 4° he debuted in a very rounded Bond-story.
All of which is true, but since I only have this one (good) movie to go on ... Sorry.
Lazenby had great screen presence though and was a good looking chap in his prime. That helped.
He must be congratulated for underplaying some of the more important & pivotal scenes. The alternative would have been to overplay it, which could possibly have been catastrophic. Given his acting inexperience, it's a testament to his judgement and Hunt's direction that he took the former route, and the film is much better for it.
I know Pierce wasn't very Flemlingesque thats why he is not in my top 3 in that aspect but i think he handled the serious and threatining moments better than Moore and Lazenby.
He has some scenes where you know he means Buisness.
With Moore in that famous scene of the Car in For Your eyes only the voice lacks the menaceing and cold tone. Like i said in the hate therad he sounds like Goofy.
As hard as he tries his voice is too funny and comedic he just can't help it, the same goes for Lazenby which is what makes them the least Flemlingesque.
For me the perfect Bond is a mixture between hard edge and ladies man Bond and i think Pierce Brosnan, Sean Connery, Daniel Craig and Timothy Dalton got that mixture. craig a bitt more in the hard edeg side but still had the Balance.
Dalton's only small problem is that he doesn't look like a Big Screen Bond even though he is very handsome and a fantastic actor but there is something about which makes him more appropriate for tv and it frustrates me not knowing what it is.
its not his good looks since he is definitely handsome, its not lack of Talent because he is very talented and he has the engaging quality which makes you care about him but i see him more as a tv Bond than a feature film Bond.
1. Sean Connery - I think this position is the easiest to justify, by far. Connery's the least controversial of the Bonds - he's widely accepted to be the best, and if he's nto placed there, he's usually second. What kind of man could unite such universal admiration in such a contested and controversial world? It's the same man who, in 1962, gave a performance that not only launched his own legendary career, but initiated perhaps the greatest and longest-running film franchise in the history of mankind. It's the same man who, even when being belted for a new film every year, gave a cool, calm performance and made the world fall in love with him. And it's the same man who impeccably led several of the series' greatest classics in his first four attempts as Bond.
2. Roger Moore - As a Moore kid, it's not a surprise that I'd rank him highly, but he was the only one who could replicate Connery's sheer effortlessness in his portrayal. He was absolutely charming and suave and full of class, but he was also capable of playing the hard bastard whenever it was necessary, and he did it well in my opinion. Add on top of that the fact that Moore actually came off as a respected Bond despite Connery setting the bar incredibly high as his predecessor (and Lazenby was all but ignored until the turn of the millennium). There's also the fact that Moore came to the role in a time of disparity between the producers, and the fact that Bond hadn't felt like it'd had a committed actor for half a dozen years. In spite of the rather tempestuous situation that Moore found himself in when he donned the tux, he made Bond his own. And for that, I think he deserves credit - a lot of it.
3. Daniel Craig - Here's a Bond who, despite much malignment and even threats of boycotting during his maiden film, turned out to be the best actor of them all. Craig's Bond, in spite of the overly gritty turn of the franchise (which might've been necessary to preserve it), was still suave, was still the ladies' man, was still Bond. And he managed to be Bond, but a more realistic one - one that you might believe is actually real. What Craig brought to Bond was a third dimension to the character, and the fact that he could both play Bond and bring in that realism without destroying the franchise is a testament to his acting ability. This, right here, is Fleming's Bond, and when he leaves the role, he will be missed.
4. Pierce Brosnan - If anyone remembers, there was a critic called Gene Siskel who described Brosnan as "looking like Bond's valet". And it's true. As much as I admire Brosnan's suave take on 007 and his timely GoldenEye saving a comatose franchise from certain death, his Bond whittled away until it became almost unbearable to watch. What started as a beautiful amalgamation of Connery, Moore and Dalton's take on 007 began to fade and began to feel increasingly like a replica of Moore's Bond, and I'd really rather take the original. He didn't really bring anything new to the role, and at the end of it, I was really just downright tired of him. As someone who enjoyed the entirety of the Moore's 12 years, even AVTAK, which should make me one of the most tolerable people out there, I'd felt more like I was being forced to survive the Bond movies rather than enjoy them by the turn of the millennium. I'm sure this might be a bit controversial, but I actually felt that DAD, in all it's carefreeness, was better than TWINE's overbearingly complicated plot line(s) and Brosnan's painfully hammy performance there. But not by much. It was still bad, and it certainly wasn't enough to resurrect the franchise that was now on auto-pilot towards a black hole. It's ironic, because Brosnan almost destroyed the franchise that he had helped to save just seven years earlier. And while Brosnan did have his considerable share of bad luck, just like Dalton, Brosnan also overacted just like Dalton. And for me, that's an automatic deduction for any Bond actor. As much as I liked Brosnan, I think EoN made the perfect decision to terminate his contract and get someone else. Anymore of Brosnan's run, and the series might've contracted complete blindness (the onset of glaucoma was already nailed in by 1999).
5. Timothy Dalton - In my opinion, Dalton was a thespian, not a movie star. He was always (and still is) more comfortable on the small screen and the stage than on the big screen. Just seeing Moore's casual one-liners and effortless suave being replaced by a man who tried too hard and overacted quite a bit was a bit less than what I hoped for in the late 80's. It really felt like Bond was waning - even moreso than when the 58-year old Roger Moore took on the role in A View To A Kill. Now, I didn't watch OHMSS back in 1969, but I heard the commotion, of course. I heard my father and his friends talk about it and I remember their reaction quite well. I mention this because when Dalton retired from the role of 007, those same people felt that he had left even less of a mark on the role than Lazenby had. And in 1989-1995, Lazenby was hardly even remembered as Bond. Now, I don't take those people's words as gospel, and I think Dalton was very good in certain moments of both The Living Daylights and Licence to Kill. But he was just not memorable in the role - and still isn't. He was too dour, it felt like he was trying way too hard in various scenes, and he just couldn't replicate the effortlessness of his predecessor, which in my opinion, is a must for any Bond actor. It's a shame, because I absolutely agree that Dalton was the bad luck Bond. He didn't get the ensemble that he wanted or needed, legal issues cropped up right when he might've redeemed himself, and he took on the role during the AIDS crisis. But having factored everything, I still can't bring myself to rank him higher than #5, and that's not a testament to his lacking portrayal of Bond, but simply that others were better.
6. George Lazenby - I'm tempted to deviate from just about everybody else's list and put Lazenby 5th, but the fact is that Lazenby was just inexperienced as an actor. He completely lacked the charisma or sheer acting ability to lead in the film right after Connery departed. And because Connery was the one and only predecessor in 1969, things were as tough as a set of coffin nails for Lazenby. What helped was his natural physique, which nobody questioned was fitting for Bond. But outside of the fight scenes, you really can't attribute the brilliance of On Her Majesty's Secret Service to Lazenby, not even the oft-cited final scene, which I think is made more because of what the scene entails than because of Lazenby's performance (which is good, don't get me wrong, but not what makes the scene).
What I can praise Lazenby for is not overacting. It was fortunate that he never overdid it in his sole outing, even in that final scene.
Agreed. Something which Craig has in droves.
It's really tough for me to rank the actors too, but if I had to be objective, Connery and Craig would be clear top 2. I won't ague with your comments on Moore though he has charisma and natural charm in droves too.
lazenby above Craig and Moore go home your drunk bro.
1. Roger Moore
2. Daniel Craig
3. Sean Connery
4. Pierce Brosnan
5. Timothy Dalton
6. George Lazenby
Best bond-actor is Sean, but Roger - despite Pierce being Bond when I was young - is my absolute favorite.
2. Roger Moore
3. Sean Connery
4. Daniel Craig
5. Pierce Brosnan
6. George Lazenby
I like Lazenby's more human, romantic and vulnerable Bond a lot more than the funny grandpa that Rog was. I also like him more than the working class bodybuilder that Craig is.
I'm expressing myself way too strongly here of course. I do like Moore and Craig but to emphasize why I like Lazenby better I had to exaggerate quite a bit.
I do wish people would not ridicule people's opinions like that.
Exceptional taste!
Not too dissimilar to my own-
1. Rog
2. Sean
--
3. Tim
--
4. Dan
5. Brozzer
I can never bring myself to rank Laz with only one film, but I thought he was great in OHMSS.
Thank you. Indeed, it is a bit unfair to rank Lazenby at all. Considering his acting background he did a very good job in OHMSS.
Rog
Sean
Tim
Brozzer
Dan
I like them all and they are all good actors. I personally like the suave and ironic Bond a bit more than the emo Bond. Or let's say it like this: I like Rog's Emo (paternal) Bond character more than Dan's Emo Bond character.
You don't know the half of it, believe me.
1. Sean
2. Rog
3. Dan
4. Tim
5. George
6. Pierce
There was a time when Dan was challenging for the #2 spot, but post-SP he has slipped quite a bit in my view.
George really should have made one more in order to fully understand his capabilities.