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
Lazenby - 1 too short, should have done DAF instead of Connery
Moore - 1 too many. Could have done with Dalton for AVTAK
Dalton - 1 too short. Would have liked to have seen him do AVTAK through to GE
Brosnan - 1 too many
Craig - Depends on how Bond 23 goes
George Lazenby- Should have played in DAF, and then have left
Roger Moore- Perfect; he knew when it was time to leave
Timothy Dalton- Not enough; should have made a Bond movie between License to Kill and GoldenEye to give him just one more
Pierce Brosnan- Perfect; like Moore, he knew when to leave
Daniel Craig- Should keep going until he loses his "Bondness"
Lazenby : we need him another six
Moore : Too long, he should stop after The spy who loved me
Dalton : Just right
Brosnan : he should left after tomorrow never dies
Craig : he should make another 3 after QOS
George Lazenby: Probably should have entered with YOLT, since Connery was pathetic in it, and gone through OHMSS and DAF as well. After this "Blofeld Trilogy", I would have wanted him to leave so Roger could come in; I really wouldn't want more than three from Lazenby.
Roger Moore: Perfect- not too many, not too few, but just right.
Timothy Dalton: Not enough; he could have done at least two more before it was time for GoldenEye with Brosnan. If they would have played by the common "2-year rule", he could have had two more movies in 1991 and 1993, but then I would want him to leave so Brosnan could enter in.
Pierce Brosnan: Not enough! He should have had at least one more in between that time of 2002-2006. Again, with the common 2-year rule, he could have done one more in 2004, and I agree with most people that it should have been a video game adaption of Everything or Nothing.
Daniel Craig: He should do at least five, maybe six- at this stage in his tenure, it's hard to tell where he might go.
Lazenby, one too short. Should of done DAF.
Moore, two too many. FYEO would of been a good sendoff.
Dalton, two too short. Should of had Moore's final two movies.
Brosnan, probably just about right. If he had gotten a better final film his tenure would of been pretty damn good, and much more fondly remembered.
Craig, should do no more than 5. He's already looking pretty old now. He's great in the role but I don't want him to ruin it by going past 50 like Roger did.
Lazenby- Two too short. Should've done YOLT and DAF.
Moore- One too many. OP was good and could've been a good send off. AVTAK was fun but Roger is too old.
Dalton- Waayyyy too short. Dalton should've done loads more films.
Brosnan- Should've done one or two more.
Craig- Undecided. But he's definetly aging and he shouldn't carry on past 50.
Lazenby - Too many. I just didn't care for him. At times, his delivery seemed stiff
Moore - Too many. He did look old at the end. He should have stopped with FYEO or OP (probably OP since he did a great job there)
Dalton - One too short. He should have done one more between 89 - 95
Bronsan - One too short. He wanted to do one more and should have been allowed instead of being uncerimoniously dumped
Craig - Too early to tell but I think he should stop at film 5 or 6. Definately no more than 6 since he'd be 50 then (if the film came out in 2018)
Lazenby - I think he did a decent job but was no actor so too long 0 films for me.
Moore - AVTAK was one too many really so OP should have been last, DAF -OP would be ideal.
Dalton - too short, should have started with AVTAK - and then one after LTK would be fine.
Brosnan - about right GE- DAD is fine.
Craig - I'd say four or five would be a good number for DC.
See, I've heard from alot of people how awesome OHMSS would've been with Connery, but I just can't see it. I don't think he could've handled the emotional scenes that well.
I'm sure Connery could have handled the emotional stuff well, he may not be Lawrence Oliver but his a decent film actor. I think the emotional stuff would have had more impact with Connery being the recognised Bond at the time.
Is that really the opinion of most people - that the Bond films should be reheating videogame plots?
Once again I find myself way out of step with the masses.
For the record
Sean - shouldve stopped after YOLT (or better still George does OHMSS in 67, a proper Fleming YOLT in 69 and then goes out with DAF).
George - should certainly done DAF and probably more.
Rog - Probably shouldve stopped after OP, although I do like his performance in AVTAK but the age thing had become too noticeable.
Tim - Wouldve been nice to see more in 91 and 93 but would his unpopularity have sunk the series?
Pierce - Certainly deserved a better send off than DAD and had one more in him.
Daniel - Is it me or is he looking a bit haggard in the SF trailer- especially with that stubble in some shots (maybe its intentional for the plot - he looked OK in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo). He never had Rog or Pierces matinee idol looks to start with so I dont think he will age as well as them. I think 1 more, 2 max before he will start to show his age too much.
Lazenby - too short (would have liked to have seen at least one more)
Moore - too long by 1.
Dalton - too short by at least 1. Pehaps even 2.
Brosnan - Just right.
Craig - Would like to see him do 5.
Connery: perfect in his entire run...including DAF and NSNA. I like that those both have a "coming out of retirement" feel. I trust that Bond is a bit more experienced in these.
Lazenby: 1 was just right for him. While I would have been curious to see DAF the revenge story, I think the fact that he only did 1 film, made that 1 film all that more special and unique.
Moore: Great all the way through OP. OP should have been his swansong: leave on an all time high.
Dalton: As Sean Connery said "He underestimated the role". Two films were enough to establish his run. He just didn't have that "it" factor, that charisma to carry on the legacy.
Bros: He worked ok as a Bond for the 90's but that should've been it. Frankly, DAD shouldn't have even been made at all....But...it did pave the way for CR, and while I have serious criticisms of that film, I think it was the right move for the series.
Craig: Too early to tell. I think 3 or 4 films is enough for him. But SF could change that. He's definitely creating a positive zeitgeist for Bond and keeping the series strong.
Lazenby- since he did do OHMSS rather than Sir Sean, he should have gotten to do DAF and gotten his revenge on Blofeld and Bunt. Ilse Steppat dying shortly after OHMSS didn't help.
Moore- DAF what it was, he should have started here. Moore and violent revenge don't do well, it goes against his grain as a person. Should have ended after OP.
Dalton- Started with AVTAK and ended with GE. Plus 2 movies in between.
Brosnan- TLD through DAD.
Craig- I could see him going through 2016 and hope he gets 5 movies.
1. Connery--one too many (two if you count NSNA)
2. Lazenby-- should have done at least 4
3. Moore -- should have quit after OP
4. Dalton -- way too short should have done two more
5. Brosnan -- about right.
6. Craig -- Jury is still out. so far so good.
Lazenby - I would have liked to have seen at least one more to see what direction they would have gone.
Moore - AVTAK is one too many.
Dalton - Definately would have loved to see "Bond '91" back in the day. Gutted. He should have done 4 or 5.
Brosnan - probably about right
Craig - hopefully lots more to come.
Lazenby - Too short, a blofeld trilogy would have been good, YOLT, OHMSS DAF.
Moore - Two too many.
Dalton - Wayyy too short.
Brosnan - Just right.
Craig - Too short. another 1 or 2 after skyfall
This is spot on.
Connery's tenure should have ended in the '60s with YOLT. He was way too jaded (a bit of a crybaby against Eon, in my book) to give a good performance in OHMSS.
Lazenby needed a follow-up to OHMSS.
Moore would have ended his reign perfectly with OP.
Dalton needed at least one more, a script truly tailored to him and yet Bondian.
Brosnan had a horrible last script.
#1 Connery 1962 - 71
should of quit after Thunderball. Goldfinger was disappointing but he certainly looked the part even if the film was lousy, after 1965 the man was a shadow of his former self, just looks tired and uninterested in YOLT and Diamonds was just an embarrassment for the actor, astronomical salaries or not, it was a disaster
#2 Lazenby 1969
Should of had more chances, good Bond, never really had a problem with an Australian Bond, maybe as he only did the one film and wasn't that prominent, but oddly enough I think for sure he had a certain quality and if not for his damn agent poking his nose in where it wasn't concerned, then George would of been fine for Diamonds and one or two other James Bond releases
#3 Moore 1973 - 85
Will always insist his time was up after FYEO, he was even too old then to a degree but the film was a success, thanks in no small part to Moore taking it seriously after the damn nonsense of Moonraker, but by the time of 1983 and Octopussy he was clearly inappropriate and the man just embarrassed himself in that and View to a Kill
#4 Dalton 1987 - 89
Should of done at least another, if not for the legal disputes, then another Bond in about 1991/92 would of been ideal, he stayed around until 1994 before losing interest and it's such a pity, Best Bond ever and only two films to show for it
#5 Brosnan 1995 -2002
Should of departed after The World Is Not Enough, it is as simple as that, even though Tomorrow Never Dies was awful for the most part, he seemed appropriate enough, but I hated the film that year
#6 Craig 2006 -
Only three films in now and 44 years of age now, he still has something to offer though, but there's no way he will do a 'Moore' and carry on (no pun intentional) into his Mid 50's, has two films as of now been enough (that we've seen) ?. Of course not, Casino Royale was a success even if Solace was a disaster, so he will have something to prove later this year, we are all quietly confident
Lazenby-way too short
Roger-WAY WAY WAY too long
Tim-so sadly short
Brosnan-just right
Dan-hopefully forever :)
Lazenby- A Blofeld trilogy would be perfect for him. I wouldn't even mind more from him.
Moore- For me it is hard to say. While he did start to age at FYEO, he still but out solid films. I would say stop at FYEO.
Dalton- Fleming's Bond deserves more than two films. I would have liked four or five.
Brosnan- Three seems fine for him.
Craig- This film will tell, but right now I say one more after SF.
Lazenby: 1 too short.
Moore: One too many.
Dalton: 2-3 too short.
Brosnan: 1 too short - although with how poorly they casted his films and how poor the scripts for TND-DAD were I'm not sure it would've even been worth it.
Craig: If Skyfall is a success and he ages well I could see him maybe getting to 5-6 films. QoS gets a lot of crap, but I think that's pretty attributable to a poor script like Brosnan's last 3. It'll be nice to see the franchise get back on track here because I'd like to see him do 2-3 more and finish off Quantum.
Lazenby - one film too long (sorry!)
Dalton - far too short (would have liked 2 more)
Brosnan - definitely too short (would have like 2 more)
Moore - about right, but just one film too many (nix AVTAK)
Craig - not done yet!! I hope at least 2 more
Lazenby : Too short - should have followed up with DAF .
Moore : Just right - i think he held his own as a world weary 007 in AVTAK.
Dalton : Too short - i would have liked to see him do one more,the jury will always be out for me.
Brosnan : Just right - But i think he could have got away with a 5th .
Craig : Going very nicely at the moment !!
Lazenby- Don't know. He doesn't even feel like a Bond but who knows maybe if given another chance...
Moore-Perfect tenure.
Dalton- Thank god he didn't do any movies that Brosnan did.
Craig- I want to see him in at least two more.
Me- Haven't started yet. :P
Lazenby - One too short (Give him DAF)
Moore - One too many (Stop at OP)
Dalton - At least two too short (Give him one or two new ones plus GE)
Brosnan - One too many (Start with TND, but I'd have been open to a new one in 2004)
Craig - I'd love to see about two more after SF
Lazenby - Should've at least done DAF but would've loved to see him do at least 4 films in all.
Moore - Should've left after OP. It was a better film for him to go out on, especially as it seemed like it was handled with an older Bond in mind (Unlike AVTAK!).
Dalton - 2 films too short. Should've done AVTAK and another film between 1991 and 1993
Brosnan - About right, although I wouldn't have minded him doing another film in either 2004 or 2005 (Would prefer the latter year though).
Craig - Would like him to stay on for another 2 or 3 films after SF.
Lazenby - A proper sequel to Majesty would have been nice. No more than that, though.
Moore - Too long, drop 2 of the movies.
Dalton - Way too short, definitely one of the strongest actors. Brilliant guy.
Brosnan - About right, just, they should have been better.
Craig - He should complete 5 movies total. As of now, I can't think of a better Bond to take over.
Laz shoulda done at least one more, maybe two.
Dalton shoulda had four min.
Brosnan had his chances; wouldn't mind one more though b/c his acting improved.
Craig needs to do at least four, I hope five total.