Who's The Best Bond?

Skyfall comes out tomorrow and, from all I've read so far, it's expected to be one of the best Bond movies. Despite this, I know a lot of people who just can't get into Daniel Craig as James Bond - they hold true to the Connery version, or the Moore version (rarely, if ever, the Lazenby version).

Focus: Who's the best James Bond? Defend your decision.

Sean Connery


George Lazenby


Roger Moore


Timothy Dalton


Pierce Brosnan


Daniel Craig

 

Connery, of course. He defined the (film) Bond character, who is larger than life and displays an extreme sort of masculinity that is now so closely associated with Bond. Nowadays we have a diverse set of models for what it means to be a "man's man" - everything from super-bodybuilders like Stallone, Schwarzenegger, and the Rock to the "bro" model. Connery's Bond hit a sweet spot, balancing physicality, intellectualism, culture, and a disdain for authority. That came with a dark side, too - his overt misogyny and the undercurrents of racism wouldn't fly today. Can you imagine a scene where a character in a modern film gets his chest shaved by subservient Japanese girls so he can become an Honorary Japanese guy?

I think the more interesting question is, who is the second-best Bond?

I have only read one Bond book, which is Casino Royale. I found it quite enjoyable; it's two notches above pulp at least. If you've never read it, the Daniel Craig film version is fucking spot-on. Aside from the Parkour scene at the beginning, added to bring in another action beat in what's fundamentally a spy "thriller," that movie is a damn fine translation of the book to the screen. In the book, many traditional Bond traits are there - the cool demeanor, the impeccable style, the fairly overt womanizing (though he keeps it mostly to his internal monologue). Book Bond is also notably detached and impersonal - kind of like a John le Carre character. I think Daniel Craig hit the balance of these features very accurately, and commendably so. Connery is too over-the-top, Moore is campy, Brosnan has no dark side, and Dalton has a dark side - but it's not borne of detachment.

 

Connery defines the character, and all other players are compared to him. I did not like George Lazenby (Majesty is a Bond movie I hate) and it's a LONG story about his downfall. Oh well, he was a huge asshole in real life. Roger Moore had fucking RIDICULOUS films sometimes, but great ones too. Moore was also gayer than the entire British Navy put together and had no athletic ability. Oh well, Octopussy is still my favourite Bond film.

I admit to liking Timothy Dalton, despite the fact the scripts ion both his films were weak. He was a lot closer to Flemming's original Bond than people give him credit for: he was moody and intense, and the guy STILL looks like he's in his 40's.

Brosnan Started off GREAT with Goldeneye (which was a solid movie), than it was all CGI and endless half-assed wisecracks for three more sub-par films that almost terminated the franchise.

Craig is an ideal choice for Bond, except one complaint about his version of the character: James Bond is NOT a one-man demolition derby. He is supposed to be suave and calculating, which Craig IS, but he's also a psychopath who destroys everything in his way. Casino Royale was spectacular and a real modern application to the Bond formula and the second film was watchable, but the Paul Greengrass-shit was a fatal mistake than made action scenes chaotic and impossible to watch. The new one looks amazing.

I would go with Connery, but if Craig stops acting so sour towards the series and at least gives a couple more good ones he could trump him.

 

Let's not confuse the actors with the character, because none of them are like the character. Not Connery, not Craig, and especially not Moore. Nor were the actors really responsible for the films they're in. Personally, I'm a fan of the whole series. I can stomach the fluctuations in quality from film to film for the most part. I even appreciate some of the campiness and comedy (as opposed to dry humour) in the Moore films, at least to a point. No one performance is %100 definitive either in my view, they are products of their time.

That said, Connery's portrayal is not only the most iconic, but perhaps also the most enjoyable. It's the consensus and I think it's true. I don't think it work today though, and not just because of political correctness (though that as well). Even during the 60's, the Bond fantasy was becoming less contemporary and more archaic. Diamonds are Forever worked at least because he was seeking revenge.
I count myself as one of the revisionists that find a lot to like in OHMSS. Lazenby lacks charm, sure, but he had a good physicality, and that film has some of the better stunt-work of the series. It's recognisably Bond without being extremely over the top. The ending is a bit much for a lot of people, but I think it was important for the Bond mythos.
Dalton was good, though it's been some time since I saw those films. Brosnan's performance I think worked as a good combination of the past actors', and Goldeneye seemed to have the perfect balance for a 90's Bond film. Of course the subsequent films were increasingly bland each time, but when he didn't look bored, I think Brosnan fared well.

Craig has been good, but Quantum of Solace was a bit on the boring side, I hope Skyfall is an improvement. I hear good things, but I won't get to find out myself until later this month because film distributors think Australia is still in the fucking dark ages (Django Unchained won't be released here for a good month after the US, despite the financial success here of Inglourious Basterds)

 

Connery IS Bond.

Craig does a fantastic job of modernizing and "darkening" the character. He gave the character a much-needed fresh start, but unfortunately, his first is still the best. Pierce Brosnan is just too much of a tiny, pretty boy to be Bond, and Craig definitely carries himself in a way that it's completely believable he could beat the fuck out of someone. The producers read the writing on the wall (Bourne, Mission Impossible, etc.) and made the character much more in line with successful action characters: darker, grittier, more realistic (in certain ways) and more brutal.

Next Bond could be Idris Elba:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/29/idris-elba-as-james-bond-_n_987678.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/2 ... 87678.html</a>

I would certainly be in favor of that shit, he's an amazing actor.

Also, Skyfall is ok...better than Quantum of Solace, but not as good as Casino Royale, in my opinion.

 

What I personally would like of the Bond movies is more Bond girl nudity.

 

I also believe Connery was the standard from which to compare all the others. That said, I like Daniel Craig the best because he's more like a real person to me than all the others.

Roger Moore was so froofroo that he probably had to run off scene to vomit after faking fucking a Bond girl.

Timothy Dalton was unremarkable to me. He's a good actor but I don't think his films were very memorable.

Pierce Brosnan was enjoyable but I feel that after goldeneye, his movies were lackluster and also forgettable. Although his Bond girls were my favorite. Between Famke Janssen and the girl who played Natalia, I was smitten.

There's a reason George Lazenby only had one movie.

And I wouldn't be upset if Stringer became the next James Bond.

 

I have trouble with this question

Connery defined Bond, and made him what he is

Dalton was the proto-aggressive Bond and very close to the Book bonds. He's probably the direct predecessor to the Craig bond. He had shitty movies to act in which is a shame.

Brosnan was in 2-3 awful fucking movies, but Goldeneye was probably the 'perfection' of the more campy/techy Bond formula, he was also my first Bond so I'm somewhat loyal to him

Craig was the perfect reinvention of Bond for Casino Royale - intense, dramatic, borrowed quite a bit from the books, and brutal. I didn't like QoS as much so I'll need to see Skyfall to judge him fairly.


Instead of picking, I'm just going to say retaining Judi Dench for the relaunch was a great move.

 

Connery. How is this even a question? Moore is my least favorite, and I'm still getting used to a blond Bond. And I like Densch as M.

 

Craig, because he is a sexy motherfucker. Sound reasoning, I know.

 

Craig. You can't take anything from Connery. Dude is legend. I like better the way Craig plays the role. The jokes are slick, he's vulnerable, never groan worthy, and he will tear your freakin' head off. The last 20 minutes of Casino Royale were high drama; it was amazing. That was a film with action elements. Not a popcorn flick like Moore's. Completely sold me. He was the only thing keeping Quantum of Solace together. Dude is magnetic to watch as Bond.

Dalton got a bad rap. Problem was he didn't have a lot of charm, he was 100% the book version. License to Kill is a mean, mean flick. Give it another watch. I grew up with Moore because my mom loved them, so I have a soft spot. Man With The Golden Gun is fantastic.

What's awesome is what was filmed back then. The stuff Connery said still makes me blush. Come on, they gave Christopher Lee 3 nipples AND a midget butler. You can't get away with that shit anymore.

Lazenby is the only one I outright loathe (though he had one of the best lines of the series). On Her Majesty's Secret Service is also the worst movie in the series. Die Another Day, while completely ridiculous horseshit, is nowhere near as boring. Halle Berry should have her Oscar rescinded.

Also, this:



"Wait til you get to my teeth." I can die happy when I can drop that line.

I take it back, this is the best Connery moment ever:

 

Connery without question, then Craig. Craig pulls off the Bond part much better than i expected. And he is the only one who could go toe to toe with Connery in a brawl and stand a chance of winning.

I saw Craig in a Broadway show a couple of years ago in a two man show with Hugh Jackman called "A Steady Rain". Craig is a better actor than I would have suspected.

As a side note, we had great seats, 3 rows from the stage. I thought it was cool to see James Bond and Wolverine up close, sharing a stage. The Mrsanthropic just thought it was great to be 20 feet from Daniel Craig and Hugh Jackman.

 

Connery, without a doubt. He gave Bond the swagger that every subsequent actor has tried to emulate.

That said, Craig is fantastic and definitely #2. He's gritty and intense. Brosnan was good, but he was too pretty. For the exception of Die Another Day when he was captive in N. Korea, he never got hurt. He rarely, if ever, bled. Craig brings realism to the character. He gets fucked up and is still able to hold his charm and stay true to the Bond persona, but he's not invincible. He has the ability to make you think, even if just for a second, that he might not be able to pull it off.

The one thing really absent from his movies, though, are the gadgets--he has none. He's got his gun and a phone and his cunning, and that's about it. It plays to the "blunt instrument" definition that M gave him in Casino Royale, but I would like to see him blast through something with the laser from his Omega, or shatter some glass with a high frequency emitting ring--hell, give him a hollow heel on one of his shoes to keep his chicklets in...just give me something. It got a little out of hand with Brosnan and his invisible Vanquish (or "Vanish," as they called it) but there are ways of including the cool tech with it still feeling real. From what I've seen of the trailers, SkyFall brings back Q in some capacity, so here's hoping.

As for the others, Dalton will always be the douche in the Rocketeer to me. He was ok, but almost too emotional. Whether or not that plays truer to Fleming's Bond or not, I didn't really like him.

Moore was good, but like Brosnan, he was too much of a pretty boy pretending to be tough. I always expected to see him wearing a neck scarf, and some of his one-liners were so damn hokie.

Brosnan is #3 because GoldenEye. The popularity of the movie, coupled with the video game sealed his fame for me. He was the Bond I grew up with, and while he's not the best, he was pretty damn awesome.

Lazenby...who? Exactly.

As for the best classic Bond scene, you have to go back to where is all began. "That's a Smith and Wesson, and you've had your six."

 

He did though, it was called Never Say Never Again. I haven't seen it for some time, and the critical consensus seems mixed, but I do recall some positive feelings for the film. Basically it's a muted version of Thunderball, which also starred Connery. If you want to know the story behind these movies, you can look it up, but basically its status as an "unofficial" Bond film shouldn't exclude it from consideration against the others, especially considering that it was directed by Irvin Kershner, the man everyone credits The Empire Strikes Back with because they don't want to give George Lucas an inch (my own assessment of Kersh as a director is slightly different).

This is a cool fan theory, except that in Diamonds are Forever, Connery's Bond is seeking very personal revenge on Bloefield, for the death of Lazenby's wife. You might as well try to tell me he's a timelord. No.

Yes, that reason was because he didn't want to come back for any more. Make no mistake, I don't think he was superior to Connery, I'm not just banging on about this point in a fanboy effort to tow an imagined company line: Broccoli et al had conducted na extrememly thorough, exhaustive and at the time, expensive search on who to replace Connery with, and at the end they settled with Lazenby, largely because of his physicality (he punched a stuntman during a screentest, unaware that these things are generally faked for film). His ability to act was largely untested; a gamble, yes, but similar to the gamble they took when hiring Connery (who Fleming originally hated, calling him a "lorry driver").

I do like On Her Majesty's Secret Service more than I like Lazenby as Bond, but I think he did a servicable job. Am I the only one on the board that thinks so? At least that OHMSS is a good film? It lacks an x-factore, but the rest is all there. I have little doubt that Lazenby would have been kept on if a) he'd signed a multi-picture contract, b) he didn't show up to the premiere with a beard and long hair, and c) he didn't start stating halfway through production he didn't want to do another film. I'm not just taking up a revisionist line here, all of this was the case by all reports.
The character was already old hat by this time and Lazenby, under the wrong impression of his celebrity status, thought he'd be making more "important" films with the likes of Dennis Hopper. It wasn't until later he'd try to go back and trade on his one claim to fame.

The reason I bring this up is because all the Bond actors all seem to have wanted to sever themselves from the character at one point or another. Connery was tired of it by Goldfinger, by all reports. Roger Moore was making fun of it in a campy way. Dalton seemed to deal with it the best, but he only accepted the role on the third offer. Apparently he still refers to the second film as "License Revoked.". Brosnan started off seeming like he relished it, but seemed more and more bored with the whole thing. Indeed, post Goldeneye, the only time he looked like he was having any fun was with the initial beardy scenes of Die Another Day which probably has the quickest good to crappy transition of all the Bond films (as soon as he shaves). Check out The Matador for a great, very un-bondlike performance as a hitman.

Also I'm in the dark about Moore's "fruity" reputation. The one substantial gay rumour I could find was thoroughly debunked, and all other indications I can deduce point to an old straight white Brit that wants to keep the status quo. Is it just that Americans think all Brits sound gay?

 

For me when you say Bond I'll always think of Roger Moore just because the first two Bond films I saw were Moonraker and A View to a Kill. However, having later read the books and re-watched the movies, I do have to agree that Dalton, who not too many people think of as the "best" Bond, gave the closest performances to Ian Fleming's character IMHO.

 

No, Roger Moore had an extremely effeminate on-screen persona, to me at least. Nothing wrong with femmy dudes, but as James Bond, it seemed slightly out of place. I felt like he tried to be the prettiest James Bond. While Daniel Craig is the more rugged Bond who gets strapped to a chair naked and whipped in the nuts with a torture device.

You would have never seen Roger Moore get treated this way. He would have had a heart attack and died.

 

I'm of the opinion that Brosnan was actually the best Bond, but got saddled with a bunch of knuckleheads for producers, directors, and writers. He had the sort of effortless class and charm that you want from Bond, without any lessening of badassery. He's a hell of an actor. He just was given absolute dogshit in terms of the movies he was in.

As someone who grew up on the Brosnan Bond, Connery and to a larger extent Craig are a bit tough to get used to because they are both a more rough-edged take on the character.

 

I have nothing to add to this discussion other than I've touched Daniel Craig's pec, so I like him the most.