The Great Bond Debate

[Funk, E.]

Given that the subject surfaced on the "Highlander 5" post I figured we might as well drag this one out of the closet for another round.

The Great "who played the best James Bond" debate in many ways mirrors the great "who was the best Star Trek captain" debate.  May default to the first. The first has an unfair advantage because a) there is no presedent and b) they create the benchmark for all others.

Now admittedly at the very least Connery did play a most excellent Bond and there was a great combination of cold killer and flip seducer. What a lot of people also don't realize is theat the Connery films were the only ones that actually followed the books which lends him yet one more unfair advantage over the competiton. Everyone else has had to try to carry a franchise reinventing itself for the times. I think this is the biggest barrier to Brosnen getting a chance to go toe to toe with Connery.  He's locked into a action movie/SFX intensive format and not being given the chance to show his colors. Dalton also had a chance but got buried by the worst script in the history of the franchise.

So anyways... there it is, have at it.

[Chadzilla]

The first James Bond movie I saw was The Spy Who Loved Me in 1977 at age ten, so, for awhile, Roger Moore was Bond to me.  Grew to appreciate Connery and feel that both Dalton and Brosnan are good choices for the part.

[Brother Ragnarok]

Of course Connery is the best.  I mean, he's SEAN CONNERY.  There are few cooler people on the planet, Bond or not.
Brosnan, however, is by far the best of the fake Bonds.  And I may be booed for this, but I thought Lazenby was pretty good.  Far better than Moore.

Brother R

[Deej]

Brother Ragnarok wrote:

> Of course Connery is the best.  I mean, he's SEAN CONNERY.
> There are few cooler people on the planet, Bond or not.
> Brosnan, however, is by far the best of the fake Bonds.  And
> I may be booed for this, but I thought Lazenby was pretty good.
>  Far better than Moore.

Agreed, on all counts. Connery is the coolest mother humper alive. Lazenby wasn't as big presence or as good an actor, but I think he he balanced the action and humor very well. Roger More just put in a bunch of cartoon-character performances, although he also had a good moment or two. I think Dalton was great, but after 12 years of Moore's buffoonery, people weren't ready for a hard-boiled Bond again. I think Brosan is also a good Bond, he's not as jkey as Moore, but not quite as serious as Dalton, good balance.

Fvorite Line From a Bond Flick: in OHMSS, after JB saves the girl and she steals his car and rides off...."This never happened to the other fella."

[Jim H]

Lazenby was ok - but did anyone else notice he was just doing his best Sean Connery impression?

[Pete B6K]

I think it's Roger Moore who was stuck in my meory as 'Bond'. Most of the first bond films i saw had him in them.  

Connery was great, he brought out the 'charm' and ego in character.  

Lazenby was awful.  

Dalton was fairly bad, partially due to bad scripts, but not all.  

Brosnan's good, but like Mr. Funk said, he's forced into fast-moving action movies, and dosen't get much chance to really act, just the odd one-liner here and there. But when he does act, he does a good job.

My vote goes with Connery I think.

Pete

[Dolph Lundgren]

I've always heard a little urban legend of sorts in regard to Bond.  The story goes that whatever Bond you've seen first ends up being your favorite Bond, even after you've seen the rest.  For me, this is pretty much true.  I had never really seen a Bond movie, but I remember going to see Tomorrow Never Dies first day (because Michelle Yeoh was in it) and instantly becoming a fan, although I look back on it and realize that TND wasn't one of the best Bond movies.  But Pierce has it all, and that's why he's my favorite.  I thought that everyone who played Bond did a good job in their own right.  Connery was great, no doubt about it.  The originator, the trendsetter.  Moore brought a little something different, and reading a lot of opinions on the Internet, a LOT of people hate him for this.  Yeah, so Moore wasn't exactly serious OR cold, like the Bond from the books.  But he still did a good job at bringing something a little different.  As for Dalton, I hate it when people say he was the (temporary) death of the franchise.  Dalton was great in his own right and these criticisms are thrust unfairly on him, IMO.  The same goes for Lazenby.  He was a good mixture, and definitely had the physical presence to carry on the Bond torch.  Personally, On Her Majesty's Secret Service is my second favorite Bond movie behind Goldeneye.  OHMSS had some things a little different that made it a great Bond flick, just like the man playing Bond brought something different as well.  IMO, all Bonds were great, and none of them played the role badly or did a disservice to the role.

Here's another question, when Pierce (unfortunately) gives up the torch, who should be the next guy to take his place?  I've heard everyone from Russell Crowe (too big) to Cuba Gooding Jr. (!) being mentioned.  But who would you guys choose?  Personally, I say give Hugh Jackman a chance in a couple of years.  Look at what he did for the non-believers that thought he couldn't play Wolverine.  Either Jackman, or Clive Owen.  Not many people know who he is, but he played "The Driver" in the BMW short films.  This guy would be great, and I'm sure that anyone who's seen these commercials would agree.  Christian Bale would be another great choice, but he's way too young and will have a good career on his hands in the next few years, I'm predicting.  Those would be my top picks.  How about you guys?

[Evan3]

I have to agree with u and Deej on this. Roger Moore was terrible, and was Bond at a terrible time. It takes a lot to make Christopher Lee seem ridiculous (man with Golden Gun). With the exception of Golden Eye, very few of the Post Connery ones were any good. Pierce, Lazenby and Daldry were all decent, but I dont think that it is the acting that is killing the franchise.

With that said, I hope Hugh Grant is the next James Bond!!!

[Deej]

Clive Owen is good, looks a bit like Connery, so he'd probably get flak for being a look-a-like even though he's a talented actor.

I think you may be right  about Hugh Jackman. He's got the physicality and the acting chops to play Bond.

I'm one f the few to admit liking Russell Crowe, but I can't see him as JB.

Christian Bale is another good choice, but he might fall into the same hole that Dalton did, that is, being TOO good an actor.

I've even heard that Robbie Williams was interested in playing Bond(could be apocryphal).

I think of all the suggestons I've heard, I'd vote for Jackman.

[Vermin Boy]

Woody Allen, Casino Royale ;)

[peter johnson]

Damn!!  Vermin beat me to the punch again!!!
Didn't David Niven also play Bond Sr. in the same film?  Now there was a dashing, debonair fellow --
peter johnson
PS:  Everyone go look at my iguana mask in the "worst fight scene" post!!

[yaddo42]

Connery -  The best hands down. Nobody to compete against (that B&W TV movie version of CASNIO ROYALE doesn't count), he had the best scripts (most loyal to the books too), and no real prconceived notions of what made Bond work.

Lazenby - Hard to judge with just the one film, but it's a great film. OHMSS would probably have been the best of the series if Connery had done it. As Bond Lazenby was like a substitute teacher, he went through the motions okay, but something just wasn't quite right. Better during the action and the awesome fight scenes than during the drama and meatier acting parts.

Moore - Too much tongue in cheek humor, never a real sense of danger in anything he does. Acted like all this spy business was a nuisance, like he was thinking, "Can we get this bloody cloak and dagger rot over with? I just want to shag the bird and get drunk on Her Majesty's dime." Moore quit trying after LIVE AND LET DIE and it shows.

Dalton -  Was the wrong Bond for the wrong time. Might have done better if he had gotten the role in the mid 70s, but the series was still making money with Moore. A good actor with weak scripts during a directionless time for the series, with the Cold War ending. Also hurt by the Brosnan/Remington Steele controversy. Would make a great Bond villain though.

Brosnan - I liked GOLDENEYE, but have hated his other films. The films are too action dominated and cookie cutter plotted. He's likeable as Bond, but bland with no real personality, partly the scripts faults, but also his limits as an actor.

Who should get the role next? Clive Owen is a good option (watch CROUPIER and see), Michael Praed (Phileas Fogg from THE SECRET ADVENTURES OF JULES VERNE) has potential but lacks the screen presence (would make a great Dr. Who though). Ioan Gruffudd from the HORATIO HORNBLOWER TV movies looks very promising once he gets a little older.

[lonecorndog]

boo

[lonecorndog]

I'll be the rarity. I love Connery, grew up on Moore, thought Lazenby was the most hideous excuse for Bond anyone ever thought of, but fell in love with the movie series all over again when Dalton actually took the role in a serious direction. Dalton is my favorite Bond, but I HATED License to Kill because it broke away from the formula which is, of course, what makes a Bond film. My favorite Bond film is The Living Daylights, including the Aha song.

New Bond? How about Nicole Kidman? We Americans can't tell the difference between British and Australian accents anyway, and it would be cool to see the men fall over her like the women do the male Bonds.

[jmc]

The problem with THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN was that the story wasn't put together very well, especially the villain's role--at one point he's a high priced hit man, but then all of sudden he has a giant solar powered laser beam that he's up to no good with.  I don't blame Moore and certainly don't blame Lee, who deserved much better.  It's still one of my favorites due to the weird "funhouse" sequences and Herve Villachez.  

I saw Moore first, but prefer Connery.  I think Moore was what was necessary to continue the series into the 70s and 80s--I don't think the series would have survived had Connery stuck around due to the changing times and the changing tastes of audiences.  A serious Bond wouldn't have worked.  The main problem with Moore is that he really started looking his age in his later films and it got ludicrous to see him as a playboy secret agent.   Moore's films appeal to younger viewers more, which is probably why I liked Moore when I was a kid and then went with Connery later on.

Lazenby wasn't bad, but had never acted before [he'd only been in commercials.]  His main fault was that he wasn't Connery, and that OHMSS didn't do well due to being too long and ending on a downer.     He ended up with a lot of blame that he didn't really deserve.  But it's probably the best film as far as Bond being portrayed as a human being instead of a cartoon character.    Incidentally, I think Telly Savalas was the best Blofeld--he seemed genuinely menacing.  

The later Bonds I don't care about one way or the other--I haven't seen many of those films other than THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH.  I really need to check out some of the Dalton films.