James Bond #23 Cancelled

[IanKennedy]

Dalton was not a great Bond. Not the worst but that's not saying much. He was too gung-ho for Bond. I prefer Moore to him but they're still not my favorites. Connery will always be top followed by Brosnan. Craig, I dunno. Both his films are good, they just didn't instantly scream Bond to me. It's there, just after Brosnan there's something about Craig's bond that just doesn't ring true.

I think Praeothmin is on to something with Moore and Dalton both being different sides of Bond taken to the fore. In Craig's case, and I hate to say this, I think he's more on the Dalton side than the Moore. Bond in name only.

But you seem to have missed the fact that Craig's bond is only new to the job. His first job was shown at the start of Casino Royale. He has the edginess you would expect of someone new to the job. I think he sat perfectly as a prequel to Connery. If he were as polished as Connery it would have been a mistake. Craig comes before Brosnan in terms of 'true' time line.

[kostmayer]

Craigs portrayal of Bond was spot on in my eyes. He wasn't supposed to be the sophisticated Secret Agent, not yet. At first, he was little more then a hitman. Vesper commented on how he wasn't quite comfortable with his wealth, and M was still trying to instil a little discipline and restraint into him (thought not much).

Brosnan was probably my fave portrayal of Bond, though after Goldeneye I didn't really rate the actual films.

[Sionnach Glic]

I wasn't that fond of Daniel Craig as Bond initialy, but he's grown on me. I'd like to see him back for another movie or two. At the very least to finish the current plot they have going on.

[Tsukiyumi]

I wasn't that fond of Daniel Craig as Bond initialy, but he's grown on me. I'd like to see him back for another movie or two. At the very least to finish the current plot they have going on.

Agreed.

[Praeothmin]

My favourite is still George Lazenby. Dunno why. Then Dalton by a mile, followed by Moore. I place Connery last. Call me heathen, but I have never liked him at all.

BURN THE HERETIC...

[Praeothmin]

Dalton was not a great Bond. Not the worst but that's not saying much. He was too gung-ho for Bond. I prefer Moore to him but they're still not my favorites. Connery will always be top followed by Brosnan. Craig, I dunno. Both his films are good, they just didn't instantly scream Bond to me. It's there, just after Brosnan there's something about Craig's bond that just doesn't ring true.

I think Praeothmin is on to something with Moore and Dalton both being different sides of Bond taken to the fore. In Craig's case, and I hate to say this, I think he's more on the Dalton side than the Moore. Bond in name only.

But you seem to have missed the fact that Craig's bond is only new to the job. His first job was shown at the start of Casino Royale. He has the edginess you would expect of someone new to the job. I think he sat perfectly as a prequel to Connery. If he were as polished as Connery it would have been a mistake. Craig comes before Brosnan in terms of 'true' time line.

That's what I said... Ok, maybe not in so many words, but what I implied when I wrote this:

Craig: Take Connery's Bond, strip away experience and the years of socializing, and you get Craig's Bond. Perfect for a reboot, and the edgiest Bond IMO...

[Tyyr]

He does a fine job at it. It's just not my favorite Bond portrayal and I don't know if you'd ever get Craig to that Connery/Brosnan charisma.

[Mikey]

Agreed. Besides, the star of Casino Royale was Peter Sellers.

[mwhittington]

Craigs portrayal of Bond was spot on in my eyes. He wasn't supposed to be the sophisticated Secret Agent, not yet. At first, he was little more then a hitman. Vesper commented on how he wasn't quite comfortable with his wealth, and M was still trying to instil a little discipline and restraint into him (thought not much).

Brosnan was probably my fave portrayal of Bond, though after Goldeneye I didn't really rate the actual films.

Exactly, he wasn't supposed to be suave or debonair yet. Remember, Casino Royale was a reboot to the Bond franchise. He had just gotten his 00 license, so he's new to the job and has to grow into it. Q told Bond in The World is Not Enough: "Never let them see you bleed, and always have an escape route." In Casino Royale, we saw Bond bleed and without an escape route, proving he's green and needs seasoning, whereas in the other Bond movies, we see an experienced, well seasoned 00 agent. That's why you see the contrast.

Connery is the iconic Bond, Brosnan added a measure of boyish charm, and was an admirable Bond. Moore was...acceptable. As for Dalton, I just pretend he was never Bond. And Lazenby, I just pretend he never existed.

[Mikey]

The charm, dry wit, and sardonicism of Connery's Bond (and the slightly caricaturish version thereof of Moore's and Brosnan's) was an innate feature of the man, not a product of training. Being suave isn't a matter of training; you either have it or you don't. If we want to talk about Casino Royale being an entry point, remember that in the real Casino Royale Peter Sellers didn't have the slightest intimation of violence or "edginess."

[mwhittington]

True.