• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

If Who were Bond...

Starkers

Starkers

Admiral
Premium Member
Steve67 made an interesting observation in another thread when he said Tom was the Sean Connery of Whos. Must admit it’s something I’ve considered before because most people asked who the best Bond is say Connery (an assertion I’d disagree with) in the same way that Tom often tops the charts of best who (along with whoever the current incumbent is!) Anyway given that the two do share a lot of common ground (British icons who first appeared on screen in the early sixties) I thought it would be fun to do my take on who the other Doctors might be if they were Bonds…

Sean Connery = Tom Baker (Everyone’s perception of the epitome of Bond/Who)

George Lazenby = Peter Davison (The underrated nice guy)

Roger Moore = Jon Pertwee (The suave, debonair man of action)

Timothy Dalton = Colin Baker (The dangerous one the world wasn’t ready for who’s become a cult icon)

Pierce Brosnan= David Tennant (The identikit Bond/ Who- great but doesn’t bring anything new to the role just a amalgamation of others)

Daniel Craig = Christopher Eccleston (The gritty one!)
 
Agreed, but Baker isn't my Who, or even what I'd compare to Connery.

Also, since when is Dalton a cult icon? He's one of the worst Bonds.
 
Well the Baker/Connery thing comes down to both being often used as the epitome of Bond or Who, it doesn't mean they're similar in any other way and in fact neither is my personal favourite (in fact in many respects Connery is my least favourite Bond)

Dalton is a legend! In many ways he's my favourite 007. (and I don't mind that people don't get that, I don't get the love for Colin Baker either!)
 
Stalkers said:
Sean Connery = Tom Baker (Everyone’s perception of the epitome of Bond/Who)
Click to expand...

Possibly, though Connery is also revered as being the first Bond, so Hartnell is probably the more apt one on that score.

Roger Moore = Jon Pertwee (The suave, debonair man of action)
Click to expand...

He also had a tendency to perform like an actor 20 years younger, too. I can't complain on that one.

Pierce Brosnan= David Tennant (The identikit Bond/ Who- great but doesn’t bring anything new to the role just a amalgamation of others)
Click to expand...

I disagree completely, at least the part about Tennant being an amalgamation. Tennant has been a unique Doctor Who. I think the comparison with Brosnan, however, is correct because the Brosnan era polarized Bond fandom - some loved it, some hated it - in part due to the franchise becoming bigger and louder, much as some have condemned RTD for doing same with Doctor Who. Also, Brosnan playing Bond was a fulfilment of a childhood dream for him, just as Tennant playing Who fulfilled his dream. Also, both were called in to play Bond/Who after their predecessors left prematurely.

Daniel Craig = Christopher Eccleston (The gritty one!)
Click to expand...

I'd also make him the "dangerous one" too.

Alex
 
I'd also suggest that Dalton and McCoy are the 007-DW equivalents of each other. Both had been starring alongside each other on stage shortly before landing the roles. Both were Celts (a Welshman and Scot, respectively). Neither was the first choice (Brosnan was supposed to play 007 but lost out because of his Remington Steele contract, while Peter Cook and the return of Patrick Troughton had been mooted ahead of McCoy). Both made their debuts around the same time. McCoy's last season of DW was 1989, ditto Dalton's last Bond movie. Each was still officially the incumbent in their role until 1995, when Brosnan and Paul McGann were officially unveiled as their replacements. And neither has had a particularly successful career since, sad to say.
 
I wouldn't say they haven't had successful careers. Dalton has been appearing in assortment of movies in the last few years (plus an upcoming appearance on Doctor Who...hmmm...maybe McCoy can show up in the next Bond movie) while McCoy has done a lot of highly regarded theater work.
 
^They're doing better than many actors, true. But I said 'not particularly successful.' Dalton hasn't had the profile that Connery, Brosnan or Craig have had, for example. And we don't see McCoy on tv as often as we see Tom Baker or Peter Davison.

BTW, I agree with the Craig - Eccleston comparison. Both are Northerners, both are/ were associated with more gritty dramas than sci-fi or big-budget adventures and both co-starred in Our Friends in The North. Both were surprise choices for the role. I just hope Craig's tenure lasts longer than Eccleston's!

You could also compare Eccleson with Brosnan in that both relaunched a franchise that had been moribound for some time and that could as easily have flopped as been the roaring successes they turned out to be.
 
One could just as easily say that Dalton and Eccleston had that in common as well, both taking franchises that had--in a lot of eyes--become little more than jokes and injecting them with much needed gravitas.

Worth pointing out as well that though Brosnan was first choice to replace Moore, Dalton was actually approached to be Bond much, much earlier--post Connery in fact, and he turned it down because he felt he was too young, so really Dalton was first choice to be 007. You can't really compare Connery and Dalton's post Bond careers because Dalton's an actor whilst Connery is a movie star, which is why his career survived so many god awful career choices (Zardoz, League of Extraordinary Gentelmen etc). Similarly with Brosnan, Dalton came to Bond on the back of a respected career in film whilst Brosnan came to Bond on the back of a succesful TV series and cinematic wonders like Alistair Mac'Clean's Death Train ;) For Dalton Bond was the pinnacle whilst for Brosnan it was a launch pad. Brosnan also had the benefit of having a bit more of a clean slate, whilst Dalton came in immeidiately after a hugely succesful Bond (love him or hate him Moore was popular).

In terms of Who Davison has had a much better post Who career than McCoy, but let's be honest in the main its because he's probably a far better actor, as for Tom Baker, well frankly most of his current work revolves around having a distinctive voice or producers essentially requiring Tom Baker.
 
Captaindemotion said:
^They're doing better than many actors, true. But I said 'not particularly successful.' Dalton hasn't had the profile that Connery, Brosnan or Craig have had, for example. And we don't see McCoy on tv as often as we see Tom Baker or Peter Davison.
Click to expand...

I think you're using a definition of "particularly successful" that's much higher than the vast majority of actual actors use. For most actors, being "successful" would mean having steady acting employment, being "particularly successful" would mean steady, highly-regarded employment. Being "very successful" would mean having a steady but low-level movie or TV career, like Dalton has. Being "hugely successful" would mean having being a well-known TV or movie actor. Being "so successful you can't even fathom it" would mean being a movie star or TV star.
 
Sci said:
I think you're using a definition of "particularly successful" that's much higher than the vast majority of actual actors use.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, the fact that I acknowledged that they're doing better than many actors was presumably a bit of a giveaway. But the vast majority of actors never landed the role of James Bond or Dr Who.

For most actors, being "successful" would mean having steady acting employment, being "particularly successful" would mean steady, highly-regarded employment. Being "very successful" would mean having a steady but low-level movie or TV career, like Dalton has. Being "hugely successful" would mean having being a well-known TV or movie actor. Being "so successful you can't even fathom it" would mean being a movie star or TV star.
Click to expand...

Well, we could go into all sorts of breakdowns of the levels of success and use all sorts of adjectives or qualifications before the word. But the fact remains, that for two actors who headed two highly regarded, well known, long-running franchises, they have not, for the most part had really high profile gigs or huge success since leaving those roles. when did you last see a Timothy Dalton movie in the cinema? Or a tv show starring Sly McCoy? Do either of them put bums on seats or add to ratings viewing? Sadly not. They're not that well known outside of fandom.

I used the comparator of other Bonds and Dr Whos to compare them with those in the most similar positions. Piercr Brosnan makes movies that get cinema releases, he has worked with Tim Burton and John Boorman, he's been nominated for Golden Globes (The Matador). Dalton has had nowhere near that level of success. Is he doing better than the majority of actors? Yes. But the majority of actors didn't play the world's most famous spy in the longest running franchise.

Similarly, McCoy isn't as instantly recognisable as most of the DWs who preceded him (apart from maybe Colin Baker). Davison has been in lots of tv shows since, like Meet The Braithwaites and Dangerous Davies. Baker - not so much. You have to compare his level of success with someone like another Doctor, not an obscure jobbing actor.

I also think the claim that Dalton was offered the 007 role in 1969 is something of a recent internet myth - in fact I only ever see it on the BBS. I've read lots of books about the Bond series and quite a few documentary programmes. I remember reading all about him when he was cast in the role in 1986 and also when he relinquished it in 1994 or 95. I don't ever remember hearing that until a few years ago on the BBS. I think it's one of these myths that has grown wings. People like O'Toole, Stamp, Burton and others were considered as Connery's replacement before they went for Lazenby. Then a few years later they even considered an American (Redford, Newman, Reynolds, James Brolin). Dalton didn't enter the picture until the 1980s.

I should say, I actually like Dalton's Bond a lot and the man himself seems like a very nice bloke, so these posts shouldn't be seen as attacks on him.
 
Well I can only speak for my own experiences, the Dalton "myth" as you put it is something I've read in several books so whilst I can't guarentee it's 100% accurate I believe it to be more than an internet rumour. As for the last Dalton film I saw at the Cinema...Hot Fuzz 2 years ago. The last Brosnan film I saw at the cinema? Mama Mia in 2008. Actually if you look at his post Bond career he hasn't made that many hugely succesful films really (The Matador was critically acclaimed but it was also 4 years ago) in fact a lot of the things he's most famous for, other than Bond, tended to occur whilst he was Bond ie the Thomas Crown affair. And in a lot of cases his roles in films haven't been major. Yes he worked with Tim Burton (but what does that prove so has Mark Walhberg) but it was a minor role in Mars Attacks. Similarly he isn't really the reason Mama Mia was a success either.

As I've said there's a clear reason why Davison has had a good post Who career, and I believe Moffat has commented on this; simply put he's one of the best actual actors to do the role which is why he's had a much better post Who career.
 
^Hot Fuzz was hardly as big a hit or as big-budget a pic as Mama Mia (even though I personally liked HF and have zero interest in seeing the latter). And Dalton was playing a supporting role, whereas Brosnan had one of the leads, alongside Meryl Streep, Colin Firth and Stellan Skaarsgard. Yes, the movie would have been a hit without him but the fact remains that the makers were prepared to cast him in it. Would they have cast Dalton if Brosnan wasn't available? And before Fuzz, when was the last Dalton movie you saw in the cinema?

I accept that Brosnan isn't Tom Cruise or Will Smith either, but he's made interesting movies like Seraphim Falls and the glossy likes of Thomas Crown, Laws of Attraction or After The Sunset and has his own production company. Dalton does have a voice role in Toy Story 3 but then again, fellow Tim, Mr Allen isn't a big box office draw either. By any commercial or name recognition standard, Brosnan has had the more successful post-Bond career.
 
Actually I'd say Eccleston was Lazenby, for turning his back after only months in front of the camera and deciding to walk.

While McGann was Dalton, investing himself with continuing... signing a 5 year contract but having that opportunity taken away due to poor decisions, some very bad timing and years of corporate wrangling between owners.

EON v MGM/UA. BBC Television v BBC Worldwide/Universal.

BBC1 controller had to resolve the rights reverting back to BBC Films issue. This turned out to be a simple matter, meaning Doctor Who could've been back sooner if anybody had actually given a damn.

Likewise, there was no movement on Dalton's 3rd film supposedly called "The Property of a Lady" because EON took the studio who released the films in cinemas, home video and TV to court.
 
Last edited:
Captaindemotion said:
^Hot Fuzz was hardly as big a hit or as big-budget a pic as Mama Mia (even though I personally liked HF and have zero interest in seeing the latter). And Dalton was playing a supporting role, whereas Brosnan had one of the leads, alongside Meryl Streep, Colin Firth and Stellan Skaarsgard. Yes, the movie would have been a hit without him but the fact remains that the makers were prepared to cast him in it. Would they have cast Dalton if Brosnan wasn't available? And before Fuzz, when was the last Dalton movie you saw in the cinema?

I accept that Brosnan isn't Tom Cruise or Will Smith either, but he's made interesting movies like Seraphim Falls and the glossy likes of Thomas Crown, Laws of Attraction or After The Sunset and has his own production company. Dalton does have a voice role in Toy Story 3 but then again, fellow Tim, Mr Allen isn't a big box office draw either. By any commercial or name recognition standard, Brosnan has had the more successful post-Bond career.
Click to expand...

I can't really argue that in terms of name recognition Brosnan has done way better, but it might come down to something as simple as Brosnan wanting it more than Dalton, by all accounts Timothy Dalton is quite a shy, quiet man. Maybe he didn't want the big time as much?

By the way, regarding the story that Dalton was approached early on to be Bond, I rewatched the documentary on the Living Daylights DVD earlier as I figured they'd mention it if it were true and I wondered if this was where I'd first heard it.

Dalton was approached before OHMSS but felt he was too young. Broccolli asked him again in the 70s and again he turned them down. He was the first choice for The Living Daylights but would have still been filming Brenda Starr when they started production so had to turn them down again. It was at this point that Brosnan's name cropped up. When he wasn't able to get out of Remmington Steele they chose to delay production of TLD and ask Dalton again. This time he said yes and began work on TLD pretty much two days after finishing on Brenda Starr.

BTW, Mama Mia is actually ridiculously enjoyable!
 
Tom Baker can be your Sean Connery . . .

if Patrick Troughton can be Cary Grant. Better actor, better Doctor, and he does have the classier spy film North By Northwest. Cary Grant was offered the role of Bond for Dr. No and agreed, but would only have done the one film.
 
Stalkers said:
By the way, regarding the story that Dalton was approached early on to be Bond, I rewatched the documentary on the Living Daylights DVD earlier as I figured they'd mention it if it were true and I wondered if this was where I'd first heard it.

Dalton was approached before OHMSS but felt he was too young. Broccolli asked him again in the 70s and again he turned them down. He was the first choice for The Living Daylights but would have still been filming Brenda Starr when they started production so had to turn them down again. It was at this point that Brosnan's name cropped up. When he wasn't able to get out of Remmington Steele they chose to delay production of TLD and ask Dalton again. This time he said yes and began work on TLD pretty much two days after finishing on Brenda Starr.
Click to expand...

If it's on the DVD doc, then fair enough. My recollection at the time was that Brosnan was always in the frame (and had been the press front-runner for a few years) until the last minute, Dalton seemed to come out of nowhere, when PB got shafted by the Remington Steele producers. I remember the casting being announced on the BBC news and the definite impression was of a last minute dark horse. Sam Neill also auditioned for TLD (I believe that also is on the DVD) while Charles Dance was offered an audition but declined it on his (now ex) agent's advice

I also think Broccoli had a bit of a habit of offering the role to various actors at various stages when either Connery or Moore were getting on his wick. Michael Gambon claims to have been offered it, in a very funny anecdote:

'But Cubby, I'm bald!'

'So was Connery, we'll stick you in a wig. That fucker wore more rugs in those movies.'

'I'll need to get my teeth done!'

'No problem, I'll pay for that!'

Etc.

BTW, Mama Mia is actually ridiculously enjoyable!
Click to expand...

I'm still not watching it! :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top