Who is the Best 007?
- Thread starter NeroShrimp
- Start date
That happens on every Bond film. Also, for the last three films or so, Wade and Purvis have written the first draft and then another writer comes in and spices it up.
*my opinion follows*
I completely respect the whole 'books come first' but we've had over 40 years of the movies deviating from the novels and I think it should've stayed that way. I loved the gadgets, I loved the cheese, I loved the evil lair hidden in volcanoes etc. I hope they come back this way soon, otherwise I'l just stick with the first 20.
Or until Craig regenerates again.
I was very happy with GoldenEye, pretty much on all levels. In my view, it's one of the best of all Bond films. After that, though, the Brosnan films IMO took a nosedive, though not because of the casting. I was about to lose interest in the franchise for the foreseeable future, when Casino Royale came along and pulled me back in.
I enjoy them all in different ways, my thoughts on each:
Connery: Probably changes his performance the most over his tenure. For the first three films he's genuinely brilliant, capturing the tone of the books they're adapting (of which From Russia is the only one that counts as "Serious" spy thriller, Dr. No and Goldfinger are the sort of books that anyone involved with making the films now who goes "We're going back to Fleming" basically ignores), has bags of charisma and is really working the material hard.
Then for Thunderball and You Only Live Twice he's clearly bored out of his mind and is putting almost no effort in, he has enough innate charm to still be watchable and let's face it, Thunderball would bore anyone, but his performance actually hurts his fifth film because he's by far and away the least interesting thing in the movie and he tends to suck life out of the scene anytime he has to speak.
Then you've got his victory laps in Diamonds and Never, by which point he's settled on the default Sean Connery performance he'll give in pretty much every film he's in for the rest of his career. It's a good performance (you can see why he won an Oscar, it's just, as with Michael Cain, it feels a bit arbitrary which of his films he received it for), but is clearly having a great time and the fun he's having is infectious. His performance is the only way in which the non-EON film is better than Thunderball.
I think if Sean had kept up the consitant quality of his first three films he'd easily be the best, and indeed when I haven't seen them for a while I'm always taken slightly aback by how brilliant he is, but the drop off is sharp enough to loose him a lot of points.
Lazenby: Arguably better than Connery would have been if he'd carried on in the style of You Only Live Twice. He's not as good an actor (though he's fine in a male lead in an action film), but his enthusiasm and a strong supporting cast carry him through and that last shot is played to perfection.
His big problem, and it's an odd one as you'd think it'd be an easier thing to pull of than the "Proper" acting bits, is he just can't quip convincingly. Every single time he tries to drop a one liner it dies more of a death than Tracey. I wonder how much of a coincidence it is the part of the film he's dubbed for has a lot of the delightfully groan inducing puns in it? "Just a slight stiffness coming on".
It would have been interesting to see him do more and develop, but I can't complain too much as we get...
Sir Roger: Charismatic, can quip and has a greater range than most people give him credit (when he has to do serious- like with the mention of his wife in Spy or most of FYEO he pulls it off brilliantly) and is closer to the Bond of most of the books before Fleming really started making the character's life hell than most people seem willing to acknowledge.
Probably has the greatest variety of Bond films as well (in terms of style and tone), meaning he's going to have at least one that will be right up the ally of even his biggest hater. Even if, on the flip side, that means there's going to be at least one his biggest fan doesn't like (Eyes for me, despite Roger playing it well I just find it a bit dull).
He did do it too long- though by doing so he may have saved us from a worse fate as the American chap who was originally cast for Octopussy makes George look like Olivier in the screen tests on the blu ray (he also, weirdly, doesn't look that much younger)- and frankly the poor plastic surgery and tango tan in A View makes him look terrifying, but I love him and Live and Let Die is my favourite of the films.
Dalton: A very good actor who is never less than watchable, but perhaps made the mistake of taking it a bit too seriously. He doesn't have the same bounce or sheer infectious undiluted joy he has in Flash Gordon (the perfect audition for Bond that makes you wish he'd gotten it in '81) or Hot Fuzz because he's insisting on trying to make Bond a real person. He's comfortably the best thing in both his movies and is never less than brilliant, but I'm always left with the feeling that if he'd have cut loose a bit more he'd have been even better.
Mind, it's more the films around him that are the problem. The Living Daylights is easily the best of the '80's Bond's but it also feels quaintly old fashioned in a lot of ways, everything that feels fresh and new about it is down to Dalton.
Licence to Kill does try to deal with the general feeling of the time that Bond had become a bit tired and long in the tooth compared to things like Indiana Jones, but it's not a fresh new direction brought to you by fresh new talent, it's a fresh new direction brought to you by the people who brought you A View to a Kill. It's no wonder it's all over the place tonally (it goes from rape and murder to a winking fish and everywhere in-between) and the best bits are the stunt sequences that were overseen by people other than the by that point clearly out of ideas John Glen.
Mine, the sea plane and tanker truck sequences are brilliant and amongst the best in the entire franchise, plus the overall plot is well constructed even if the execution falters, but generally Dalton deserved better.
Brosnan:
Greatly benefited from the gap creating a shifting of the creative team. Indeed I think the best thing about the Wilson/Barbara Broccoli era has been the ever changing directors, having at least one person in a major role who doesn't just do Bond films means every one has tried something different and fresh to stop things getting stale. It's not always worked, but points for trying.
Goldeneye looks a bit cheap in places (it's a shame that was Meadings final film as a lot of the model work looks terrible) and Brosnan is a bit too much of a pretty boy- he's probably the only Bond who benefited from getting older- but once he's had a hair cut and beefed up a bit for his second film he's pretty much non stop perfect.
Yes, his has his verbal quirks (as does Connery of course), but the sheer schoolboy glee he brings to the role is fantastic, my favourite moment of his is when he re-inflates the car tires in Tomorrow Never Dies, the expression of joy on his face is just perfect.
I live in a sad, lonely world of being the only person who thinks The World is not Enough is one of the very best films as well, it's just a shame he didn't get a better send off. I wouldn't change what we got in 2006, but it would have been really nice to have a final Brosnan in 2004, maybe even made with an eye to ending the "Old" continuity before the reboot. Not in a "Kill him off!" kind of way, just have a final scene of him walking off into the sunset or some such.
Craig: Does what Dalton did, but remembers the character is supposed to be fun and basically has a little more fun with it that makes his take that bit more enjoyable. I think he's influenced by Sir Roger a lot more than he's often given credit as well, his quips are often done in a similar dry relax delivery that really works for him.
Of course, it's hard to endorse him fully at this point before his run is done as he could always do a Connery and get bored as he goes along, but overall I'd say he's been fantastic and will really have to bugger things up to make me change that viewpoint.
So basically... I'm a Bond whore.
Connery: Probably changes his performance the most over his tenure. For the first three films he's genuinely brilliant, capturing the tone of the books they're adapting (of which From Russia is the only one that counts as "Serious" spy thriller, Dr. No and Goldfinger are the sort of books that anyone involved with making the films now who goes "We're going back to Fleming" basically ignores), has bags of charisma and is really working the material hard.
Then for Thunderball and You Only Live Twice he's clearly bored out of his mind and is putting almost no effort in, he has enough innate charm to still be watchable and let's face it, Thunderball would bore anyone, but his performance actually hurts his fifth film because he's by far and away the least interesting thing in the movie and he tends to suck life out of the scene anytime he has to speak.
Then you've got his victory laps in Diamonds and Never, by which point he's settled on the default Sean Connery performance he'll give in pretty much every film he's in for the rest of his career. It's a good performance (you can see why he won an Oscar, it's just, as with Michael Cain, it feels a bit arbitrary which of his films he received it for), but is clearly having a great time and the fun he's having is infectious. His performance is the only way in which the non-EON film is better than Thunderball.
I think if Sean had kept up the consitant quality of his first three films he'd easily be the best, and indeed when I haven't seen them for a while I'm always taken slightly aback by how brilliant he is, but the drop off is sharp enough to loose him a lot of points.
Lazenby: Arguably better than Connery would have been if he'd carried on in the style of You Only Live Twice. He's not as good an actor (though he's fine in a male lead in an action film), but his enthusiasm and a strong supporting cast carry him through and that last shot is played to perfection.
His big problem, and it's an odd one as you'd think it'd be an easier thing to pull of than the "Proper" acting bits, is he just can't quip convincingly. Every single time he tries to drop a one liner it dies more of a death than Tracey. I wonder how much of a coincidence it is the part of the film he's dubbed for has a lot of the delightfully groan inducing puns in it? "Just a slight stiffness coming on".
It would have been interesting to see him do more and develop, but I can't complain too much as we get...
Sir Roger: Charismatic, can quip and has a greater range than most people give him credit (when he has to do serious- like with the mention of his wife in Spy or most of FYEO he pulls it off brilliantly) and is closer to the Bond of most of the books before Fleming really started making the character's life hell than most people seem willing to acknowledge.
Probably has the greatest variety of Bond films as well (in terms of style and tone), meaning he's going to have at least one that will be right up the ally of even his biggest hater. Even if, on the flip side, that means there's going to be at least one his biggest fan doesn't like (Eyes for me, despite Roger playing it well I just find it a bit dull).
He did do it too long- though by doing so he may have saved us from a worse fate as the American chap who was originally cast for Octopussy makes George look like Olivier in the screen tests on the blu ray (he also, weirdly, doesn't look that much younger)- and frankly the poor plastic surgery and tango tan in A View makes him look terrifying, but I love him and Live and Let Die is my favourite of the films.
Dalton: A very good actor who is never less than watchable, but perhaps made the mistake of taking it a bit too seriously. He doesn't have the same bounce or sheer infectious undiluted joy he has in Flash Gordon (the perfect audition for Bond that makes you wish he'd gotten it in '81) or Hot Fuzz because he's insisting on trying to make Bond a real person. He's comfortably the best thing in both his movies and is never less than brilliant, but I'm always left with the feeling that if he'd have cut loose a bit more he'd have been even better.
Mind, it's more the films around him that are the problem. The Living Daylights is easily the best of the '80's Bond's but it also feels quaintly old fashioned in a lot of ways, everything that feels fresh and new about it is down to Dalton.
Licence to Kill does try to deal with the general feeling of the time that Bond had become a bit tired and long in the tooth compared to things like Indiana Jones, but it's not a fresh new direction brought to you by fresh new talent, it's a fresh new direction brought to you by the people who brought you A View to a Kill. It's no wonder it's all over the place tonally (it goes from rape and murder to a winking fish and everywhere in-between) and the best bits are the stunt sequences that were overseen by people other than the by that point clearly out of ideas John Glen.
Mine, the sea plane and tanker truck sequences are brilliant and amongst the best in the entire franchise, plus the overall plot is well constructed even if the execution falters, but generally Dalton deserved better.
Brosnan:
Greatly benefited from the gap creating a shifting of the creative team. Indeed I think the best thing about the Wilson/Barbara Broccoli era has been the ever changing directors, having at least one person in a major role who doesn't just do Bond films means every one has tried something different and fresh to stop things getting stale. It's not always worked, but points for trying.
Goldeneye looks a bit cheap in places (it's a shame that was Meadings final film as a lot of the model work looks terrible) and Brosnan is a bit too much of a pretty boy- he's probably the only Bond who benefited from getting older- but once he's had a hair cut and beefed up a bit for his second film he's pretty much non stop perfect.
Yes, his has his verbal quirks (as does Connery of course), but the sheer schoolboy glee he brings to the role is fantastic, my favourite moment of his is when he re-inflates the car tires in Tomorrow Never Dies, the expression of joy on his face is just perfect.
I live in a sad, lonely world of being the only person who thinks The World is not Enough is one of the very best films as well, it's just a shame he didn't get a better send off. I wouldn't change what we got in 2006, but it would have been really nice to have a final Brosnan in 2004, maybe even made with an eye to ending the "Old" continuity before the reboot. Not in a "Kill him off!" kind of way, just have a final scene of him walking off into the sunset or some such.
Craig: Does what Dalton did, but remembers the character is supposed to be fun and basically has a little more fun with it that makes his take that bit more enjoyable. I think he's influenced by Sir Roger a lot more than he's often given credit as well, his quips are often done in a similar dry relax delivery that really works for him.
Of course, it's hard to endorse him fully at this point before his run is done as he could always do a Connery and get bored as he goes along, but overall I'd say he's been fantastic and will really have to bugger things up to make me change that viewpoint.
So basically... I'm a Bond whore.
^^ Nicely done. I mostly agree with everything you said.
TWINE's main problem is Denise Richards' character (who isn't especially credible on paper either, mind you, so it's not solely Richards' fault). It's got a lot of compelling elements otherwise, especially Sophie Marceau's villain (indeed, the first three Brosnan films had some of the best villains in the franchise, in my opinion).
*my opinion follows*
I completely respect the whole 'books come first' but we've had over 40 years of the movies deviating from the novels and I think it should've stayed that way. I loved the gadgets, I loved the cheese, I loved the evil lair hidden in volcanoes etc. I hope they come back this way soon, otherwise I'l just stick with the first 20.
Or until Craig regenerates again.
I love them too, but when popular culture & movies start lampooning them successfully, you can't keep doing the same thing with a mostly straight face. Die Another Day proved that - it was so horribly dated by 2002.
I'd be very surprised if they went back to what you describe, ever. The Bond movies--like Star Trek actually--have always reflected the era they were made in. The 60's, 70's & 80's to a degree had all that garish colour because the people wanted to escape the scary realism of the Cold War & nuclear proliferation by having a superman roll in & save the day.
The 007 of today lives in a different world - with GoldenEye being the turning point - where he has to be a more grounded, noble saviour because with terrorism & violence on our doorsteps, a safari-suited man killing bad guys in volcanoes we just wouldn't buy. Like Trek, Bond needs to evolve to survive another century.
Indeed. TWINE has a truly superb first 15-20 minutes but then tries too hard for the rest of it, with a desperate attempt to stay with Brosnan-camp while also having a hint of Dalton/Craig-edge - and fails at both.
I've always thought TWINE could have been one of the modern greats if it had the strength of its convictions. You could retrofit a lot of that story into a Craig-era plot I reckon.
Kara had an interesting look and if "interesting" is what they were after, then that's great. But she just didn't do anything for me. Maybe if they'd done something with her hair, or ... I don't know. She was sweet and all of that. I don't have any aversion to her, at all. But while I adore Caroline Bliss, the absolute best Bond Girls for me are Eva Green and Sofia Marceau. All the rest are adequate, as far as I'm concerned. The best Bond is Timothy Dalton, in my opinion, though. At least "they" did give him a couple of hotties in LICENSE TO KILL.
It was also pretty much remade as The Dark Knight Rises as well (though just to throw people off it opens with a bigger budget version of the plane hooking pre-credits of Licence to Kill. Chris Nolan likes his Bond alright.
Mind, Bond returned the favour with things like Silva being a knock-off Ledger Joker (and like most of the variations of that character we've had in blockbusters it missed the point- The Joker does elaborate shit just for the sheer joy of it. Characters like Silva have actual goals and plans so jumping through all the ridiculous and seemingly self defeating hoops they do makes no sense) and Stately Bond Manor- complete with secret underground tunnels- burning down.
For most of the last decade it's felt like the two franchises were trying to eat one another, if Nolan were to actually direct a Bond the Universe will probably explode.
In the interest of completeness, the pursuit of which was ditched quite a few pages ago, I submit Daliah Lavi. 
Seriously though, on the theme question, I have to give much and enduring love for You Only Live Twice. It's mysterious, atavistic, and picaresque, amongst many other things, all rolled into one. Whatever the hell that means!!! At present I prefer Barry's instrumental version, but I can easily be persuaded.
Seriously though, on the theme question, I have to give much and enduring love for You Only Live Twice. It's mysterious, atavistic, and picaresque, amongst many other things, all rolled into one. Whatever the hell that means!!! At present I prefer Barry's instrumental version, but I can easily be persuaded.
Users who bought You Only Live Twice (theme song) also bought:
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbyAZQ45uww[/yt]
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbyAZQ45uww[/yt]
I still like Brosnan. There was a certain charm he brought to the role that I liked, and Goldeneye and Tomorrow Never Dies are great films.
Similar threads
