A startling conclusion, one I hope can bring some peace to this forum.

Klaus Hergescheimer

Recently, I wrote regarding my appreciation for Moore in that I appreciate his ability to entertain and his audacity to play the role his way regardless of detraction while, at the same time, acknowledging that I prefer other Bonds' portrayals to his in that theirs (Dalton, Brosnan, Connery) tend to be much closer in spirt to the literary character.

Well, the other day, I watched OHMSS, featuring the other Bond that I am generally not expressively fond of: Lazenby. As I was watching it, while I was able to definitely tell that he was not the greatest actor in the world, a funny thing happened: I really couldn't find a point in the film in which I found his portrayal particularly disagreeable. His image was great (perhaps even the closest to the literary 007), he moved well, he fought well, his mannerisms were fine, and while he was no Bogart, he handled the lines suitably, and the final scene of the movie rather expertly. It was at this point that I realized something:

While I have my favorite (Dalton), and I generally think that some (Dalton, Brosnan, Connery) performed better in the role than the others (Moore, Lazenby), I like all of the actors' portrayals of Bond. In what is often a polarized Bond fan community (in which I participated), I think we could all benefit sometimes from letting down our guards and our pre-conceived notions to the most minute detail of what Bond should do and to just sit back, relax, and enjoy each of their performances and films. Heck, I would reccommend watching five back to back, picking out one from each actor. I think it could do us a lot of good.

emtiem

I have my favourite Bonds and style of Bond, but don't confuse that with ever disliking or refusing to watch any of the Bond films because they aren't my tip-top favourites. They're all so similar- the differences are only ever relative. Liking Bond means I like them all; I'd imagine most Bond fans are like that, aren't they?

darenhat

There are some things about Lazenby that I find a bit disagreeable concerning his mannerisms, but I'm not sure who to blame for that. Oddly enough, my wife (who had never seen a Bond film until I came along) watched OHMSS and came to the same conclusion I did.

We both disliked the fact that, as Bond, he seemed very rough around the edges. While Connery's Bond was certainly an individual with strong self-confidence, Lazenby's came off as simply cocky. While there was an element of chivalry in Connery's Bond, Lazenby seemed lecherous. His pawing of Moneypenny seemed incredibly uncouth, and his childish glee as he perused (and purloined) the Playboy magazine seemed beneath the Bond we had been accustom to.
Physically, he was fine. His acting was fine. But it was those small characteristics that made me feel that Lazenby (or Peter Hunt) could't really portray a genuine 007, but rather only some strange caricature of him.

Hardyboy

There are times in the film when Lazenby comes across as uncouth and untrained. A prime example, I think, is when he says to Tracy, "Please stay alive!" He delivers the line like a lounge lizard in a sleazy dive, as if he's really saying, "Stay alive for tonight at least, toots--tomorrow you can off yourself." Still and all, I think Lazenby approached the role both seriously and sincerely, and there are times when he is very good. Had he stuck with the role of Bond, who knows how he might have developed as an actor?

Loeffelholz

The Great Hergescheimer raises a valid point, for which I am prepared to give him unfettered credit :v

Moore is my least favourite Bond, hands down, and yet I enjoyed all of his films to varying degrees. I like Moore himself; he just wasn't 'my Bond,' as he clearly was for so many others. I salute Moore Bond fans, because they helped him keep the ship afloat. {[]

Lazenby's lack of training certainly works against him, but there's much in OHMSS to enjoy; particularly the physical business and the final scene. I agree with Hardy that the "Stay alive...at least for tonight" line is cringeworthy at best, but his reading of the line, "we have all the time in the world" compensates nicely.

Dalton had excellent moments, as did Brozzer, there's no denying it. I was in the cinema for each of them, and enjoyed them all. Now it's a Brave New World, and we're all curious about how it will play...

As someone recently wrote somewhere, "Every generation seems to get the Bond it needs." A profound insight, IMRO, and I certainly hope the author was correct.

Long Live James Bond :007)

Dan Same

My problem with Lazenby wasn't that he seemed uncouth (although his interplay with Moneypenny did cross the line) but rather IMO he seemed to be absolutely terrible in delivering one-liners. I cringed sometimes when he delivered some of his lines.

That said, I think something needs to be pointed out. This is a Bond forum. By that I mean, yes, many of us would hold strong opinions about particular Bonds and Bond films but I doubt we would feel the same way in comparison to non-Bond films. For example, my least favourite Bond films are DAD, TLD and AVTAK. But if I were to nominate my least favourite films of all time those three films wouldn't make the list. Yes, I loath AVTAK in comparison to most other Bond films, but give me AVTAK over Predator 2, Drop Dead Fred or Dune any day of the week. Also, while Dalton may be my least favourite Bond, I only really dislike him in comparison to other Bonds, and I can still find something to enjoy about LTK and TLD regardless of what I think about Dalton. So, yes, we may have strong opinions, but I doubt that many of us would have any Bond films on our 'least favourite films of all time' lists.

Napoleon Plural

The bad one-liners would have been worse in a cinema where the silence would be deafening and awkward. At home on DVD, you can take it or leave it more.

Yes, he's too cocky with Tracey at the beginning and many of his snotty posh lines are meant to be send-ups of that old style Profumo type, as Connery would have delivered them. Maybe being a foreigner, Lazenby doesn't seem to get that, and his delivery is just smug.

But he's very good at showing his concern when in a fix at Piz Gloria and all on his own.

Dan Same

Napoleon Plural wrote:

But he's very good at showing his concern when in a fix at Piz Gloria and all on his own.

I actually think he expressed too much concern.

My two favourite things about Lazenby were his physicality and his handling of the final scene.

MrsDalloway

Hardyboy wrote:

There are times in the film when Lazenby comes across as uncouth and untrained...

OHMSS is my favourite of the series, yet my personal gripes are the infamous caviar scoop (after the fight with Tracy's bodyguards) and many of the scenes where Lazenby appears to walk like a Neanderthal. At other times his walk is fine, and I can't help thinking that these and most of the problems with line delivery - mentioned by others above - are directorial issues. After all, the poor chap was only in his first film - it's not as if Bond films are so short on budget that they couldn't afford "one more take, Mr Lazenby".

superado

To me, there's an acceptable standard deviation from the character's center that has allowed me to like all the 20th century Bonds (is that an indirect, if not PC way of putting it?)

I strongly sympathize with Loeffes, for one, for seeing Moore's weakness in the role, being a tad effete for the character; but because he was the resident Bond when I started watching them at the cinema, acceptance came very naturally...which I suppose is what will happen for the first-timers to Bond this year. To me, it's not just about maintaining standards, it's staying within the perceived standard deviation.

Andy A 007

I agree Klaus. I definately have my favorites (Connery and Dalton). AndWhile Roger Moore is definately my least favorite Bond, and I can barely stand watching him in the role at times, in the end I realize that every one of the Bonds was great in their own way and brought something unique to the role.

PUCCINI

Hey Moore and Lazenby did a great job, as well as the others, Connery is my favorite Bond, but I think some of Moore Bond films are still more entertaining than th rest in the series, and for Lazenby, well...OHMSS is one of the best films, one of my personal favorites...

I LOVE ALL THE FILMS, THEY'RE LIKE CHILDREN TO ME!!

Andy A 007

Lazenby did do a fantastic job! Definately the next best thing to Connery at the time. I've always wished that Lazenby would have stayed on for a couple more to prove himself as a great Bond.

Sir Hillary Bray

Andy A 007 wrote:

Lazenby did do a fantastic job! Definately the next best thing to Connery at the time.

Yes, I imagine you're right, as he was the ONLY thing next to Connery at the time.

Andy A 007

Sir Hillary Bray wrote:

Andy A 007 wrote:

Lazenby did do a fantastic job! Definately the next best thing to Connery at the time.

Yes, I imagine you're right, as he was the ONLY thing next to Connery at the time.

Good point.

ohmss1969

"Stay alive...at least for tonight"

He's just being romantic

Jamesbondjr

Personally, I think that all the actors to play Bond have brought something to the role.
I have a favourite Bond (Connery) and Bond film (FRWL) but after that I look at all the others equally, I don't have a least favourite Bond or Bond film.
I also believe that none of the actors portrays Bond badly. Sure there are moments in some of the films that don't seem right or are badly done, but as a whole the films are great fun!

Predator

... shows how long since I've been from the site that I could miss an interesting post like this one!


I suspect that there is a tendancy to put too much emphasis on the character of Bond over the character of the Bond film to which an actor is playing in. I can think of no better example as OHMSS in this regard.

Some of Lazenby's dialog is a touch on the clunky side (and I cannot bear his quite dreadful skiing style!), but the emphasis here is on the whole. The way that despite the inevitable failings of the film (of any film), it all falls together so well. That so many Bond fans cite OHMSS as a high point of the series is testament to the fact that it is not just about the actor in the lead role. Or having multiple explosions. Or a dialog-rich script. It is about how the constituent parts add together to provide a Bondian experience.

Dan Same

Predator wrote:

(and I cannot bear his quite dreadful skiing style!)

Really? Because I actually consider the first skiing scene to be one of the greatest chase scenes in cinematic history.

BTW, I completely agree with your post. Although OHMSS has its flaws (Lazenby being chief among them), it is how everything comes together that makes this IMO one of the most beautiful and saddest films ever made.