I can't believe Roger Moore is over 6 feet, he only looks like a little fella', and Craig could well be a bit less than 5'10 but probably made more effort than any of the others to put on muscle for the part. I would guess both the heaviest and tallest would be either Connery, Dalton or Lazenby.
I met Sir Roger in Monaco (he was as charming as you would expect... lovely person) a few years ago and he is deffo over 6 feet.
agree i met sir ROG also and he is a big man hed obviousley been past his prime
then, but still you wouldnt want to pick a fight with him ,and i wasnt no slouch then
(a rugby playing 6ft 1 cop) and he was bigger than me
I mentioned this in an old post but I thought I'd mention it again in reference to Craig's height. It's posted in the press as anywhere from 5' 10" to 5' 11 and Craig won't go on record with it (probably because he thinks the whole issue is silly), but I talked to someone who worked on the crew in the Bahamas scenes in CR and he told me Craig was definitely more like 5' 11" or 5"11.5", because he got a photo posing right next to him and they were both in their bare feet and this crew member is just shy of 5'10" and said Craig was obviously an inch or inch and a half taller because his eye level was just above his. There maybe others (including fellow actors) who have given his height at being 5' 10", but since they are usually in shoes unlike this man who was in his barefeet next to Craig in his barefeet, they are guessing and are misled by the shoes factoring in the equation.
Compared to the other actors? Yes. Compared to the novel Bond at 6'? Yes. However,
there is a difference between 5'8" and 5'10", especially since Craig is actually near 5'11". In shoes that would put him at 6' or over. Ok, Bond in shoes would still be an inch taller, but we're only talking about an inch. I don't notice height differences in people unless there is a 2-3 inch difference and maybe thats just a personal point. An example here
is Connery with Fleming. Connery was 6'1 1/2" when he made Dr. No. Fleming was 6'.
He gave Bond his own height and weight. The difference is obvious when one looks at
the eye level of both. Pierce Brosnan was the closest actor to resemble Fleming in height
and weight in GEYE - 6' 1/2". So if Craig is close to 5' 11" barefoot , he is shorter than
Fleming (and therefore Bond), but only by an inch or not much more than that. Personally, when men are in shoes I don't notice a lot of difference if they are within an
inch or inch and a half of each other. Two or three starts to be noticeable. I understand the reason to have Bond one of the tallest in a scene because having tall leading men
always provided a more commanding presence. For me, as long as Craig doesn't seem
like Nick Nack in the films, I don't have a problem with him being shorter than Dalton (6'2"). For example, he seems to be the tallest in this photo with the cast members and producer and director (and he may have lifts in his boots, who knows - don't care). So as long as the other actors in the films are about his height or shorter (unless they are supposed to be a giant thug), I dont' think it should be an issue. His light hair always bothered me more than his height, but that's another issue.
Compared to the other actors? Yes. Compared to the novel Bond at 6'? Yes. However,
there is a difference between 5'8" and 5'10", especially since Craig is actually near 5'11". In shoes that would put him at 6' or over. Ok, Bond in shoes would still be an inch taller, but we're only talking about an inch. I don't notice height differences in people unless there is a 2-3 inch difference and maybe thats just a personal point. An example here
is Connery with Fleming. Connery was 6'1 1/2" when he made Dr. No. Fleming was 6'.
He gave Bond his own height and weight. The difference is obvious when one looks at
the eye level of both. Pierce Brosnan was the closest actor to resemble Fleming in height
and weight in GEYE - 6' 1/2". So if Craig is close to 5' 11" barefoot , he is shorter than
Fleming (and therefore Bond), but only by an inch or not much more than that. Personally, when men are in shoes I don't notice a lot of difference if they are within an
inch or inch and a half of each other. Two or three starts to be noticeable. I understand the reason to have Bond one of the tallest in a scene because having tall leading men
always provided a more commanding presence. For me, as long as Craig doesn't seem
like Nick Nack in the films, I don't have a problem with him being shorter than Dalton (6'2"). For example, he seems to be the tallest in this photo with the cast members and producer and director (and he may have lifts in his boots, who knows - don't care). So as long as the other actors in the films are about his height or shorter (unless they are supposed to be a giant thug), I dont' think it should be an issue. His light hair always bothered me more than his height, but that's another issue.
There is a lot of speculation (see celebrity heights on the web) that DC is probably 5"9 barefoot.
However my gripe is that he does often look short on screen, particularly in any kind of crowd scene, and often with his leading lady. His proportions suggest nowhere near 5" 11 to me, even EON have stopped claiming 5"11 for Daniel. If he was even within striking distance of 5"11 then they would have claimed 6ft (actors are often optimistic re their height) Even this misses the point, as what we do know is that Fleming described him as tall. it can be argued that 6ft is not particularly tall by today's standards as people have generally got taller in the post war period.
So " tall" rather than 6ft should be the yardstick. what is certain is that even his mother, most ardent fan, or even Babs would describe him as tall. Is this important? to me yes as it affects gravitas.For most people no as he is a very successful Bond, despite his height.
On screen, appearances are everything. Whether an actor is actually tall or not can be concealed in various ways by camerawork, perspective, and so on- it's what the audience perceives that counts.
On that basis, Sean Connery always came over as a big man, while Daniel Craig doesn't. Those are the two extremes, with the other Bond actors in between.
Whether that matters or not, is of course a different question. Height is only one factor in matching an actor to a part- though casting Tom Cruise as Jack Reacher stretches the point somewhat!- and Bondwise here's a quote from Kingsley Amis (who knew more than most about the literary Bond)-
"Our prototype is six foot tall and, whereas a few inches either way will make no vital difference, those under four foot six and over seven foot would be better advised to model themselves on one of the original 007's enemies, probably Goldfinger (five foot) or Dr No (six foot six)."
Slightly off-topic: my brother-in-law is the same height as Richard Kiel, and after talking to him for about ten minutes while we were both standing, I felt a crick in my neck and had to ask that we sit down. I'm over six foot and not used to looking up to talk to people!
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
On screen, appearances are everything. Whether an actor is actually tall or not can be concealed in various ways by camerawork, perspective, and so on- it's what the audience perceives that counts.
On that basis, Sean Connery always came over as a big man, while Daniel Craig doesn't. Those are the two extremes, with the other Bond actors in between.
Whether that matters or not, is of course a different question. Height is only one factor in matching an actor to a part- though casting Tom Cruise as Jack Reacher stretches the point somewhat!- and Bondwise here's a quote from Kingsley Amis (who knew more than most about the literary Bond)-
"Our prototype is six foot tall and, whereas a few inches either way will make no vital difference, those under four foot six and over seven foot would be better advised to model themselves on one of the original 007's enemies, probably Goldfinger (five foot) or Dr No (six foot six)."
Slightly off-topic: my brother-in-law is the same height as Richard Kiel, and after talking to him for about ten minutes while we were both standing, I felt a crick in my neck and had to ask that we sit down. I'm over six foot and not used to looking up to talk to people!
Totally agree. In SF during the Tube chase scene when DC weaves through the throng of commuters, I couldn't help but notice how he was pretty much the same height as everyone else, e.g., average. The earpiece didn't help in making him look like any other undercover security agent. For the movie, LA Confidential, Russell Crowe mentioned that his character was supposed to be a huge, brutish man and he was not, being under 6 ft, so what he did was rent a small apartment with low ceilings to get used to hulking around. I noticed in DC's movies and more so in SF, he is often made to stand with legs wide apart, which also didn't help de-enphasize the shortness; lastly, I'm not sure if it's the body building bulk, but the effect of the shortened neck because of the developed muscles in that area, just made him look squat.
On your quote from Amis' "Book of Bond or, Every Man His Own 007" ...just as the title promotes, the wide "acceptable" range of height provided was meant exactly to do that, to cast a wider net of inclusion as possible for as many men aspiring to be a 007, or else too many guys would have been disqualified from having potential and not many copies would have sold!
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
On your quote from Amis' "Book of Bond or, Every Man His Own 007" ...just as the title promotes, the wide "acceptable" range of height provided was meant exactly to do that, to cast a wider net of inclusion as possible for as many men aspiring to be a 007, or else too many guys would have been disqualified from having potential and not many copies would have sold!
You're right, of course, and Amis was going for laughs in that book, but I'd agree with him that an inch or two of height isn't vital.
In the end, I just don't think height matters. When you get right down to the nitty gritty, not a single actor has been a perfect match for the novel Bond. I would say Dalton and Brosnan are the closest, with Brosnan definitely close, but even so, Bond has ice-blue eyes and a scar on his cheek, and is 6 foot tall, which absolutely none of the actors have fit perfectly. And oddly, Bond has Michael Fassbender's high forehead in the picture he commissioned to the paper of what his imagination of Bond was. It doesn't look much like anybody who's played him on screen, except for maybe Roger Moore.
In the end, when it comes to James Bond's height and weight, it's all subjective to the person watching the movie, when you get right down to it. None of the actors have perfectly matched the "Novel Bond". Connery and Dalton may be slighted for their eye color, Moore and Craig for their hair color, Craig for his height, etc. In the end, we all have our Bond favorites, and or our perception of what James Bond is. There's no right or wrong answer as to James Bond's height and weight, it's all down to personal preference.
On screen, appearances are everything. Whether an actor is actually tall or not can be concealed in various ways by camerawork, perspective, and so on- it's what the audience perceives that counts.
On that basis, Sean Connery always came over as a big man, while Daniel Craig doesn't. Those are the two extremes, with the other Bond actors in between.
Whether that matters or not, is of course a different question. Height is only one factor in matching an actor to a part- though casting Tom Cruise as Jack Reacher stretches the point somewhat!- and Bondwise here's a quote from Kingsley Amis (who knew more than most about the literary Bond)-
"Our prototype is six foot tall and, whereas a few inches either way will make no vital difference, those under four foot six and over seven foot would be better advised to model themselves on one of the original 007's enemies, probably Goldfinger (five foot) or Dr No (six foot six)."
Slightly off-topic: my brother-in-law is the same height as Richard Kiel, and after talking to him for about ten minutes while we were both standing, I felt a crick in my neck and had to ask that we sit down. I'm over six foot and not used to looking up to talk to people!
Totally agree. In SF during the Tube chase scene when DC weaves through the throng of commuters, I couldn't help but notice how he was pretty much the same height as everyone else, e.g., average. The earpiece didn't help in making him look like any other undercover security agent. For the movie, LA Confidential, Russell Crowe mentioned that his character was supposed to be a huge, brutish man and he was not, being under 6 ft, so what he did was rent a small apartment with low ceilings to get used to hulking around. I noticed in DC's movies and more so in SF, he is often made to stand with legs wide apart, which also didn't help de-enphasize the shortness; lastly, I'm not sure if it's the body building bulk, but the effect of the shortened neck because of the developed muscles in that area, just made him look squat.
On your quote from Amis' "Book of Bond or, Every Man His Own 007" ...just as the title promotes, the wide "acceptable" range of height provided was meant exactly to do that, to cast a wider net of inclusion as possible for as many men aspiring to be a 007, or else too many guys would have been disqualified from having potential and not many copies would have sold!
DC's height was never a problem for me in CR or QOS but in SF, i think the extra fitted suits and tall cast members really made his short stature obvious throughout the film. Its not really a minute difference either, just about everybody in the film save for M is either eye level with him (naomi) or a head taller then him (Tanner), even Berenice looks to be a little taller then him.
But again, the bottom line for any Bond actor is, are they a convincing killer, and is the actor the kind of person that women would believably be attracted to? I think all 6 Bond actors have fit the bill. Some more than others (Connery, Dalton, Brosnan) but they all have. The only ones who MAY stretch credibility would be Roger Moore, and to a lesser extent, George Lazenby.
In the end, I just don't think height matters. When you get right down to the nitty gritty, not a single actor has been a perfect match for the novel Bond. I would say Dalton and Brosnan are the closest, with Brosnan definitely close, but even so, Bond has ice-blue eyes and a scar on his cheek, and is 6 foot tall, which absolutely none of the actors have fit perfectly. And oddly, Bond has Michael Fassbender's high forehead in the picture he commissioned to the paper of what his imagination of Bond was. It doesn't look much like anybody who's played him on screen, except for maybe Roger Moore.
In the end, when it comes to James Bond's height and weight, it's all subjective to the person watching the movie, when you get right down to it. None of the actors have perfectly matched the "Novel Bond". Connery and Dalton may be slighted for their eye color, Moore and Craig for their hair color, Craig for his height, etc. In the end, we all have our Bond favorites, and or our perception of what James Bond is. There's no right or wrong answer as to James Bond's height and weight, it's all down to personal preference.
I agree that the specifics vary, but the designation 'tall' does not and even 6ft no longer counts as particularly tall. It doesn't bother you and that's fine, but for me it looks wrong, Bond should not blend in with the crowd. Does it stop Daniel being a fine Bond? No it does not, but it is something that jars more than eye colour, or even hair colour for that matter and is something I have to overcome in order to enjoy him. it's only every now and then that I notice, but when I do it jars and makes me conscious of how far from the classic hero archetype he is, and the fact that Daniel is a fine character actor playing a leading man.
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
There is a lot of speculation (see celebrity heights on the web) that DC is probably 5"9 barefoot.
However my gripe is that he does often look short on screen, particularly in any kind of crowd scene, and often with his leading lady. His proportions suggest nowhere near 5" 11 to me, even EON have stopped claiming 5"11 for Daniel. If he was even within striking distance of 5"11 then they would have claimed 6ft (actors are often optimistic re their height) Even this misses the point, as what we do know is that Fleming described him as tall. it can be argued that 6ft is not particularly tall by today's standards as people have generally got taller in the post war period.
So " tall" rather than 6ft should be the yardstick. what is certain is that even his mother, most ardent fan, or even Babs would describe him as tall. Is this important? to me yes as it affects gravitas.For most people no as he is a very successful Bond, despite his height.
Yes, I find two things you mentioned remarkable, (1) I model in 1/6 figures and a guy who's made a name for himself in the hobby is also a historian/museum craftsman in the UK and he goes through the trouble of shortening British figures, stating that during WWII the average height of British men was below 6', so Bond's height at 6' like Fleming's made him relatively taller than most people, not necessarily head and shoulders but I would imagine enough to strike an impression. (2) On impressions and having read a few books actually about Fleming vs. Bond, many acquaintances who were sources for these books mentioned just how handsome and charming Fleming was particularly when among a crowd, which I firmly believe was not a personal conceit lost in the Bond books.
Upon re-readings of the novels and short stories, I'm actually surprised to not remember the frequent instances of characters thinking to themselves or remarking to another how handsome or good looking Bond was, or having formed a certain impression after seeing his tall, lean and dark features for the first time. If anything, this effect of visual impression and gravitas was the one, most essential and recognizable feature that was judiciously carried over to the film series from the books and it is what set Bond far apart from everything else and became a class of his own.
Nonetheless, I acknowledge that in today’s culture, what constitutes gravitas and what is considered good looking have been radically redefined to the point that old school handsome is actually laughed at and ironically, in our day and age of heightened tolerance and acceptance, classic Bond’s brand of handsome and metro-sexual way of carrying himself (how he walks, crosses his legs, parts his hair, etc.) might be considered effete or too “gay.” I also noticed the ebb and flow of tastes and fashions and perhaps after the excesses of big and awesome things of the 80’s and 90’s, today there seems to be a trend of taking something mundane and infusing it with loads of attitude. You can see this in the deconstructionist approach to men’s fashion, hairstyles and what’s considered “cool.” During the late 60’s and early 70’s when a similar social trend was taking place, the Bond character gave slight nods to it but firmly stood its ground; however , never before until the reboot did character actually give in and embrace the trend.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
I apologize for my omission of reference to the photo I attached in my previous
post showing Craig with Gwyneth Paltrow on a beach. Paltrow is 5'9" and when
I zoom in it looks clear he has about two inches on her.
As far as Craig not standing out in the crowds in the tube scenes - I actually
took no notice of it and even appreciated that he didn't seem like some imposing
figure. I realize Bond is not supposed to be a real person and the films starting with
Connery have tried to imbue him with a larger than life presence as if he were
some type of superhero, but that was always one of my pet gripes about what the
series did - they got further and further away from Fleming's spy who was based
on real spies but who was other wise a normal agent caught up in exaggerated plots. If we see Connery in the first two Fleming based films, he comes across as
pretty much a masculine, leading man type doing real spy/detective work. When
they started saddling him with more gadgets and he stopped getting injured in the
multitude of action scenes he went through, he turned into more comic book superhero to me than Fleming's spy. Craig may not be as imposing in stature as
someone like Connery, but to me it's because he is not, and because his movie plots have gotten back to a little reality that I appreciate his casting for this
reboot. Yes, someone like Christian Bale pushing his way through the tube crowds
would look more like the tall, dark haired literary 007 and perhaps we'll get an actor
with those looks next time. However, long as they don't make another YOLT and all the
other sci-fi remakes they did of that, I can accept Craig for now.
Hello all, after reading through this thread you inspired me to go a little CSI on the DC height speculation.
I wasn't able to find a paparazzi photo of him leaving a convenience store unfortunately. What I was able to find was him standing directly next to a 2014 Land Rover Sport. *I hope its ok (I didn't see anything in the rules against it) if I hot link these photos I'm not sure if there is even a way to attribute a source in bb code so I have done so in quotes encapsulating each image.
From http://www.landrover.com that model has an exterior height of 70.1'' or a hair over 5'8'' . Judging from the 2nd picture of him standing up next to the vehicle he appears to my eye to be right at 2'' taller than the truck so I'd say 5'10'' is about correct.
I'm a little surprised as I wouldn't have pegged him to be much over 5'9'' beforehand.
I believe back when Connery was Bond he must have been a bit over 6'3'' if not a little over. Currently at 81 years old he is 6'2''.
I know it bugs some people but I've never noticed Craig's height in the Bond's so
It's not a problem for me. ) up against the villains he looks as tall as the other Fella )
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
) I think for some fans he'd really need to look and sound like
Pierce Brosnan to play Bond. )
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
BIG TAMWrexham, North Wales, UK.Posts: 773MI6 Agent
Roger Moore always seems a big broad bloke. In OCTOPUSSY he looks clearly unfit with quite a big stomach at times. I can't believe he's not the heaviest - not so much on location but in those scenes shot at Pinewood.
70.1" is a bit over 5'10", not 5.8". Which would.make DC 6' by that reckoning, which he clearly isn't. Unless those shoes have lifts in them, of course.
Now that I stare at him for a bit it may be the fact that his head appears too big for his body that bothers me more than the height.
That's because you're used to seeing feminized models with tiny faces and super-long Alien heads which look tiny head on but gigantic in profile. If you look at classic art, whether it's Greek or whatever, Craig's proportions are masculine.
I'm in my mid 30s so the first Bond jumps to mind is Roger Moore. I do think he hung on too long as Bond but I can't knock the guy if I had chance to be Bond they could dig me up drag me around up there "Weekend at Bernie's" style! Actually I think I'll put that in my will just in case.
Pierce did absolutely kill it as bond, especially considering some of the plot devices,and writing he got stuck with. Somewhere between the starting WWIII to sell papers, the invisible car, and surfing the tsunami I think I would have had to start hamming it up like Adam West in the old Batman till the writers sobered up -{ .
Actually PB might have been the best bond ever just for keeping people from calling bs and walking out of theatre. If he had more toward DC's story lines he'd probably still be Bond.
Can anyone imagine any of the other Bonds in DAD or GE?
70.1" is a bit over 5'10", not 5.8". Which would.make DC 6' by that reckoning, which he clearly isn't. Unless those shoes have lifts in them, of course.
Comments
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
agree i met sir ROG also and he is a big man hed obviousley been past his prime
then, but still you wouldnt want to pick a fight with him ,and i wasnt no slouch then
(a rugby playing 6ft 1 cop) and he was bigger than me
I'm five eleven and a quarter; I'd be a short Bond.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
there is a difference between 5'8" and 5'10", especially since Craig is actually near 5'11". In shoes that would put him at 6' or over. Ok, Bond in shoes would still be an inch taller, but we're only talking about an inch. I don't notice height differences in people unless there is a 2-3 inch difference and maybe thats just a personal point. An example here
is Connery with Fleming. Connery was 6'1 1/2" when he made Dr. No. Fleming was 6'.
He gave Bond his own height and weight. The difference is obvious when one looks at
the eye level of both. Pierce Brosnan was the closest actor to resemble Fleming in height
and weight in GEYE - 6' 1/2". So if Craig is close to 5' 11" barefoot , he is shorter than
Fleming (and therefore Bond), but only by an inch or not much more than that. Personally, when men are in shoes I don't notice a lot of difference if they are within an
inch or inch and a half of each other. Two or three starts to be noticeable. I understand the reason to have Bond one of the tallest in a scene because having tall leading men
always provided a more commanding presence. For me, as long as Craig doesn't seem
like Nick Nack in the films, I don't have a problem with him being shorter than Dalton (6'2"). For example, he seems to be the tallest in this photo with the cast members and producer and director (and he may have lifts in his boots, who knows - don't care). So as long as the other actors in the films are about his height or shorter (unless they are supposed to be a giant thug), I dont' think it should be an issue. His light hair always bothered me more than his height, but that's another issue.
There is a lot of speculation (see celebrity heights on the web) that DC is probably 5"9 barefoot.
However my gripe is that he does often look short on screen, particularly in any kind of crowd scene, and often with his leading lady. His proportions suggest nowhere near 5" 11 to me, even EON have stopped claiming 5"11 for Daniel. If he was even within striking distance of 5"11 then they would have claimed 6ft (actors are often optimistic re their height) Even this misses the point, as what we do know is that Fleming described him as tall. it can be argued that 6ft is not particularly tall by today's standards as people have generally got taller in the post war period.
So " tall" rather than 6ft should be the yardstick. what is certain is that even his mother, most ardent fan, or even Babs would describe him as tall. Is this important? to me yes as it affects gravitas.For most people no as he is a very successful Bond, despite his height.
On that basis, Sean Connery always came over as a big man, while Daniel Craig doesn't. Those are the two extremes, with the other Bond actors in between.
Whether that matters or not, is of course a different question. Height is only one factor in matching an actor to a part- though casting Tom Cruise as Jack Reacher stretches the point somewhat!- and Bondwise here's a quote from Kingsley Amis (who knew more than most about the literary Bond)-
"Our prototype is six foot tall and, whereas a few inches either way will make no vital difference, those under four foot six and over seven foot would be better advised to model themselves on one of the original 007's enemies, probably Goldfinger (five foot) or Dr No (six foot six)."
Slightly off-topic: my brother-in-law is the same height as Richard Kiel, and after talking to him for about ten minutes while we were both standing, I felt a crick in my neck and had to ask that we sit down. I'm over six foot and not used to looking up to talk to people!
Totally agree. In SF during the Tube chase scene when DC weaves through the throng of commuters, I couldn't help but notice how he was pretty much the same height as everyone else, e.g., average. The earpiece didn't help in making him look like any other undercover security agent. For the movie, LA Confidential, Russell Crowe mentioned that his character was supposed to be a huge, brutish man and he was not, being under 6 ft, so what he did was rent a small apartment with low ceilings to get used to hulking around. I noticed in DC's movies and more so in SF, he is often made to stand with legs wide apart, which also didn't help de-enphasize the shortness; lastly, I'm not sure if it's the body building bulk, but the effect of the shortened neck because of the developed muscles in that area, just made him look squat.
On your quote from Amis' "Book of Bond or, Every Man His Own 007" ...just as the title promotes, the wide "acceptable" range of height provided was meant exactly to do that, to cast a wider net of inclusion as possible for as many men aspiring to be a 007, or else too many guys would have been disqualified from having potential and not many copies would have sold!
You're right, of course, and Amis was going for laughs in that book, but I'd agree with him that an inch or two of height isn't vital.
In the end, when it comes to James Bond's height and weight, it's all subjective to the person watching the movie, when you get right down to it. None of the actors have perfectly matched the "Novel Bond". Connery and Dalton may be slighted for their eye color, Moore and Craig for their hair color, Craig for his height, etc. In the end, we all have our Bond favorites, and or our perception of what James Bond is. There's no right or wrong answer as to James Bond's height and weight, it's all down to personal preference.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
I agree that the specifics vary, but the designation 'tall' does not and even 6ft no longer counts as particularly tall. It doesn't bother you and that's fine, but for me it looks wrong, Bond should not blend in with the crowd. Does it stop Daniel being a fine Bond? No it does not, but it is something that jars more than eye colour, or even hair colour for that matter and is something I have to overcome in order to enjoy him. it's only every now and then that I notice, but when I do it jars and makes me conscious of how far from the classic hero archetype he is, and the fact that Daniel is a fine character actor playing a leading man.
Yes, I find two things you mentioned remarkable, (1) I model in 1/6 figures and a guy who's made a name for himself in the hobby is also a historian/museum craftsman in the UK and he goes through the trouble of shortening British figures, stating that during WWII the average height of British men was below 6', so Bond's height at 6' like Fleming's made him relatively taller than most people, not necessarily head and shoulders but I would imagine enough to strike an impression. (2) On impressions and having read a few books actually about Fleming vs. Bond, many acquaintances who were sources for these books mentioned just how handsome and charming Fleming was particularly when among a crowd, which I firmly believe was not a personal conceit lost in the Bond books.
Upon re-readings of the novels and short stories, I'm actually surprised to not remember the frequent instances of characters thinking to themselves or remarking to another how handsome or good looking Bond was, or having formed a certain impression after seeing his tall, lean and dark features for the first time. If anything, this effect of visual impression and gravitas was the one, most essential and recognizable feature that was judiciously carried over to the film series from the books and it is what set Bond far apart from everything else and became a class of his own.
Nonetheless, I acknowledge that in today’s culture, what constitutes gravitas and what is considered good looking have been radically redefined to the point that old school handsome is actually laughed at and ironically, in our day and age of heightened tolerance and acceptance, classic Bond’s brand of handsome and metro-sexual way of carrying himself (how he walks, crosses his legs, parts his hair, etc.) might be considered effete or too “gay.” I also noticed the ebb and flow of tastes and fashions and perhaps after the excesses of big and awesome things of the 80’s and 90’s, today there seems to be a trend of taking something mundane and infusing it with loads of attitude. You can see this in the deconstructionist approach to men’s fashion, hairstyles and what’s considered “cool.” During the late 60’s and early 70’s when a similar social trend was taking place, the Bond character gave slight nods to it but firmly stood its ground; however , never before until the reboot did character actually give in and embrace the trend.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
post showing Craig with Gwyneth Paltrow on a beach. Paltrow is 5'9" and when
I zoom in it looks clear he has about two inches on her.
As far as Craig not standing out in the crowds in the tube scenes - I actually
took no notice of it and even appreciated that he didn't seem like some imposing
figure. I realize Bond is not supposed to be a real person and the films starting with
Connery have tried to imbue him with a larger than life presence as if he were
some type of superhero, but that was always one of my pet gripes about what the
series did - they got further and further away from Fleming's spy who was based
on real spies but who was other wise a normal agent caught up in exaggerated plots. If we see Connery in the first two Fleming based films, he comes across as
pretty much a masculine, leading man type doing real spy/detective work. When
they started saddling him with more gadgets and he stopped getting injured in the
multitude of action scenes he went through, he turned into more comic book superhero to me than Fleming's spy. Craig may not be as imposing in stature as
someone like Connery, but to me it's because he is not, and because his movie plots have gotten back to a little reality that I appreciate his casting for this
reboot. Yes, someone like Christian Bale pushing his way through the tube crowds
would look more like the tall, dark haired literary 007 and perhaps we'll get an actor
with those looks next time. However, long as they don't make another YOLT and all the
other sci-fi remakes they did of that, I can accept Craig for now.
I wasn't able to find a paparazzi photo of him leaving a convenience store unfortunately. What I was able to find was him standing directly next to a 2014 Land Rover Sport. *I hope its ok (I didn't see anything in the rules against it) if I hot link these photos I'm not sure if there is even a way to attribute a source in bb code so I have done so in quotes encapsulating each image.
and here
From http://www.landrover.com that model has an exterior height of 70.1'' or a hair over 5'8'' . Judging from the 2nd picture of him standing up next to the vehicle he appears to my eye to be right at 2'' taller than the truck so I'd say 5'10'' is about correct.
I'm a little surprised as I wouldn't have pegged him to be much over 5'9'' beforehand.
I believe back when Connery was Bond he must have been a bit over 6'3'' if not a little over. Currently at 81 years old he is 6'2''.
It's not a problem for me.
Pierce Brosnan to play Bond.
Pierce did absolutely kill it as bond, especially considering some of the plot devices,and writing he got stuck with. Somewhere between the starting WWIII to sell papers, the invisible car, and surfing the tsunami I think I would have had to start hamming it up like Adam West in the old Batman till the writers sobered up -{ .
Actually PB might have been the best bond ever just for keeping people from calling bs and walking out of theatre. If he had more toward DC's story lines he'd probably still be Bond.
Can anyone imagine any of the other Bonds in DAD or GE?
70.1'' / 12'' = 5'.841'' Unless I'm missing something?