Questions for those who feel that Dalton is the best Bond...

chrisisall

Did you see Dalton's movies in the theatre or later on TV or video?
Did you love his performance immediately, did it take some time to decide he was the best, or did you recently re-discover his movies?
And, can you rate the other Bond actors, using Tim as a 10?

Smiert-Spionam

I'm only 24 and so I would have been too young to view his fims at the theatre/cinema. I only truely came to regard Dalton as the best Bond when I brought the DVD box set about 2 years ago. This was the first time I'd watched his films all the way through and I immediately loved what he brought to the role. Incidentally when I was watching the box set I watched them all chronologically so I was watching TLD and LTK off the back of the Roger Moore films. Maybe another reason I rate Dalton so highly is because of his ruthless, serious and darker portrayal of Bond which is a complete opposite to what Sir Rog brought to the role.

Anyway my ratings of the actors to portray Bond would be:

Timothy Dalton - 9/10
Sean Connery - 9/10
Daniel Craig - 8/10
George Lazenby - 7/10
Roger Moore - 6/10
Pierce Brosnan - 5/10

Le Samourai

I saw both Dalton films in the theater. In fact, TLD was the first Bond movie I saw on the big screen.

I was immediately blown away by Dalton's performance. Having read the Fleming novels before ever seeing a Bond movie, I remember thinking "Finally! 007 like I always imagined him!" LTK just further cemented my opinion.

As for the other Bond actors, I can't really rate them numerically. Suffice to say Dalton is my favorite, followed by Craig and then Lazenby. Connery and Brosnan come next, with Moore last.

Sir Miles

I'm not sure Dalton is my fav anymore...but he was for a long time...

I saw both his movies at the cinema...and thought he was teriffic straight away...both his movies have decent scripts...they lean away from having too many gags...and I think he got the character of Bond just about right -{

With NO misty eyes 8-) )

Agent007jamest

when I was a child I seen both films opening day and many times after in theaters. I initially thought he was the best but my opinion has soften over the years. Now he is in my top 3 behind DC & SC. I think he was so ahead of his time and the press just couldn't wrap their collective minds around the brutality of LTK though they did nothing but criticize RM for the cartoonish style of the films before.
But as a child he blew my mind! I was so ready for a OO7 that played it serious. I was really sad when he declined Goldeneye or what ever his third would have been.

chrisisall

Sir Miles wrote:

With NO misty eyes 8-) )

LOL!!!! )

Well, I saw every movie from DAF on in the theatre when originally released, and honestly I liked Dalton's films okay, but I had been waiting for Pierce being the big Remington Steele fan that I was, and was not prepared for such an intense, palable human Bond at that time. Then came Brosnan's films, and I was in Heaven.... until DAD... 8-)
CR & QOS came & went, but I was still a Brosnanite, so I didn't think too much of them beyond appreciating that Craig was a fine actor.
Then I joined AJB, and read the sterling praises here concerning Dalton, so I bought his movies on DVD for a second look (now having read all of Fleming's novels), and POW! I was like, "How in Hades did I NOT see how brilliant this man's performance was back then????"
I can only plead that I was a dopey kid. 8-)
This of course led to my purchasing Craig's movies for a second look.
And I realized that I had been a dopey adult as well; Craig rocks, much like Dalton in times past (though for me Dalton is still tops).

For me:
TD- 9.9/10
DC- 9/10
SC- 8/10
PB- 8/10
RM- 7/10
GL-6/10

But I liked 'em all...

CmdrAtticus

After Dalton's performances, he became my favorite actor, as I am one of those members who prefer the scripts and characterizations that are closest to Fleming's concept. It's unfortunate that he got what I perceive as "Moore's leftovers" in the script department. They skewed them a little towards Dalton's performance, but they still could not help but leave in the juvenile humor. I put DC on the same level as Dalton, he just does a slightly different take on it, since he is playing a younger Bond starting out.
Connery was always tops when I was growing up, but after all these films and years and new actors, and seeing Connery in so many other roles, I realized he was just playing a suave version of himself, rather than actually trying to be Fleming's character. Moore and Brosnan did more or less the same take - they were pretending to be the cinematic idea of Bond (though Brosnan did try injecting some character in certain
scenes), whereas when I watch TD and DC, I get the impression they are trying to reveal the character from the novels, and when I read them I can see them more as the novel Bond and not the cinematic Bond. I think thats why although the general audience enjoyed the TD films, they didn't as much because it was such a change from Moore and they weren't used to the dark tone. Many at that time had not seen the first two films in years or had never seen them and had forgotten how much darker they were before Goldfinger turned the direction towards a lighter tone. Dalton or DC could easily have done those first two if they had been contemporaries of Connery then. I have no problem picturing them in Connery's place. Anyway, Brosnan was such a hit because audiences had not seen a Bond for years and they balanced the lightness and darkness just right for his first outing. With fear they could lose their relevance and box office in this new century, and with the world's innocence stolen by terrorists, the producers knew they had a chance to go back to the character from the novels - a more realistic, human Bond dealing with real life monsters. Remaking Casino Royale was the right thing to do and since the audiences were already conditioned to mythical characters being "rebooted" - Superman, Batman, etc., they knew they could get away with it. Fortunately, they found a good character actor to hang the tux on, and now we're off into the future with Bond still being a relevant hero. I only hope that whoever keeps the Bond experience going in the future, they keep Bond's human side in the scripts and never, ever go back to doing parodies of him.

chrisisall

Wow, it's like a professional treatise! Great Cmdr!

Blackleiter

Very well put, sir! -{

CmdrAtticus wrote:

After Dalton's performances, he became my favorite actor, as I am one of those members who prefer the scripts and characterizations that are closest to Fleming's concept. It's unfortunate that he got what I perceive as "Moore's leftovers" in the script department. They skewed them a little towards Dalton's performance, but they still could not help but leave in the juvenile humor. I put DC on the same level as Dalton, he just does a slightly different take on it, since he is playing a younger Bond starting out.
Connery was always tops when I was growing up, but after all these films and years and new actors, and seeing Connery in so many other roles, I realized he was just playing a suave version of himself, rather than actually trying to be Fleming's character. Moore and Brosnan did more or less the same take - they were pretending to be the cinematic idea of Bond (though Brosnan did try injecting some character in certain
scenes), whereas when I watch TD and DC, I get the impression they are trying to reveal the character from the novels, and when I read them I can see them more as the novel Bond and not the cinematic Bond. I think thats why although the general audience enjoyed the TD films, they didn't as much because it was such a change from Moore and they weren't used to the dark tone. Many at that time had not seen the first two films in years or had never seen them and had forgotten how much darker they were before Goldfinger turned the direction towards a lighter tone. Dalton or DC could easily have done those first two if they had been contemporaries of Connery then. I have no problem picturing them in Connery's place. Anyway, Brosnan was such a hit because audiences had not seen a Bond for years and they balanced the lightness and darkness just right for his first outing. With fear they could lose their relevance and box office in this new century, and with the world's innocence stolen by terrorists, the producers knew they had a chance to go back to the character from the novels - a more realistic, human Bond dealing with real life monsters. Remaking Casino Royale was the right thing to do and since the audiences were already conditioned to mythical characters being "rebooted" - Superman, Batman, etc., they knew they could get away with it. Fortunately, they found a good character actor to hang the tux on, and now we're off into the future with Bond still being a relevant hero. I only hope that whoever keeps the Bond experience going in the future, they keep Bond's human side in the scripts and never, ever go back to doing parodies of him.

chrisisall

In watching TLD just last night, I find myself fascinated with Dalton's acting style.
Many actors depend on timing to deliver their lines; Dalton relied on a measured response to another actor. When Saunders said "You're late, this is a mission, not a fancy dress ball!" Tim just lets it hang there as he reads the other man. I see stuff going on in his eyes. Is he thinking "Saunders suddenly reminds me of someone I've killed."?
Then he lets it go: "There's time."

Brilliant actor, that one.

Le Samourai

Totally agree! -{

CmdrAtticus wrote:

After Dalton's performances, he became my favorite actor, as I am one of those members who prefer the scripts and characterizations that are closest to Fleming's concept. It's unfortunate that he got what I perceive as "Moore's leftovers" in the script department. They skewed them a little towards Dalton's performance, but they still could not help but leave in the juvenile humor. I put DC on the same level as Dalton, he just does a slightly different take on it, since he is playing a younger Bond starting out.
Connery was always tops when I was growing up, but after all these films and years and new actors, and seeing Connery in so many other roles, I realized he was just playing a suave version of himself, rather than actually trying to be Fleming's character. Moore and Brosnan did more or less the same take - they were pretending to be the cinematic idea of Bond (though Brosnan did try injecting some character in certain
scenes), whereas when I watch TD and DC, I get the impression they are trying to reveal the character from the novels, and when I read them I can see them more as the novel Bond and not the cinematic Bond. I think thats why although the general audience enjoyed the TD films, they didn't as much because it was such a change from Moore and they weren't used to the dark tone. Many at that time had not seen the first two films in years or had never seen them and had forgotten how much darker they were before Goldfinger turned the direction towards a lighter tone. Dalton or DC could easily have done those first two if they had been contemporaries of Connery then. I have no problem picturing them in Connery's place. Anyway, Brosnan was such a hit because audiences had not seen a Bond for years and they balanced the lightness and darkness just right for his first outing. With fear they could lose their relevance and box office in this new century, and with the world's innocence stolen by terrorists, the producers knew they had a chance to go back to the character from the novels - a more realistic, human Bond dealing with real life monsters. Remaking Casino Royale was the right thing to do and since the audiences were already conditioned to mythical characters being "rebooted" - Superman, Batman, etc., they knew they could get away with it. Fortunately, they found a good character actor to hang the tux on, and now we're off into the future with Bond still being a relevant hero. I only hope that whoever keeps the Bond experience going in the future, they keep Bond's human side in the scripts and never, ever go back to doing parodies of him.

chrisisall

Agent007jamest wrote:

I initially thought he was the best but my opinion has soften over the years. Now he is in my top 3 behind DC & SC.

Fair enough to say.

DaltonFan1

I'm too young to have seen TLD or LTK in the cinema.

I certainly liked his performance immediately, but I had to go through all ,then 5, actors to conclude that TD is the best. Once you've endured the silliness of RM, SC's ageing etc., you appreciate what Dalton did.
What really does it for me is Dalton's intensity, particularly in LTK. You never really see the other Bonds properly pissed off. TD is the only one who seems to have genuine emotion sometimes get in the way of his job, excluding the end of OHMSS, and that makes his Bond feel real.

If I give TD a 10, then the others get the following ratings:
SC '62-'65 - 9
SC post TB - 5
GL - 8
RM '73 - '79 - 7
RM post MR - 6
DC - 6
PB - 4

Jimmy Bond

1. Sean Connery - He defined the cinematic James Bond in a very defintive way. He's Fleming-ian, but not quite - his dark humor defines him, but without taking away what made Fleming's Bond what he was. His turns in the first four (though TB less so) were the defintive Bond performances, never topped by anyone, his YOLT and DAF mechanical and uninspired by nature, and his NSNA turns a mellowed but still gracefull last turn by THE Bond actor of all time.
9/10

2. Timothy Dalton - The most emotional Bond, the only Fleming-like Bond (the puns are far, far fewer by now) and by far the most convincing of the post-Connery time. Unfortunately, he was only on two films, and that sucked. Still, he was a breath of fresh air after Moore's far too long tenure.
9/10

3. Pierce Brosnan - IMO, a convincing continuation of Dalton's portrayal, but infused with the cinematic elements of the character - mainly, the humor. Still, he's pretty good at it, and a lot of the time is above the material - especially in DAD's second half, which without him would've completely sank (although it did so anyhow for some people). Nowadays underrated, but definitely a Fleming-ian Bond.
8/10

4. George Lazenby - Also known as Connery Number 2, he still did do incredibly well in this film. I mean, by all means shouldn't OHMSS ever be the debut Bond for anybody, and he delivered anyhow. Still, he can be stiff, and a little range would've been nice. But, he is still to date the most convincing brawler. All others were invariably OK, but Lazenby I could believe could kick serious ass. He sold that quality well.
7/10

5. Daniel Craig - Pre-Skyfall mind you, so I can't know if I'm wrong on this one. But judging from CR and QOS, he's... OK. I'm sorry, but I'm not on board with the Craig's-the-best-thing-since-sliced-bread bandwagon. In CR he's really good, but in QOS, he's really terrible. Not bad as in acting (Craig's a good actor), but the characterization is all over the place. He's a superhero in a way Moore would've envied, and his performance lacks any emotional resonance, depsite the film being a revenge story - and thats the worst thing that can happen in such a film. So yeah, one really good performance and one really bland, uninspired, robot-like performance for me.
7/10

6. Roger Moore. What can I say that anybody hasn't? I'll only add that if For Your EYes was his best Fleming Bond peformance and TSWLM his best Cinematic Bond performance, OP would have to be his most balanced performance, and ideally would've been his final turn. Otherwise, a mixed bag.
7/10

chrisisall

Can't fault that list of your opinions. You were very fair IMO. :007)

Bodie

I remember coming out of the cinema after seeing TLD and being blown away by Dalton. After years of watching Rog chasing villians in his gadget laden zimmer frame here was 007 as he was supposed to be - an assassin who looked like he would kill. In the scene in the fairground after Saunders is killed when Bond sees the balloons and vaults the railing with his Walther drawn you just know that if it has been Necros on the other side of the hedge Bond would have shot him on sight.

Dalton is definitely the closest to Flemings Bond.

Dalton like Craig exudes the message - dont f*@^ with me.

Jimmy Bond

I don't get why people compare Craig with Dalton, at least pre-SF. Craig's Bond in his first two is not nearly as sophisticated and charming as Dalton's. The intensity is there, but thats about it. Dalton's act was more nuanced.

Q and M

At the moment i put Craig and Dalton as the top 2 followed by Connery. I purchased the DVD's about 2 years ago having seen very little of Bond. I watched the Dalton films last as I did not expect much as little was known of him, however i was blown away by his performance and this was further emphasised by reading the books and acknowledging that he is the closest to Ian Fleming's James Bond.
After Casino Royale and Quantum Of Solace, i ranked Craig as slightly above average as Bond, probably 3rd or 4th behind Dalton and Connery for sure, however i have been swayed so much by his performance in Skyfall. His interpretation of Bond like Dalton is very believable and this is what i think Bond should be all about.
Dalton is my favourite Bond, however Craig is very close to him and may even overtake him in his fourth outing as 007

DEFIANT 74205

CmdrAtticus wrote:

After Dalton's performances, he became my favorite actor, as I am one of those members who prefer the scripts and characterizations that are closest to Fleming's concept. It's unfortunate that he got what I perceive as "Moore's leftovers" in the script department. They skewed them a little towards Dalton's performance, but they still could not help but leave in the juvenile humor. I put DC on the same level as Dalton, he just does a slightly different take on it, since he is playing a younger Bond starting out.
Connery was always tops when I was growing up, but after all these films and years and new actors, and seeing Connery in so many other roles, I realized he was just playing a suave version of himself, rather than actually trying to be Fleming's character. Moore and Brosnan did more or less the same take - they were pretending to be the cinematic idea of Bond (though Brosnan did try injecting some character in certain
scenes), whereas when I watch TD and DC, I get the impression they are trying to reveal the character from the novels, and when I read them I can see them more as the novel Bond and not the cinematic Bond. I think thats why although the general audience enjoyed the TD films, they didn't as much because it was such a change from Moore and they weren't used to the dark tone. Many at that time had not seen the first two films in years or had never seen them and had forgotten how much darker they were before Goldfinger turned the direction towards a lighter tone. Dalton or DC could easily have done those first two if they had been contemporaries of Connery then. I have no problem picturing them in Connery's place. Anyway, Brosnan was such a hit because audiences had not seen a Bond for years and they balanced the lightness and darkness just right for his first outing. With fear they could lose their relevance and box office in this new century, and with the world's innocence stolen by terrorists, the producers knew they had a chance to go back to the character from the novels - a more realistic, human Bond dealing with real life monsters. Remaking Casino Royale was the right thing to do and since the audiences were already conditioned to mythical characters being "rebooted" - Superman, Batman, etc., they knew they could get away with it. Fortunately, they found a good character actor to hang the tux on, and now we're off into the future with Bond still being a relevant hero. I only hope that whoever keeps the Bond experience going in the future, they keep Bond's human side in the scripts and never, ever go back to doing parodies of him.

+1 -{

Thunderpussy

Dalton has always been my Favourite Bond actor.
It's sad the way things turned out.

Tobias

I saw both Tim Dalton films on video as i was 13 when TLD came out and i saw that on video back in 1989 when the video rental shops were still around and licence to kill i saw for the first time in 1992 but wasnt very impressed with it .TLD is my favourite Dalton film though.Thomas Wheatly who played Saunders comes from my home town of Chelmsford Essex

CmdrAtticus

chrisisall wrote:

In watching TLD just last night, I find myself fascinated with Dalton's acting style.
Many actors depend on timing to deliver their lines; Dalton relied on a measured response to another actor. When Saunders said "You're late, this is a mission, not a fancy dress ball!" Tim just lets it hang there as he reads the other man. I see stuff going on in his eyes. Is he thinking "Saunders suddenly reminds me of someone I've killed."?
Then he lets it go: "There's time."

Brilliant actor, that one.

That's why he's my favorite too. His timing and delivery came from all those years of doing Shakespeare -it's such a great training ground for actors. You can see in his performance how he was trying to bring out the human Bond of the novels, which is why I think it put the audiences who were only familiar with the cinema Bond and the years of Moore's character so much off kilter.

chrisisall

It's been said recently on another Bond site that Tim's acting prowess was too far above the material, and that's what most people who don't like his Bond are ACTUALLY disliking. :007)

Higgins

8-)

Thunderpussy

chrisisall wrote :

It's been said recently on another Bond site that Tim's acting prowess was too far above the material, and that's what most people who don't like his Bond are ACTUALLY disliking.

I think you've got something there.

chrisisall

Bondtoys wrote:

8-)

You of course realise that by appearing on this thread you are defacto stating that you feel Tim was the best Bond...

Virgil37

Having read the novels, Dalton and Craig are the closest. Bond is licenced to kill and Dalton and Craig never let you forget about that, never mind the cars, the girls, the gadgets. Connery had that quality too at the beginning, then lost it IMO.

My favourite Dalton moment (similar to the one of Connery with Strangways) is when he´s going to kill Pushkin and he says, "if I trusted Koskov we wouldn´t be talking". He means it. I can see Craig playing that, and Connery at the beginning.

Dalton was also Bond when I became a fan, so I'm really fond of his period and movies.

Muston

First saw Dalton's Bond's on TV and now have them on DVD. I found Dalton such a breath of fresh air after Moore's slap-stick. He was the right man for the time and I can see a lot of similarities between Dalton and Craig's Bond. Especially Licence To Kill and Quantum Of Solace which have a lot in common.

Dalton - 10/10
Craig - 10/10
Brosnan - 8/10
Lazenby - 7/10
Connery - 7/10
Moore - 2/10

chrisisall

When I was younger, Diamonds Are Forever was my favourite Bond movie, later it was Thunderball, in 1987 my Mom died, and I wasn't quite in the right mood for much that was serious in the movies, which is why I think I didn't really respond to Dalton's début, and 1989 wasn't much of a better time for me personally, by 1997 Brosnan's Tomorrow Never Dies became my instant favourite, and it stayed that way until earlier this year when I joined here & broke down & bought the Connery, Dalton & Craig DVD's missing from my collection and promptly discovered that Dalton REALLY nailed it, and I was amiss in not realizing it much sooner.
Now my favourite Bond film is The Living Daylights, and I only choose that over Licence To Kill because of the John Barry music- they are so close for me.
Can't wait to see Skyfall, Craig rocks as well...

Higgins

chrisisall wrote:

Bondtoys wrote:

8-)

You of course realise that by appearing on this thread you are defacto stating that you feel Tim was the best Bond...

No, it's just like a car crash or a convention of nerds. Must have a look.
And I did not reply your question, so it is how it was: Dalton sucks

chrisisall

Mental help can be found in many places, many times for free or at least at a reasonable cost.