Which Bond had the best chemistry with the Bond Girls?

Blackleiter

I have recently been going through the Bond movies in the 50th anniversary Blu-Ray collection, and I have been struck by the varying degrees to which there appears to be good chemistry between the Bond actors and their leading ladies. For example, in my opinion Sean Connery seems to have pretty good chemistry with Daniela Bianchi (Tatiana Romanova) and Shirley Eaton (jill Masterson), but not much with Jill St. John (Tiffany Case) and Mie Hama (Kissy). Despite their behind-the-scenes battles, I believe the chemistry between George Lazenby and Diana Rigg really adds to the success of OHMSS. Daniel Craig and Eva Green really mesh together well in Casino Royale, while I detect no real chemistry at all between Craig and Olga Kurylenko in Quantum of Solace. So what do you folks think - which Bond actors and Bond Girls have the best on-screen chemistry?

alphaagent

None of Craig with any of them. He has general moments like the shower with Vesper, the fire with camille and the casino with severine. But overall he is poor with the women. Connery always has great chemistry, just watched from russia with love, their scene in the train is great. It might have to do with how belivable the actor is. Up until the casino in Skyfall, i always found craig coming across as the guy who wants to be smooth but isn't, the dialogue on the train in casino is great, but the acting is awkward, you can taste the awkward, like if you were sitting behind Bond on the train and heard that conversation you would be like "burrrn". For sure Connery, he just does with ease Look at him and pussy galore, again it comes to the actor Craig wouldn't even get naked with Bernice for fcks sake in the shower scene and she had to convince him, that for me sets up a lack of chemistry! Connery would have been whallaper out before they even started shouting for the lights.

DieAnotherDay

I would have to agree, I think Connery's chemistry with Tatiana and Pussy added to the greatness of those films, Roger Moore had a very good Chemistry with Anya Amasova and Octopussy but barely any with any other leading lady. I also feel that Brosnans chemistry with Natalia Simonova and Elektra King was absolutely spot on but all of the other actresses in his films were very badly cast. Craig and Vesper were also a good match but IMO Lazenby and Dalton had zero chemistry going on throughout their films, which is why I find the love story in OHMSS that much harder to get emotionally involved in

Overall best chemistry though: Got to be the mighty Connery

ZorinIndustries

I always found Roger Moore to be good with women, even the ones who weren't that great of actresses. Look at Corinne, Countess Lisl, and all the other minor roles. Moore does a good job seducing the girls he's with, it's just a shame that he only had a few occasions where the girl would act just as well.

Le Samourai

I know I'm going against the tide here, but Connery's interactions with women always makes me cringe. He comes across as, at best, a chauvinistic cad, and at worst a sexual predator. I never get the impression he cares about any of the women in his life, nor that he makes any sort of emotional connection with them. In general, I don't care for Connery Bond's macho nonsense.

And I don't by the argument that it was just a sign of the era. Actors such as Cary Grant and Humphrey Bogart seemed to genuinely connect with their female costars without any of the misogynistic air of Connery.

As for examples of good Bondian chemistry, off the top off my head I would say Lazenby-Rigg, Moore-Bouquet, Dalton-d'Abo, Brosnan-Marceau, and Craig-Green.

Firemass

i tend to agree with

Le Samourai wrote:

I know I'm going against the tide here, but Connery's interactions with women always makes me cringe. He comes across as, at best, a chauvinistic cad, and at worst a sexual predator. I never get the impression he cares about any of the women in his life, nor that he makes any sort of emotional connection with them. In general, I don't care for Connery Bond's macho nonsense.

I tend to agree with you on this one Le Samourai. It's too bad that Brosnan got chewed out by M for being a "misogynist dinosaur" as if he was paying for Connery's various infractions.

alphaagent

That's because Bond is a chauvinistic cad and i disagree because he never cares about the women that he meets in the line of duty usually because they work for the opposition, volpe, galore he also by proffesion is to do all necessary for king/queen and country aka romanova or domino. But if you remember in goldfinger he shows genuine affection and remorse for both the mastersons. It is Craig who is the macho nonsense, fckn never even saves severine after all that talk VOMIT. plus he acts no different with solange (essentially that is Bond and the nature of his work/character).

Le Samourai wrote:

I know I'm going against the tide here, but Connery's interactions with women always makes me cringe. He comes across as, at best, a chauvinistic cad, and at worst a sexual predator. I never get the impression he cares about any of the women in his life, nor that he makes any sort of emotional connection with them. In general, I don't care for Connery Bond's macho nonsense.

And I don't by the argument that it was just a sign of the era. Actors such as Cary Grant and Humphrey Bogart seemed to genuinely connect with their female costars without any of the misogynistic air of Connery.

As for examples of good Bondian chemistry, off the top off my head I would say Lazenby-Rigg, Moore-Bouquet, Dalton-d'Abo, Brosnan-Marceau, and Craig-Green.

Jarvio

Hmm.... let's see

Connery/Honey - Excellent
Connery/Tatiana - Very good, but could be seen as sexist with Connery's slap to Tataiana's arse )
Connery/Pussy - Pussy challenged bond, and it worked
Connery/Domino - I always forget about Domino...
Connery/Kissy - Connery had better chemistry with Aki tbh
Lazenby/Tracy - Very good I thought
Connery/Tiffany - Pretty hilarious combination tbh
Moore/Solitaire - Excellent
Moore/Goodnight - One of the worst
Moore/XXX - She challenged him, which worked well
Moore/Goodhead - Didn't like this chemistry
Moore/Melina - It worked...
Moore/Octopussy - A slightly older bond girl, which worked very well for Moore
Moore/Stacey - Not great, but not as bad as most make out
Dalton/Kara - A weak link IMO
Dalton/Pam - As much as I like Dalton, again, not such great chemistry with the leading lady
Brosnan/Natalya - Quite well done
Brosnan/Wai Lin - Didn't like it much
Brosnan/Christmas - Terrible if I'm honest
Brosnan/Jinx - The worst of the lot
Craig/Vesper - Unique, and very developed
Craig/Camille - Seen better, seen worse
Craig/Severine - Excellent, but too short-lived

Overall I think it's between Connery and Moore... But I'm gonna say Moore, because Connery at times is a bit chauvinistic (sign of the times maybe?)

Firemass

When I first saw Goldeneye in the cinema I innocently assumed that Bond and Natalya lived happily ever after. Imagine my confusion when Tomorrow Never Dies came out and there was no mention of why the Natalya relationship didn't work out.

Keep in mind I was like 10 and no prior knowledge of the Bond series.

Blackleiter

Although I disagree with some of your choices, I like your analysis. One thing in particular that struck me is your comment that Connery had better chemistry with Aki than Kissy. I absolutely agree.

Jarvio wrote:

Hmm.... let's see

Connery/Honey - Excellent
Connery/Tatiana - Very good, but could be seen as sexist with Connery's slap to Tataiana's arse )
Connery/Pussy - Pussy challenged bond, and it worked
Connery/Domino - I always forget about Domino...
Connery/Kissy - Connery had better chemistry with Aki tbh
Lazenby/Tracy - Very good I thought
Connery/Tiffany - Pretty hilarious combination tbh
Moore/Solitaire - Excellent
Moore/Goodnight - One of the worst
Moore/XXX - She challenged him, which worked well
Moore/Goodhead - Didn't like this chemistry
Moore/Melina - It worked...
Moore/Octopussy - A slightly older bond girl, which worked very well for Moore
Moore/Stacey - Not great, but not as bad as most make out
Dalton/Kara - A weak link IMO
Dalton/Pam - As much as I like Dalton, again, not such great chemistry with the leading lady
Brosnan/Natalya - Quite well done
Brosnan/Wai Lin - Didn't like it much
Brosnan/Christmas - Terrible if I'm honest
Brosnan/Jinx - The worst of the lot
Craig/Vesper - Unique, and very developed
Craig/Camille - Seen better, seen worse
Craig/Severine - Excellent, but too short-lived

Overall I think it's between Connery and Moore... But I'm gonna say Moore, because Connery at times is a bit chauvinistic (sign of the times maybe?)

James Suzuki

Defiantly Moore, no doubt about it

superado

Le Samourai wrote:

...I don't by the argument that it was just a sign of the era. Actors such as Cary Grant and Humphrey Bogart seemed to genuinely connect with their female costars without any of the misogynistic air of Connery.

But it was a sign of the times. Grant and Bogart were actually behind the times during the 60's, and arguably during the 50's when the novels were written as far as the sexual revolution was concerned.

Le Samourai wrote:

I know I'm going against the tide here, but Connery's interactions with women always makes me cringe. He comes across as, at best, a chauvinistic cad, and at worst a sexual predator. I never get the impression he cares about any of the women in his life, nor that he makes any sort of emotional connection with them. In general, I don't care for Connery Bond's macho nonsense.

As for Connery, it was his physical sensuality that landed him the role of Bond and it showed. If he was a predator, his female conquests gave their dreamy acquiescence and IMO this was more believable with him than any of the others. Connery was more in the mold of Dean Martin, the Rat Pack and Hugh Hefner's Playboy philosophy. If that was all too subtle just watch Austin Powers. It was in the post-war when the realities of life began to be starkly explored, including sexuality, then of course all of that going full-bore in the 60's. Male chauvanism was a widely accepted attitude and lifestyle that was enjoyed by both genders, evidenced by the sexual objectification of women by the fashions that emerged during and after the war (e.g., bullet bras, the bikini, etc.) The frank openess and embrace of today's youth toward sexuality is the direct result of all of that. It was this cultural awakening that made it ripe for Fleming to showcase his personal amorous history that was received by enthusiastic masses and if Fleming had not gone that way, we may not have a Bond movie series to enjoy now.

Brosnan_fan

Roger Moore, without doubt, though AVTAK is a non-event. Pierce Brosnan's first 3 also worked, and though their tenures were very short-lived, both George Lazenby and Timothy Dalton scored solidly.

always shaken

Have to agree with agent DIE ANOTHER DAY,only Connery
could say, ah pussy,properly with out looking like a total dick
(jerk for our U.S brothers)

Blackleiter

I think you're on to something.

superado wrote:

Le Samourai wrote:

...I don't by the argument that it was just a sign of the era. Actors such as Cary Grant and Humphrey Bogart seemed to genuinely connect with their female costars without any of the misogynistic air of Connery.

But it was a sign of the times. Grant and Bogart were actually behind the times during the 60's, and arguably during the 50's when the novels were written as far as the sexual revolution was concerned.

Le Samourai wrote:

I know I'm going against the tide here, but Connery's interactions with women always makes me cringe. He comes across as, at best, a chauvinistic cad, and at worst a sexual predator. I never get the impression he cares about any of the women in his life, nor that he makes any sort of emotional connection with them. In general, I don't care for Connery Bond's macho nonsense.

As for Connery, it was his physical sensuality that landed him the role of Bond and it showed. If he was a predator, his female conquests gave their dreamy acquiescence and IMO this was more believable with him than any of the others. Connery was more in the mold of Dean Martin, the Rat Pack and Hugh Hefner's Playboy philosophy. If that was all too subtle just watch Austin Powers. It was in the post-war when the realities of life began to be starkly explored, including sexuality, then of course all of that going full-bore in the 60's. Male chauvanism was a widely accepted attitude and lifestyle that was enjoyed by both genders, evidenced by the sexual objectification of women by the fashions that emerged during and after the war (e.g., bullet bras, the bikini, etc.) The frank openess and embrace of today's youth toward sexuality is the direct result of all of that. It was this cultural awakening that made it ripe for Fleming to showcase his personal amorous history that was received by enthusiastic masses and if Fleming had not gone that way, we may not have a Bond movie series to enjoy now.

ChromeJob

Is the question about the CHEMISTRY between the actors in their roles, or the NATURE of the onscreen relationship.

You want to know Connery's secret sauce, just watch the John Cork documentaries,[1] and EVERYTHING OR NOTHING. To a woman, his costars talk about how a great guy he was/is, an instant lifelong friend (Andress), supportive (Girl Photographer actress in DR NO), easy to get along with. Shame that in the last two films he did, there was stress, enmity with the producers,... it was not a happy working environment for Connery.

But clearly from the home movies and stuff, he was playing that role, and NOT playing himself. The role is complex and not a ladies' man like Moore was known to play (THE SAINT), and sometimes very mean to woman (e.g.his treatment of Tanya after he's found Kerim dead). Watch FRWL, he's kinda of tolerating and coddling her on the train, knowing she's probably a double agent, and after Kerim's death, he's savage with her. She pleads with him, and honestly would you believe her? He's unconvinced. The relationship is clearly chilly, but after she "sleeps it off" (drug) she probably realizes that he's taken her with him, keeping her safe from certain assassination by either SPECTRE or the KGB, and by the end, she makes her choice (kills Klebb, trusts Bond). They both played this complexity very well.

But I digress. I always thought Connery was a superb actor. Watching the old films again and seeing home movies of him (by all accounts he was shy and very private), I realize just how much of what he showed us as Bond was performance. And I think he carried that to his interactions with other actors, even the supporting roles like Ms Taro, Pleydell-Smith, Kerim, Grant, Hawker (his caddie in GF), Jill, Tilly, Oddjob, etc. That's why I really cringe at his scenes with Quarrel ... completely untrue to his feelings about the man in LALD and DN (books).

My two pence worth....

[1] Oh, sorry, the Ken Adam home movies are an extra on the TB Blu-Ray. Really funny how he would mug for people's 8mm cameras. I mean, he had a warm relationship with the set designer?? How many "stars" are that unpresuming....

Blackleiter

You've asked a very good question, and the question in my post actually pertains to the chemistry between the actors. Perhaps I should have framed it differently, because the chemistry actually depends on not just the actor playing Bond, but also on the particular actress playing the Bond Girl. That being said, I completely agree with you about Connery as an actor. I think he made it look so easy playing such a difficult role that his skill as an actor is often overlooked. That's why it really burns me when I hear the frequent refrain that "Connery fans only think he's the best because he was first." Not true, at least not for me. The way he juggles the smooth, sardonic, resourceful, menacing and sometimes cruel elements of Bond is masterful, and he carries the screen like no other Bond actor. And as you have pointed out so skillfully, he also plays off of his fellow actors quite well. Those are the reasons he's the best, in my opinion.

ChromeJob wrote:

But I digress. I always thought Connery was a superb actor. Watching the old films again and seeing home movies of him (by all accounts he was shy and very private), I realize just how much of what he showed us as Bond was performance. And I think he carried that to his interactions with other actors, even the supporting roles like Ms Taro, Pleydell-Smith, Kerim, Grant, Hawker (his caddie in GF), Jill, Tilly, Oddjob, etc. That's why I really cringe at his scenes with Quarrel ... completely untrue to his feelings about the man in LALD and DN (books).

Firemass

alphaagent wrote:

It is Craig who is the macho nonsense, fckn never even saves severine after all that talk VOMIT.

yea, that was pathetic. They even gave Bond a gun and he just lamely took a shot at Severine and the idly stood by while Silva killed her.

alphaagent

Firemass wrote:

alphaagent wrote:

It is Craig who is the macho nonsense, fckn never even saves severine after all that talk VOMIT.

yea, that was pathetic. They even gave Bond a gun and he just lamely took a shot at Severine and the idly stood by while Silva killed her.

Firemass, don't know but I like you already. EXCTLY EVEN HAD A GUN. Low point of the movie for me. but still

zaphod

Blackleiter wrote:

You've asked a very good question, and the question in my post actually pertains to the chemistry between the actors. Perhaps I should have framed it differently, because the chemistry actually depends on not just the actor playing Bond, but also on the particular actress playing the Bond Girl. That being said, I completely agree with you about Connery as an actor. I think he made it look so easy playing such a difficult role that his skill as an actor is often overlooked. That's why it really burns me when I hear the frequent refrain that "Connery fans only think he's the best because he was first." Not true, at least not for me. The way he juggles the smooth, sardonic, resourceful, menacing and sometimes cruel elements of Bond is masterful, and he carries the screen like no other Bond actor. And as you have pointed out so skillfully, he also plays off of his fellow actors quite well. Those are the reasons he's the best, in my opinion.

ChromeJob wrote:

But I digress. I always thought Connery was a superb actor. Watching the old films again and seeing home movies of him (by all accounts he was shy and very private), I realize just how much of what he showed us as Bond was performance. And I think he carried that to his interactions with other actors, even the supporting roles like Ms Taro, Pleydell-Smith, Kerim, Grant, Hawker (his caddie in GF), Jill, Tilly, Oddjob, etc. That's why I really cringe at his scenes with Quarrel ... completely untrue to his feelings about the man in LALD and DN (books).

Could not agree more, he just found the right balance. I don't buy that he never cared about them, just think about his expression upon discovering the Gold paint, or the tenderness he displays with Tatiana. it was not until Dalton and the exasperated and annoyed with himself over going back for the Cello that we get anything like this quality of nuanced performance.

Napoleon Plural

Well, Connery had great sexual chemistry. Not sure about emotional chemistry with anyone.

He had no real chemistry with any of the NSNA gals save the Shrublands one.

Disagree about Lazenby and Rigg chemistry, doesn't work for me. They fall in love cos it's in the script.

Moore the narcissist was in love with himself, but shared the love with Barbara Bach and maybe Lois Chiles I guess. Actually he had chemistry with Moneypenny. And Corinne in MR perhaps, not much though.

Dalton, well not much. Brozzer? Sexual chemistry with Christmas Jones, emotional with Halle Berry.

Theundeadkennedy

Blackleiter wrote:

Although I disagree with some of your choices, I like your analysis. One thing in particular that struck me is your comment that Connery had better chemistry with Aki than Kissy. I absolutely agree.

I also agree with that. But after her death its as if she never really meant much to him. Which I don't find as off putting as many people seem to. Bond's lack of compassion is part of his characterization in my eyes. He's suppose to be cold chauvinistic dinosaur. I guess many expected him to weep after Severine's death.

alphaagent

Theundeadkennedy wrote:

Blackleiter wrote:

Although I disagree with some of your choices, I like your analysis. One thing in particular that struck me is your comment that Connery had better chemistry with Aki than Kissy. I absolutely agree.

I also agree with that. But after her death its as if she never really meant much to him. Which I don't find as off putting as many people seem to. Bond's lack of compassion is part of his characterization in my eyes. He's suppose to be cold chauvinistic dinosaur. I guess many expected him to weep after Severine's death.

I never expected tears, just not for him to let her be killed in that way. Chauvinistic old dinosaur, misogynist absoloutely and proud. But he is chivalrous and a hero in that respect. The lack of remorse is too much with Bond and I am sorry, he never cried over tracy's death he shouldn't cry over fckin M's or ever for that matter.

Blackleiter

Ummm....I think he did cry over Tracy's death.

alphaagent wrote:

Theundeadkennedy wrote:

Blackleiter wrote:

Although I disagree with some of your choices, I like your analysis. One thing in particular that struck me is your comment that Connery had better chemistry with Aki than Kissy. I absolutely agree.

I also agree with that. But after her death its as if she never really meant much to him. Which I don't find as off putting as many people seem to. Bond's lack of compassion is part of his characterization in my eyes. He's suppose to be cold chauvinistic dinosaur. I guess many expected him to weep after Severine's death.

I never expected tears, just not for him to let her be killed in that way. Chauvinistic old dinosaur, misogynist absoloutely and proud. But he is chivalrous and a hero in that respect. The lack of remorse is too much with Bond and I am sorry, he never cried over tracy's death he shouldn't cry over fckin M's or ever for that matter.

James Suzuki

He did cry, and this is friendly forum, we try to tone down the f words.

alphaagent

He never shed tears, they showed the one where he didn't, plus he was calm and composed not sobbing and blubbering. And James it was a friendly Frick Not a F-CK. It was necessary to express how passionate my post was.

Blackleiter

I disagree. True he wasn't sobbing and blubbering, but he was crying.

alphaagent wrote:

He never shed tears, they showed the one where he didn't, plus he was calm and composed not sobbing and blubbering. And James it was a friendly Frick Not a F-CK. It was necessary to express how passionate my post was.

zaphod

Blackleiter wrote:

I disagree. True he wasn't sobbing and blubbering, but he was crying.

alphaagent wrote:

He never shed tears, they showed the one where he didn't, plus he was calm and composed not sobbing and blubbering. And James it was a friendly Frick Not a F-CK. It was necessary to express how passionate my post was.

I watched it very recently and he does cry ( I usually stop the film at the original/intended end point- the high tracking shot before they set off to make sure that I don't bulb as well) it's beautifully played by Lazenby, and I'm not sure if even the great Sean could have equaled it.

ChromeJob

According to Hunt and Lazenby, he actually did cry during the first take of her death scene. Hunt thought it a bit much, and they reshot it.

I'd have to watch the "making of" again, but I think Hunt filmed the high crane shot so that they *could* end it with the marriage, and then kick off the next film with Tracy dying (rather like QOS kicks off right where CR left off). I suspect that Hunt did it as a hedge, but really did want to end the film as the book did. With Lazenby acting up and possibly already making noises about leaving the series when they were in post-production editing, it might've been a very easy sell indeed for Hunt to wrap up the OHMSS story without a cliffhanger.

You call that antique crap that Craig was given in SF a gun? Ever shot one of those old black powder things? Not very effective as close order combat weapon in a pinch. Only thing I think he could've done with it was gut shot someone at close range, but then the percussion isn't very fast (like a modern semi-auto), so ... I think it would've been stupid to try anything.

Firemass

still...Craig has gone 0/3 for ending a 007 film getting the girl.

Sean went 6/6, Roger went 7/7 Dalton went 2/2 and Pierce went 4/4

poor Lazenby 0/1...you have our sympathies for what happened.

Peppermill

Roger "the vacuum kisser" Moore. Not only did he always get the main girl in the end, he also had every woman in the film eyeing him.