Aww man, that was misleading. I was gonna go for covalent...
Anyways, I always like Roger Moore the best.
Anyways, I always like Roger Moore the best.
I definitely love the new direction, but I saw Goldeneye before all of the others, and I just wound up comparing all of them to Pierce Brosnan. Some were good, and I liked just as well (Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, and Sean Connery being all tied for 2nd place)Esotera said:Daniel Craig, as I quite like the direction they've started taking the Bond franchise in.
Not really, it pretty summarily explains the current poll.game-lover said:snip
This guy makes some fine points.Squilookle said:As already said- Brosnan is the distillation of all the best traits of the bonds that came before- therefore it would have to be him, even though much of the brosnan era scriptwriting fell short and Connery is absolutely excellent. I suppose I'd rank them:
1: Brosnan- Best bits of everyone, and knew how to kick ass and have fun at the same time.
2: Connery- Pretty much nailed the role in everything except Diamonds Are Forever. Lazenby should have done that one. I love the way Connery just sort of goes along with the absurd nature of things sometimes, like the names of women he meets.
3: Moore- Comfortably good fun. A little cheesy but everyone forgets he could do a serious scene just as well. For Your Eyes Only, anyone? Also had some spectacular stunts in his time.
4: Lazenby- A real life black belt, Lazenby in some ways does the most vicious energetic fighting. Probably the deadliest looking in action on screen. Poor guy had to act like a chaste fop, and genuinely fall in love. This was so different from the bond fare before it that everyone hated him for it, and I dont think he deserves an ounce of it.
5: Dalton- Brought too much of his classical training to his acting. Brooded the best, but every single threat, no matter how small, had his eyes bugging out like he just shat himself- making him look far less capable than the others.
6: Craig- Excellent in Casino Royale, but overall breaks the big rule of bond physique: The whole point is that Bond is an average build guy with special training. He carries a small pistol and isn't built like a tank, so that the movies can keep putting bond at a disadvantage, whether in firepower or physical strength, and he uses his wits to find a solution. Craig just pounds on everyone and overcomes them with sheer force, which frankly just sucks. Seeing Connery face off against Oddjob or Moore against Jaws is far more entertaining than Craig's fights against people equally or less physical than he is.
All in all I've found Craig's reality to be an interesting 'what if Bond was just starting out now' alternate reality, but I think it's high time we ditched it and got back to James Bond, veteran spy, kicking arse and loving it... or at least as much as his smirk and raised eyebrow will show it...
Not really, there's plenty of it in Casino Royale. It's just not cringe-worthy.Spaghetti said:Well, Craig brings a coldness that you'd expect Bond to have, but Bond's charm suffers as a result.
He's an amalgamation of quite a few people, including Fleming. Or at least, how Fleming wanted to see himself.Elementary - Dear Watson said:Yes... the real life inspiration for James Bond was that of a member of the RAF!![]()
...That was an amazing response haha, gonna have to use that one in the future:'DAylaine said:...Yeah, that deja vu seriously just crit me for like, thousands of damage. xDBlueberryMUNCH said:Mmh this thread was done a few days ago.
Still, I'd say my top 3 are Connery, Brosnan and Craig (in no particular order).
On the basis that I like the two 'new' ones though, I'll vote Craig:].
Diablo2000 said:And who the fuck is David Niven?
He played Bond in the original version of Casino Royale in the....60's or 70's..can't remember offhandgame-lover said:Who the hell is David Niven???