Bond. James Bond.

[Harry Dresden]

You watch Who, too? Which is your favorite? I've only watched since the last re-start, and I think Tennant is my favorite, only because I'm still mad at Christopher Eccleston for walking away.

yea David Tennant was great......but Eccleston was good too....i rented everything available from Net Flix over the course of last year just to see how they all were and how the storyline has progressed.....starting with the 1st Doctor and working to the Movie....the 5th Doctor Peter Davison was my favorite out of the early guys....Romana a Time Lady was one of his best Companions as she was also incredibly intelligent and unlike some of the female companions he has had, was able to take care of herself ......kinda like River Song.....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Dalton was very good, his portrayal perhaps the closest to Fleming's character, but the gap between films was too great and I don't think he was appreciated by the general audience as much as he was by fans.

I voted Dalton. I thought he was an excellent Bond - much darker in his humor and a more brutal agent. Too bad they didn't get him pre-'View To A Kill'. That crap and 'Octopussy' really put the series in a hole. Awful movies.

I do think that Brosnan is the physical embodiment of James Bond. The first time I saw him on Remington Steele I thought he'd be the perfect 007.

Connery was strong. Moore had his moments. Craig is OK, but he's turned it into just another action role. There isn't a strong connection to Bond.

i can agree with this....i felt Dalton had the attitude a guy like Bond would have to have to be who he was.....

 

[Swagger]

Roger Moore was a comedian. Nothing more, nothing less. He had his tongue firmly wedged in his cheek throughout his tenure as 007. Dalton was closer to Flemming's Bond than any of his predecessors. He made a point of researching his role, too. He brought darker edge to Bond. Brosnan was good, but there was something about his style that made it seem as though he was striving to match Dalton's persona. He was a bit too suave as well. Afterall, a secret agent has to spend a lot of time roughing it, not enjoying the salubrious existence Brosnan's Bond did with all those gadgets at his disposal. That was one of the reasons that, as a whole, made Sean Connery's Bond rather unconvincing. He'd often emerge from a serious scrape with death immaculate, as if someone had combed his hair during a fight without the audience noticing. His romantic encounters nearly always bordered on rape (see his 'embrace' with Honor Blackman's Pussy Galore in the barn scene in Goldfinger), as well, which didn't sit easily with me. Daniel Craig deserves the praise he's recieved for his take on Bond. Though the writing team should share in that credit as well. They're a match made in heaven. Craig is a Machiavelian Bond, a carbon copy of Flemming's original 007. He's violent and unrepenting. He doesn't take any prisoners, either. And he carries Bond's signature sidearm: the Walther PPK. A discreet weapon that fits neatly under his tux; none of this P99 nonsense.

But Desmond Llewelyn's Q (which stands for quartermaster - how many of you knew that, eh?) will always be my favourite character.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZTrb49wi3o&feature=related"]And this - between 1:24 - 2:15 - will always be the best Bond fight. Seriously, I don't think I've ever seen a henchman struggle so much with security.[/ame]

 

[J.E.D]

I've never been a Bond fan; however, I've always had a sentimental attachment to Roger Moore as Bond, because he was Bond when I was a kid, so it brings back memories. Having said that, I have watched most of one of the recent Bond films, and I have to say, it was pretty good. Definitely the most realistic Bond to date. The worst -- probably Pierce Bronsan. Un-watchable.

 

[Synthaholic]

I've never been a Bond fan; however, I've always had a sentimental attachment to Roger Moore as Bond, because he was Bond when I was a kid, so it brings back memories. Having said that, I have watched most of one of the recent Bond films, and I have to say, it was pretty good. Definitely the most realistic Bond to date. The worst -- probably Pierce Bronsan. Un-watchable.

Boo! Hiss!!

GoldenEye is one of my favorites.

And it also starred Sean Bean, recently seen as Ned Stark on Game Of Thrones.

 

[American Horse]

I read all the books, at least the ones authored by Fleming. I never saw any of the movies in a theater, seeing them all later on TV.

Here's my vote for BOND

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZY0xk0VeDs&feature=BFa&list=AV4oVf-d_DwKDHyciEVprNXdMsFr0EbaGl&lf=list_related]Bond Duel - YouTube[/ame]

 

[The Infidel]

Pussy Galore.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuUrNukZxvc]Sean Connery saying "pussy" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Big Fitz]

Out of the opening credits Pierce Brosnan was the best shot at the barrel. Connery wobbled, Lazenby, Moore and Dalton missed.

Every actor brought his own take and emphasis to the character of Bond. Connery and Craig brought out the sexy grittiness of the character. Moore and Brosnan brought out the suave debonire side of him. Dalton? Total miscast IMHO and Lazenby was a one and done for damn fine reason. The spoofs? meh. Ignored them.

And all lived and died by the writing. My all time top five Bonds go:

5 - You Only Live Twice
4 - Casino Royale (Craig)
3 - Goldeneye
2 - Thunderball
1 - The World Is Not Enough

I have a soft spot for Moonraker only because it sucks so damn hard it's funny to watch and Jaws gets a freakish happy ending.

 

[Toome]

Roger Moore was a comedian. Nothing more, nothing less. He had his tongue firmly wedged in his cheek throughout his tenure as 007. Dalton was closer to Flemming's Bond than any of his predecessors. He made a point of researching his role, too. He brought darker edge to Bond. Brosnan was good, but there was something about his style that made it seem as though he was striving to match Dalton's persona. He was a bit too suave as well. Afterall, a secret agent has to spend a lot of time roughing it, not enjoying the salubrious existence Brosnan's Bond did with all those gadgets at his disposal. That was one of the reasons that, as a whole, made Sean Connery's Bond rather unconvincing. He'd often emerge from a serious scrape with death immaculate, as if someone had combed his hair during a fight without the audience noticing. His romantic encounters nearly always bordered on rape (see his 'embrace' with Honor Blackman's Pussy Galore in the barn scene in Goldfinger), as well, which didn't sit easily with me. Daniel Craig deserves the praise he's recieved for his take on Bond. Though the writing team should share in that credit as well. They're a match made in heaven. Craig is a Machiavelian Bond, a carbon copy of Flemming's original 007. He's violent and unrepenting. He doesn't take any prisoners, either. And he carries Bond's signature sidearm: the Walther PPK. A discreet weapon that fits neatly under his tux; none of this P99 nonsense.

But Desmond Llewelyn's Q (which stands for quartermaster - how many of you knew that, eh?) will always be my favourite character.

And this - between 1:24 - 2:15 - will always be the best Bond fight. Seriously, I don't think I've ever seen a henchman struggle so much with security.

I agree with most of what you posted. I see Connery more as a reflection of the Cold War as opposed to reincarnation of Ian Fleming's character. On that note, I agree that Dalton was probably closer to what the real Bond was intended to be. Unfortunately, people kept comparing him to Connery instead.

I pick Craig because his version of Bond is fresh and new. They ran out of Ian Fleming books to copy, so the scriptwriters are forced to come up with something original, and so far, Craig is successfully recreating Fleming's ruthless, professional, licensed-to-kill operative without having to look over his shoulder for Connery, Moore, et al.

 

[g5000]

Sean Connery without a shadow of a doubt.

I thought Roger Moore was the worst until Pierce Brosnan came along. Jesus, that Brosnan shit was so bad I gave up Bond for the next several films, and I was a die-hard Bond man.

Brosnan fucked Bond up for me so badly that whan I finally watched Daniel Craig in whatever the first one of his was, I was still turned off. Someone had to convince me to watch Craig's version again.

That convinced me more than ever that Connery is the only one.

Oh...and Timothy Dalton sucked, too. Royally sucked.

 

[Polk]

Connery is an icon. Excellent in the role.
Lazenby was a good replacement, but...
Moore was exactly the right man to take the franchise in to the 70s. Lazenby rejected an offer for a multi-picture deal because he thought the character was dated. I think he would have been right about that, but the more light-hearted tone of the Moore films.
Dalton was terrible.
Brosnan did a good job of bring back the franchise. Goldeneye holds its own against almost any other film in the series, but the last two Brosnan films were the two weakest (though, that's because of terrible scripts).
Craig is okay. Casino Royale was fun, but Quantum of Solace was average at best.

 

[Synthaholic]

Connery is an icon. Excellent in the role.
Lazenby was a good replacement, but...
Moore was exactly the right man to take the franchise in to the 70s. Lazenby rejected an offer for a multi-picture deal because he thought the character was dated. I think he would have been right about that, but the more light-hearted tone of the Moore films.
Dalton was terrible.

BOO!!!! HISS!!!

Brosnan did a good job of bring back the franchise. Goldeneye holds its own against almost any other film in the series, but the last two Brosnan films were the two weakest (though, that's because of terrible scripts).
Craig is okay. Casino Royale was fun, but Quantum of Solace was average at best.

Partial redemption for you.

 

[Polk]

I may have been a little to harsh toward Dalton. The Living Daylights was okay (and the Afghan scenes are pretty funny in retrospect), but License to Kill was an awful concept that Connery couldn't have saved.

 

[BDBoop]

Inorite!?

I start all the best threads.