It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
And hopefully we will be in the next era as well!
If we can't have Robert Pattinson because of Batman, then I think someone to keep an eye on is Jamie Dornan. In fact, he's my preferred choice. He's sexy and has a certain Tim Dalton-esque danger to him.
Maybe I'm only talking about myself, but I don't think people really notice age all that much on screen. I don't notice how old DiCaprio or Pitt or McConaughey are (I actually don't know but I guess they're knocking on a bit). And for kids an adult is an adult, unless he's a really old guy.
The only real reason to pick a Bond probably in his late 30s or so is to make sure he's up to continuing in the role for quite a few years.
Yeah that's a decent call.
He's not a great actor though.
He's worse than Cavill. Or at least as bad as him.
I'd agree
One striking, magnetic British man with a housegold name has recently become available, his schedule cleared. With a brooding presence, a cheeky sense of humour, sense of style, oozing masculinity and timeless class, and a British accent through and through...
...what does everyone think of Prince Harry of Sussex is the next Bond?
He's the right age, went to the same schools as Bond, and is most importantly available. It is probably best for Eon to put feelers out before Marvel snaps him up?
LOL, sometimes I wonder if he timed his resignation from the Royal Family to put him in the frame for Bond. Am I being silly or is this something we could see? Was it stage managed by Harry?
He should play Prince Hal in Henry IV.
+3 Bond is also a killer but I get what you are saying. His eyes looks a bit weird but ladies love him.
Still I don't think he looks like Timothy at all.
Hell yeah :)>-
I do wish he'd got better material, my issue with his tenure isn't him it is what he was given to work with. Though as you said my friend handsome as hell, wolf perfectly nails it.
Dalton is the only other actor that could have pulled off Casino Royale, I'm not sure it would have been successful as DC.
Whereas I think Dalton is the most accomplished stage actor the series has had, I don't think he is as accomplished a screen actor as Craig.
Craig possesses a confidence that no one apart from Connery in the series exudes. When I say that, I mean in all his cinematic ventures, no disrespect to Roger but he wasn't what you would call versatile where as Craig has really delivered a varied package of rolls over his career.
I mean have we really seen an actor in the series step out of his comfort zone like Craig has done with Logan Lucky and then Knives Out?
What was the show he did with Gillian Anderson. He played a serial killer and he was excellent.
Thank you yes; that's what I've always said. Or rather: it's what Dalton lacks- he fails to look like he barely even notices anyone else like Connery and Craig do; and to be fair Roger gets that too- he's utterly self-assured when he walks in a room. None of them give a toss about you other than what Bond himself can get from you, because he knows he's the most important person there. Dalton exudes nervousness. I think he's trying to make Bond seem like a real secret agent looking over his shoulder all the time, but he just ends up feeling not like Bond. Craig gets what Dalton didn't: you can be real-feeling and super-confident too, which makes it a great screen performance.
I've always thought Dalton was much better and more charismatic in other roles like Rocketeer or even Hot Fuzz than he was as Bond. He just chose to play it in a way that meant he lacked presence.
I think that's debatable. He said he was doing that but whether he succeeded is a matter of opinion. To be honest the one I actually find closest to the books is probably Lazenby, as he's a bit of a blank slate! :)
Even Lazenby got the confidence thing: he was so ballsy he got cast as James Bond in a movie without being an actor! :)
Not the overall film(TLD) was faithful adaption but dalton played the character pretty close to the book bond.
Lazenby sometimes say a lot he doesn't mean. Dalton on the other hand is hands down my favorite and he played far more closer than Lazenby imo.
Although I strongly disagree with you about Jamie Dornan, I think you're right about what trigger tabloids to say who'se being considered as the next Bond. I might audition to one of those BBC Sunday dramas. If I'm cast, I won't get any nearer to Bond, but the tabloids will have a day. I can already read the headlines : "Bold move as 42 year old French Canadian about to sign as Bond."
Agreed.
The only way to move on from Moore’s Bond, Dalton believed, was to go back to the source material: the Bond novels by Ian Fleming.
On being offered the role in ’86, Dalton studied Fleming’s work extensively, explaining at the time, “I’d read a couple of the books years ago, and I thought I’d find them trivial now, but I thoroughly enjoyed every one.”
“On those pages I discovered a Bond I’d never seen on the screen, a quite extraordinary man, a man I really wanted to play, a man of contradictions and opposites.”
Dalton made a point of drawing his take on the character directly from Fleming, so much so that many devotees of Fleming’s writing today CORRECTLY believe Dalton’s performance is the closest to the character as originally written.
Dalton didn’t just bring a Fleming-esque quality to his Bond personality-wise – in his two Bond outings, the actor also looks the most like the 007 that the author described in the books.
According to Fleming, James Bond is 6 foot and has a slim build, grey-blue eyes, a “cruel mouth” and short black hair that leads to a point at the hairline.
At 6′ 2″ with black hair, grey-blue eyes and slim build, Dalton is surely the closest physical match to Bond as described by Fleming.
Dalton also arguably has that “cruel mouth” that Fleming imagined, while Dalton’s resemblance to Carmichael is undeniable.
After the series blew up into self-parody in the Brosnan era, Daniel Craig rejuvenated Bond in 2006 by portraying the character like never before – at least if critics are to be believed.
With Casino Royale, his 00-debut, Daniel Craig was credited with bringing a realness to Bond that some argued no actor had previously brought to the role. This is wrong......
Someone had, of course: after Connery, Lazenby and Moore had played the character with an arched eyebrow for 25 years, it was Timothy Dalton who pioneered a more subtle FLEMINGESQUE approach to 007. Being arguably the most experienced actor to have ever played Bond helps.
Known through the 60s and 70s for his work on the stage, typically in Shakespeare plays, Dalton brought a gravitas and understatement to 007 that James Bond had never known. Unlike the others, Dalton played Bond small AND HE PLAYED HIM TO THE BOOK..... FLEMING'S BOOK THAT IS.
He's shockingly wooden actor IMO.
And I'd very much disagree he brought gravitas: personally I think he kind of disappeared in the role. He's not a presence in those films like even Brosnan was. In them he's just not really a movie star like it needs. He looks great though, yes.
Heh! It's a good point. As you guys say, funny how Norton is suddenly a candidate again now he's on telly in a 60's drama wearing a dinner jacket...
:D
He was dark, he was ruthless, and he managed to show precisely what Bond was all about: a merciless, calculating, professional assassin. His relationships with women and M were the same as Fleming's books.
Ironically, the very characteristics that got Dalton slammed are the very same things that the Bond producers are praising Daniel Craig for.
On and on, they have said they want Bond to be closer to the original Ian Fleming character. They want him to be grittier, darker and less jokey. What they really want, it seems, is to have Dalton back.
Whereas Moore’s Bond would constantly toss one-liners and cheap jokes and raise an eyebrow, Dalton took it more seriously, not afraid to show fear and anger (LIKE THE BOOKS). But that’s where some moviegoers didn’t take to him.
I read Fleming’s novels after I saw the movies. It can be the case that you embrace the first James Bond you ever see as your lifetime favourite. The first Bond I saw was Roger Moore in FYEO, some time in the late 1980s. I loved it, I love Roger, and it remains one of my favourites. Then I saw Connery. I loved him too. I thought they were both great in different ways – but not quite what I’d had in mind from the character in the books. Connery remains my favourite onscreen.
When I saw Dalton in The Living Daylights & Licence to Kill I thought: “That’s him! That’s James Bond!” Dalton steeped himself in Fleming’s stories for his research for the part. It shows. I noticed it as a kid with no preconceptions. Dalton moves with great poise, and lets his narrow eyes do a lot of work. He’s like a hunter, the consummate silent killer. Connery and Craig both move with an intoxicating swagger that looks fantastic on screen. But is it entirely right for the part?
It’s one of the choices that make his Bond so enduringly fascinating. There’s a sequence early on in The Living Daylights when Bond is ordered to kill a sniper who may be targeting Koskov, a Russian former KGB agent who is defecting to the West. He notices that the sniper is a woman. No matter. He lines up the shot. Then he notices something else and deliberately misses, hitting the rifle out of her hands instead of the target.
“Your orders were to kill that girl,” Saunders reprimands him.
“Stuff my orders,” Bond replies. “That girl didn’t know one end of the rifle from the other. I only kill professionals.”
None of the previous incarnations of Bond could possibly have delivered that line. Earlier Bonds were all establishment figures who obeyed their orders, allowing the British Government to act as arbiters of their morality. There’s nothing so unambiguous in the world of Dalton’s Bond. Note that it’s not because the sniper is female, nor because she’s beautiful – he would still have killed her without a second’s thought if she had been a real KGB assassin. It’s because she’s not part of the game. THIS IS FROM FLEMING.
Bond is in a right state at the end of Licence to Kill. His nose is bloody, his hair’s a mess, his jacket’s ripped and he’s covered in dust. After he kills off the main baddie, Sanchez (Robert Davi), Bond dry heaves in disgust at it all. It’s an amazing reaction. Dalton’s is a human Bond. THIS IS FROM FLEMING.
Dangling over the edge of whirring blades in Licence to Kill, Pam rushes over and asks if he’s all right. “Switch the bloody machine off!” he yells. It took until 1989 for Bond to lose his cool…THIS IS FROM FLEMING.
Like Fleming's books, Dalton's Bond is human, edgy, and morally complex. Dalton may only have made two films, but he captured Bond perfectly. He will always be the connoisseur’s James Bond.
You said it better than i could have, proven once again why Dalton is still my favorite bond. I will do a detail review on him when I get the time. Another Scene I would like to add where he saw Felix in bag, he was completely shaken by seeing his buddy like that. A lot of people may find him weak while he was shivering but i would say he was more human.
Excellent post, right on the mark about Dalton and Fleming. As a kid (still do) I always liked Dalton and Connery the most. The cool and collected Dalton vs the charismatic and laidback Connery. Both the best in their own right.
Aidan Turner anyone........?
Aidan Turner is great but I doubt he will get it. It will be someone similar to him and dalton I feel for sure.