Which Bond got to visit the best locations?

echo

I'm tempted to say Moore, but that's a bit unfair because he had seven films. Even his weaker films had pretty impressive geography.

What do you think?

R1s1ngs0n

Tough one but it’s definitely a toss between Connery and Moore.
On the whole. Moore gets to visit more exotic places; however, the Bahamas and especially Japan sit at the top of my travel destination wishlist.

Baltimore_007_

I thought Moore straight away maybe because there's truth in the answer. Made what seven appearances and took in sights and locations from just about every continent or corner of the earth. Never made it to Australia but managed to reach about near everywhere else. It's all about which actor featured the most. Dalton made two appearances and seemed restricted to Mexico and Europe / Afghanistan, Lazenby isn't a factor in it while Brosnan, Craig etc just didn't jet set like their predecessor/s.

Connery, 7 movies also, guess you have to include NSNA as part of it, but Moore gets the vote for the particular accolade.

Venutius

Any location that had Eva Green in it, that was the best location. So: Dan.
Eh? What do you mean, 'simp'? ;)

M_Balje

Roger Moore have moost various mix and also a very good reasen why it is my favorite era. But Connery Bond visit The Netherlands. My birthcountry and Amsterdam is my birth city.

It was very close (see inside Yolt) or Thunderball have been last Bond movie and it not have been Kevin Mclory to blame.

SIS_HQ

Connery:
The goods: Jamaica, Turkey, Bahamas, and Japan.

I never found American locations quite distinctive and exotic, just common and normal looking, although Las Vegas might come close, Kentucky might be the most dreadful location ever put in a Bond film.

Moore:
The goods: Egypt, Brazil, Venice, Greece and East Berlin.

The bad: Again, most of Americas (New Orleans and California),

The okays/neutral: Thailand is decent looking but I don't liked how the film stripped off its aesthetics on screen, they never gave Thailand its chance to shine by showing its beautiful spots.
I don't found India all attractive (Taj Mahal and that Palace are beautiful, I may guarantee), but the country looks a bit too polluted, it's even shown in the film at the start right after the backgammon scene while Bond was in the Tuktuk with Vijay, Octopussy showed the light and dark side of India.

Italy, while good, became tiring by the time of the Craig Era where most of his films where set in there, Cortina and Sardinia do looked good at that time though.

Brosnan:
The goods: Monaco, Russia, Hamburg, Saigon, Bilbao, Turkey, Hong Kong, Cuba, Iceland, Korea.

The bad: Azerbaijan (we didn't see much of this country?).

Craig:
The good: Austria, Cuba, Norway, Mexico, Tangiers, Montenegro.

The bad: Italy became a bit tiring at this point, most of his films where set in Italy, I think of Craig as the Italian Bond.


Lazenby: Switzerland and Portugal, and both are beautiful.
None are bad.

Dalton:
The good: Bratislava, Vienna, Tangiers, Mexico
The bad: Afghanistan, Florida Keys

This is how I would rank them:

Lazenby - for me, none are bad locations, Switzerland and Portugal are two beautiful countries, and unique because none Bond film were ever set in those locations.

Connery - Beautiful locations too, but again, okay, I may like Las Vegas, but most of Americas just seemed too common, especially Kentucky.

Dalton - No one could go wrong with Bratislava and Vienna.

Moore - Quite a few, Thailand is good looking, India was quite decent looking, it's a polluted country, really, Italian locations were quite good but watching the Craig Era made me tired of Italy, and few American locations that's not a standout, but the rest are great.

Craig Era - Just purely Italian Locations which really got tiring at this point.