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
I don't know, TB doesn't feel the strongest directed to me. I think he probably stopped at the right point, and apparently he quit during editing anyway didn't he?
I wouldn’t say it’s an easy role (actually I suspect it’s deceptively tricky to play for an actor, and I reckon even some great actors would struggle a bit with it). There is a good deal of natural charisma and screen presence which comes into it. If you don’t ’have it’ then it’s tricky for an actor to play a believable Bond, which I think is where Lazenby’s problem came in. Acting ability aside I don’t think his real life charisma quite made its way onto the screen.
He makes Connery look like the Prince of Wales
And as Peter said, not really an actor at all: he barely knows where to look. Like the bit where he finds the chips in his drawer after spending the night with Tracy- what's he thinking? I have no idea, there's nothing going on behind his eyes at all.
Which funnily enough makes him kind of easy to picture as Fleming's Bond when reading one of the novels, because he looks sort of right but brings almost no personality to the part at all, so it's easy to overlay book Bond's personality and imagine him saying the lines in the book. If I try and picture Connery when reading a Fleming it doesn't work for me as his screen persona is too strong and different to Fleming's 007.
I do think Lazenby had the charisma, because if he hadn't, then Cubby wouldn't likely to bat an eye on him in that Barber Shop or in that Chocolate Advert they've seen him in, the Producers thought that he had potential, these are the same people who chose Connery over Fleming's choice, David Niven, and Fleming disliked Connery for looking more like an overgrown stuntman who thankfully was guided and molded into shape with Terrence Young's guidance (hence, why I wished Young had directed Lazenby) and Connery's casting succeeded, these are the same producers who have Dalton and Brosnan on their radar, so they know what they're doing, when they've seen potential in Lazenby, they knew it, if not for Lazenby quitting from the role.
That's said, for some casual audiences, the 'Cinematic' James Bond, just like Bourne, Hunt, and Wick, is still an action hero, if they looked good in a suit, sophisticated, classy, believable in fight scenes and action, sexy, could handle the essential aspects of the character, then any actor could've gotten the role, there's a criteria already laid on for the Cinematic Bond role through screen tests, if they've passed it, then, they could be Bond, this is not just about Lazenby, it's about choosing the Next Bond, in general, it's just the same as Bond Girls, think of why people prefer the performances of Barbara Bach, Claudine Auger, and Daniela Bianchi over the likes of Halle Berry (an Oscar winning actress) and Denise Richards, for example? It's on how they carry the role, and the quality of the material they're going to be given with, we don't need an A List, Oscar Winning Actors and Actresses in this:
1.) As long as the material is good
2.) As long as they could carry the role, then they could be in.
I mean Halle Berry could've been great as Anya Amasova, but just imagine Barbara Bach as Jinx, for example, but why many people prefer the latter to the former? Because of the material they've been given with.
And Lazenby, I think carried it well, like what I've said, the romance in OHMSS are the best that I could expect from a Bond film (not that the romance in the book was anything that convincing either), Lazenby carried it in the most Bondian way possible (that montage scene is really great, so them skiing together).
This is just my Controversial Opinion, but I don't think the role of Cinematic James Bond is really that demanding, if they pass the criteria, they could go for the role.
It’s not that Lazenby didn’t have charisma as a man. He clearly did and any interview with him will show it. But conveying that charisma as an actor onscreen, and in this case as James Bond, is another matter. It doesn’t matter how much charisma he had, the fact that he didn’t always seem comfortable in the role, didn’t always naturally know where to look, and indeed had this tendency to recite his lines in a stiff, wooden manner kills that slightly. It’s what I mean when I say playing Bond isn’t as easy as it looks. A lot of great actors simply won’t be able to play the role convincingly, but it’s also a case where a non-actor is even unlikelier to succeed, even if they have the look. Honestly, I don’t think the producers struck gold with him (although from auditions I can definitely see how he was the best option), and after Connery they clearly wanted a Bond in the role long term to steady the ship.
I really don’t think Young would have gotten anything better out of him. Despite Connery being a slightly left field pick he was an actor ultimately, and he was very natural onscreen. It’s very much a case where getting the right actor is key for a director - hell, for Bond in general it’s a case where the actor doesn’t really need to be ‘moulded’ into the character because they have the ability to play him naturally. In that sense Connery wasn’t transformed into Bond just because they took him to Saville Row and taught him about fine dining. That’s just preparation, and to some extent Lazenby would have gotten that too.