Bond movie ranking (Simple list, no details)

1120121123125126231

Comments

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,244
    Birdleson wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Pierce was an excellent compromise for those who didn't care for the harder edged Dalton Bond as well as those who weren't fans of Moore's lighthearted humor. Yet at the same time, his performance didn't alienate fans of either. He was fairly universally loved and considered by many to be the next best Bond to Sean.

    It wasn't Dalton's harder edge that turned people off at the time. It was his basic lack of charisma which Moore and Connery had in excess. He and his films were perceived as dull. I don't remember one damned person saying "Too Dark!" People want some real charm with their cold-blooded Bond (Craig). In many ways GE was darker than TLD, and Brosnan was a cold Bond (as cold as any beforehand). But he had charm.

    Yes, but once I read the books I was able to see what Dalton was going for, and the lack-O-charm fit in nicely I thought. He's the real-er Bond. ;)
  • Posts: 19,339
    Dalton was a boring,lovestruck plank compared to Pierce....
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Dalton played Fleming's character, Brosnan after GE was a parody. Dalton still has charisma too.
  • edited November 2016 Posts: 11,175
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Dalton played Fleming's character, Brosnan after GE was a parody. Dalton still has charisma too.

    I agree that Brosnan was something of a parody, but I do think he has more charisma than Dalton does. I've said this several times before, but I don't think Dalton translates to the big screen that well and works better on television.

    That said I get what Dalton was going for in trying to make Bond a less glamorous character and I admire his approach to the role.

    I think if there was a problem it was that he sometimes seemed self-conscious in the lighter scenes and also, in the case of LTK, his attempts at being tough and vengeful felt acted with his pronounced expressions and scowls.
  • Posts: 4,814
    I think the opposite! Its Brosnan who never looked comfortable on the big screen! He never did anything of worth up to Bond! He needed Bond more than we needed him, hence his whining to the press when he was dumped! As Bond he came across more as a supporting player, he faded into the background, and actors of lesser note stole the movies from him (Scorupco, Coltrane in GE, Schiavelli in TND, Carlyse in TWINE, eh...the icebergs in DAD!!). He was stiff and smarmy, and his attempts at acting (the infamous painface!) were laugable!
    Dalton on the other hand, had huge screen presense, embodied the part, and was Flemings Bond personified! He is starting to be appreciated now for what he was trying to do with the role. Bring him down to earth, show some depth, a different angle than was shown before! Connery was great, but too cold and unemotional, Lazenby was good, but his lack of experience showed, Moore put his own stamp on the role, but was too light, and the comedy became too much, Brosnan was anonymous, and Craig finished what Dalton started!
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e il momento che verrà
    Posts: 5,866
    10/10: adore it
    1. ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE
    2. THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS
    3. FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE
    4. GOLDENEYE

    9/10: love it
    5. LICENCE TO KILL
    6. CASINO ROYALE
    7. THUNDERBALL
    8. GOLDFINGER

    8/10: like it
    9. THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN
    10. THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH
    11. QUANTUM OF SOLACE
    12. THE SPY WHO LOVED ME
    13. DR. NO

    7/10: ok
    14. YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE
    15. SKYFALL
    16. OCTOPUSSY
    17. MOONRAKER
    18. NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN

    6/10: watchable
    19. A VIEW TO A KILL
    20. TOMORROW NEVER DIES
    21. LIVE AND LET DIE
    22. SPECTRE

    5/10: tolerable
    23. FOR YOUR EYES ONLY
    24. DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER
    25. DIE ANOTHER DAY
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Why do you rate GE over DN???
  • edited November 2016 Posts: 11,175
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    I think the opposite! Its Brosnan who never looked comfortable on the big screen! He never did anything of worth up to Bond! He needed Bond more than we needed him, hence his whining to the press when he was dumped! As Bond he came across more as a supporting player, he faded into the background, and actors of lesser note stole the movies from him (Scorupco, Coltrane in GE, Schiavelli in TND, Carlyse in TWINE, eh...the icebergs in DAD!!). He was stiff and smarmy, and his attempts at acting (the infamous painface!) were laugable!
    Dalton on the other hand, had huge screen presense, embodied the part, and was Flemings Bond personified! He is starting to be appreciated now for what he was trying to do with the role. Bring him down to earth, show some depth, a different angle than was shown before! Connery was great, but too cold and unemotional, Lazenby was good, but his lack of experience showed, Moore put his own stamp on the role, but was too light, and the comedy became too much, Brosnan was anonymous, and Craig finished what Dalton started!

    I agree that Brosnan was self-conscious also but for different reasons to Dalton.

    I'm not arguing that Dalton was closer to Fleming's Bond or is a stronger actor. However, I'm still not convinced Dalton had a particularly strong screen presence. When was the last time you saw him in a leading role in any film? He's a good actor but he's better fitted to television, the theatre or supporting film roles.

    True Brosnan could be hammy as hell sometimes (and yes his painfaces could be pretty laughable), but I feel Dalton's style of acting is too mannered and "big" for film. Craig and Connery on the other hand could convey a lot by doing relatively little with their faces, Dalton was always doing something (looking round, making tense expressions, scowling, narrowing his eyes etc).
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    I think he has enough screen presence and a smouldering quality for Bond. True on his career though, although Brosnan is no A-lister. Brosnan was looks and style over substance.
  • edited November 2016 Posts: 11,175
    suavejmf wrote: »
    I think he has enough screen presence and a smouldering quality for Bond. True on his career though, although Brosnan is no A-lister. Brosnan was looks and style over substance.

    You do have a point there. Certainly pre-Bond Brozza's career seemed pretty lightweight and not all that impressive. But nonetheless, I feel he has a stronger screen presence than Dalton.

    Then again, I feel Connery, Laz, Moore and Craig also have a stronger screen presence than Dalton.

    I think Dalts works well in starring roles on television (Penny Dreadful, Jane Eye, Chuck, TimeShare etc - I'd like to see him in another TV series at some point) but less so in films. Despite Bond he hasn't seemed to have made the transition from small to big screen as easily as his fellow Bond actors.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger @!#¤%^§
    Posts: 43,614
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Why do you rate GE over DN???

    It s pure madness.
  • I rate GE over all of the rest.
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,141
    GE is #1
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,244
    Murdock wrote: »
    GE is #1
    I can totally understand that. My top tens are all so almost #1.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Given the circumstances
    edited November 2016 Posts: 7,338
    GE is top 6 for me.
  • For a moment I thought I was in the "controversial opinions" thread, @GoldenGun, and was about to post that that's quite possibly the least controversial Bond ranking I've ever seen!
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,021
    GE is always Onatopp on things!
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e il momento che verrà
    edited November 2016 Posts: 5,866
    @Some_Kind_Of_Hero I'm quite happy you put it that way. I would have thought SF and FYEO might be too low and TMWTGG, TWINE and QOS are a bit high for a non-controversial ranking. Also I suppose a top 2 with Lazenby and Dalton is not all that common I'd expect.
  • A couple of those things stood out to me, too, @GoldenGun, but not enough to sway my initial impression. Round here at least I don't think it's at all surprising to find OHMSS or TLD ranked rather high.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e il momento che verrà
    Posts: 5,866
    Well glad to hear that. Thanks for the feedback @Some_Kind_Of_Hero
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e il momento che verrà
    Posts: 5,866
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Why do you rate GE over DN???

    While I like DN, I adore GE. It's as simple as that. ;)

  • Posts: 11,175
    I find Isabella Scorrupco a better actress and more compelling character than Ursula Andress.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,128
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I find Isabella Scorrupco a better actress and more compelling character than Ursula Andress.

    Absolutely ....
  • Posts: 11,175
    GBF wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I find Isabella Scorrupco a better actress and more compelling character than Ursula Andress.

    Absolutely ....

    As beautiful as Andress was, she seemed fairly lightweight as an actress.

    Honey Ryder/Andress isn't all that much more than a glorified piece of eye candy.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Given the circumstances
    Posts: 7,338
    I don't agree, I think she did pretty good with a small role. She's great in the scene about her past. That's a great scene, and her performance carries it.
  • Posts: 11,175
    She's ok but Tatiana and Pussy were better in my view.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Given the circumstances
    Posts: 7,338
    I agree, but they, especially Tatiana, have a much larger role. Honey is a good character given how much time she is given to make an impression. I don't agree that she is just a attractive bimbo in the style of Goodnight, though I'm sure the Bikini is pretty much all she's remembered for.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,638
    We certainly learn more about Honey and her past in her short screentime than Natalya Simonova. All we learn from her is that she is a computer programmer at Servenaya....!
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    I rate GE over all of the rest.

    Don't get me wrong, I like all Bond films, but GE is just mediocre in the cannon. What never ceases to puzzle and amuse on a personal level is when this film is rated highly on this site." Ultimately, it provides little more than a flashy, over-hyped, vapid, MTV-influenced pot-pourri of greatest hits moments which don't add up to a satisfying whole. It's like one of those mediocre compilation albums where you simply flick through to the songs you like, enjoying the few good bits, and arbitrarily disregarding the rest. Fleeting surface flash and gloss with no real heart or soul. Compared to the better films in the series, it is a fairly hollow Bond movie with an awful score and an adequate actor in the lead role.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Given the circumstances
    Posts: 7,338
    We certainly learn more about Honey and her past in her short screentime than Natalya Simonova. All we learn from her is that she is a computer programmer at Servenaya....!

    Yes, but its not tit for tat. We learn less about Natalya, but we spend alot more time with her throughout the story.
Sign In or Register to comment.