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
It is my understanding that the public didn't really take too well to Dalton's portrayal of the character in LTK however. With TLD, he apparently gained tepid acceptance (I think his first film is still the least grossing first one among all the actors) but LTK was supposedly too dark and violent compared to expectations. At least this is what I have been told.
In hindsight, a more traditional Bond film should have been made and maybe go dark for the fourth film.
But, Wilson wanted the harder edge and Dalton had nothing to do with the script.
But, the flavour of LTK is true to Fleming, who to audiences was of no interest. To them Bond was Superman who screwed three women per film.
Dalton has his fans who are growing. I respect Dalton for being willing to take the brutal backlash. Brosnan was accepted so easily, but that acceptance was his Achiles heel..
My favourite Bonds are Connery and Dalton, with Moore. Moore was my first exposure to the character.
The controversy Dalton caused the series is his legacy. And it lives on. If you read Cubby's book, you will see why he wanted Dalton. And he said Dalton just wanted to be respected for being Fleming's Bond. And he is.
As for the public, they are fickle. They proved that by how with media help, they jumped on the Craig bandwagon leaving Brosnan in the dust. The generation of Connery /Moore were more loyal as Dalton predicted they would be.
That's very true also. He paid a price for that later.
Yes indeed. But the advent of DVD, gives audiences a chance to explore Bonds of the past. Not even Lazenby will be forgotten and the worse they talk about you, the more curious others become.
Even Roger Moore recently said that the Bond films did not deserve Dalton. Roger knows how this industry works and a kind acknowledgement. Moore has a humility and has broadened his perspective. He said Dalton always gives interesting performances. Moore is a class act.
A sidenote. I had a friend who disliked Dalton. I lent him Cubby's book and he changed his opinion to the contrary. Broccoli always had method. Dalton was no accident. He was part of the plan.
I wish more would be that objective. Dalton was maligned for being true to the character. He gave the series a new perspective after 25 "years. No small feat.
When The Snow Melts. An incredible read for a serious Bond fan. Broccoli was a genius producer and his tales are amazing. The book also betrays how Dalton was like a loyal son to him. Dalton carried his coffin at his funeral service.
And he talks tonnes about Moore. Great stuff.
Thank you for the debate @bondjamez Though I know I draw the short straw for defending Dalton.
I do like Craig in CR and QOS but I prefer both of Dalton's perfomances over anything Craig has done.
The thuggishness of Craig feels totally misplaced for a Bond actor. Bond has lost his elegance the last few years. Even though that's essential, nobody seems to care.
Timothy Dalton was the perfect Bond, mixing the tormented protagonist with a touch of class.
In the USA AVTAK took more. But not worldwide.
boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=jamesbond.htm
Thank you @goldengun
I have said this before, but SF was the Bond film for those who do not like Bond. The amount of comments I have seen on the Internet, that before Craig they did not care for Bond.
My brother-in-law is an example. He only has Craig's films and dislikes classic Bond. When Bond followed Bourne, only then did he take interest in the series.
Compared to Craig in SF, I do not see the Dalton films as far removed from the classic formula as some accused. The Dalton era connects to the classic era more smoothly. You see the thread running through the series.
I love the references to the past Bond in TLD. "Forget the ladies for once Bond,!" or the "Not tonight Hans," when asking for separate beds.
And I noticed Dalton smiles far more as Bond. He is not this machine or always angry. TLD is the first film where you see Bond enjoy himself at the funfair with Kara. That was good to see.
Dalton was a super fine actor who also looked the part. You have to look the part too. Otherwise Simon Pegg could be the next Bond.
Dalton - so-so
So they earned more money, this actually has happened, and has been popular enough to run as long as it had:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1086761/
Doesn't mean that it is good quality tv though.
Precisely. There's a bit of backlash re. Craig at the moment because a lot of fans are venting over SP, but the work is there. He brought something special and while he may not be my favourite I think it's undeniable. Regardless of circumstances, or the 'If only me auntie had bollocks she'd be my uncle' arguments, Craig delivered big time. That's what will be remembered.
Craig definitely delivered in CR and QOS and both of those films are in my upper half.
It was Sam Mendes, however, who let him down with two pretentious and totally schizophrenic efforts where he turned Craig in a Ken Loach character with a suite.
The examples above have been well chosen (as mentioned before, its the SP humour that is the issue I think and it could be said that it's the scriptwriters fault rather than DC)
PS I would also add the scene where Bond first meets Vespa on the train. Its a very tricky scene as there is humour but underlying tension. That scene sets up the foundation for their whole realtionship and it works so well.
Those scenes are written for Craig. Dalton did not have scripts like Craig. Craig acts those scenes well,. It is pointless to compare that, because Dalton's films were constructed differently.
You are comparing a post-911 Bond film with end of Cold War film. The culture and world events could not be more different.
The Craig era was a total reboot. Dalton's was not.
Or do we go down a path of comparing technology. The phones in Connery's films are not as sophisticated as Craig's.
Absolutely @acoppola, your perceptions are astounding!!!
Sarcasm. But no counter argument.
Sarcasm? Can't you take a compliment? Man - you got issues man.
What does it achieve?
This all started with a scene in LTK with Della.
May as well compare the technology between the DB5 1964 and the latest Aston Martin. It is a futile exercise.
The written word can be easily misinterpreted. Sorry if I took it the wrong way @tanaka123
In the circumstances and context of this at times heated discussion, I can be forgiven.
Sarcasm. But no counter argument.
[/quote]
Sarcasm? Can't you take a compliment? Man - you got issues man.
[/quote]
The written word can be easily misinterpreted. Sorry if I took it the wrong way @tanaka123
In the circumstances and context of this at times heated discussion, I can be forgiven.
[/quote]
ou It's up to @tanaka123 whether you are forgiven,you cant forgive yourself when it's somebody else you have offended,methinks haha !!
Sarcasm? Can't you take a compliment? Man - you got issues man.
[/quote]
The written word can be easily misinterpreted. Sorry if I took it the wrong way @tanaka123
In the circumstances and context of this at times heated discussion, I can be forgiven.
[/quote]
ou It's up to @tanaka123 whether you are forgiven,you cant forgive yourself when it's somebody else you have offended,methinks haha !![/quote]
His post came across as sarcastic. In all honesty, it is becoming petty and childish here.
But you are mistaken, if you think I care.
Let's see your contribution here in terms of substance.
Piss poor wisecracks don't cut it. Your tag line about Kara Milovy being brain dead is ironic judging by what you wrote.
People have been comparing the various Bond's and their abilities for decades, yes context is required at times, but you're disappearing down a rabbit hole. Dalton, according to you, can be excused because of Glen's shortcomings as a director - does Glen then take credit for the excellent moments in both those films, or does that fall at Dalton's feet? Sounds like double standards to me. Or perhaps Glen is excused because of inadequate production support, which in turn trickles down to Cubby... your overstretching yourself with this one. Dalton is excellent at times, but for me, and others, he's also not so great here and there.
As for comparing the above scenes with GF, yes you can. It's all down to how the actor applies themselves within the scene. Their presence and delivery being paramount. There are moments when Dalton feels like a chameleon who can slip into a room unnoticed, where Connery and Craig have an enigmatic spark to their performances that makes them the focal point. I'd pinpoint Dalton as being more earnest than enigmatic.
Having said that, emotional though Dalton was at times, I actually prefer his work in both his films to Craig's in SP.
My point is I think the director does indeed matter very much. As an example, I love Connery with Young & Gilbert. I don't particularly like Connery with Hamilton (I think he is better suited to Moore, although GF is lauded around here).
I never had a problem with Dalton's screen charisma personally. I think he owns every scene he is in. It's the performance I sometimes take issue with. The only Bond actor who I feel didn't fully own the screen all the time he was present was Brosnan.