Who is James Bond?

[TheMindlessType]

In light of the Daniel's post on who the best James bond is I've decided to post my thoughts on the matter. While the -best- James Bond is up for debate, indeed I invite you to go tete a tete with me, the worst James Bond is clear. Written some time ago, here are my thoughts on the matter.



Having spent so much of my youth (and let's face it, my current early adulthood) watching the James Bond films repeatedly I've had a lot of time to reflect on the series. I've seen each film, aside from Octopussy, at least six times if not more than a dozen and I've come to acquire some pretty strong feelings on the actors. The strongest of which is my adamant belief in who is the worst actor to play the role of James Bond. It might seem more rational to discuss who the best Bond was because recognizing excellence and making a case for what makes an actor great can guide people to the better portions of the series – The issue comes from the fact that the movies span more than 40 years and 22 canon films, 23 if you want to include Never Say Never Again, which I do - in fact, I think it's crucial to my argument that I do include it. As a result being made over such a large time frame, the style has changed drastically over the years, at times completely away from the subject matter of the original novels and away from it's early, simple, camp appeal. Filming techniques have improved, budgets have gotten bigger, dialogue has drastically been altered to pander to different audiences. The difference between Dr. No and Quantum of Solace is immense. Those differences are essentially what make discussion of who the best Bond is impossible. There are those who are “puristsâ€

 

[Longo_2_guns]

As probably the second biggest Bond afficionado here, as I mentioned that time I was in the podcast, I agree with a great deal of what you said

However, I think Moore's movies are some of the worst. An assassin building a laser beam from space? Fucking Star Wars? He did a few good ones, namely The Spy Who Loved Me and Live and Let Die, but most of them were just so terrible. And yes, Moore was too old and too unspylike.

Oh, and for me, I'd rate the Bonds as so: Connery = Craig > Dalton > Lazenby > Brosnan > Moore

Oh, and you should really read the books. They're awesome.

Oh yeah, Daniel's an idiot for saying Brosnan. But go figure.

 

[StickyGreenGamer]

When it comes to there being a James Bond marathon on T.V., I really don't care who is playing the role. I'm going to watch all of it, cause that his how I was raised.

Now, when it comes to actually picking out a movie from the selection, I'm generally going for one of the Craig films. In my opinion, Craig is the best Bond. The last two films have been some of the best, and he has delivered solidly in both. Dark, gritty, ruthless, witty, he spans the whole range. He is believable as Bond. Eva Green's character, Vesper Lynn put it best,

All right... by the cut of your suit, you went to Oxford or wherever. Naturally you think human beings dress like that. But you wear it with such disdain, my guess is you didn't come from money, and your school friends never let you forget it. Which means that you were at that school by the grace of someone else's charity: hence that chip on your shoulder. And since you're first thought about me ran to "orphan," that's what I'd say you are...Since MI6 looks for maladjusted young men, who give little thought to sacrificing others in order to protect queen and country. You know... former SAS types with easy smiles and expensive watches...I wouldn't go as far as calling you a cold-hearted bastard... But it wouldn't be a stretch to imagine. You think of women as disposable pleasures, rather than meaningful pursuits.

-1

That, in a nutshell (or quote block), pretty much wraps up what the character should be. Craig delivers in that regard. Ice cold, kills two guys, straightens up, and is right back to cards. Just my opinion though.

As far as the worst, I find Moore's movies to be stuffy, and those are the one's most likely to drive me away from the T.V.

Nice essay though, you have plenty of valid points in there, and besides preferring Craig over Connery, I am almost in complete agreement with you. Thanks for sharing that.

1-http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0381061/quotes (IMDB)

 

[De-Ting]

I think Brosnan was the best looking Bond, and have nothing else to add to the debate.

 

[TheMindlessType]

I have to disagree with you on the apparent ridiculousness about the laser beam from space. They used the same concept in Goldeneye and it was awesome, cept it was an EMT. Yes, the production values were lacking somewhat, but those were the times. The idea of a laser in space was a very real threat, as are many of the Bond villains and their weapons. The Bond story drew an immense amount from our current enemies and the dangers we faced. The space race was not about putting men on the moon but gaining military superiority for launching our missiles and being able to keep tabs on other people. In that sense, moonraker is a really important moment in movie history for immortalizing our real fears.

I agree with your rankings.

I'm making my way through the books.

And I don't think Daniel is an idiot. Brosnan has his strong points, just as a face alone. Also, never underestimate the power of nostalgia.

 

[MattAY]

I think Brosnan was the best looking Bond, and have nothing else to add to the debate.

Whenever I talk about Bond amongst peers this is, more often than not, the concluding sentence.

I concur like concrete Tingy.

 

[NickKmet]

Going back, and watching the earliest Bond films, it's really hard to not notice the blatant sexism (especially when watching them with my girlfriend). In really, Connery's character is written very thinly. But, Connery had such a charm about him - he was able to make Bond so much more than what was there, and had some of the best one liners (I'll never forget when I was old enough to understand what "Pussy Galore" implied, and then seeing his reaction to hearing her name for the first time is just great). For nostalgia reasons, and because Connery is and always has been a complete badass, Connery is #1.

I have to go with Craig at #2, because the reboot of the character is exactly what was needed, and Craig is incredible in bringing the depth of character we've started to expect of our modern action heroes to life. And you can't beat those beautiful blue eyes.

I have Brosnan and Dalton in a tie at #3. Goldeneye was a phenomenal Bond movie, and Brosnan really made the character work. I think he probably embodied the pre-Craig Bond the best (as in, he followed Connery's example the best), while adding something to the character. Going back and watching Dalton's Bond movies, I feel like he also acted the role incredibly well, and his acting style made Bond seem like a real person, rather than a larger than life caricature. It's too bad that he had the try the role out in the 70s.

Lazenby goes 4th, primarily because nobody could possibly be worse than Roger Moore. I guess On Her Majesty's Secret Service isn't that bad of a movie, and Lazenby did fairly well, but it's hard to place him after one movie, because he tried really hard to be Connery. Craig is much easier to place because the character is so different and fresh and new.

Moore is abysmal. Terrible acting, came off as a pretentious asshole, and was way too old for the role. The only Bond movies I haven't seen came from his era.

 

[used44]

Brosnan isn't necessarily a bad Bond, but his movies are certainly amongst the worst of the franchise, save for Goldeneye.

 

[Paradox]

Hugh Jackman revealed recently that he was offered the role of James Bond for Casino Royale. He turned it down saying he did not want to portray two iconic characters at the same time (Bond and Wolverine).

 

[Bretimus_v2]

Yeah, bad fit too. I really like Daniel Craig in the role. I just thought it was hilarious who all wanted to be the new Bond. I'm pretty sure Colin Firth was on that list.

Each Bond tried to bring something to the game. I love Connery's charm, he is laughable in some of the action moments. Brosnan was always the full package for me. He was believable in the action and the intrigue and the romance. Craig is such a different interpretation of the character for me though. I like the grittiness but he just seems to detached at times.

 

[Paradox]

Idris Elba (Heimdall in 'Thor' and Luther in the BBC series of the same name) has stated he'd like a shot at the role should Daniel Craig vacate it.

It could be an opportunity to bring a continuity of sorts to all the Bond films; the name of James Bond and the designation of 007 could actually be a code name given to different MI:6 special agents over the past 50 years or so.

 

[Daddio]

Hollywood destroyed the Bond films.

 

[Paradox]

^^^Not enough jet packs, submersible cars, razor sharp hats, or evil lairs in volcanos in the current films for you? Maybe in the next one Bond could bang a questionably named metallic colored chick.

 

[used44]

I thought it was weird that somebody would mention Heimdall from Thor as one of Idris Elba's main credits and not mention Stringer from The Wire but then I noticed it was Paradox.

 

[daverabbit]

Idris Elba (Heimdall in 'Thor' and Luther in the BBC series of the same name) has stated he'd like a shot at the role should Daniel Craig vacate it.

It could be an opportunity to bring a continuity of sorts to all the Bond films; the name of James Bond and the designation of 007 could actually be a code name given to different MI:6 special agents over the past 50 years or so.

Or maybe James Bond is a time lord! And I thought the same thing as Used.

 

[TheMindlessType]

Paradox, oddly enough there seems to be a resurgence of this whole Doctor Who-ism style of story telling. While I don't think the Bond franchise will ever go with the idea of continuing a story via a revolving door of characters filling the 007, a few major franchises are considering it, such as the Bourne series and Ghostbusters. Though I guess technically Doctor Who isn't really a new character just taking the name, his transformation wholly restructures his body so he's chemically different, thus acts different, and is on whole, different. It really is a new character entirely.
Bond on the other hand is essentially the same, he just continues to modernize and only has slight changes in his personality.
Anyway, the new Bourne movie was supposed to star Matt Damon in an axillary capacity as he passes the torch to a new treadstone, or whatever they call it now, escapee and have this new guy be the new "Bourne" but obviously isn't Jason Bourne. Unfortunately due to a change in director Matt Damon has declined to continue his part in the film.
So it's interesting that you bring up the idea of the 007 as a moniker and not as a character. Personally I don't think that would survive. The public is already very critical of the Bond series, with many fans crying bloody murder over this new, less campy Bond. Were you to change the canon so drastically by focusing the films on 007 rather than James Bond I think they would be committing franchise suicide.

Bretimus, I think part of the greatness of Craig's Bond is that, at times he seems entirely detached but you get the sense that is only by training and duty. The dullness in his eyes is only masking the actual pain he suffers from the things he needs to do to keep the world safe.
In Goldeneye, 006 talks about this idea during his big reveal. How the liquor and the girls are over indulged in to hide the actual struggle he feels. The Bond we see in Connery and Moore is one that has already gone through that transition stage. Craig's bond has a lot more internal struggle with a bigger show of being detached. He is growing into the spy shoes, having only been on a few missions with double-oh status. Which is why he isn't so calm and cool. Why he gets his hands dirty a lot more. It's also why people hate him, because he's not perfect.

 

[Daddio]

^^^Not enough jet packs, submersible cars, razor sharp hats, or evil lairs in volcanos in the current films for you? Maybe in the next one Bond could bang a questionably named metallic colored chick.

Yes. Jet packs and submersible cars would be sweet.

All the product placements can go f*ck themselves though, the Brosnan Bond films were just one large commercial ad for whoever would pay, kinda like Transformers. Too bad for Brosnan though, didn't mind the type of Bond he played, too bad the movies were shit.

They are at least going in the right direction with the Daniel Craig movies, you can get a sense for why he became the way he did in the original films.

 

[StickyGreenGamer]

Some relevant info on the next Bond film:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/0 ... 73302.html

 

[kingg5]

Wow too long to read. Some of you may know i'm a connery fan, but I think Pierce Brosnan played a pretty decent Bond. After the newer Bond movie with Halie Barey I pretty much gave up on the newer ones. Favorite one is From Russian with love.

 

[GRColin]

Barry Nelson, AKA "Jimmy Bond" is the worst James Bond ever.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Nelson