67 replies to this topic

[Iceskater101]

If in LtK during the barfight scene the Bondgirl Pam Bouvier looks tougher and fights better as Bond himself, you know you have a big problem!

 

No.. it means that she is a bad ass Bond girl.... I mean I don't see a problem with that at all.

[Grard Bond]

The problem is: Dalton don't look good in fightscene's. That is a huge problem when you're playing someone like Bond!

[Mallory]

He looked pretty damn tough to me. Go watch the movies again. I just watched both films again, I am the most impressed with his performance. He also by far the most handsome actor ever to play Bond.

[Hockey Mask]

He looked pretty damn tough to me. Go watch the movies again. I just watched both films again, I am the most impressed with his performance. He also by far the most handsome  goofiest looking actor ever to play Bond.

FTFY

[Major Tallon]

Bless you, Mallory.  You nailed it.

[Iceskater101]

He looked pretty damn tough to me. Go watch the movies again. I just watched both films again, I am the most impressed with his performance. He also by far the most handsome actor ever to play Bond.

 

Definitely.

[Grard Bond]

 

He looked pretty damn tough to me. Go watch the movies again. I just watched both films again, I am the most impressed with his performance. He also by far the most handsome actor ever to play Bond.

 

 

He looked pretty damn tough to me. Go watch the movies again. I just watched both films again, I am the most impressed with his performance. He also by far the most handsome actor ever to play Bond.

 

I just watch his two movies a couple of weeks ago (from the exellent blu ray box)and I have still the same opinion about it.
There is not one good fight scene with Dalton. Ofcourse that is also the fault of director Glen and the editor.
My biggest problem is that I realy like Dalton, I think it 's a terrific guy and actor and I understand what he tried to do, but I find him as Bond some kind of nerd-like and his two movies a little dull. Sorry, I can't change that feeling.

[Georgi Koskov]

so you are saying the fight scene on the back of the plane isn't good? The fight scene in the Jail in the middle east isn't any good? What are you talking about? Yeah fair enough the LTK key west fight is cringeworthy and campy, but to say he doesn't have any good fight scenes is a joke of a statement...

[Professor Pi]

When I first read Grard Bond's comments on Dalton's fighting, I disagreed with it. But when I watched TLD and LTK, I noticed the edits are such that you don't see Dalton swing a solid punch or run for that matter.  Craig is definitely tougher.  Even Brosnan's fight scenes are edited such that they make him look like a better fighter.

 

I still think Dalton has more resolve and is more steely, but physically...Grard's got a point.  Timothy's still my favorite.

[Mallory]

That's just poor editing. They can make anyone throw a punch and look tough. I think he still looks affective. And it is clearly him doing the dangerous stunts.

[Turn]

Personally, I've alwas cringed and felt the punch Necros took from Dalton's Bond in the fight on the cargo net. Just saying.

 

As a huge Dalton fan from the beginning, I've never had any questions about his toughness and completely bought into the Dalton is Dangerous marketing tag. No, he's not Craig or Connery or even Lazenby, but never did I question his toughness. I think some of it was intentional on Dalton's part in saying you can't identify with a superman and wanting to appear more vulnerable. Although I have to admit I wondered when TLD was released why the best fight in the film was between Necros and the guard at the safe house.

[Grard Bond]

so you are saying the fight scene on the back of the plane isn't good? The fight scene in the Jail in the middle east isn't any good? What are you talking about? Yeah fair enough the LTK key west fight is cringeworthy and campy, but to say he doesn't have any good fight scenes is a joke of a statement...

The fight scene on the back of the plane is ofcourse great, but that is more of a stuntscene then a real man to man fight scene with Dalton. The fightscene in the jail is not realy great, not Connery, Lazenby or Craig level, it's a little silly, it's more The A-team like (the televisionshow, not the movie). And no it's not a joke of a statement, it's just an opinion, maybe not yours, but mine.

Personally, I've alwas cringed and felt the punch Necros took from Dalton's Bond in the fight on the cargo net. Just saying.

 

As a huge Dalton fan from the beginning, I've never had any questions about his toughness and completely bought into the Dalton is Dangerous marketing tag. No, he's not Craig or Connery or even Lazenby, but never did I question his toughness. I think some of it was intentional on Dalton's part in saying you can't identify with a superman and wanting to appear more vulnerable. Although I have to admit I wondered when TLD was released why the best fight in the film was between Necros and the guard at the safe house.

That is exactly what I mean: the realy great fightscene from TLD and what remines me of the old Connery (and Lazenby) Bondmovies is without Dalton, but between  Necros and the guard. Such a tough and exellent staged fight doesn't have Dalton himself in his two Bondmovies at all.

[Mallory]

The fight between Necros and the Guard is the best in the whole series.

[lechero]

The fight between Necros and the Guard is the best in the whole series.

 

No, not even close.

[Iceskater101]

Haha that's a pretty bold statement but hey to each their own.

[Grard Bond]

The fight between Necros and the Guard is the best in the whole series.

Bond versus Grant (FRWL) is way better and more suspensfull, because it is with Bond himself.

[plankattack]

The fight between Necros and the Guard is the best in the whole series.

Bond versus Grant (FRWL) is way better and more suspensfull, because it is with Bond himself.

Nothing to do with TD of course, but it's always struck me as a curious director/writer decision, to have such a great fight that doesn't feature Bond, and not even the primary villain (to me Necros has always been a henchmen, rather the villain, though the blurred lines with these roles is one of the things that undermines TLD).

 

And the focus on the fight is really unnecessary - there isn't some great plot point in the fight - it's just part of the set-piece that is the kidnapping at the safe house. You almost feel everyone got carried away with how great it is, without stopping to think "it's too much attention on some side action."

 

I think it's a great, yet because of who's in it, a weirdly unfulfiling moment. I guess it does establish Necros as a nasty piece of work, but he's already whacked the milkman to show the audience what a meanie he is.

[Grard Bond]

Precisely. That's exactely what I always was thinkink when I'm watching that scene.

Why this great fight whithout Bond himself?

It would be so much better if Bond was not driven away yet in the Aston and has this fight in the kitchen with Necros.

[doublenoughtspy]

To me it boils down to whether you see Bond as a thug pretending to be an aristocrat, or an aristocrat acting like a thug.

 

I think Connery, Lazenby, and Craig fall into the former category, and Moore, Dalton, and Brosnan in the later.

 

The book Bond is also in the later category.  The book Bond is skilled at hand to hand combat, but he isn't a brick sh#thouse running through walls.

 

He does press ups and Judo - more lithe and cunning than brute force.

 

While I would rank Dalton in the lower tier for his fight scenes (not entirely his fault), I would put him in the top tier for every other component of portraying Bond and think he is the most accurate portrayal of Fleming's Bond that has ever been put on celluloid.

[Dustin]

To me it boils down to whether you see Bond as a thug pretending to be an aristocrat, or an aristocrat acting like a thug.

I think Connery, Lazenby, and Craig fall into the former category, and Moore, Dalton, and Brosnan in the later.

The book Bond is also in the later category. The book Bond is skilled at hand to hand combat, but he isn't a brick sh#thouse running through walls.

He does press ups and Judo - more lithe and cunning than brute force.

Not sure I can entirely agree there, you could make a case for either category with book Bond. Yes, Judo at first looks more refined, but Bond's actual fights IMO are fought and won most often more by brute force than by refinement. He kills the Mexican in GOLDFINGER with a rough and entirely unrefined move from Fairbairn's GET TOUGH, designed to make the most use of the body's force against the attacker's chin and later the edge of the hand against the Adam's apple, a likewise devastating blow - if performed with the necessary power. The fight with Red Grant is an exercise in sheer mind-numbing brutality, using everything from knife to hand-to-hand combat to - finally - Grant's own book gun. Lastly the guard at Piz Gloria is hit with such crushing force - aided by an impractical makeshift knuckleduster - against the table that his neck is broken. That's pretty close to running through walls in my book.

Edited by Dustin, 11 March 2013 - 07:54 PM.

[plankattack]

But I think any discussion of fighting is down to cinematic trends and the athletic abilities of the actors, rather than interpretation of the character.
 
Sir Rog never looked entirely smooth throwing a punch, while how many people on these threads have moaned about PB's running style! And with action films becoming ever more an art form, there's no choice with DC and whoever comes next to make the fight scenes edgy and visceral in a way that wasn't the case in the 60s, 70s, and even 80s.
 
As for TD, there was nothing aristocratic about his headbutt in the TLD PTS - at the time, that was the toughest move we might have seen from a Bond since FRWL.
 
The depiction of violence, onscreen and on-the-page has evolved.

[quantumofsolace]

whatculture april 8 2013

007 Reasons Timothy Dalton Was Actually A Fantastic Bond

http://whatculture.c...tastic-bond.php

[glidrose]

whatculture april 8 2013

007 Reasons Timothy Dalton Was Actually A Fantastic Bond

http://whatculture.c...tastic-bond.php

 

More fanboy nonsense. And most of the points are fairly easy to deflate.

 

He saved the series? Yeah... right... LTK did wonders for the series' longevity.

 

The article repeats that canard that the producers wanted him for OHMSS. Our own DNS has had plenty to say about that.

 

He can play villains? Okay. But all the more reason he can't play heroes.

 

He's nothing like Fleming's Bond. I think it was our own SNF who once articulated the differences between the two. I think it was our own Jim who said there was more Fleming in five minutes of the film TMWTGG than there was in the two Dalton films.

 

This Dalton adulation reaches its nadir when the fanboy author claims Dalton brought the series into the modern age with "hokey" (his words, not mine) villains a thing of the past. Hmmm... I guess Mr. fanboy never read the Bond 17 treatment. Anthropomorphic villains, anyone?

 

Dalton did not pave the way for a darker, edgier JB. JASON BOURNE DID. Period.

 

"Adding to the somewhat superfluous" not to mention unfounded and dishonest "hypothesis that Craig would not have been as popular if Dalton had not already taken Bond in a similar direction..." Does anybody here truly believe this? How many casual Bond fans and regular moviegoers who've seen the Craig films actually saw or liked the Dalton films? There's a pretty good chance the moviegoers who've made the Daniel Craig Bonds big box-office hits have probably not seen every pre-Brosnan Bond film. In fact I'm convinced that Pierce Brosnan and Daniel Craig are the two Bonds many are most familiar with. If only the die-hard fans went to see a Bond film... well... look at the returns for OHMSS, TMWTGG, AVTAK, TLD and LTK. That's what happens when the core viewership is us guys and not the great unwashed.

 

The author's #1 reason why Dalton was supposedly so great? "He quit." Yep. Some reason. Okay, the author also says, "He didn’t stay on until he was no longer wanted." Dunno about that. The studio, quite a few (mostly North American) fans and casual moviegoers thought he hung on for two films too many.

 

The article even makes those same spurious comparisons between LTK and QOS that appear on these and other boards. Even Dalton fans conceed that QOS was tonally cohesive while admitting that Dalton's two Bond films feel like Dalton and the production team were pulling in two very different directions. One of our own members who worked on the films said they should have replaced John Glen when Dalton took over.

 

I've said it elsewhere and I'll say it here: Dalton and Craig are like chalk and cheese.

 

Let the flaming begin!

[Dustin]

The author's #1 reason why Dalton was supposedly so great? "He quit." Yep. Some reason. Okay, the author also says, "He didn’t stay on until he was no longer wanted." Dunno about that. The studio, quite a few (mostly North American) fans and casual moviegoers thought he hung on for two films too many.

 

Don't think this is really telling the whole truth. As far as I remember audiences and critics were happy enough with Dalton after TLD. I remember fond reviews in a number of publications which previously had dismissed Bond for some time or ignored more recent entries altogether, amongst them the Herald Tribune. My impression was Dalton was very welcome at the time of TLD, with mostly favourable comparisons to Connery and the great days of the series. Dalton's undoing was LTK, and this primarily because of behind-the-scenes politics of the Bond industry.

 

Dalton's position after LTK was not so different from Moore's after TMWTGG (or Craig's after QOS), what he lacked was the support of a crucial group of studio suits and a really persuasive third Bond production. The series repeatedly has been at this point, a watershed moment for every actor in the role. Dalton didn't get that third chance, others did. But I think it's just as wrong to claim he was not liked right from the start than to claim he saved the series. If Dalton hadn't shown promising potential in TLD there wouldn't have been LTK. 

Edited by Dustin, 08 April 2013 - 07:30 PM.

[glidrose]

The author's #1 reason why Dalton was supposedly so great? "He quit." Yep. Some reason. Okay, the author also says, "He didn’t stay on until he was no longer wanted." Dunno about that. The studio, quite a few (mostly North American) fans and casual moviegoers thought he hung on for two films too many.

 

Don't think this is really telling the whole truth. As far as I remember audiences and critics were happy enough with Dalton after TLD. I remember fond reviews in a number of publications which previously had dismissed Bond for some time or ignored more recent entries altogether, amongst them the Herald Tribune. My impression was Dalton was very welcome at the time of TLD, with mostly favourable comparisons to Connery and the great days of the series. Dalton's undoing was LTK, and this primarily because of behind-the-scenes politics of the Bond industry.

 

Dalton's position after LTK was not so different from Moore's after TMWTGG (or Craig's after QOS), what he lacked was the support of a crucial group of studio suits and a really persuasive third Bond production. The series repeatedly has been at this point, a watershed moment for every actor in the role. Dalton didn't get that third chance, others did. But I think it's just as wrong to claim he was not liked right from the start than to claim he saved the series. If Dalton hadn't shown promising potential in TLD there wouldn't have been LTK.

 

Disagree with you there. I think there was a world of difference between Dalton's position and Moore and Craig's. I think Moore had the support of the studio and we know Craig absolutely did.

 

I didn't say that Dalton wasn't liked from the start. I did say there were a number of North American fans and casual movie-goers who did not like him. Let's not forget Dalton told a fan publication during the making of LTK that he had a feeling this would be the final Bond film ever, not just his last. A lot of North American casual moviegoers and fans did not like Dalton. As someone here said, they avoided LTK in droves because they didn't like what they'd seen in TLD. I realize this is different across the sea. The British were more accepting about Dalton.

 

Moreover, Moore's second film started strong in North America, but business turned soft due to bad worth of mouth. QOS was a major hit, though negative word of mouth did soften business slightly after its stellar opening weekend. LTK started soft - in the North American market - and only went downhill. And Dalton remains the only actor whom the studio actively tried forcing out the door. Much has been written about the Calley vs. Broccoli tempest at this point.

 

My original post didn't refer to critics because by and large they did consider Dalton an improvement on aging Moore.

Edited by glidrose, 08 April 2013 - 08:10 PM.

[Dustin]

 

The author's #1 reason why Dalton was supposedly so great? "He quit." Yep. Some reason. Okay, the author also says, "He didn’t stay on until he was no longer wanted." Dunno about that. The studio, quite a few (mostly North American) fans and casual moviegoers thought he hung on for two films too many.

 

Don't think this is really telling the whole truth. As far as I remember audiences and critics were happy enough with Dalton after TLD. I remember fond reviews in a number of publications which previously had dismissed Bond for some time or ignored more recent entries altogether, amongst them the Herald Tribune. My impression was Dalton was very welcome at the time of TLD, with mostly favourable comparisons to Connery and the great days of the series. Dalton's undoing was LTK, and this primarily because of behind-the-scenes politics of the Bond industry.

 

Dalton's position after LTK was not so different from Moore's after TMWTGG (or Craig's after QOS), what he lacked was the support of a crucial group of studio suits and a really persuasive third Bond production. The series repeatedly has been at this point, a watershed moment for every actor in the role. Dalton didn't get that third chance, others did. But I think it's just as wrong to claim he was not liked right from the start than to claim he saved the series. If Dalton hadn't shown promising potential in TLD there wouldn't have been LTK.

 

Disagree with you there. I think there was a world of difference between Dalton's position and Moore and Craig's. I think Moore had the support of the studio and we know Craig absolutely did.

 

I didn't say that Dalton wasn't liked from the start. I did say there were a number of North American fans and casual movie-goers who did not like him. Let's not forget Dalton told a fan publication during the making of LTK that he had a feeling this would be the final Bond film ever, not just his last. A lot of North American casual moviegoers and fans did not like Dalton. As someone here said, they avoided LTK in droves because they didn't like what they'd seen in TLD. I realize this is different across the sea. The British were more accepting about Dalton.

 

Moreover, Moore's second film started strong in North America, but business turned soft due to bad worth of mouth. QOS was a major hit, though negative word of mouth did soften business slightly after its stellar opening weekend. LTK started soft - in the North American market - and only went downhill. And Dalton remains the only actor whom the studio actively tried forcing out the door. Much has been written about the Calley vs. Broccoli tempest at this point.

 

My original post didn't refer to critics because by and large they did consider Dalton an improvement on aging Moore.

 

Yes, that was my impression, too.

 

But I think someone like Calley could also well have prevented Moore's or Craig's third entry, based on the returns of their second ones and some Bond-in-waiting-backstage. And what would we have made then of the cut-down Moore tenure or the fate of Craig's ignominious 'reboot'? I suppose it only ever takes a tiny difference to arrive at a completely different outcome, something like a butterfly's flap. Had Calley not prevented that ill-fated third Dalton film, who knows what we might have gotten in return? Dalton's two performances were not so uneven as to prevent him entirely from 'finding' his balance at the third try, the way Moore effectively did for most audiences.     

[thecasinoroyale]

 

[glidrose]

But I think someone like Calley could also well have prevented Moore's or Craig's third entry, based on the returns of their second ones and some Bond-in-waiting-backstage. And what would we have made then of the cut-down Moore tenure or the fate of Craig's ignominious 'reboot'? I suppose it only ever takes a tiny difference to arrive at a completely different outcome, something like a butterfly's flap. Had Calley not prevented that ill-fated third Dalton film, who knows what we might have gotten in return? Dalton's two performances were not so uneven as to prevent him entirely from 'finding' his balance at the third try, the way Moore effectively did for most audiences.     

 

But this is all conjecture. Dalton endured this and Moore & Craig didn't.

[doublenoughtspy]

He's nothing like Fleming's Bond. I think it was our own SNF who once articulated the differences between the two. I think it was our own Jim who said there was more Fleming in five minutes of the film TMWTGG than there was in the two Dalton films.

 

Put down the crack pipe.

 

Don't refer to SNF as "our own" - he threatened litigation against a number of people - including the owners of this site because of a Facebook post.  He's been banned with good reason.

 

Re: TMWGG.  I must have missed Fleming's research on midgets, flying cars, schoolgirls doing Kung Fu, and redneck sheriffs doing barrel rolls with a slide whistle when I was going through his archives and manuscripts.  Perhaps I wasn't trying hard enough?

 

I realize it is lost on most of Bond fandom, but I always try to separate the actor's choices from the producer's or the studio's.

 

Dalton certainly wasn't responsible for the fact that his films were budgeted the same as those from a decade earlier.

 

He wasn't responsible for the writing.  TLD is overly complex, LTK, hampered by the writer's strike, is weak on all kinds of levels.  He certainly had nothing to do with the bizarre Bond 17 treatments, though you seem to blame him for those too.

 

He wasn't responsible for the weak casting of his leading ladies, or the weak casting of his villains.

 

He wasn't responsible for Glen's direction.  While his LTK quote about shooting interior stuff like it was television will always be an easy place for fanboys to point to him as a hack, I don't think that is fair.  Having been through the production documents of the entire Glen era I came away amazed at just how efficient he was regardless of the issue.  It was one of the many reasons they kept going back to him.  Sure, we realize now that you need to give the films longer production schedules and more breathing room - but he didn't have that luxury.

 

I could continue my defense and celebration of the Dalton era but I've already produced my dissertation on that.

 

And if you think Dalton isn't Fleming's Bond, then I suggest you go back and re-read Fleming, in Draco's words, carefully this time.

[glidrose]

Whew.

Re: TMWGG. I must have missed Fleming's research on midgets, flying cars, schoolgirls doing Kung Fu, and redneck sheriffs doing barrel rolls with a slide whistle when I was going through his archives and manuscripts. Perhaps I wasn't trying hard enough?

Let me further explicate. The five minutes from TMWTGG I referred to and I believe Jim was referring to was the scene where Bond slaps Andrea around.

I realize it is lost on most of Bond fandom, but I always try to separate the actor's choices from the producer's or the studio's.

Excellent point, which I myself also made in my original post. Dalton isn't responsible for the change in the series. He is responsible only for his own performance. Period.

He certainly had nothing to do with the bizarre Bond 17 treatments, though you seem to blame him for those too.

No, I do not blame him for that. The author of the article credits Dalton for taking the Bond films in a new direction. Therefore if we follow this chap's unfathomable lead...
 

And if you think Dalton isn't Fleming's Bond, then I suggest you go back and re-read Fleming, in Draco's words, carefully this time.

Sorry, but nothing anybody says will convince me any of the actors is anything like Fleming's Bond. And yes, I've carefully read and re-read Fleming.