44 replies to this topic

[Peterfranks]

Dalton was a very good Bond in my opinion. It is annoying that he did not do any more films as he was so good. Why did he not do any others? i don't know why personally.

[ray t]

Dalton was a terrific actor who played bond as Fleming would have wanted.

this was at the opposite end of the spectrum of how Moore played it and AVTAK was an extreme example of a Moore Bond.

US audiences thus having been used to a more light-hearted and witty bond in moore, were treated to something they werent used to in LTK...

Plus LTK only entered its first weekend at the US box office at #3...weak marketing didnt help

then there was the legal problem with the studio(s) and by the time 1994 came around, Pierce was available...something which was not the case in 1986 when NBC did a 180 on cancelling REMMINGTON STEELE upon hearing of a potential PB/JB linkup which led them to take up Pierce's option and renew RS for another (and this time final) season.

there is a screen treatment out there for the 3rd Dalton which would have been released in 1991/92...but Eon and Cubby had "issues" to contend with which delayed/postponed/gutted the 3rd Dalton....

[Victor Zokas]

Presumably the change from Moore to Dalton was the same for everyone outside the USA. Everyone else seemed more ready to accept the change. I think more than this perhaps in America Dalton just didn't have the type of star appeal or charisma that was wanted.

Brosnan does seem to be going down the road of examing 007's conflicts and darker side, and he seems to be popular worldwide. I think Dalton appeals if you like Fleming. Brosnan appeals to fans and those with more of a passing interest in 007.

I don't think it does the series any good if the holder of the 007 post disappears too quickly.

[Special Edition]

Timothy Dalton was a bad Bond, not as bad as George Lazenby, but still pretty bad. 2 movies from him was plenty ! He forgot to play Bond as a gentleman, so things were bad.

Pierce Brosnan is great ! He needs to stick around for a long time yet.

[Peterfranks]

I must disagree terribly with the comment above this post concerning Brosnans continuation of Bond.

Pierce Brosnan is on the whole a good actor but i think lacks a quality of his own. (eg. Moore - gentleman like charisma, humourous english tone. Dalton - Serious, to the point)

His only good film was Goldeneye, after that he took a a terrible slump to film TND, TWINE is a marginal improvement.

I can only hope that DAD is more like the Brosnan seen in Goldeneye.

Besides, Brosnan has made a number of confusing comments about how many more Bonds he will do. If you want him to to many more than i think you are unlikely to see this - after 3 films he is getting bored with the role, i will be surprised if he does another after DAD.

Anyway to get back to the point of this Topic - Dalton protrayed Bond closed to the actual character than anybody before or after him - it is this quality that leads me to the conclusion that he has been the best Bond yet.

[General Koskov]

As I was only four years of age when LTK came out, I really have no experience of public reaction to Dalton. However I have read from less-dubious-than-other sources ('Licence to Thrill: a Cultural History of the James Bond 007 Films' James Chapman. 2000) that Dalton exited because he had been 'in the role' for eight years (only two with films, though) and he thought it time to retire in '94.

This was around the time Eon and MGM cleared up the legal problems preventing them form making another film. So, it turns out that Dalton, nor the somewhat underrated LTK is to blame! ;D

Although I do think that the ad campaign was weak for LTK--what happened to the nice painted posters of yore? ???

[RossMan]

Special Edition (02 Apr, 2002 02:40 p.m.):
Timothy Dalton was a bad Bond, not as bad as George Lazenby, but still pretty bad. 2 movies from him was plenty ! He forgot to play Bond as a gentleman, so things were bad.

Timothy Dalton, for me , is the best actor to have played Bond. That's what Fleming was looking for when he wrote Casino Royale. I'd love to see td1 come back for one more Bond or two. Of the five actors, he best portrays Fleming's Bond which is the very reason why he's my favorite Bond.

Bond's not supposed to be a gentleman, not all the time at least. He's a paid killer, an assassin, who goes out and follows his orders.

[Jim]

RossMan (03 Apr, 2002 02:20 a.m.):

He's a paid killer...who...follows his orders.

...so Licence to Kill DOES have nothing to do with Ian Fleming after all.

Always thought so.

[White Knight]

The audience just didn't like him that much. His movies didn't bring in a lot of money. I also like Dalton a lot, but the majority of people didn't. At least that is what I think.

[Dr. Tynan]

I agree that td1 should have been in more Bonds. It's probably stupid, but I once suggested that Bond fans should write to the producers asking that he return as Bond (is that bad grammar?). This was done for Richard Kiel, that's why he came back in Moonraker

I don't think he is too old (though I suppose I haven't seen him in a while).

[Victor Zokas]

So, obviously Dalton/Bond should have just given up on his friend and meekly followed M's orders. Bond frequently questioned his orders in Fleming's novels. LTK has more to do with Fleming's works than many Bond films particularly out of the recent ones.

[Dr. Tynan]

Oh [cuss] I think I was the first person to post a message on April fools day. Does that make me the fool of CBN?

[Peterfranks]

Dr. Tynan (01 Apr, 2002 12:12 a.m.):
I agree that td1 should have been in more Bonds. It's probably stupid, but I once suggested that Bond fans should write to the producers asking that he return as Bond (is that bad grammar?). This was done for Richard Kiel, that's why he came back in Moonraker

I don't think he is too old (though I suppose I haven't seen him in a while).

I Think that Dalton is about 56, so i suppose it is not too late for him to come back as Moore went on til he was 60 odd, did he not?

[Peterfranks]

Dr. Tynan (01 Apr, 2002 12:12 a.m.):
I agree that td1 should have been in more Bonds. It's probably stupid, but I once suggested that Bond fans should write to the producers asking that he return as Bond (is that bad grammar?). This was done for Richard Kiel, that's why he came back in Moonraker

I don't think he is too old (though I suppose I haven't seen him in a while).

I Think that Dalton is about 56, so i suppose it is not too late for him to come back as Moore went on til he was 60 odd, did he not?

[Victor Zokas]

Dalton was unpopular with USA audiences. Elsewhere even LTK did better business than many of Moore's later films. When the series restarted with GE, MGM just wanted a name that the US might take to. Enter Brosnan.

[Bondpurist]

I agree totally. He often treats M with contempt, even if he doesn't always show it.

[IrishCrown]

There was no way in hell MGM was going to let Dalton do anymore. Brocolli was not going to budge in letting Dalton go. It took his health problems getting worse before something happened. Dalton realizes his most ardent defender was out of the picture, and he jumped ship before he got pushed. In 86, no one really wanted him in the part anyway. The majority of us wanted Brosnan back then. I almost feel sorry for Dalton in that aspect. Did you all know he sued a paper for libel when they were printing a story that said Pierce was going to be Bond in 89 after they said Dalton flubbed it in 87? Dalton won the case. He won the battle, but lost the war.

[007.5]

Timothy Dalton is my favourite Bond of all and he should have done more films. He was Fleming's Bond and you got the feeling that he was the serious overworked assassin of Fleming's conception. Unfortunately it's all about money. Well done Timothy! You're great.

[WarBird]

I liked him, when he played Bond he didn't visually look like a secert agent working for England. He looked like an amateur to me. He didn't look like to could save to world and get to women, it seemed to me he was the party stay out late type to me, but his act was convincing to me. Thats my opinion.

[rafterman]

Dalton was fine, but the series had the big break for the legal problems and he decided to step down, no one made him leave...He was under contract up through 94...

[WC]

Dalton would've been great in a film version of Casino Royale. He would've had the edginess and the harried, overworked feel of Bond in the book. The torture sequence at the end and the betrayal by Vesper Lynn would also be in keeping with Dalton's portrayal.

Shame the TD films never showed Bond eating his scrambled eggs or whatever it was he ate.

[brendan007]

dalton was acceptable in TLD, but LTK just went to far. sure it might be nice to explore that side of bond, but Dalton forgot that if a character is to succeed as well as bond has, the audience has to like that character. Daltons potrayal of Bond in LTK gives us no reason to actually like that character, as a result, the film suffers.
his portrayal was completely wrong for what people wanted, and in my opinion its not an accurate portrayal of flemings bond either.

[Dortmunder]

I think that Dalton did a good portrayl in both TLD and LTK. I enjoy TLD much more, but I can't complain about LTK. I thought that it was interesting to see how the Fleming Bond was on screen. IMO he should have done more movies, and if he did 2 more (91 and 93), I'm sure that he would have been better accepted.

You also have to look at it that if Dalton did do two more, and he was accepted, he may have done another (depending on age, too). If he did do another, we may have not had Brosnan. Another one of those "What If".

[Sir James]

Originally posted by Peterfranks
I must disagree terribly with the comment above this post concerning Brosnans continuation of Bond.  

Pierce Brosnan is on the whole a good actor but i think lacks a quality of his own. (eg. Moore - gentleman like charisma, humourous english tone.  Dalton - Serious, to the point)

His only good film was Goldeneye, after that he took a a terrible slump to film TND, TWINE is a marginal improvement.

I can only hope that DAD is more like the Brosnan seen in Goldeneye.

Besides, Brosnan has made a number of confusing comments about how many more Bonds he will do.  If you want him to to many more than i think you are unlikely to see this - after 3 films he is getting bored with the role, i will be surprised if he does another after DAD.

OK well in defense or my thoughts, my title and all Brosnan fans, I extrenmely disagree. First of all , you talk about Brosnans lack of orignality in the role. That is so very far from the truth. Brosnan has been able to combine the best aspects of all the previous Bond

[Turn]

Originally posted by Sir James
OK well in defense or my thoughts, my title and all Brosnan fans, I extrenmely disagree.

This seems to be a typical occurance here on the forums -- Brosnan fans who jump to defend any little thing said about him by those who like Dalton, which are few, while anti-Dalton people take him to task routinely. This isn't necessarily aimed at you, Sir James, as you stated your case quite nicely. I know Bondpurist may have annoyed some with his vicious defense of Dalton and may have turned people off Dalton all the more, but by-and-large, some Brosnan fans seem more vocal against Dalton.

I'm a fan of both Brosnan and Dalton. Both actors gave unique portrayals of my favorite character. I was disappointed when Dalton abandoned the role in '94. After seeing Brosnan grow in the role in each new film, the more I've liked him. He blends the things most people, fans and non-fans, want to see in Bond.

Comments like "nobody really wanted Dalton as Bond in '86" just don't make any sense to me. It was never a competition then and it shouldn't be now. How can people be that annoyed? Pierce got the role eventually and look at what he's done with it. I look at it this way -- I've got Dalton on DVD to watch when I want to as well as Pierce's three Bonds and I can't wait to see DAD in less than two months.

[freemo]

[quote]First of all , you talk about Brosnans lack of orignality in the role. That is so very far from the truth. Brosnan has been able to combine the best aspects of all the previous Bond

[Mourning Becomes Electra]

Confused, no, difference of opinion and perception yes. I happen to think Brosnan is exceptional in most areas, and plays the character better than anyone else has, and plays a more interesting well rounded and integrated Bond than anyone else has. You don't agree, but I wouldn't call your difference of opinion confusion.

[Jim]

Originally posted by freemo


First ? Hardly, Connery had all those traits and Moore had them to, it's just that they were so brilliant at the aspects they were best at, that the other parts (where they were also more than capable) are not recognized as much.  

Broz is exceptional in none of the areas, and for some reason that's always confused with being exceptional in all of them.

Indeed. Jack of all trades, Master of none.

A corporate coagulation of greatest hits of Bond films was GoldenEye. A corporate coagulation of greatest hits of his predecessors is Mr Brosnan. There's a question posted on this board about whether Mr Dalton could have been any better as Bond in GoldenEye - no he couldn't - the Bond and the film are eminently suited to one another.

[Simon]

Following the above thought, it is quite amazing that the shake up that everyone said the series so badly needed at that time was exemplified by the biggest collection of Bond regulars ever.

By shake up, I am wont to believe that there are serious changes, radical moves and brazen ideas afoot.

The result was more of a gentle stir, but nonetheless entertaining for that.

[Sir James]

GoldenEye was a vital rebirth for Bond, but there is no need to go into the obivious here.

Dalton IMO is a great actor. In any film he is in his scens are filled with passion, and adreanlen. Obiviously what Pierce modeled his "darker Bond" after. But there is one problem with him, the fact that he is an acotr, not a star. The person who personifies 007 must be a star. Connery, Moore, and now Brosnan are all stars. They stand out in their roles, and you notice that is not only Bond there, thats (Connery, Moore, or Brosnan) too. Daltons downfall was not having that attractive personality. He was great, but becuase of that he could never be appreciated by the masses.