102 replies to this topic

[ChandlerBing]

You're awfully young to be writing those words. Do you type those words when you write to your mother? Man, all of those things you've been saying really makes me wonder what is in the water where you live. The headbutting, the killer looks.....spooky.

[Bondpurist]

Don't patronise me. I have the mental age of 18. The water where I live is very hard. Very hard indeed.........

[ChandlerBing]

patronise, patronise, patronise....HA! I just patronised you. And you are very spooky and very weird to be writing like you do. And no, I don't believe you're mentally or physically 18.

[Bondpurist]

I didn't say I was physically 18. You just contradicted yourself by the way - you said it was spooky etc. but you said you don't believe my mental age either. What do you really think?

[ChandlerBing]

Honestly, I think you're a nutcase in a psych ward with access to the Internet. But that's what I think. I hope no one catches you out of your cell because I really enjoy debating with you.

[Bondpurist]

I am not a nutcase. That DOB is my real DOB. I can assure you.

[ChandlerBing]

I still think you're a nutcase. You're Tim Dalton's biggest fan! Have you seen Misery, or at least read the book?

[Bondpurist]

Isn't that an 18? Rules me out then.

[ChandlerBing]

Well, maybe you can get your mother and father to take you or rent it for you. Better yet, they might be able to drive you down there--yes, you can go with them!--and they will let you look at other things in the video store aside from the Timothy Dalton section. Life on the other side of the shelf! Yes, there is life, Bondpurist, go for it! Seek it! Grab it by the balls! Sorry, I shouldn't be using that language writing to a minor.

[Bondpurist]

DON'T CALL ME THAT I'm changing my DOB on my profile. That way nobody else'll know.
I have a life thanks - I don't just watch the Dalton Bond films.

[14 20 02]

Originally posted by ChandlerBing
Sorry, I shouldn't be using that language writing to a minor.

I am 1year older than BondPurist and i think you should NOT be calling him that ChandlerBing as many people on these forums are about the same age him like me. People who are younger than you are not minors!

BondPurist, do not be ashamed of your age.

[Bondpurist]

What difference does age make? It's not as if I'm 5 or anything. He didn't even realise until he saw my profile anyway.

[14 20 02]

If you ask me you should both stop calling each other names. It's not going to solve anything. BondPurist you and ChandlerBing do not agree on the same things you should just leave at that. You can't make everyone agree with you. And it doesn't matter about age even if you are 11,12, 13, 14, 15, 16 or 17 as long as you like the Bond films and you are proud of that then people will have something in common with you. Why do you think people join CBN they want to talk about the Bond films and the actors and everything else about James Bond.

[Bondpurist]

I'm quite prepared to leave it at that but Chandlerbing keeps being personal about it. He keeps saying I don't have a life, I'm too young, I'm a nutcase, etc.,etc. Can't we just agree to disagree?

[License To Kill]

See, Purist. Your entitled to your own opinion, but what I discourage about you is when you bash every other Bond, especially Roger Moore.
They made the series what It was, without them, we might not have it today. So just be thankful that we still have a series and stop bashing all the other Bonds.

~LTK~

[Jim]

Hasn't this been enlightening reading?

The next question is why Dalton? I only ask that because one needs a reminder now and again what the plot here is. I could add that that's a bit like The Living Daylights, but that would be cheap.

But then I am cheap. 'Tis my tragedy. I bear a heavy burden, do I not?

I come here to escape the children, not be reminded of them.

Whatever the relative merits or demerits of Roger Moore, had he not been popular, there would have been no films for Timothy Dalton to be in and we would have been robbed of his James Bond.

As for depicting Fleming's Bond, I'm not convinced that Dalton comes that close. Dalton's James Bond is a middle class scruffbag with little or no style. Dalton's Bond could be "a stupid policeman". At least Connery's Bond pretended to be the failed gentleman that Fleming appears to have intended. Roger Moore didn't appear to adopt the "failed" bit of that character and Pierce Brosnan...half man, half biscuit.

They're all different, and none of them come that close. Wouldn't do for them all to be the same, would it? This place would seize up, for a start.

If one were to combine them all, one might get close.

[Predator_007]

Originally posted by Jim
Hasn't this been enlightening reading?

If one were to combine them all, one might get close.

Very much so ... very enlightening.

And your thoughts about combining the good parts of each and every Bond is sound. None of the Bonds are perfect when you use Fleming's criteria. I dislike all these arguments about how one actor looks like Fleming's description - an utterly bogus argument as anyone can be made to look the part given the right make-up etc. The argument should always be to discuss whether any particular actor suits the Bond character.

IMO Connery and Brosnan best match MY idea of Bond - followed by Moore and Dalton - I'm afraid I don't believe Lazenby does (although he was in a very fine Bond film).

I think both Dalton and Moore get criticism unjustly sometimes - both are fine actors (yes, Roger Moore is a fine actor), but there is this confusion between the quality of their films, the quality of their performances in those films and their overall quality as film actors. It is for this last reason that I prefer Moore over Dalton ... Moore's a much better film actor, while Dalton is the superior stage actor ...

[ChandlerBing]

Back on topic with this question: Would they have gone for Timothy Dalton as Bond if A View To A Kill been better received? View's style was Goldfinger-lite with the comedy in heavy doses. The film didn't do very well here in the US, but still again racked up overseas grosses that saved its bacon. Due to this movie, there was a lot of serious thinking about taking Bond down a different road. Hence, that's where we come to the question of Why Dalton? Because Dalton's Bond was that different road.

[1q2w3e4r]

I think for Bond to survive after Moore they had to go with someone like Tim. I know they signed Pierce, but I don't believe that TLD would have been that different with him in it. He surely would have played it different, we've seen that. But script wise, it was pretty fixed.

[Predator_007]

I have to agree that our Rog wouldn't have wanted to do TLD even had AVTAK been more 'successful' (its worldwide grosses were OK), although I think he could have made a pretty good stab at it - because of all the right Roger Moore ingredients in the film (easy villains, trademark henchman, etc.)

TLD was exactly what the series needed at the time - there was a lot of dead wood that needed dealing with - what better way than with a new Bond, new Moneypenny and lower profile story. I should qualify that last statement by saying that the story was more down to earth and 'believable'.

Pretty much any actor could have made a reasonable attempt as Bond in LTD - a reasonable script, a reasonable story, reasonable characters and a bit of fun ...

[Mr Wint]

My opinion on this subject: Timothy Dalton was average as Bond. Not excellent, not bad. But his films weren't as thrilling and inventive as earlier Bondfilms. Where is the golden girl in TLD/LTK? The larger-than-life-villains? The big sets?

Originally posted by Bondpurist
Moore's range of emotions was very limited - there was the 'amused' emotion, the 'very amused emotion' and the indifferent look, whenever he was fighting. He was never particularly romantic, angry, annoyed, vengeful...

Moore is good at showing emotions, especially fear! And he can be romantic. Watch the scenes with Solitaire or Bond's handling with Corinne Dufour/Octopussy. Isn't that romantic??? No, when it comes to romance Roger Moore beats all others Bonds. No one is as gentle and charming with the ladies.

And, Bondpurist, don't forget that it was Roger Moore who first brought a more human edge to Bond. Connery/Lazenby played Bond as a superhero. They never showed any emotions. Lazenby's Bond felt sadness for Tracy, but it was very short and very down-played. And don't believe the big myth that Connery played Bond as a complex person. He never did.

It was in TMWTGG that we where first introduced to a more human James Bond. Remember Bond's chat with Mary Goodnight; "For this moment and for moments yet to come" and then Bond says: "

[ChandlerBing]

I agree with your posting about Roger Moore. Bondpurist is likely going to bust a blood vessel when he reads it, but that's his problem. Roger also had some good moments in Octopussy when he saw what the yo yo guys did to Vijay. For Your Eyes Only on the sled with Melina. The worst thing about the Roger Moore years that I absolutely hated was Jaws. To Dalton's credit, we didn't get a Jaws-clone anywhere in there.

[mrmoon]

Fantastically well put Mr.Wint, I'm glad someone other than myself sees Roger Moore's Bond as superbly as he was (or the best in my opinion) not just this court jester that ignorant Bond fans label him as.

Long live King Roger.

[ChandlerBing]

I don't think Roger Moore was joking around when he blew away Stromberg, shooting the old codger in the groin, for God's Sake! You don't do stuff like that lightly!

[Bondpurist]

Moore only showed emotion when it was written into the script. Dalton had the ability to show emotion and give so much more depth to Bond in other ways other than obvious lines - when he finds the Leiters' bodies for example - he says very little ; 'Della!' 'It's Bond. Get an ambulance here, quick!' - and that's about it. But his expressions, posture, movement, reaction have the effect of a thousand words.
As for Mr wint's points, they are all very well but he misses the point somewhat. Moore generally never showed much emotion - the only times he did this was when it was in the script - he very rarely was angry or stressed or nervous or very afraid.

Moore is good at showing emotions, especially fear

You say that and then come up with no examples. I can't think of once when Moore was afraid. He seemed to be in a general state of indifference to me - whatever happened to bond he just made corny one liners in the most overt and tacky fashion possible or got on with it like a smiling robot, not a tough killing machine.H

we today have this intrigued, humours, ... character

e was never particularly fearsome or frightening - I don't remember one occasion when I thought 'Oh god, this man's a killer!' - which is what Bond should be.

It's partly thanks to Moore that we today have this intrigued, humours, ... character

Flemming's Bond humerous or 'intigued'?, whatever that's meant to mean in this context, I don't think so! Bond had a very occasional and very subtle sense of humour. Not a man to deliver farcical one liners in Moore's fashion.

Pretty much any actor could have made a reasonable attempt as Bond in LTD - a reasonable script, a reasonable story, reasonable characters and a bit of fun ...

Could any actor of conveyed the anger of Dalton during the film, his reaction to the murder of Saunders, the Pushkin bedroom scene? Could any actor of had Dalton's chemistry with D'abo? Could any actor of gave the impression of a disillusioned secret agent during the 'If he fires me I'll thank him for it' speech? I don't think so. LTK rectified any characterisation problems Dalton had anyway.

Where is the golden girl in TLD/LTK? The larger-than-life-villains? The big sets?

Nowhere, because Dalton's Bond films didn't want to go down that cliched, hackneyed, unoriginal paths. Dalton made the part his, not anybody elses.

Would they have gone for Timothy Dalton as Bond if A View To A Kill been better received? View's style was Goldfinger-lite with the comedy in heavy doses. The film didn't do very well here in the US, but still again racked up overseas grosses that saved its bacon. Due to this movie, there was a lot of serious thinking about taking Bond down a different road. Hence, that's where we come to the question of Why Dalton? Because Dalton's Bond was that different road.

Pehaps CB has a point here. However, I think Dalton (failing Brosnan) would of got the part with or without AVTAK - Moore's films were still likely to provoke a change in attitudes to the sort of actor needed to play Bond.

Moore's a much better film actor, while Dalton is the superior stage actor ...

I think Dalton's best in both categories, but that's just my opinion.

what I discourage about you is when you bash every other Bond,

If you read carefully, in other threads as well, I do say some nice things about other Bonds - I like Connery, Brosnan and even Lazenby to a certain extent, but just not as much as Dalton. Yes, I do criticise other Bonds, but isn't that sort of thing what these forums are for?

Whatever the relative merits or demerits of Roger Moore, had he not been popular, there would have been no films for Timothy Dalton to be in and we would have been robbed of his James Bond.

OK, granted, but that doesn't mean that we have to worship Moore like a god - I personally still don't like him although I respect his role in the continuity of the Bond films.

As for depicting Fleming's Bond, I'm not convinced that Dalton comes that close. Dalton's James Bond is a middle class scruffbag with little or no style. Dalton's Bond could be "a stupid policeman".

Middle class scruffbag? Scruffbag!!!! Flemming's Bond isn't as stylish and debonair as generally thought - he doesn't drink many Martinis and doesn't wear a dinner jacket to every occasion, and Dalton has similar amounts of style - his efforltess demolition of half the Czech police force, his ability to convince Sanchez that he has 'class', his flourishing, shameless cheek that makes evryone think he is a waiter, his casino scenes and his voice lead me to belive that although he has class and and style in abundance, but he remains down to earth enough to be close to Flemming's Bond. He may wear more casual clothes than normal, but that's a part of the step to realism that Dalton took. He still wears a dinner jacket with elegance and poise and has the mean, ruthlessness tinged with fear and vulnerability that Flemming's Bond had. He plays the role seriously, and Flemming's Bond was certainly serious. And yes, Dalton is middle class but so was Bond - he went to Eton for christsakes. Dalton fits Flemmings Bond perfectly in my opinion - and even if you don't think so it's difficult to deny that Dalton was serious, uptight, dark and ruthless like Flemming's Bond.
And may I remind you Dr No once described Connery's Bond as a 'stupid policeman'.

The worst thing about the Roger Moore years that I absolutely hated was Jaws. To Dalton's credit, we didn't get a Jaws-clone anywhere in there.

Once again you're being irrelavent - Jaws wasn't Moore's fault and it wasn't down to Dalton that we didn't have another Jaws. So don't bring in criteria to judge the Bonds on when it's not relevant.

[Bondpurist]

I'm not saying he was a court jester, but he wasn't consisently Flemingian and serious enough to be a decent Bond. As for the Stromberg bit, it was in the script and even Moore would struggle to do it with his normal half amused half indifferent air. It's just a shame that there weren't more moments like that in the Moore films, because Moore doesn't do it too bad.

[Mr Wint]

Originally posted by Bondpurist
Moore only showed emotion when it was written into the script.

So, what you mean is that almost every scene where Dalton showed emotions was NOT written in the scripts? Perhaps you don't now so much about filmmaking. When Dalton screams "Della" he doesn't improvise, it is written dialogue.

You say that and then come up with no examples. I can't think of once when Moore was afraid.

I didn't give you any examples because I thought you knew Roger Moore and his films well, but obviously you didn't: Moore showed fear when Kananga threaten him with a knife during the climax in LALD ("Isn't there an easier way to do this?"). Moore shows fear when he's trying to disarm the bomb in Octopussy. Moore shows fear when he's fighting with Jaws in the train in Spy. Moore shows fear when Bond is in the centrifuge machine in Moonraker. (Of course, all this was in the script....)

Dalton's Bond films didn't want to go down that cliched, hackneyed, unoriginal paths ... (...)... Flemming's Bond isn't as stylish and debonair as generally thought - he doesn't drink many Martinis and doesn't wear a dinner jacket to every occasion...

Strange, some Bondfans are so fanatical about Ian Fleming and "his" Bond. They always complain on the films and one starts to wonder why they just don

[1q2w3e4r]

I agree that EON's Bond now has its own presence and style, ever since however Roger Moore came into the role. Before this, with the exception of YOLT all of the films and to a lesser extent DAF followed and transcribed FLeming's novels to the page. FRWL, TB, OHMSS are all truely faithful adaptions. DN, GF catch Fleming's style and sweep of the novels and put them on the page. No offence, but Fleming's novels did seriously influence the early direction of the series. I agree that Bond straightening his tie should stick in, its a nice touch and nod to Connery.

"Forget Fleming" However, is im afraid to say a little ambitious. It was probably a throw away gesture, and Im not starting a flame war here. But Bond's earliest films are the most financially successful. His style does come across as a character, thanks largely in part to the terrific direction of Terrance Young and his own injection into the character and Guy Hamilton's work on Goldfinger.

I guess while i love the union jack at TSWLM, and other bits and pieces, i like the more "realistic" approach to Bond of the early films, for me, the enjoyment isn't so much out of this world stunts, its the simply and class touches such as adding a flower to a lapel while dressing in his tux, lighting a cigarette and looking at his watch waiting for the bomb to go. Or throwing flowers over number 6's "widow" after 007 issues a beat down.

For me, things like this embody the class of Bond, not simply big action sets. Because it's these touches even now, that define Bond from the competition.

[Jim]

Originally posted by Bondpurist


And may I remind you Dr No once described Connery's Bond as a 'stupid policeman'.

Fair enough old pal, old beauty, but you needn't of (sic) reminded me of that. And the Dr No comment was rather the point; it's an insult to ConneryBond, but it sums up DaltonBond finely.

FlemingBond was a thug with ambitions at gentility (however many Ms he could bung in); ConneryBond likewise. MooreBond a gentleman with ambitions at thuggishness and DaltonBond is a prole. Middle class scruffbag didn't just refer to the clothes; clothes maketh not the man. DaltonBond lacks style, lacks class (whatever Sanchez says, and he's mad, him).

This may well be the fault of how DaltonBond is written rather than how he's played. This may well not be Mr Dalton's fault.

But what Mr Dalton needs to take the blame for is the way it's played. He overcompensates. He is noticeably "doing acting". Blimey, look at the acting on that. Ac-Tor Boy is replete with clever twitches but unnecessarily so. It would appear that Mr Dalton wanted Bond to be hard work so he made it look like hard work and as a result it's hard work to sit through. He goes too far, and unlike a real artist, doesn't know when to stop. The Ac-Ting is so noticeable that it detracts from everything else that's going on around him. OK Timothy, we get the message; you can act. Thank you, and stop shouting about it.

Where's the subtlety? Rather, where's the subtlety that comes without Mr Dalton straining himself to shout by body language or that strange double-takey thing he does, that THIS IS SUBTLE. One didn't notice Roger Moore's acting (perhaps it didn't exist...not a good example) but with Mr Dalton, the performance gets in the way. It's tremendously thuggish, and far from humble. Look ye at my craft. Today I am acting. Oh, put a sock in it and try to wear that dinner jacket convincingly, there's a good lad.

[Bondpurist]

[quote]So, what you mean is that almost every scene where Dalton showed emotions was NOT written in the scripts? Perhaps you don't now so much about filmmaking. When Dalton screams "Della" he doesn't improvise, it is written dialogue.[/quote]
The only word he had to say is 'Della'. That on it's own, and stage directions such as walk here and go there don't give anyone any clues as to the emotions experienced and shown - Dalton used his talent and acting ability to convey these emotions - there's only so much a script can do, the acting does so much more. Dalton could make Bond look angry or sad without a word of diologue or a sentence of stage direction. Moore showed emotion and built Bond's character only in the lines he said, not in the way he acted.
[quote]FlemingBond was a thug with ambitions at gentility [/quote]
I disgree. He was a ordinary man being used as a tool of the state, who indulged in vice to relieve himself and relax himself from his awful, terrifying job.
[quote]DaltonBond lacks style, lacks class[/quote]
That is totally subjective. I disagree, but neither of us can objectively prove it one way or another, so there's no point in arguing about it.
[quote]But what Mr Dalton needs to take the blame for is the way it's played. He overcompensates. He is noticeably "doing acting". Blimey, look at the acting on that. Ac-Tor Boy is replete with clever twitches but unnecessarily so. It would appear that Mr Dalton wanted Bond to be hard work so he made it look like hard work and as a result it's hard work to sit through. He goes too far, and unlike a real artist, doesn't know when to stop. The Ac-Ting is so noticeable that it detracts from everything else that's going on around him. OK Timothy, we get the message; you can act. Thank you, and stop shouting about it.[/quote]
Well pardon him for trying to act properly, trying to be someone else other than himself. At least he made an effort - Moore didn't try to be Bond, he was just himself, which is either good or bad depending on whether you like Moore or not.
[quote]Where's the subtlety? Rather, where's the subtlety that comes without Mr Dalton straining himself to shout by body language or that strange double-takey thing he does, that THIS IS SUBTLE. One didn't notice Roger Moore's acting (perhaps it didn't exist...not a good example) but with Mr Dalton, the performance gets in the way. It's tremendously thuggish, and far from humble. Look ye at my craft. Today I am acting. Oh, put a sock in it and try to wear that dinner jacket convincingly, there's a good lad.[/quote]
Dalton was perfectly subtle - you delibrately exaggerate his acting style to benefit your anti dalton message. He only seemed like that because he was actually ACTED, which was a massive change from Moore and seems comparitively OTT. Earlier on you said that Fleming's Bond was a 'thug with ambitions at gentility' and now you're calling Dalton 'thuggish' - where's your consistency?? Dalton played Bond as if he was Bond not as if he was someone pretending to be Bond. Some may not like that, but I think it's great. What you hate about Dalton I admire.
Dalton, a prole? Anyone who talks like Dalton and acts like him is hardly a prole.
[quote]Strange, some Bondfans are so fanatical about Ian Fleming and "his" Bond. They always complain on the films and one starts to wonder why they just don