30 replies to this topic

[SPECTRE ASSASSIN]

Timothy Dalton will long since be remembered as the most gritty actor to ever play James Bond. I for once thought Dalton was an amazing 007. He infused the character with a long since need of danger, toughness. That was absent in the Moore era.

My question is, how has Dalton changed in your view? Do you appreciate him more then ever? What contributions has he done to the Bond series? Is he better then the other actors?

Your opinions please.

[Tarl_Cabot]

-My question is, how has Dalton changed in your view?

He hasn't changed for me. I always liked him. I seem to prefer the lower budgeted, low tech Bond films...I think he was a great James Bond who could have been my favorite if he had been offered great Bond films in '91 and '93. I thought he was a breath of fresh air after 12 years of Roger Moore.

-Do you appreciate him more then ever?

Yes. He looks like a secret agent. Brosnan looks like a movie star(nothing wrong with that really). I liked him partially because he didn't have alot of baggage or celebrity exposure when he was Bond. I thought Brosnan has been way too accessable. Mystery, is a good thing...

-What contributions has he done to the Bond series?

He's made the Roger Moore style James Bond extinct, ie two dimensional, comedic, not taking this stuff too seriously style of acting(which actually works fine for Roger-and only Roger! ). Brosnan has followed Dalton's lead by keeping Bond very human(despite absurd stunts in GE and DAD) and emotional, like a real person who just happens to have an outrageously adventerous life!


-Is he better then the other actors?

Yes and No.I think he's the best actor to play the part but it's really a role that requires great movie star charisma so I have to continue to regard Sean Connery as the best Bond, but Dalton's Bond is the closest incarnation of the literary Bond.I still wish we could have seen those lost '91/'93 films!

[ChandlerBing]

I have just about come full circle with my thoughts on Dalton. In 87, I was blown away to see Bond taken seriously again. Here was a guy who looked like he was a secret agent and could do some of the things he is said to have done, unlike Roger Moore, who just was so wrong for the part of Ian Fleming's James Bond.

The years were not kind to Dalton for me. I really did not like the vulnerability his Bond had. I really prefer the Connery Bond, the one who nailed all those women and beat up those guys on the Disco Volante. Brosnan is really good in the physical stuff. I just wish he'd do more punching and less shooting. I would love to have more stuff like he did in that final fight with 006 in the wheelhouse.

To me, James Bond is a guy men want to be, and women want to be with. Dalton's Bond never had all that much fun. It's like the writers took the piss out of Bond. I used to blame Dalton for that, but I now blame the writers, who went too far in the other direction in taking Bond seriously.

I now regard Dalton as not the worst Bond--that one goes to Roger Moore, who seems now to get worse as I get older.


1. Connery
2. Brosnan
3. Lazenby/Dalton
4. Moore

If you put together Dalton's acting and Lazenby's fighting ability, you'd have a really good Bond!

[Tarl_Cabot]

'Dalton's Bond never had all that much fun.'

Maybe it appeared that way but I just love the attitude of LTK which was This is what I can do when I'm pissed off! That was a refreshing...and it was the high testosterone late 80's...I think the producers thought the public would eat it up.Oh well.

[Willie Garvin]

-My question is, how has Dalton changed in your view?

He hasn't changed for me. I always liked him. I seem to prefer the lower budgeted, low tech Bond films...I think he was a great James Bond who could have been my favorite if he had been offered great Bond films in '91 and '93. I thought he was a breath of fresh air after 12 years of Roger Moore.

-Do you appreciate him more then ever?

Yes. He looks like a secret agent. Brosnan looks like a movie star(nothing wrong with that really). I liked him partially because he didn't have alot of baggage or celebrity exposure when he was Bond. I thought Brosnan has been way too accessable. Mystery, is a good thing...

-What contributions has he done to the Bond series?

He's made the Roger Moore style James Bond extinct, ie two dimensional, comedic, not taking this stuff too seriously style of acting(which actually works fine for Roger-and only Roger! ). Brosnan has followed Dalton's lead by keeping Bond very human(despite absurd stunts in GE and DAD) and emotional, like a real person who just happens to have an outrageously adventerous life!


-Is he better then the other actors?

Yes and No.I think he's the best actor to play the part but it's really a role that requires great movie star charisma so I have to continue to regard Sean Connery as the best Bond, but Dalton's Bond is the closest incarnation of the literary Bond.I still wish we could have seen those lost '91/'93 films!

Agree completely.To me Timothy Dalton is the best actor--other than Sean Connery--to ever play James Bond.I like all of the other actors in different ways but they don't resonate with me the way Dalton does.Like Connery before him ,Dalton really looked like he knew how to kill someone.The others have a harder time suggesting this.And while I enjoy Roger's and Pierce's films it's difficult to believe a man who looks like a movie star is a secret agent.Not impossible,just difficult.

Tim's greatest contribution to the series,in my opinion,was the reintroduction of a darker more vulnerable 007.This hadn't been on the screen since Dr.No and from Russia With Love.The Dalton Bond looked and acted like a man who didn't especially love his job.He looked like a spy and also that he knew he'd die in the field someday.He smoked and he drank.And had the times been different,he'd probably have been seen as more of a womanizer than he is in his two movies.Dalton also looked like Ian Fleming's James Bond--not Hoagey Carmichael--but still with the long thin face,prominent nose,cruel mouth and square jaw.All he really needed was that long thin scar running down his cheek to complete the picture.And he sounded right.Sean had a great voice.So did Roger.And so did Dalton.

Dalton wasn't the huge physical specimen Connery was so when he fought he had to work at it just a bit more.This gave him a greater believablity.If conquering his foes was supposed to be easy then the Bond films would be boring.Even Sir Roger-the least physically adept of the 007s--looked his best when he appeared to be in danger.It worked for Sean in Dr.No and particularly at the hands of Red Grant in FRWL and opposite the shark in Thunderball.

Timothy Dalton's physicality is actually quite remarkable when we remember that he often did as many of his stunts as Eon would safely let him--including dangling in the air over an airplane at the start of one movie and hanging from the side of a wayward ammunition truck in the start of another.That latter sequence reportedly scared Cubby Broccoli when he was on location and was informed that his star was doing some of the dangerous stuntwork.As one stunt arranger explains on the The Living Daylights DVD,everyone involved had to talk Dalton out of becoming involved with more of the action.Director John Glen recalled that they had to "dial back" Dalton's involvement,lest he hurt himself.

And I liked the fact that when his 007 was enraged he really looked like he could kill.That the individual responsible was going to DIE.I don't always get this from Pierce although he's generally good at it.Audiences didn't exactly fall all over themselves for Dalton.He didn't do the scripted comedy well but in fairness, most of it wasn't written very well.And Tim wasn't Roger Moore-who'd been Bond for 10 years and the only 007 for at least one generation. Moore was a very hard act to follow for anyone--even Pierce Brosnan.

Dalton had great chemistry with Desmond and Caroline Bliss(another sometimes derided performer),and he always did his very best for the films themselves.He was generous with the other actors as well.He didn't have great screenplays but he made them work.A very professional performer and an excellent James Bond.I too,wish Tim had had at least two more Bond films because he was just hitting his stride.At any rate,Timothy Dalton can be very proud of his time as James Bond.

Edited by Willie Garvin, 06 June 2004 - 11:28 PM.

[SnakeEyes]

Dalton was someone I didn't like untill I saw the films. I heard the bad mouth and thought that he was just as bad as that Lazenby guy (who I had never seen either).
I was young, give me a break.
I saw the films, I woke up.
Dalton is Bond. He isn't playing Bond; he's being Bond. That's the key factor that makes me rate him over the others. I'll spare you the part about how it sucks he got 'the boot' and how he needed (needed) to do more films and how his 'replacement' wasn't quite 'up to scratch' etc.

[007Travis]

I have always liked Dalton; I love his portrayal in TLD. I'm not the type though, who will say that I hate one of them because of this or that, or anything like that. I enjoy all of them. I do have favorites, but I don't think any of them were horrible or anything like that. They each add something to the films, and it will continue to happen as it ages. Just my opinion. So far, I've really enjoyed all five actors to play Bond.

[trevanian]

'Dalton's Bond never had all that much fun.'

Maybe it appeared that way but I just love the attitude of LTK which was This is what I can do when I'm pissed off! That was a refreshing...and it was the high testosterone late 80's...I think the producers thought the public would eat it up.Oh well.

I think he is having fun when the money is blowing in his face aboard the plane in LTK ... he is expressing joy about pulling the escape off.

But most of the time, Dalton's Bond doesn't express a sense of fun, but instead, something more realistic given the situation ... a sense of SATISFACTION (such as when he gives Kilifer the moneybag.) That sense of emotional response seems true AND it works better than Brosnan's occasional giggle, which freaks me out.

Connery had a charisma that combined with the toughness to create something really unique for all time, but Dalton made it feel real for me. It might be that Brosnan (the TAILOR OF PANAMA Brosnan that is) could do the same, but hey, the best lines in the Brosnan era all went to Sean Bean in GE!

[SeanValen00V]

'Dalton's Bond never had all that much fun.'

Maybe it appeared that way but I just love the attitude of LTK which was This is what I can do when I'm pissed off! That was a refreshing...and it was the high testosterone late 80's...I think the producers thought the public would eat it up.Oh well.

Internationally they did dig it, the amercians have never really digged Bond as the main event in their country for a long time.. Dalton was strong internationally, in the UK, LTK was 6 weeks at number one!! Goldeneye was 4 weeks at number one, The British knew their Bond much better, the amercians just wanted more amercanish type Bond that resembles blockbusters like Lethal Weapon and Die Hards.

Goldeneye glossed like 70 million in the US,look at DAD, 150 million, but DAD wasn't a great Bond film, it was creatively comprimised, Halle Berry marketing tool, stupid all for weekend box office numbers.


And remember Dalton's LTK was the fall guy in a huge summer 89, after that, Bond films were released in the fall, so if you forget some bad marketing and release timing in US, Dalton was well recieved around the world, and hugely praised by critics, and thats what we should be proud of.

Edited by SeanValen00V, 07 June 2004 - 04:53 PM.

[Lady Rose]

I think Dalton was ahead of his time really.He seems to be a lot more appreciated now than then.As was previously said,he did a lot better in Europe and elsewhere than in the States but it appears sucess is equated to how well you do at the US box office.

His portrayal of Bond was both exciting and brave.It would take an actor of his ability and drive to have portrayed Bond the way he did.No doubt he wanted to be sucessful,any actor would,but he was also prepared to take a great risk and not just follow the style of the phenominally sucessful Roger Moore.It is because of Daltons portrayal the Bond was brought back to earth.
I am re reading Casino Royale at the moment and Dalton had Bond to a tee.

Any actor would have had trouble taking over from Moore and I really believe even Pierce Brosnan would not have been so suscessful if Dalton hadn't gone before him and opened up knew oppotunities for the Bond character.He is an important part of Bond history that turned the series around

[Turn]

From the minute he was announced as the new Bond to now, my opinion hasn't changed -- he's a great Bond. I will always be grateful for his take on the character, will always feel sad he never had a chance to continue and for the undeserved crap he took from some quarters, will always appreciate his dedication to the Broccoli family despite his not being Bond anymore and will always follow his career.

I will probably always rank Connery first, but Dalton is a close second.

[Onyx2626]

Love the Daltons, then and now.

Hate that the fact he did only 2 bothers the fans [like me] more than it bothers him. I wanted him to demand his job back!

Love the fact that Connery praised him, when the rest of the world said "yuck".

Hate the fact that some still hate him. (some guy at my record store...i killed him)

Love the fact that Dalton complimented Roger Moore, who btw, most critics hated. [he said the Moore movies were so big and campy, they required an actor with a good sense of self to pull it off]

Edited by Onyx2626, 08 June 2004 - 01:42 AM.

[Tarl_Cabot]

"Dalton wasn't the huge physical specimen Connery was so when he fought he had to work at it just a bit more."


I read Sean's Playboy interview and he was about 208 lbs. while filming Thunderball...

Dalton wasn't built like a construction worker;he was lean but he looked fit and strong enough to knock out someone with one properly placed punch(Bruce Lee was 122 lbs).Skill can compensate for lack of brawn. I don't think he lacked anything in physical presence.

[Adrian Carlisle]

[quote name='SeanValen00V' date='7 June 2004 - 16:47'] [quote name='Tarl_Cabot' date='5 June 2004 - 20:04'] Goldeneye was 4 weeks at number one, The British knew their Bond much better, the amercians just wanted more amercanish type Bond that resembles blockbusters like Lethal Weapon and Die Hards.

Goldeneye glossed like 70 million in the US,look at DAD, 150 million, but DAD wasn't a great Bond film, it was creatively comprimised, Halle Berry marketing tool, stupid all for weekend box office numbers.


And remember Dalton's LTK was the fall guy in a huge summer 89, after that, Bond films were released in the fall, so if you forget some bad marketing and release timing in US, Dalton was well recieved around the world, and hugely praised by critics, and thats what we should be proud of. [/quote]
What a stupid statement to make. I can assure you that Americans know who James Bond is and wouldn't want to change him to make him more "Americanized". Ever heard of Indiana Jones? That character was specifically created as an American answer to Bond, but I'm getting ahead of myself. At any rate, though, this "Americanization" that's been happening to Bond (and it has happened to some extent, I'll agree...but it's not huge, rather because of a cinematic trend than specific changes targetting a core audience) is ONLY due to studio stereotyping - delivering what they THINK the American audience wants. The true Bond fans in this country aren't that stupid. GoldenEye took in $106 million, not $70 million, at the US box office...quite good for 1995, and it beat all the action pictures that year, except for Batman. Ahead of Die Hard 3 even, part of a series which you cited as an archetype for the "Americanization" of Bond. Hell, adjusted for inflation, GoldenEye's take and all those of the Brosnan Bonds, or any other Bond, is more than Vin Diesel's stupid "America's 007" film xXx. So really, your conclusion is a bit overblown.

I hated Die Another Day. It was a TERRIBLE film. Yes it made a lot of money here, but still not enough to break even with production and marketing costs. And let me assure you that Halle Berry was not a reason that more people went to see the film. She did recieve hoopla, but as I remember it was because of her "bikini entrance" being reminiscent of Ursula Andress'. It wasn't because we love her so much here. She's a good actress when her film choices complement her ability, but it's not as if she's a mega star.

All of Brosnan's films have made more than the previous ones. Yes, they've changed the Bond formula, but that's because of an overall trend toward "bigger, better, louder" and "more CGI!" (which I personally don't agree with). Licence to Kill was a great film, but as you pointed out, it was released during a crowded time here. It's box office take wasn't because "Americans wanted a more Americanerish Bond" (again, look at xXx...NOTHING can replace Bond), it's just that Bond just didn't have the power it used to. The same thing happened with Star Trek. Sometimes good movies don't get the attention they warrant, and that's just a fact of life. Batman and Indiana Jones were hefty competition in a changing era of action films. Plus LTK opened in substantially less theaters.

[00-FAN008]

Timothy Dalton will long since be remembered as the most gritty actor to ever play James Bond. I for once thought Dalton was an amazing 007. He infused the character with a long since need of danger, toughness. That was absent in the Moore era.

My question is, how has Dalton changed in your view? Do you appreciate him more then ever? What contributions has he done to the Bond series? Is he better then the other actors?

Your opinions please.

Dalton was an excellent Bond, agreed, and even as a solid Moore fan I would have to admit that the hard-edge and danger of Bond was stronger in Dalton's era and weaker in Moore's era.

[Von Hammerstein]

Liked Timothy Dalton as much as I like Roger Moore or Pierce Brosnan, Connery always being THE James Bond for me. But I always felt dissapointed that Dalton didn't get a third run as 007. I feel TLD and LTK are low points in the film series. I think if Dalton had had the usual formula of evil villain in a stainless steel lair, with a plausible but OTT plot to enslave the world. Dalton would have shined as Bond. Would have liked to seen him in Goldeneye and Tomorrow Never Dies. Sadly it was not to be.

[Harmsway]

Well, for me, Sean Connery IS James Bond. There's no way around that.

But to evaulate Dalton:
I always liked his approach to Bond. He made Bond seem human and real and was the closest thing to Fleming, even if the Bond he presented wasn't exactly Fleming's Bond.

He's a terrific actor - better than any of the other Bonds, but he just lacked charisma. He wasn't easy to warm up to, and he didn't have that edge. I know many people think of him as being deadly, but he just doesn't always seem to have that masculinity that I think the Bond character should have in every situation - even his romantic encounters.

Dalton didn't capture the macho side of Bond that I feel is absolutely essential to the character. Neither Brosnan or Moore have really grasped it either. It's that air of I'm better than you and anybody else, that apparent indifference, that coldness - it's the "man's man" quality.

Neither was he particularly "cool". He's not really that suave, and he always seemed out of place when put into those upper class situations that Bond is known for. That's why the general audience didn't care for him too much.

But on a whole, he gave us a successful new interpretation of the Bond character. After the lightness of the Moore years, it was nice to have someone go in the entirely opposite direction and give us a dark Bond. I don't think the interpretation was entirely successful, but it saved the series from self-parody. I honestly wished he had done more films, because he most likely would have improved. Pity.

Edited by Harmsway, 13 July 2004 - 06:20 PM.

[License To Kill]

Not to get off-topic, but you cannot blame Roger Moore for the movies he was involved in. I think for those movies, you need to blame the time and era the 1970's-early to mid 80's. Those times were troubling for the world, especially America. With Vietnam, recession, the drugs and the gas problems. His movies were pure escapism from the real life struggles, that's why they were so comedic and at some times, slapstick. Roger made the Bond role "cool and hip" for the 1970s-80s.

Sorry for the rant!

[Qwerty]

I always liked Timothy Dalton as James Bond. He's not my number one of number two favorite for the role, but he still did a fantastic job. His performance in The Living Daylights, a terrific film, was in my view brisk and to the point. It worked very well. With Licence To Kill I think he went down a little bit, but hardly much to complsin about. Glad he was Bond, like many of the others, he brought his own style to the role. These two films will be looked good upon in the future.

[cofalco]

The main problem Dalton had was the scripts given to him - they didn't work well around his personality. TLD was about one re-write away from being a great film IMHO. I'm still mad he didn't get to do that third picture. He needed better direction than what he got - there should have been a thorough housecleaning after Roger Moore left - EON should have fired John Glen and maybe even Richard Maibaum (he was mostly absent for LTK anyway) and brought in a new team for Dalton. What should have been the arrival of a new era turned out to be the bookend of the old.

[H.M.Servant]

I think Dalton was a great Bond. I think all the actors were great Bonds. In their own way. I like his (Daltons) approach to the character, it was interesting to watch and it suited the films he was in (or maybe they suited him) But I've always liked him and I always will so no my view hasn't changed over the years.
I don't know if I like him better than Brosnan or Moore it depends, I think they've all had their strong moments. It's also hard to because Dalton only made two and they were toned down compared to the later Moore and Brosnan films, it would have been intersting to have seen dalton in a movie like Octopussy or TND I think because they seem to be a little more light hearted than the two Dalton did and maybe he also would have been able to do a "lighter" side to Bond, as well as the "dark" side? who knows?

[RevolveR]

My first impression of Timothy Dalton in The Living Daylilghts was resentful. I simply felt he was not fit to be Bond. After seeing LTK, I was convinced of this.

Then about 2 years ago I decided that I would watch the Dalton Bonds once more, but with an open mind. I found that as I had matured, so had my Bond tastes. I was able to compare Dalton with my own image of FLeming's Bond having read some of the novels. I discovered that Timothy Dalton was not a bad Bond afterall, just misunderstood. I now even enjoy LTK, although I don't think that it's one of the better Bond movies.

Dalton's Bond came at just the right time. He could not have been the first Bond due to lacking the charisma that Connery developed. He couldn't have done it during the Moore era due to the need for comical escape. And he couldn't do it now because it seems the demand is for blockbuster action movies that Dalton could not comfortably portray Bond in.

Dalton's Bond is a hard, vulnerable, gritty human who brought the character back to earth in between 2 larger than life periods. Maybe what we need now is another Timothy Dalton....

[Tarl_Cabot]

Yes, the cycle demands another Dalton-esque era! I offer Clive Owen.He's the anti-thesis of Brosnan, as Dalton was very much Roger's...

The popularity of Jason Bourne makes Clive Owen in a down to earth thriller very viable to making profits!

[Double-Oh-Zero]

...I really believe even Pierce Brosnan would not have been so
suscessful if Dalton hadn't gone before him...

Yes, quite. I doubt Brosnan would have been able to pull off the ball-breaking fight in GE if Dalton hadn't come before. Each of the actors before Brosnan contributed something to the role, and Dalton is no exception.

Anyway, I used to think of Dalton as the unwanted stepchild of the series (along with Lazenby, although he was more the strange uncle no one liked to talk about). Since then, I've warmed up to him, especially with TLD. I really do enjoy him as Bond.

Although I'm still perturbed with LTK. Maybe one day I'll come to like it...





...or not.

[SnakeEyes]

I just watched TLD and he hasn't aged a bit.

[Lady Rose]

Yes, the cycle demands another Dalton-esque era! I offer Clive Owen.He's the anti-thesis of Brosnan, as Dalton was very much Roger's...

The popularity of Jason Bourne makes Clive Owen in a down to earth thriller very viable to making profits!

The jury is still out with me on the Clive Owen debate but I do agree with the sentiment of a return to a Dalton-esque era.
It seems with all the Bonds (except Tim who wasn't in it long enough) that they start off pretty serious with some funny lines ... Dr No, Live And Let Die and GoldenEye and then end on a really stupid film..... Diamonds,A View To a Kill and the impossibly ridiculous Die Another Die. It seems this is an indicator the actor is on his way out!!

My only concern is the actor who takes over PB will suffer the same fate as Tim who is greatly underappreciated by the general public. I always admired him as he stuck by his acting principles and gave 100%,doing for Bond what he thoought was right and taking the chance.God knows were Bond would have been if TD hadn't put himself on the line with such a drastic change.

[Martin Mystery]

Yes, the cycle demands another Dalton-esque era! I offer Clive Owen.He's the anti-thesis of Brosnan, as Dalton was very much Roger's...

The popularity of Jason Bourne makes Clive Owen in a down to earth thriller very viable to making profits!

My thoughts exactly.

[Genrewriter]

I've always liked Dalton and his approach to the character. TLD was a great start to his tenure and LTK was a superb entry in the series. I really wish he had done more films.

[DanMan]

I always liked Dalton. LTK rates as my 4th favorite Bond film...

My Top 5...

1) Die Another Day
2) Goldeneye
3) Tomorrow Never Dies
4) Liscence To Kill
5) Live And Let Die

[Buck]

I thought Dalton was a breath of fresh air after Moore. He was a bit more grim and gritty then the campy and slapstick Moore Bond flicks.

Buck