72 replies to this topic

[Pete]

But Connery in Dr No, FRWL and GF totally nailed the character from the books.

He sure did. In DN and FRWL especially, Connery had all of the Fleming aspects perfected. Craig is very close - especially in the cruel looks department, but overall, Connery is closer. For me, anyway.

Connery is nothing like Fleming's Bond. The closest is Dalton followed by Craig and Lazenby. Connery is the film icon that every other actor had to follow, but he was nothing like the Bond in the books.

I disagree considerably, I'd say Connery was one of the closest. Care to explain why?

As I said earlier Connery was the film Bond. His portayal was nothing like the Bond in the books. Many of the things we think of as Bond come from the films and not the books. The Tux, the gadgets Bond's one liners all stem from Connery's Bond and not Flemings. Dalton, Craig and to an extent Brosnan are closer IMO than Connery. Oh and Connery made Bond Scottish something Fleming only tipped his hat at after Connery was cast.

I've never seen Connery as Bond when I read the Fleming books but I do see him as Gardners Bond as he was in NSNA.

[The Shark]

But Connery in Dr No, FRWL and GF totally nailed the character from the books.

He sure did. In DN and FRWL especially, Connery had all of the Fleming aspects perfected. Craig is very close - especially in the cruel looks department, but overall, Connery is closer. For me, anyway.

Connery is nothing like Fleming's Bond. The closest is Dalton followed by Craig and Lazenby. Connery is the film icon that every other actor had to follow, but he was nothing like the Bond in the books.

I disagree considerably, I'd say Connery was one of the closest. Care to explain why?

As I said earlier Connery was the film Bond. His portayal was nothing like the Bond in the books. Many of the things we think of as Bond come from the films and not the books. The Tux, the gadgets Bond's one liners all stem from Connery's Bond and not Flemings.

The one-liners perhaps, which were introduced by Connery and Young to counterbalance the violence. However gadgets and tuxedos are certainly present in Fleming's Bond works.

I would say Connery is incredibly close to that of Fleming's Bond lore. He nails his cruel conviction, longer nature, cynicism, brutality, and his lust for life.

Personally I don't really see how Brosnan is any closer to the Bond of the novels than Connery under these paremters, or in terms of any other aspects.

Oh and Connery made Bond Scottish something Fleming only tipped his hat at after Connery was cast.

Then surely that's a testament to Flemig's approval of Connery's performance, if he changed his heritage. That would seem to make the character more Fleming-esque, than if Fleming nearly noted Connery's presence in the role.

I've never seen Connery as Bond when I read the Fleming books but I do see him as Gardners Bond as he was in NSNA.

I see Connery's Bond when we read Fleming's Bond, though I don't read Gardner or Benson's contributions.

[Pete]

But Connery in Dr No, FRWL and GF totally nailed the character from the books.

He sure did. In DN and FRWL especially, Connery had all of the Fleming aspects perfected. Craig is very close - especially in the cruel looks department, but overall, Connery is closer. For me, anyway.

Connery is nothing like Fleming's Bond. The closest is Dalton followed by Craig and Lazenby. Connery is the film icon that every other actor had to follow, but he was nothing like the Bond in the books.

I disagree considerably, I'd say Connery was one of the closest. Care to explain why?

As I said earlier Connery was the film Bond. His portayal was nothing like the Bond in the books. Many of the things we think of as Bond come from the films and not the books. The Tux, the gadgets Bond's one liners all stem from Connery's Bond and not Flemings.

The one-liners perhaps, which were introduced by Connery and Young to counterbalance the violence. However gadgets and tuxedos are certainly present in Fleming's Bond works.
I would say Connery is incredibly close to that of Fleming's Bond lore. He nails his cruel conviction, longer nature, cynicism, brutality, and his lust for life.

Personally I don't really see how Brosnan is any closer to the Bond of the novels than Connery under these paremters, or in terms of any other aspects.

Oh and Connery made Bond Scottish something Fleming only tipped his hat at after Connery was cast.

Then surely that's a testament to Flemig's approval of Connery's performance, if he changed his heritage. That would seem to make the character more Fleming-esque, than if Fleming nearly noted Connery's presence in the role.

I've never seen Connery as Bond when I read the Fleming books but I do see him as Gardners Bond as he was in NSNA.

I see Connery's Bond when we read Fleming's Bond, though I don't read Gardner or Benson's contributions.

Where were the Tuxedo's mentioned in Fleming's books? I may be wrong but I can't remember any gadget apart from the briefcase in FRWL and the AMDB3 with slide out gun drawer.

Connery in no way, shape or form was Fleming's Bond. Give one example fron the books that Connery nailed and made the world think that he was the ultimate "Bond".

[The Shark]

But Connery in Dr No, FRWL and GF totally nailed the character from the books.

He sure did. In DN and FRWL especially, Connery had all of the Fleming aspects perfected. Craig is very close - especially in the cruel looks department, but overall, Connery is closer. For me, anyway.

Connery is nothing like Fleming's Bond. The closest is Dalton followed by Craig and Lazenby. Connery is the film icon that every other actor had to follow, but he was nothing like the Bond in the books.

I disagree considerably, I'd say Connery was one of the closest. Care to explain why?

As I said earlier Connery was the film Bond. His portayal was nothing like the Bond in the books. Many of the things we think of as Bond come from the films and not the books. The Tux, the gadgets Bond's one liners all stem from Connery's Bond and not Flemings.

The one-liners perhaps, which were introduced by Connery and Young to counterbalance the violence. However gadgets and tuxedos are certainly present in Fleming's Bond works.
I would say Connery is incredibly close to that of Fleming's Bond lore. He nails his cruel conviction, longer nature, cynicism, brutality, and his lust for life.

Personally I don't really see how Brosnan is any closer to the Bond of the novels than Connery under these paremters, or in terms of any other aspects.

Oh and Connery made Bond Scottish something Fleming only tipped his hat at after Connery was cast.

Then surely that's a testament to Flemig's approval of Connery's performance, if he changed his heritage. That would seem to make the character more Fleming-esque, than if Fleming nearly noted Connery's presence in the role.

I've never seen Connery as Bond when I read the Fleming books but I do see him as Gardners Bond as he was in NSNA.

I see Connery's Bond when we read Fleming's Bond, though I don't read Gardner or Benson's contributions.

Where were the Tuxedo's mentioned in Fleming's books? I may be wrong but I can't remember any gadget apart from the briefcase in FRWL and the AMDB3 with slide out gun drawer.

Here are list of gadgets featured in Fleming:

- Camera case bomb
- Cane gun
- Carpet stinger (used to wreck Bond's car)
- Desk gun (used later in TSWLM)
- Diamond containing golf balls
- Attaché case with concealed compartment containing a silencer and 30 rounds of .25 ammunition.
- FRWL version of attaché case
- Submarine periscope provided for spying on an office in Istanbul
- Kerim's walking-stick rifle
- Grant's book-gun
- Klebb's telephone gun
- Poison tipped knitting needles
- Poison tipped knife-shoe
- Marsh buggy disguised as dragon
- Homing device
- Aston Martin DB III with switches to alter the colour and type of the front and rear lights, reinforced steel bumpers, long barrelled colt. 45 in trick apartment and radio pick-up for homing device
- OddJob's steel rimmed bowler hat
- Concealed knife in the heel of Bond's shoe
- Identicast machine
- Goldfinger's sonic detector
- Tape recorder hidden in chair's squash cushion
- SPECTRE hydrofoil with hidden underwater hatch
- Geiger counter concealed as camera
- Compressed air underwater speed packs
- Underwater chariot (sledge)
- Synchrophone
- Cyanide firing gun
- Great sheet of armour plate glass designed to be hurtled down a baffled slit in M's office as a protective barrier

Connery in no way, shape or form was Fleming's Bond. Give one example fron the books that Connery nailed and made the world think that he was the ultimate "Bond".

Fine. Here are several examples -

- Bond's strenuous and painful crawl through Dr. No's labyrinth of pain, culminating in the tooth-and-nail battle with the Giant Squid. Connery epitomises the resolve, tenacity and boy-scout resourcefulness displayed by Fleming's Bond.

- Nearly the entirety of Thunderball.

- The Benzedrine-tinged game of Bridge with Drax in Moonraker.

- The various scenes with Tanaka, Dikko and Bond's struggle through the Garden Of Death in YOLT.

- The entire Train segment of FRWL ending with Grant's bloody demise.

- Bond's temperament in Goldfinger.

Just a few examples.

[jaguar007]

- The Benzedrine-tinged game of Bridge with Drax in Moonraker.

Actually this example I can only see Dalton or Craig doing. I'm not disagreeing with you Shark, Connery is my favorite, but Connery's Bond was far too cool to use benzedrine. Same with Moore and Brosnan. Only Craig and Dalton really displayed the qualities (or lack there of) to use drugs to give them an edge.


It has been said that Bond is what Fleming wanted to be. I think it could be said that Connery's Bond is what Fleming's Bond wanted to be.

[Trident]

- The Benzedrine-tinged game of Bridge with Drax in Moonraker.

Actually this example I can only see Dalton or Craig doing. I'm not disagreeing with you Shark, Connery is my favorite, but Connery's Bond was far too cool to use benzedrine. Same with Moore and Brosnan. Only Craig and Dalton really displayed the qualities (or lack there of) to use drugs to give them an edge.


It has been said that Bond is what Fleming wanted to be. I think it could be said that Connery's Bond is what Fleming's Bond wanted to be.

Now, this is a most interesting thought. Does Fleming's Bond aspire to something? Does he have an ideal, an image of perfection, mentally of course, which he pursues? And if so, would Connery be close to it?

[Lachesis]

The one-liners perhaps, which were introduced by Connery and Young to counterbalance the violence. However gadgets and tuxedos are certainly present in Fleming's Bond works.

I would say Connery is incredibly close to that of Fleming's Bond lore. He nails his cruel conviction, longer nature, cynicism, brutality, and his lust for life.

Oh and Connery made Bond Scottish something Fleming only tipped his hat at after Connery was cast.

Then surely that's a testament to Flemig's approval of Connery's performance, if he changed his heritage. That would seem to make the character more Fleming-esque, than if Fleming nearly noted Connery's presence in the role.

I've never seen Connery as Bond when I read the Fleming books but I do see him as Gardners Bond as he was in NSNA.

I see Connery's Bond when we read Fleming's Bond, though I don't read Gardner or Benson's contributions.

Absolutely, Fleming was on hand to advise for the first two films and clearly found resonance in Connery. Connery didnt simply play Bond, he became Bond so much so that even for his creator, Bond became Connery.

- The Benzedrine-tinged game of Bridge with Drax in Moonraker.

Actually this example I can only see Dalton or Craig doing. I'm not disagreeing with you Shark, Connery is my favorite, but Connery's Bond was far too cool to use benzedrine. Same with Moore and Brosnan. Only Craig and Dalton really displayed the qualities (or lack there of) to use drugs to give them an edge.


It has been said that Bond is what Fleming wanted to be. I think it could be said that Connery's Bond is what Fleming's Bond wanted to be.

I can certainly see merit in that final quote but imo Connery's Bond was more than capable of any degree of skullduggery to get the job done, his charisma was such that he could pretty much get away with anything from GF onward.

If the terminology can be employed I can easily accept the term "Connery IS James 007" in the right mood I would have to be honest and say I could also accept "Dalton IS James Bond 007" but for the rest it's James Bond 007 played by ..etc etc.. similar but different

Edited by Lachesis, 18 March 2010 - 12:36 PM.

[Major Tallon]

Where were the Tuxedo's mentioned in Fleming's books? I may be wrong but I can't remember any gadget apart from the briefcase in FRWL and the AMDB3 with slide out gun drawer.

Connery in no way, shape or form was Fleming's Bond. Give one example fron the books that Connery nailed and made the world think that he was the ultimate "Bond".

For evening dress, the best example I can think of is from Chapter Eight of Casino Royale.

While I think Dalton is the closest to the man Fleming described, and I recognize that all of this is hopelessly subjective, I also think that Connery handles the part very well.

[Pete]

Where were the Tuxedo's mentioned in Fleming's books? I may be wrong but I can't remember any gadget apart from the briefcase in FRWL and the AMDB3 with slide out gun drawer.

Connery in no way, shape or form was Fleming's Bond. Give one example fron the books that Connery nailed and made the world think that he was the ultimate "Bond".

For evening dress, the best example I can think of is from Chapter Eight of Casino Royale.

While I think Dalton is the closest to the man Fleming described, and I recognize that all of this is hopelessly subjective, I also think that Connery handles the part very well.

This is part of my point, Connery handles the part, but he's just Connery. He plays every role the same from James Bond to Robin Hood. Moore is the same. At least the likes of Lazenby, Dalton & Craig put a bit of effort in to the role.

The opening paasage of Fleming's Casino Royale is a far cry from the bridge game in the film Dr.No. The introduction of Fleming's Bond is miles away from the introduction of Connery's Bond.

Maybe it all depends on the order you read the books and see the films.

[The Shark]

Where were the Tuxedo's mentioned in Fleming's books? I may be wrong but I can't remember any gadget apart from the briefcase in FRWL and the AMDB3 with slide out gun drawer.

Connery in no way, shape or form was Fleming's Bond. Give one example fron the books that Connery nailed and made the world think that he was the ultimate "Bond".

For evening dress, the best example I can think of is from Chapter Eight of Casino Royale.

While I think Dalton is the closest to the man Fleming described, and I recognize that all of this is hopelessly subjective, I also think that Connery handles the part very well.

This is part of my point, Connery handles the part, but he's just Connery. He plays every role the same from James Bond to Robin Hood. Moore is the same. At least the likes of Lazenby, Dalton & Craig put a bit of effort in to the role.

The opening paasage of Fleming's Casino Royale is a far cry from the bridge game in the film Dr.No. The introduction of Fleming's Bond is miles away from the introduction of Connery's Bond.

Maybe it all depends on the order you read the books and see the films.

Maybe it's just entirely subjective, and dependent on many factors?

Personally I don't think Connery is one note at all, if anything it's the exact opposite. Everything from the mischievous grin he gives when he knows what's up, but the other fellow isn't aware of that, and Bond plays along, to the barely suppressed terror he expresses when confronted with Grant, and the romantic tenderness he shows later with Tatiana and Domino.

There are many facets to Connery's Bond that are often over-looked, along with Moore.

[jaguar007]

There are many facets to Connery's Bond that are often over-looked, along with Moore.

I have to agree with Shark.

[captnash2]

connery misses on the depth of character that the recent bonds are now allowed to show.

[Lachesis]

Personally I don't think Connery is one note at all, if anything it's the exact opposite. Everything from the mischievous grin he gives when he knows what's up, but the other fellow isn't aware of that, and Bond plays along, to the barely suppressed terror he expresses when confronted with Grant, and the romantic tenderness he shows later with Tatiana and Domino.

There are many facets to Connery's Bond that are often over-looked, along with Moore.

Indeed Connery delivered the whole gamut of bond, perhaps not with equal or rather flemingesque bias but all the boxes had a tick.

Today the performances are more selective and restricted imo, maybe better in key areas but conversely lacking or non existant in others. When it comes to actual individuality, the more cerebral and ecentric elements have been diminished in favour of a relentless physical presence fairly atypical of any literary, or indeed British figure. Bonds recent journey has made him more a closely comparable figure to the Hollywood action figure archetype than ever, whereas its notable that before Craig he was quite an anachronism (so much so that Hollywood was unable to copy him).

[Stephen Spotswood]

I remember Timothy Dalton's tuxedo got an appreciative laugh in TLD, when with a simple strip of velcro under his lapel, he had an instant camoflauge suit suitable for the fashionable sniper.

[Qboat]

Although I think Dalton is the Bond most like the books, this guy looks the part more to me:

http://www.cedmagic....-strangways.jpg

Cant see anything sorry
anyway I'm 100% Daniel

[captnash2]

connery was probably a breath of fresh air in the 60s, countering the image of a conventional romantic hero played by gable, hudson, grant and others.

but by time of OHMSS when more brutal heorics from eastwood and 'dirty dozen' dominated the more emotional romantic flemingesque bond was kinda welcome to counter that style.

probably why dalton, brosnan and now craig were appealing bonds by opening up the character on screen.

but craig still isn't the bond that fleming wrote in his books.
maybe 'bond 23' will rectify that.

Edited by captnash2, 01 April 2010 - 10:05 AM.

[Stephen Spotswood]

Here's another picture of same guy:

http://www.007james....imothy_main.jpg

[Lachesis]

but craig still isn't the bond that fleming wrote in his books.
maybe 'bond 23' will rectify that.

I doubt it tbh, the further we move from Flemings era the looser the connection to the values and traits he felt were significant, the less they factor into the next guys performance...time and tide wait for no one.

[Daddy Bond]

I suspect that the next Bond movie WILL get closet to Fleming's Bond and that Craig will do a fantastic job with it (as he has with his first two installments).

I also have no problem with the portrayal of the "developing Bond" that Craig has presented. It fits well (not perfectly - but well) with who Bond becomes in Fleming's books. I honestly can't imagine any of the other Bond actors doing a better job with CR and QOS. AND, I happen to think CR and QOS are two of the best Bond films in the franchise.

Might I also add that, regardless of whether one likes QOS, could any of the other Bond actor have done better than Craig with the QOS material? The only other Bond actors that I could even IMAGINE being able to pull of QOS would be Connery and Dalton.

[Dr. Metz]

To be honest, Daniel Craig is my least favorite bond. He wasn't horrendous, but he feels more like a blockbuster action star than bond, and his movies were boring to me.

[The Shark]

To be honest, Daniel Craig is my least favorite bond. He wasn't horrendous, but he feels more like a blockbuster action star than bond, and his movies were boring to me.

What about Pierce Brosnan - doesn't he exemplify the politically correct, meterosexual, a little bit of everything, super-hero, James Bond?

[Dr. Metz]

To be honest, Daniel Craig is my least favorite bond. He wasn't horrendous, but he feels more like a blockbuster action star than bond, and his movies were boring to me.

What about Pierce Brosnan - doesn't he exemplify the politically correct, meterosexual, a little bit of everything, super-hero, James Bond?

I know, but he felt a little bit more like bond to me then Craig. Also its not really Craig per se, but his movies. They are too downbeat and violent for me(Which is somewhat ironic, because i liked LTK). I know that's what most movies today are like, but I'm not a big fan of it. Also, i don't think the reboot was really that necessary, but i can't do anything about that.

Edited by Dr. Metz, 12 April 2010 - 07:29 PM.

[jaguar007]

To be honest, Daniel Craig is my least favorite bond. He wasn't horrendous, but he feels more like a blockbuster action star than bond, and his movies were boring to me.

I feel almost the opposite. I think he brought back the animal instinct to Bond that has been missing since Connery vacated the role.

[Bryce (003)]

I think and hope that with Bond23 we'll get more of a Bond3 (i.e. Goldfinger) bit. Now that Bond has been restarted (so to speak) and all the five acts of CR and QoS have been played out, that we can have a fun, spirited ride of some evil man (or woman) out for their own goals and nothing to do with Quantum (save that for Bond 24).

"Third times the charm" or so they say. Craig is a great Bond and the series reflects that. Ideally, the next film will as well. Were it up to me, I'd use GF as the model. A baddie up for nothing more than their own gain who just, by whatever reason or circumstance, crosses Bond or MI6's path. Take it from there and with Craig's 007, it would be a sure fire hit.

[The Shark]

To be honest, Daniel Craig is my least favorite bond. He wasn't horrendous, but he feels more like a blockbuster action star than bond, and his movies were boring to me.

What about Pierce Brosnan - doesn't he exemplify the politically correct, meterosexual, a little bit of everything, super-hero, James Bond?

I know, but he felt a little bit more like bond to me then Craig. Also its not really Craig per se, but his movies. They are too downbeat and violent for me(Which is somewhat ironic, because i liked LTK). I know that's what most movies today are like, but I'm not a big fan of it. Also, i don't think the reboot was really that necessary, but i can't do anything about that.

I agree with you Dr. Metz, I have a similar cynicism of his Bond films but not Craig himself,

Hopefully with Bond 23 they get it all right. A 'bird with a wing down' Bond girl (who doesn't handle a gun, or try to be a shallow poster girl for Bab's idea of 21st Century feminism), very few action sequences, a smoking chauvinist Bond, a taut, witty script, Dench's M scenes kept to an absolute minimum with a fitting send-off, a new composer providing a purely orchestral score (making us cheer that the days of generic-techno-Arnold are finally gone), an older, more imposing, erudite, and menacing villain, spine-chilling henchmen, and countless elements craftily lifted from Fleming. Craig finally in his own element, chewing up the scenery in every scene.

But sadly, I have my doubts.

[jaguar007]

I agree with you Dr. Metz, I have a similar cynicism of his Bond films but not Craig himself,

Hopefully with Bond 23 they get it all right. A 'bird with a wing down' Bond girl (who doesn't handle a gun, or try to be a shallow poster girl for Bab's idea of 21st Century feminism), very few action sequences, a smoking chauvinist Bond, a taut, witty script, Dench's M scenes kept to an absolute minimum with a fitting send-off, a new composer providing a purely orchestral score (making us cheer that the days of generic-techno-Arnold are finally gone), an older, more imposing, erudite, and menacing villain, spine-chilling henchmen, and countless elements craftily lifted from Fleming. Craig finally in his own element, chewing up the scenery in every scene.

Actually I think Casino Royale fit your description of a Bond movie better than any of them have in several decades.

[Bryce (003)]

Well, we can get into the whole "should Bond smoke?" debate again, but I would like to see Bond have a vice/habit other than hard drinking. Watching CR the other day, I do like the hard stare he gives himself in the mirror after the stairwell fight and slugging the tumbler of scotch. That sort of "What the Hell am I into?" moment with something to numb the debate.

[jaguar007]

Watching CR the other day, I do like the hard stare he gives himself in the mirror after the stairwell fight and slugging the tumbler of scotch. That sort of "What the Hell am I into?" moment with something to numb the debate.

That scene perhaps makes me think of Bond in the books more than any other scene in the entire series.

[The Shark]

I agree with you Dr. Metz, I have a similar cynicism of his Bond films but not Craig himself,

Hopefully with Bond 23 they get it all right. A 'bird with a wing down' Bond girl (who doesn't handle a gun, or try to be a shallow poster girl for Bab's idea of 21st Century feminism), very few action sequences, a smoking chauvinist Bond, a taut, witty script, Dench's M scenes kept to an absolute minimum with a fitting send-off, a new composer providing a purely orchestral score (making us cheer that the days of generic-techno-Arnold are finally gone), an older, more imposing, erudite, and menacing villain, spine-chilling henchmen, and countless elements craftily lifted from Fleming. Craig finally in his own element, chewing up the scenery in every scene.

Actually I think Casino Royale fit your description of a Bond movie better than any of them have in several decades.

It was good, but it still goes against many of points. I'd argue TLD and GE ticked off most of my points fairly well.

- Too many and overly unnecessary action sequences
- Often stilted and stagy dialogue (most of those bits reek of Paul Haggis)
- Sinking House
- David Arnold still sabotaging the franchise from within
- Mediocre title song
- Bond written as an overly clean-cut, gym freak, PC friendly, Donky Kong action hero
- Weak villain
- Non-entity of a henchman
- Appallingly bad last 3rd.
- Dench still still spewing psycho-babble and giving Bond life lessons
- Card game interrupted by needless action

[Dr. Metz]

a new composer providing a purely orchestral score

I agree. It annoys me that Barry didn't do more scores for the movies. But i don't remember Arnold being that bad.

Edited by Dr. Metz, 12 April 2010 - 08:22 PM.