27 replies to this topic

[ChandlerBing]

I guess I have felt really bad about the stuff I have written in the past about Timothy Dalton, because I've really been going back and dusting off those widescreen VHS copies of both The Living Daylights and License To Kill, wanting to go back and maybe see if my opinions might have changed. Interestingly enough, I liked both films when they were released. I was all of 11 yrs old seeing Daylights in theaters. I wasn't quite 13 when I saw License To Kill twice in theaters. But as the years went on, I just didn't go for them anymore. I felt, after seeing Goldeneye, that Pierce did a much better job of being Bond.
As they say, to know Timothy Dalton's Bond is to like him, or something like that. Dalton had come in right after the enormously successful Roger Moore era that split people into two camps. People who were Fleming afficiondos and really loved the first few Bond movies were horrified at what was being done with novels like Moonraker and The Man With The Golden Gun. Adding characters such as JW Pepper into the mix didn't help at all. These people were really chomping at the bit when Kevin McClory kept piping up that he had an alternative Bond he wanted to make. The Fleming crowd thought this could be good, much better than what we're getting.
To be fair, Roger had a lot of good, tough moments as Bond. Watchingf For Your Eyes Only again the other night, I could not help but be impressed with him there. The numerous Fleming influences there really almost made up for the raping and pillaging of Moonraker. Of course, Moore stayed on and finished with A View To A Kill, but what can you do?
Timothy Dalton was a welcome breath of fresh air for many fans because, for one, he did many of his own stunts. Not all of them, mind you. He's not Jackie Chan. But you couldn't tell in many scenes that it was a stunt double, which didn't take you out of the story. Roger's blond and red headed doubles often took me out of the movie, and didn't work. My problem with Dalton here is that he just wasn't physically impressive as Bond. You can say he was making Bond more human as opposed to the Connery/Lazenby Bond who knocked people across the room with one punch. I like the Bond who gave as good as he got.
It was quite painful for me to watch Dalton doing the humor. He couldn't quite do it. You can, again, maybe blame it on the scripts, and that he's only as good as the material he's got, but again, I thought he was lacking here. Maybe he was just trying really hard to be a big, HUGE contrast to Moore's Bond, but it just didn't work. Yes, Fleming's Bond wasn't humorous, but I like a bit of humor with my Bonds. As much as I love Brosnan's Bond, it gets a little overboard sometimes.
I feel that Bond should be someone men want to be, and women want to be with. Connery had that, and then some. Lazenby had it to some extent. Roger was a pretty boy with that raised eyebrow that always seemed to get him into the sack. Pierce is nice, just ask People Magazine. Dalton never seemed to have that inate sexual charisma that let you believe he could screw anyone he wanted to. He was just Timothy Dalton, look at me, I'm a Shakespearean actor playing James Bond.
I tried here to give a fair and balanced viewpoint about Timothy Dalton. Being one of the more vocal Anti-Daltonites around, I thought I'd surprise you with this essay. I know a lot of you don't agree with me about Dalton, and that's fine. We're here to discuss and debate all things Bond. I just added my 2 cents.

[Daltonitus]

Well, with all that in mind, I hope we won't have to read another one of your silly little comment type replys

[Doubleshot]

I myself like Dalton to some extend, and agree with your two primary criticisms. I believe that Dalton lacked in creating an on-screen charisma and fell way behind when it came time to deliver the one-liners.

[rogermoore007]

Dalton was certainly a better than expected Bond--I think he should've done one or two more movies, but...along came Pierce...

[brendan007]

I think dalton was a great bond in TLD, but i cant forgive him for his perfomance in LTK. It is just totally unbond, he is playing a completely different character from wat we've seen for the previous 15 films. Whether its daltons fault or the producers i dont care, im blaming dalton for that film.

[_JW_]

*sighs*

The neverending LTK debate rages on...

[ChandlerBing]

I rented the LTK DVD from Netflix recently, and I'm sorry. The guy's just ugly as sin. When people saw that idiotic trailer, it's no wonder the opening weekend was even worse than the Living Daylights. Timothy Dalton's just not a handsome man, a la COnnery or Brosnan. Moore is a pretty boy, and Lazenby was, well, Lazenby. No, I'm not gay, guys can look at other guys and say hmm, why can't I look like him? Connery is also on record as saying his sexiest co-star was none other than Michael Caine.

[Daltonitus]

Well, I guess it's a matter of taste but i'd rather be a Dalton than a Connery.

As for the trailer, the one with the watch is briliant, the other one is pretty poo though

You have to remeber that Dalton wanted to play more Flemming than Cubby as far as bond went, so saying he is different to the last 15 films is precisely what he wanted - he achived his aim well, just because you don't like that aim doesn't make it bad.

[Felix_Leiter]

Here's my 2 cents. Everything is subjective. To say one Bond is better than the other makes no sense. I like Dalton, you don't. Let us move on.

[kevrichardson]

Dalton was fine as James Bond . His Tenure in the role was simply cut short by greed bean-counters in suits. Had Dalton count for at least GoldenEye we would have seen what happen to Connery by the time of Goldfinger . Every thing would have been just right.

[Daltonitus]

I think probably the reason I like GE so much is the Dalton way it's been written.

Brosnan plays a very good Dalton immitation in that film, splicing his own style of one liners into it that 'the people' seem to love so much. A really great film, but how much better/worse would a Dalton one have been....

[Mourning Becomes Electra]

Brosnan said he hadn't even watched a Dalton Bond film (too painful then) except for a piece of one he saw on an airplane when he was a captive audience, when he'd done GE. He wasn't "imitating" Dalton. He was playing Bond the way he said he was going to as far back as 1986 when he was interviewed about it. If he were to be imitating anyone it would be Connery. Oh and Dalton isnt the only Bond actor to read Fleming.

Brosnan's interpretation was what worked so well and made GE the success it was; that and U.S. audiences especially had wanted Brosnan as Bond for a very long time. GE had the promotional hook of Brosnan is "finally" Bond and the franchise and the media milked that for all it was worth and then some. They wouldn't have had the same hook with Dalton returning or the same kind of free publicity.

Bond films are not actor proof, audiences have their preferences and it shows in the box office, and the "people" spoke with their $$$'s. Yes it had better marketing and there was a 6 year layoff but that wouldn't fully account for a threefold increase in U.S. audience for GE. Many films are marketed heavily and bomb. Before GE was released many in the media were predicting it would bomb and the franchise was all but dead. Would Dalton's GE have done better than LTK, yes I think it would have. Would it have been nearly as successful as Brosnan's GE, I highly doubt it. Proof of Brosnan's poularity is that the B.O. has continued on about the same level or better over the next 3 when the novelty of him in the role would have worn off. No amount of marketing would continue to make people buy what they didn't want any more. (like what's happenned to other francshises)

And before anyone says all I'm talking about is $$$ and Dalton's GE would have been a better film regardless, I also think Brosnan's is the better interpretation and personification of the role.

[Daltonitus]

Hmm well I didn't mean it to read that Brosnan was simply copying Dalton, although it seems that's the way it does read....

What I meant was that the way GE was written was with Dalton in mind, then reshaped to Brosnan, who's personal style with the left-over 'Dalton' in the script mixed VERY well.

FWIW I think Brosnan came at the right time to the right role. As soon as I saw the 'you were expecting someone else', I knew it was gonna be cool. What happened to the follow ups....lol.

[Robinson]

Originally posted by ChandlerBing
My problem with Dalton here is that he just wasn't physically impressive as Bond.  You can say he was making Bond more human as opposed to the Connery/Lazenby Bond who knocked people across the room with one punch.  I like the Bond who gave as good as he got.

I dunno. Dalton gets props for bringing back the head butt.

Look, each actor has his strengths & weaknesses as Bond. Dalton was the antidote for the various acts of whimsy during Moore's tenure. However, the pendulum swung too far in the opposite direction. The Dalton/Bond was devoid of humor. Like Connery said of Dalton "he seemed to forgot how to have fun with this."

As for the Bond who gave as good as he got, that all depends on who's writing the script and who's coreographing the fight scenes. Pierce's fight w/ Sean Bean in GE was the best since FRWL, but can that be contributed to Pierce? That goes to Martin Campbell, making the decision that he wanted something as visceral as FRWL. Vic Armstrong plans it out, The actors and stuntpeople play it out and Terry Rawlings cuts it to suit Campbell's wishes.

Ultimately what did Dalton in is simply that he wasn't Pierce Brosnan. That's what the general public disliked about him then and that's what folks still dislike about him now.

[Daltonitus]

Yes, the whole world was ready for Brosnan and then he was 'revoked' by another contract....Dalton could have been the best bond ever and people would have still felt somewhat cheated.

I have to agree on the 006/007 fight in the dish room at the end of GE, that is really very realistic and impressive, it shows 2 highly trained killers going at it hand to hand in the way you would expect. That is my favourate Bond 'fist fight' ever.

[SeanValen00V]

Pierce Brosnan said himself he played the role cautious in Goldeneye, the best asset Brosnan had in GE, he looked like Bond, popular, and he didn't need to overdo anything, just underplay it. Pierce has said it has taken time to find his Bond, he's had many films to do it, what I respect about Dalton is, with just 2 films, he's nailed the part of a tough gritty agent, and I think LTK has humor moments that are darker and adult in tone, throwing the bad guy out of the plane, like giving Crest back his own men, thank you for that, the interplay with Bond and Sanchez in his casino office, Bond looking down on one of his men "I see what you mean" to one of Sanchez's men who looks like a idiot, I'm a problem eliminator, that stuff is adult oriented, and humor is subjective.


Everyone has a opinion of how they want a James Bond film, so there's not really a right or wrong, answer, let fans enjoy their favorites, life's too short.

[Daltonitus]

Yer, Daltons is a humour that you have to think like him to get in some ways.

Like the 'yes I got the message' in TLD.

[ChandlerBing]

Dalton and humor in the same sentence...well, there's a first time for everything.

[rogermoore007]

Originally posted by ChandlerBing
Dalton and humor in the same sentence...well, there's a first time for everything.

I agree--I didn't find Tim funny at all--and I retract my statment that Tim should've done more--I watched LTK and TLD recently and I just can't see Tim doing any more films--he did not have the physique, looks or humor, but still managed an "OK at best" job

[Daltonitus]

Oh look, another Dalton topic turning sour again...

[Robinson]

Originally posted by rogermoore007
I agree--I didn't find Tim funny at all--and I retract my statment that Tim should've done more--I watched LTK and TLD recently and I just can't see Tim doing any more films--he did not have the physique, looks or humor, but still managed an "OK at best" job

Dalton's physique was fine. He just wasn't in Connery or Lazenby shape. Neither was Moore and neither is Brosnan. That Brawniness just isn't there. Y'all act like he was Bob Hoskins or something.

I thought Dalton did the job. I just found the writing, casting and direction in LTK to be somewhat underwhelming. If those elements stayed the same, I couldn't picture the series continuing either.

Again, Dalton wan't Brosnan and that's the underlying issue here. Shoot, Brosnan wasn't Brosnan back then either.

[rogermoore007]

I still think Moore and Brosnan just look better--Tim was ugly--Brosnan recovered the series with Goldeneye after TLD and LTK which were not great but not the worst

[ChandlerBing]

It's not going sour at all. When someone comes on here and says how they would use the golden gun to kill Dalton, (like someone did on another board about Brosnan) then it will get sour. I don't harbor that kind of feeling towards Mr. Dalton. I am sure he's a stand up kind of guy. He's just not my idea of who James Bond should be.

[Robinson]

Originally posted by ChandlerBing
It's not going sour at all.  When someone comes on here and says how they would use the golden gun to kill Dalton, (like someone did on another board about Brosnan) then it will get sour.  I don't harbor that kind of feeling towards Mr. Dalton.  I am sure he's a stand up kind of guy.  He's just not my idea of who James Bond should be.

Which begs the most important question: Who or what is your idea of who James Bond should be? Considering that David Niven and James Mason were originally considered to play the secret agent, what exactly are you looking for?

[Daltonitus]

My idea of James Bond IS Dalton.
Connery is also a close Bond.
Even good old Lazenby isn't bad...
Roger is too funny, Brosnan too 'different' to the novels.

[ChandlerBing]

Someone with the ruthlessness of Jack Palance and the suaveness of Cary Grant.

[Jriv71]

I think what really hurt Dalton was the 6-year gap. (Duh.) I'm just saying, Brosnan came in at the right time, and he's great too. Dalton could have done 2 films after LTK, before Goldeneye, then left, and he'd have left with more respect than he gets now, because people would've seen how good he could be. I think he was great, if not funny. I'll sacrifice the humor for a true Fleming-esque Bond. I think the familiarity after 3 or 4 films would've really helped his rep alot.

D'you know what really hurt him in LTK? The hair. Take a look at those sideburns he's got goin' on in the casino scene, and others. Man, he would've looked better with Ace Ventura's hair. That being said, for me, 2 Dalton films is all too brief, like lightning in a bottle for me, since I am a huge fan of Dalton's.

[Robinson]

Originally posted by ChandlerBing
Someone with the ruthlessness of Jack Palance and the suaveness of Cary Grant.

Substitue Michael Caine in "Get Carter" for Jack Palance & you've got something.