Nigel Posted March 8, 2007 VT Supporter Share Posted March 8, 2007 Bob HolnessI'll have a pee. Dont think he would have quite pulled it off on screen! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic_bouma Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Anyone else think Alan Hansen would make a good James Bond? I thought he would until i watched an MOTD episode and saw a shower of dandruff on his shoulder! Bond would never have allowed it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Designer1 Posted March 8, 2007 VT Supporter Share Posted March 8, 2007 Connery for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Condimentalist Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Roger Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Svenne Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Connery. Then Moore. Then it's anybodys pick really. But those two stand out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dean_allen Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 i voted for Connery as i have the collection and like him better than moore! However after seeing Casino Royale at the cinema i have to say that Daniel Craig looks like he could do some serious harm to an enemy. Bond was unique with connery and we lost that with everyone else, but i think that Craig will bring all that back with his charachter!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocafella Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 For me it is Roger Moore Why? He fills the role better than nr. 2 in Connery, and nr. 3 in Brosnan. Firstly because his charm and wit is superior to the others, but also because the movies he was in was better than the ones made in the 60's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davepez Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Roger Moore was a cheeseball!!!! Its Connery for me every time. I always thought Dalton played it close to the 'book' bond, and Brosnan was ok, people just remember him being better as he was in Goldeneye which was quality!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted March 8, 2007 Moderator Share Posted March 8, 2007 Brosnan wasn't bad. He was at least suave and charismatic which is part of Bond's charm I suppose. Went for Moore though (I suspect thefeet1980 disagreed with me in the coolest character thread ). I'll freely admit I'm not a Bond-series fan though anyway. Gimme Austin Powers any day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 I voted Dalton, if only to be different. Connery was very good, and I can't comment on Craig yet as I havent seen the film but he sounds like I Bond I'll enjoy seeing based on comments here. Lazenby was woeful, Roger Moore hilariously bad though he did seem to get the films that were competing with Star Wars... Moonraker anyone?:lol I liked Dalton's two films as I thought he was appropriately miserable. I haven't got anything really against Brosnan, he's just a bit too sleek really I guess, although Goldeneye is one of my favourite films. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam100 Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 connery or brosnan thoguht brosnan was very good in goldeneye can't remember many bond films that clearly tbh, bar goldeneye which i watched again recently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted March 8, 2007 VT Supporter Share Posted March 8, 2007 Basing it only on "official" (Eon) films. Hence no Niven etc.... Point of note - Niven gets a metion in the Fleming book "You only live twice" as the only man who treated Kissy Suzuki with respect whilst she was in Hollywood - hence she names her diving cormorant after him - nice touch. Craig definately represents Bond as Fleming intended - although Connery has the advantage of being Scottish...i do like Craig though. IINM, Fleming only started to refer to Bond's ethnic background after Connery came along. Brosnan still retains my vote for being a near-perfect synthesis of his predecessors. I'll wait until Craig's third film before there's enough of a sample to move him up. On the basis of Casino Royale, I'm placing him neck-and-neck with Dalton in 2nd place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avfc443 Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 I went for Moore but I would probably gone for Lazenby if he'd done more. Thought he did well in On her Majesty's secret service. I liked them all apart from dalton- I didn't hate him but he wasn't in the same league as the others (was more true to the book though). (500th Post) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paddy Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 I went for Luke's dad, best Bond by a distance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oaks Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Ican't believe that Brosnan has 4 votes. Lazenby did more for Bond in 1 film than Brosnan did in 4. Brosnan has the look of what bond should look like, but thats it. He wasn't even a good enough actor to pull Bond off. Dalton is way underrated outside Bond fans. Lazenby stared in what might be the best Bond film. Although he wasn't that good himself, On her majesty's secret service is the most underrated Bond film there is. Connery and Moore are still the Kings though for different reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Can't believe that anyone would vote for Moore. Hopelessly distant from the character in the books, comically untalented as an actor, and generally about as unsuited to the role as George Bush is to be a professor of moral philosophy. He has two expressions, face at rest and face with one eyebrow lifted. He has one pitch of voice. he came to prominence because he's tall, and has regular features which appeal to some in a matinee-idol way. Connery is the business, and Craig can outdo him if given the chance. Some of the others weren't bad, but Moore is the Doug Ellis to Connery's Randy Lerner; out of place, out of depth, out of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Can't believe that anyone would vote for Moore. Hopelessly distant from the character in the books, comically untalented as an actor, and generally about as unsuited to the role as George Bush is to be a professor of moral philosophy. He has two expressions, face at rest and face with one eyebrow lifted. He has one pitch of voice. he came to prominence because he's tall, and has regular features which appeal to some in a matinee-idol way. Connery is the business, and Craig can outdo him if given the chance. Some of the others weren't bad, but Moore is the Doug Ellis to Connery's Randy Lerner; out of place, out of depth, out of time. absolutely 100% spot on Peter. I am quite shocked by some of the posts here in support of Moore. he is nothing at all like the Bond Fleming created. He's a wooden comical cartoon version of him, who got the part thanks to his outings as Simon Templar in the Saint. Moore was not helped by the increasingly comical scripts for his Bond films, but i've yet to see Moore excel in a serious acting role, and the Bond role is (or at least should be) a serious role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant(aka_eddy) Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Can't believe that anyone would vote for Moore. Hopelessly distant from the character in the books, comically untalented as an actor, and generally about as unsuited to the role as George Bush is to be a professor of moral philosophy. He has two expressions, face at rest and face with one eyebrow lifted. He has one pitch of voice. he came to prominence because he's tall, and has regular features which appeal to some in a matinee-idol way. Connery is the business, and Craig can outdo him if given the chance. Some of the others weren't bad, but Moore is the Doug Ellis to Connery's Randy Lerner; out of place, out of depth, out of time. absolutely 100% spot on Peter. I am quite shocked by some of the posts here in support of Moore. he is nothing at all like the Bond Fleming created. He's a wooden comical cartoon version of him, who got the part thanks to his outings as Simon Templar in the Saint. Moore was not helped by the increasingly comical scripts for his Bond films, but i've yet to see Moore excel in a serious acting role, and the Bond role is (or at least should be) a serious role. Agree with you both. Daniel Craig has the capability to become the best overall but at the moment he is certainly reviving the franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted March 9, 2007 VT Supporter Share Posted March 9, 2007 The casting people certainly deserve an honourable mention for giving Craig the role as from an outside view he not Bond.....but it just worked!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LancsVillan Posted March 9, 2007 Moderator Share Posted March 9, 2007 Can't believe that anyone would vote for Moore. Hopelessly distant from the character in the books, comically untalented as an actor, and generally about as unsuited to the role as George Bush is to be a professor of moral philosophy. He has two expressions, face at rest and face with one eyebrow lifted. He has one pitch of voice. he came to prominence because he's tall, and has regular features which appeal to some in a matinee-idol way. Connery is the business, and Craig can outdo him if given the chance. Some of the others weren't bad, but Moore is the Doug Ellis to Connery's Randy Lerner; out of place, out of depth, out of time. What a brilliant summary, cheers Peter. I've seen all of the Bond films and have them all somewhere upstairs on DVD and Video and I'm looking forward to the next one more than I have done before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts