Craig, Connery or ... Dalton? Vote now for the ultimate James Bond

OUTRAGE!

No Bob Holness, sure he was radio bond, but surely a radio story is just a movie for blind people.

Lazenby Fan Club.com

Vote early and vote often!

Dalton for me, as has been mentioned, probably closest to the original books, and The Living Daylights will always remain my personal favourite. Best theme tune, best car, best storyline imo. I generally tend to dismiss the Dalton haters as not really knowing what they are talking about.

After that it would have to be Connery, then Craig. I try to forget the Moore ever played Bond. Just so worng...

Missing in action...

...Barry Nelson in the 1954 version of Casino Royale and David Niven in the 1967 version of Casino Royale.

there can be only one

Contrary to popular belief, Bond is a Scotsman so there can be only one choice.

Where's the mighty Bob Holness?

On radio only, I grant you, but come on. Big up Bob Holness. He was the original.

I'd vote for him if only because, I'm told, when he didn't get the job for the film he said, 'So which c**t got it.'

Nice work Bob. Gone but not forgotten.

Hmmm

The recent Bond movies are the betters ones, IMHO. Gritty and animalisitc type Bond - the scene in Casino Royal when he's tied to the chair and being tickled with the rope can't exactly be compared with the laser beam closing in on his nads in Goldfinger, but shows how the characters have changed over the years along with expectation of the audience. Connery's Bond is the most agressive of the rest of the pack, but in comparison with Craig he's still cool, a measured quick thinking officer and deals with it as such. Craig's Bond is an ex-SAS hardnut who becomes a caged tiger. I've not read the books yet but JimmyPage above suggests this is what Bond should be.

I saw Roger Moore first cos that's the generation I'm from. Live and Let Die, For Your Eyes Only and Diamonds are forever were almost wiped from my memory when I watched Goldfinger and then Dr No and saw the cool viciousness of Connery.

I've always liked Connery but disliked Moore. As most Connery bond fans seem to do.

I was against the casting of Daniel Craig right up untilbI saw Casino Royale trailers and realised how much of a fantastic job he does.

Comparing across decades is difficult. But for me, I think Craig just takes top spot over Connery. He actually looks like someone tough enough for the stunts bond does.

I voted Brosnan though, because the films were a bit pants but as a Bond he was really good.

I voted for Moore

I grant that Connery was certainly the better actor, but to my mind James Bond is, first and formemost, an utter sleaze, a slimeball who worms his way into bed with every woman in the story - and IMO it was Moore who carried the "sleazebag" style off better. He really did come across as utter slime. Connery's suave, sophisticated Bond came off as seeming too "clean-cut" and genteel for what the character was supposed to be, which to my perception jarred with the "slipperiness" I expected from Bond.

As to Craig and Brosnan, they simply came off as common garden "action hero" types and while their performances were enjoyable, there was nothing to distinguish them from other action movies of the time, like Die Hard or the Bourne movies.

I don't think any of them are bad. Although there have been some pretty shocking films. I've not seen 'On Her Majesty's Secret Service' in 20-odd years, so can't remember if it was Lazenby's crap acting, or a rubbish script. The thing is he does really well at the end of the film, which suggests he can act, but my memory's not clear enough to say.

Roger Moore stayed on too long. Some of his early films are great. He was a harder character at the beginning. But by 'View to a Kill' he can't even run up a half flight of stairs, without getting out of breath. That was sad to see. But if you can dismiss those from polluting your mind, his earlier films are good.

I voted for Connery. If I'd seen Skyfall, and it was good, I might have changed to Craig. The problem is Question of Sport. Quantum of Solace' was a right old dog's breakfast, and detracted from the loveliness of 'Casino Royale'.

Connery was just so iconic. But also Bond was so amazing in the 60s. Almost nobody had been on a 747, in the 60s, so even airports were cool. And it was a new kind of film. I suspect you have to have been there to get the full effect (we're all a lot richer than we used to be back then). Once you've done 20 flights in a year on business, hotels and airports suddenly lose all their charm, and happy association with holidays...

Poor Dalton suffered from crap-film-itis. Although 'License to Kill' was OK. I liked him a lot. I was no fan of Brosnan, until his last film - but I'm not sure if that was the films, or him.

I was torn between Brosnan and Craig. I know the Brosnan stories were a bit rubbish, but I did enjoy them a lot more than the Moore/Connery/Dalton ones - So far the Craig ones have been good and I've enjoyed them, but in the end I went for the Brosnan ones....

Of course, since my BluRay boxset arrived this morning I might have to sit down and rewatch the lot in order just so that I get the enjoyment of them all over again! (Damn this being in work thing - I could be most of the way through Dr. No by now!)

I'd like to say it was a tough choice,

I find Moore completely enjoyable and like Lazenby's single appearance. And to be honest, most of the ones I find blah are because of really lousy scripts not the actors or the way they played the character.

But the truth is that when I get together with friends and the GM is snarking a character with an angel on one shoulder, It's not the devil on the other side it's Sean Connery. So he wins without even thinking about it.

Connery all the way

Lazenby was OK, Moore was too tongue-in-cheek, Dalton was let down by the scripts, Brosnan was pretty good. Craig is good, but the character isn't James Bond to me; the films are more generic action movies. And he never gets out of breath!

pffft - Moore carried off the

'perfect english gent' type cool as shown by John Steed and Captan Picard (technically a frenchman, but he's played as English as they come by patrick stewart) - never blows his cool, always perfectly mannered - even when someone's trying to kill him (seen in The Spy Who Loved Me, when Caroline Munro's helicopter pilot is doing her best to machine gun him.) plus he could show a hard edge when he needed to (such as when he gave Locque's car a helping hand - or foot - off the cliff in For Your Eyes Only.)

Dalton second as he really did play the part as it was written - I read a good piece (I forget where unfortunately) on a 007 website a while ago where the case was made for his performance in Licence To Kill being the template for Craig's portrayal.

Brosnan a very close third - although his last outing broke any last bounds of believability.

I rate the Bonds on how many great films each had

Connery was definitely the best actor of the early years, and arguably ever. But until Diamonds are Forever he never seemed comfortable with one-liners and quips. He was also less of a stereotype bond. In general his movies have less vodka martinis, etc. The killer for me though is that whilst From Russia with Love makes it into my all-time top 5, no other Connery film makes it into the top 10. Thunderball was unfortunately turgid due to the lengthy underwater sequences with no dialogue. And despite the largest set of all time (at the time), and a truly brilliant opening, You Only Live Twice was also pretty turgid. The whole Japanese island thing before the volcano takes forever without giving us any useful plot advancement. OHMSS is just dreadful. Lazenby is never a credible Bond. Roger Moore is interesting. He has some of the worst abominations for example Moonraker or The Man with the Golden Gun. But, he has at least 3 outstanding movies. Two of which are in my top 5. Spy who Loved Me, For Your Eyes Only and Live and Let Die are all brilliant. Dalton was also intriguing. The political correctness of that era was clearly a problem, But Living Daylights was a good film. License to Kill has its moments as well. License to Kill is probably in my top 5, but only just.

Brosnan was very interesting. Goldeneye was without doubt one of the best Bond movies, easily in my top 5 and probably my number 2 all time Bond film. But then the films lost their edge. Had Brosnan had a second film even close to the quality of Goldeneye, he would have been my favourite Bond. Craig I have an issue with. Whilst as an actor I'm finding him compelling, the films are not holding up. I really enjoyed Casino Royale at the cinema, but it didn't really survive a second watching. Quantum of Solace was pretty bad.

So for me, by the fact that he has 2 films in my top 5, Moore is my favourite Bond. Brosnan then comes in next, followed by Connery and Dalton. Craig is second to last, and Lazenby is dreadful. It would be easy for Craig to shoot up the list a little if one of his next films is really good.

It is still Connery for me, despite the political incorrectness of the films. Most of the later Bonds have had to suffer from pretty naff scripts padded out with special effects and big fight/chase scenes. The results are neither memorable nor impressive.

Dalton made quite a good fist of his two outings. Brosnan was too smooth. Moore was far too smooth. Lazenby was not bad but struggled with a really poor script and a leading lady who couldn't stand him (is it really true she ate raw onions before every love scene?). Craig comes second for Casino Royale, but Quantum of Solice is so forgettable that the only thing about it I can remember is that I have seen it.

Well, how about the forgotten bond?

Which would be Barry Nelson.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Nelson

The first ever James (Jimmy) Bond and not even on the list.

Best Bond

Connery, after him, I'm split on Brosnan and Craig... past that... meh