Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I haven't visited the Bond forum for a couple of months and I was quite surprised to see all the arguments concerning Brosnan and Craig.
I happen to like both of them but I would say that Daniel Craig is the better actor and a great Bond.
I thought I would make a poll and put the debate to bed.

I have nothing against either of them, but if I were to pick one based on their acting I would have to go with DC.

Pierce Brosnan is a far better actor and Bond than Craig will ever be.

Brosnan every day of the week.

I vote for Daniel Craig as I think he has been outstanding since he started in the role.

Brosnan

Craig isn't a better actor at all, imo. Have you seen Brosnan's other films?

Pierce.

Brosnan plays a better Bond, imo.

Brosnan is better at acting.

Craig is better at action.

Craig is a far better Bond than Brosnan.

Originally posted by Mindset
Brosnan

Craig isn't a better actor at all, imo. Have you seen Brosnan's other films?

You are so right. Craig is not a good actor.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Brosnan plays a better Bond, imo.

Glad to see there are people who agree with me!!

IMO they both have their goods and bads.

Brosnan is better in all aspects.

Looks is subjective. Though Brosnan is more good-looking, imo.

Brosnan any day i also like timothy dalton

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
Brosnan is better in all aspects.



You are so right.

Originally posted by Darth Martin
Craig is a far better Bond than Brosnan.

so very true.amen to that.AND a better actor as well.Craig any day of the year and it would actually be Craig that is better in all aspects.Except looks of course.Brosnan gots him beat in THAT catagory.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
so very true.amen to that.AND a better actor as well.Craig any day of the year and it would actually be Craig that is better in all aspects.Except looks of course.Brosnan gots him beat in THAT catagory.

If you honestly think that Craig is a better actor then I am not sure you should really be watching films.

Craig of course. Better Bond and closer to how Bond was in the original books.

Brosnan is nothing special in the acting department, same for Craig; both are not bad actors, but they are nothing brilliant either.

Originally posted by MildPossession
Craig of course. Better Bond and closer to how Bond was in the original books.

Brosnan is nothing special in the acting department, same for Craig; both are not bad actors, but they are nothing brilliant either.

Dalton was the closet to the Bond of the books.

Originally posted by 003
If you honestly think that Craig is a better actor then I am not sure you should really be watching films.

thats because the truth hurts you that he is.you blatantly ignore evidence when presented to you that there wasnt a huge uproar over Brosnan being replayed. since you ignore facts like that link I provided you,its time to add one more troll to my ignore list.

I know, didn't say he wasn't. Dalton is my favourite Bond after Craig.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
thats because the truth hurts you that he is.you blatantly ignore evidence when presented to you that there wasnt a huge uproar over Brosnan being replayed. since you ignore facts like that link I provided you,its time to add one more troll to my ignore list.

what evidence? seriously.


re: brosnan.

brosnan has more range as an actor. that's been shown in the crazy amount of roles he's had that he's had to adapt to.

he's also 15 years older than Craig, and could never do the stunts Craig did in CR.

if people think craig is a better bond, then fine, but to say brosnan is a bad one when goldeneye did wonders for the franchise is ridiculous.

Mr Parker is always like that....

Originally posted by -Pr-
what evidence? seriously.


re: brosnan.

brosnan has more range as an actor. that's been shown in the crazy amount of roles he's had that he's had to adapt to.

he's also 15 years older than Craig, and could never do the stunts Craig did in CR.

if people think craig is a better bond, then fine, but to say brosnan is a bad one when goldeneye did wonders for the franchise is ridiculous.

I am glad to see that there is someone on here talking some sense. GoldenEye rejuvenated the franchise after such a long lay-off and will always bee one of the bet films in the franchise.

I would have to say that Brosnan is better as his acting range is far greater than that of Daniel Craig.

Originally posted by -Pr-
what evidence? seriously.


re: brosnan.

brosnan has more range as an actor. that's been shown in the crazy amount of roles he's had that he's had to adapt to.

he's also 15 years older than Craig, and could never do the stunts Craig did in CR.

if people think craig is a better bond, then fine, but to say brosnan is a bad one when goldeneye did wonders for the franchise is ridiculous.

are you forgetting that the Reason they gave Brosnan for not bringing him back as Bond was they said he was too old? that was complete B.S.They were just trying to keep from hurting his feelings that he was doing a bad job as Bond.Roger Moore was FAR older than Brosnan was when he decided to hang it up as Bond and go out on his own terms and Connery was a geezer when they brought him back as Bond in Never Say Never Again.Even with his toupee on you could see he looked far older than Brosnan did when Brosnan thanfully was told to leave as Bond.

Here is that link that proves this guy talks shit that fans were not outraged like he claims them to be when Craig took over.


some people only see what they want to see though so i doubt he ever read it.

why dont you ask HIM where HIS evidence is that Craig couldnt act to save his life and is a horrible actor and all that B.S crap he keeps sprouting off just cause he hates it that Craig replaced Brosnan?

the evidence is right here and black and white that most Bond fans contrary to what he keeps falsey rambling on that they were outraged about Brosnan leaving is pure B.S,

http://www.cinematical.com

Like the link so accurately says,there WASN'T a huge outcry of opposition from most Bond fans when Brosnan left and craig took over. that is a non biased magazine that is reporting that.

Im not the only that has noticed this guy is trolling either..

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f65/t534842.html

as you can see from how he replies to everybody,he attacks everybodys opinions.Telling me I dont know nothing at all about acting if I like Craig as an actor. He also shows he is clueless in everything he mentions including everything he says about Brosan, in the fact here he is saying that I like Wright as an actor when I NEVER said I liked Wright. I dont even know who Wright is as a a matter of fact. evidence this guy makes things up.

like alpha said so well,he is just posting to get a rise out of people.

Originally posted by -Pr-
what evidence? seriously.


re: brosnan.

brosnan has more range as an actor. that's been shown in the crazy amount of roles he's had that he's had to adapt to.

he's also 15 years older than Craig, and could never do the stunts Craig did in CR.

if people think craig is a better bond, then fine, but to say brosnan is a bad one when goldeneye did wonders for the franchise is ridiculous.

weak argument. Goldeneye had such an amazing script to it,of course it made Bond fans love that movie.Heck it made even Brosnan haters such as myself love the movie because of that. Im only going by what I have seen of everything that I have ever seen Brosnan do.I remember him in Remingten Steel because my parents used to watch the show so I saw a few episodes of it and he was just HORRIBLE in that show. When I saw him as Bond in all the Bond movies,nothing changed,same old Brosnan.horrible acting still.

For instance in Goldeneye since you mention that movie,I have seen that one quite a few times.would have seen it even more by now if even Craig or Dalton was in it.He says to that girl in bed-No more foreplay. That line SHOULD be funny but because of Brosnan's weak delivery,its NOT!!! Moore and Connery would have had me rolling in the chair.same as Craig and Dalton Im sure. His acting as Bond doesnt even come close to those guys.


Brosnan may have been good in other movies,but as Bond he was bad.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
weak argument. Goldeneye had such an amazing script to it,of course it made Bond fans love that movie.Heck it made even Brosnan haters such as myself love the movie because of that. Im only going by what I have seen of everything that I have ever seen Brosnan do.I remember him in Remingten Steel because my parents used to watch the show so I saw a few episodes of it and he was just HORRIBLE in that show. When I saw him as Bond in all the Bond movies,nothing changed,same old Brosnan.horrible acting still.

For instance in Goldeneye since you mention that movie,I have seen that one quite a few times.would have seen it even more by now if even Craig or Dalton was in it.He says to that girl in bed-No more foreplay. That line SHOULD be funny but because of Brosnan's weak delivery,its NOT!!! Moore and Connery would have had me rolling in the chair.same as Craig and Dalton Im sure. His acting as Bond doesnt even come close to those guys.


Brosnan may have been good in other movies,but as Bond he was bad.

no weaker than your rant.

a great script isn't shit without actors to put it in to effect. the fact that you say the script is what made the movie just proves you hate brosnan.

brosnan had charm as bond. the way you can't see that amazes me...

Originally posted by -Pr-
no weaker than your rant.

a great script isn't shit without actors to put it in to effect. the fact that you say the script is what made the movie just proves you hate brosnan.

brosnan had charm as bond. the way you can't see that amazes me...

totally wrong.I have seen many films were a great script overcame a horrible actor,he had a good supporting cast around him and great special effects and a good story.as always,you ignore points brought up about how his line deliverys are horrible.again as I just proved,other people saw it on that thread that he cant stand to see Brosnan criticized.you can ignore it all you want,but the facts are right there and black and white on that thread that he just posts to get a rise out of people.Im not going to take the bait anymore.

again the FACTS are most Bond fans did not care when Brosnan left as that link clearly proves.you can choose to ignore it like he does.I dont care because its right there in black and white.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
totally wrong.I have seen many films were a great script overcame a horrible actor,he had a good supporting cast around him and great special effects and a good story.as always,you ignore points brought up about how his line deliverys are horrible.again as I just proved,other people saw it on that thread that he cant stand to see Brosnan criticized.you can ignore it all you want,but the facts are right there and black and white on that thread that he just posts to get a rise out of people.Im not going to take the bait anymore.

again the FACTS are most Bond fans did not care when Brosnan left as that link clearly proves.you can choose to ignore it like he does.I dont care because its right there in black and white.

yes, attack me while claiming that your opinions are "facts".

not working.

oh and it doesnt look like I posted the right link of that non biased news source that proves most Bond fans did not care when Brosnan was FORCED out. I love how you DODGED those points also I gave earlier the B.S reason they gave Brosnan for not wanting him back of being too old for the part which again was B.S. in the fact Moore was older than he was and Connery looked a lot older than Brosnan when HE was brought back which is proof they were tired of Brosnan.

again here is the right link that talks about the truth that most Brosnan fans did not care when he was let go below.

for some reason,the one i provided before wont go to the article on Brosnan so here is the link to that thread where I posted before.its in my second to late post on that page.all there in black and white

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=528426&pagenumber=4

right there saying there wasnt a huge fan opposition or outcry to him being replaced.the truth hurts him though and he ignored it.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
oh and it doesnt look like I posted the right link of that non biased news source that proves most Bond fans did not care when Brosnan was FORCED out. I love how you DODGED those points also I gave earlier the B.S reason they gave Brosnan for not wanting him back of being too old for the part which again was B.S. in the fact Moore was older than he was and Connery looked a lot older than Brosnan when HE was brought back which is proof they were tired of Brosnan.

again here is the right link that talks about the truth that most Brosnan fans did not care when he was let go below.

http://www.cinematical.com/2010/06/...mes-bond-again/

FACT: Brosnan was critically acclaimed as Bond in Goldeneye.

FACT: The movie was incredibly successful.

If you had a point that wasn't filled with unrestrained, unnatural hatred, then maybe i would reply.

FACT- you CANT cant get around,there wasnt a huge outcry of fan opposition to Craig replacing Brosnan as Bond.those were not my words those were from a non biased magazine.period,end of story.I know Im done.Like I said,its all there in black in white in that link.

Brosnan was fine as Bond, just after Goldeneye he was given pretty mediocre films to work with and probably one of the worse in the series, Die Another Day.

Thats exactly how I would put it below as far as the Bond actors go.

Darth Martin
Senior Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location:


I wouldn't know if Brosnan is a good actor or not because I'm not too familiar with him outside of the four Bond films he's done. However, he is the worst 007 for me. It's not that he's horrible, it's just that the other 5 are better than him......and he's not all that close.

Originally posted by -Pr-
FACT: Brosnan was critically acclaimed as Bond in Goldeneye.

FACT: The movie was incredibly successful.

If you had a point that wasn't filled with unrestrained, unnatural hatred, then maybe i would reply.

You won't win against this guy Parker. it seems he cannot see reason.

Pierce Brosnan was a far better Bond than Daniel Craig. As far as I am concerned Craig is too bland for the role and he doesn't have the skill to pull the character off.

craig sucks.

he has NO charisma or charm at all. hes not attractive in the least

Originally posted by Mr Parker
FACT- you CANT cant get around,there wasnt a huge outcry of fan opposition to Craig replacing Brosnan as Bond.those were not my words those were from a non biased magazine.period,end of story.I know Im done.Like I said,its all there in black in white in that link.

the lack of outcry was because die another day was a pile of shit, and brosnan was too old to do another one.

just because you try to twist it in to something else doesn't make it so.

Originally posted by AthenasTrgrFngr
craig sucks.

he has NO charisma or charm at all. hes not attractive in the least

agreed about him not being attractive.Thats why neither Craig or Brosnan have been very good replacements as Bond like Dalton was.Dalton had the looks and good acting to go along with it. Craig has very good acting skills but doesnt fit the part.Brosnan looked the part but was horrible at delivering lines.Without Brosnans good looks,he wouldnt have charm or charisma.

Craig easily by miles.Brosnan wasn't a good James Bond at all.I havent seen him in any other movies that I can remember but from what I have seen of him as James Bond, his acting is terrible.He doesnt even come close to being as good as the others.

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it, but el oh el.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
are you forgetting that the Reason they gave Brosnan for not bringing him back as Bond was they said he was too old? that was complete B.S.They were just trying to keep from hurting his feelings that he was doing a bad job


Just because you think that it does not make it true. In fact MGM wanted Brosnan to stay on and that is a FACT!!

Parker, I'm giving you a warning for trolling. The subject of the thread is not 'look at 003, nobody likes him!' so I fail to see why it is necessary for you to rag on him. If you can't hold a normal, civil discussion, I suggest that you put 003 on Ignore so that you aren't tempted to bash him as you have been relentlessly doing.

Brosnan. Definitely. No contest.

Brosnan sucked after Golden Eye.

Originally posted by The Nuul
Brosnan sucked after Golden Eye. And Craig sucked after Casino Royale. Goldeneye was better than Casino Royale. All this means: Brosnan > Craig.

(I also thought that Tomorrow Never Dies was pretty good.)

Craig may be closer the Ian Fleming's Bond... but I didn't grow up with Ian Fleming's Bond.

Just rewatched Casino Royale - Craig is better in that than Brosnan was in any of his Bond films.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
Just rewatched Casino Royale - Craig is better in that than Brosnan was in any of his Bond films.

I think this is the first time we have ever agreed on anything. Except for the Nolan Batman films of course.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
Just rewatched Casino Royale - Craig is better in that than Brosnan was in any of his Bond films.

Yup.

Hope Craig stays on for at least 3-4 more films.

Originally posted by Robtard
Yup.

Hope Craig stays on for at least 3-4 more films.

Craig is dreadful and hopefully the producers will wake up and get rid.

Are you still going on and on about that...

Craig is better. Brosnan was at his best in Goldeneye, but, meh.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Craig is better. Brosnan was at his best in Goldeneye, but, meh.

Damn Im freaking out.This is the first time we have ever agreed on anything about any movie as well. btw,you forgot to put in your vote.

Originally posted by MildPossession
Are you still going on and on about that...

sure looks that way doesnt it?

Craig is a better physical Bond, more suited to the action stuff. He lacks the swagger of Brosnan, though, imo. And the charm.

Craig is an emotionless robot who should not even have an acting career.

And you are talking out of your arse once again. He is hardly a BAD actor.

Originally posted by MildPossession
And you are talking out of your arse once again. He is hardly a BAD actor.

The man is a terrible actor and if you stopped drooling over him for a second you would see that.

If you think he is a terrible actor then you are an idiot, the only reason you are calling him a terrible actor is because you are still in a silly mood over him getting the role of Bond. You need to really get over it...

You silly Craig haters are going to have to put up with him in yet another Bond film, the film is back on track now with MGM, filming starting next Summer or early Autumn apparently.

Originally posted by MildPossession
You silly Craig haters are going to have to put up with him in yet another Bond film, the film is back on track now with MGM, filming starting next Summer or early Autumn apparently.

haters? plural?

That was towards all people who thought or still think Craig is a rubbish Bond.

Originally posted by MildPossession
If you think he is a terrible actor then you are an idiot, the only reason you are calling him a terrible actor is because you are still in a silly mood over him getting the role of Bond. You need to really get over it...

If you think someone who shows no emotion and has only one facial expression is a good actor than you the idiot.

I like both actors in the role, but if I had to choose I would just go for Brosnan.

I am a big fan of both, but I think that Brosnan just shades it for me. Hopefully we will get to see more of Craig with news that the next film is back on track.

Nope, you are the one showing yourself up on this board with your silly agenda against one actor. If you think that about his acting, you were clearly not watching these films properly.

Originally posted by MildPossession
Nope, you are the one showing yourself up on this board with your silly agenda against one actor. If you think that about his acting, you were clearly not watching these films properly.

I have watched the films properly and all of his other films and I am telling you that the guy is a bad actor and if you can't see that then I feel for you.

Would you two love birds get a room already!

Originally posted by 003
I have watched the films properly and all of his other films and I am telling you that the guy is a bad actor and if you can't see that then I feel for you.

Daniel Craig is far from being a bad actor. I have liked him everything he has been in and I am more than happy with him in the role of Bond.

Craig isn't a bad actor, but by the same token I don't think he's a great actor either.

he's good enough to fit in to the role of a just starting, emotionally crippled bond, though. i really enjoyed casino royale, and i don't blame him for QOS being not that great.

irl, though, the guy doesn't seem to have a whole load of charisma. some of his interviews put me off big time. that doesn't impact his movie roles that i can see, though.

Oh no, he certainly isn't a great actor, agree with you on that, but he is certainly not a bad actor like some deluded people seem to think.



Urgh, no thank you!

Originally posted by MildPossession
If you think he is a terrible actor then you are an idiot, the only reason you are calling him a terrible actor is because you are still in a silly mood over him getting the role of Bond. You need to really get over it...

well said,you hit the nail right on the head.

Originally posted by MildPossession
You silly Craig haters are going to have to put up with him in yet another Bond film, the film is back on track now with MGM, filming starting next Summer or early Autumn apparently.

Looks like its time for them to throw some more tantrems and cry.

Originally posted by MildPossession
Oh no, he certainly isn't a great actor, agree with you on that, but he is certainly not a bad actor like some deluded people seem to think.



Urgh, no thank you!

There is nothing deluded about it. Craig is a shockingly bad actor and you will just have to accept it.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
well said,you hit the nail right on the head.

Do you do anything but troll?

I thought he would make a good Bond when I saw him in Layer Cake, enjoyed watching him in that film.




Yes of course he is shockingly bad at acting... ZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Originally posted by MildPossession
I thought he would make a good Bond when I saw him in Layer Cake, enjoyed watching him in that film.




Yes of course he is shockingly bad at acting... ZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

yeah we know that Brosnan is a shockingly bad at acting,thats old news.

Parker and 003, if you guys don't quit it the mods are most likely going to come in here and give you two a talking to. I don't think anybody wants that.

Originally posted by MildPossession
I thought he would make a good Bond when I saw him in Layer Cake, enjoyed watching him in that film.




Yes of course he is shockingly bad at acting... ZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Craig is a shockingly bad actor. The guy gives a new definition to the term wooden.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
yeah we know that Brosnan is a shockingly bad at acting,thats old news.

You are a sad act Parker.

Brosnan easily. Of course all fall short of Connery

Originally posted by MildPossession
I thought he would make a good Bond when I saw him in Layer Cake, enjoyed watching him in that film.


I totally agree with you. I was really excited when he was given the part and I remain so now.

Originally posted by belladolce
Craig. Definitely. No contest. Fixed.

His two films dwarf Brosnan's four.

I like both but for me Daniel Craig has been like a breath of fresh air so he gets my vote.

Brosnan, easily at least in my opinion.

I just hate Daniel Craig as Bond.

I guess everyone is gonna have their favourite Bond. To me When Brosnan first came on the scene I felt he combined some of what made both Sean and Roger great Bonds and added a little something to the role himself. Roger had his trademark arching of the eye brows, Brosnan had the loosening of the tie. They gave the role their personal touches, touches which are, now associated with Bond.

What makes a great Bond movie are memorable moments that stand the test of time. Sean's, Roger's and Pierce's Bond movies have them in spades. Movies like Golden eye,Spy who loved me,You only live twice have iconic moments that we will remember decades from there release. From little Nelly, The submarine Lotus, to the bungee jump scene intro or the tank chase. Those movies are classics.

The new Bond movies are action packed but nothing stands out to me thus far, from the last 3 films as iconic nor can I see them in the next 10/20 years from now in the greatest Bond moments montages.

As this is about who people consider to be a better Bond out of Craig and Brosnan I would have to say, for me it's Brosnan all the way. I grew watching Roger Moore who was my favourite, Brosnan always reminded me of a cross between Sean and Roger and was perfectly cast for the role. When Craig was cast they wanted to take Bond in a new direction, a re-imagining if you will, which means Craig does not have the traditional Bond look. He has been revamped to attract a new audience, made to be more physical, etc. I think Craig is a good action star but I don't like him in the role of Bond. I don't see the sophistication or class in his portrayal of Bond that is associated with the name. I see little difference in Craig's role as Bond than I do in his role in Layer Cake or Cowboys and Aliens. Craig has a rough thuggish look that wouldn't seem out of place in a Guy Richie east London based movie.

I say this to say that I don't see Craig as being synonymous with Bond but whenever I see Roger, Sean and Pierce I see Bond in them because they exude class and the ingredients of a classic Bond even when they are off set. They don't have to act or try to be Bond that is why they were a perfect fit for the role. Brosnan has been in around 50 movies and he only made 4 Bond movies yet he is mostly associated with that role, even when seen in movies that came out much sooner. When I see Craig I don't say it's Bond I say it's Craig and he's done 3 movies just one less than Brosnan. I saw Brosnan and Bond as being synonymous by his third movie.

I prefer Brosnan, but Craig is solid.

I've just been watching all the Bond movies in a row with my kids, and to ben honest I was surprised how well Connery still holds up. He has that interesting combination of being both charming AND a complete bastard. A good combo for the Bond character.
Moore was all charm and ONLY charm, he was hardly a menacing character at all (and to be frank I find most of the Moore movies quite boring (exception: For Your Eyes Only), nothing really happens and it's never really dangerous.

For me the problem with Brosnan (although I do like him a lot better than Moore) is that he IS a combination of Connery and Moore. And it makes me wonder what he is then? Good performances all around, but undetermined. Even the filmmakers seem at loss what these movies are: upgraded movies from the 70s or 80s? Trying to be something new or not, trying to keep all the elements that made all the previous Bonds successful?
Even the titles reflect that non-descriptive nature of the Brosnan movies. Goldeneye was okay but after that: Tomorrow never dies, The World is not Enough, Die Another day???? What does that mean? I mean, the title doesn't help at all to remember what they were about.

For me with Craig entered a new era of Bond, fit to the times in which they are made and yes, he brought back the bastard that Connery once put in his Bond. Something I had missed for a long time, something Brosnan was not able or allowed to put in it. He was suave, not very dangerous... Craig is mean and a very credible character, one that gets damaged and not just walks out with a few hairs out of place. And I like that.
My fav for sure: Casino Royale, beats Skyfall if you ask me. Simply because the film makers made it very hard on themselves with that long poker game and came out triumphantly.

So my favs are both Connery and Craig, followed by Brosnan.

No comment on Dalton?

Dalton had better songs.

I am a huge fan of both actors but I have voted for Craig because I think he has done a great job of bringing Bond into the 21st century.

Originally posted by -Pr-
No comment on Dalton?

I kinda liked License to Kill, because of the effort to make it mean and less techy... I think that's the prelude tot Casino Royale.

But Dalton is a better villain than a hero, I think. He lacks the charisma to be Bond, I think. His acting is fine BTW.

Originally posted by queeq
I kinda liked License to Kill, because of the effort to make it mean and less techy... I think that's the prelude tot Casino Royale.

But Dalton is a better villain than a hero, I think. He lacks the charisma to be Bond, I think. His acting is fine BTW.


License to Kill is a great film because Dalton is the only actor so far to portray Bond in the way in which he was written.

Originally posted by queeq
I kinda liked License to Kill, because of the effort to make it mean and less techy... I think that's the prelude tot Casino Royale.

But Dalton is a better villain than a hero, I think. He lacks the charisma to be Bond, I think. His acting is fine BTW.

I suppose I can agree with that.

Well good.

Check out Dalton as villain in Rocketeer and Hot Fuzz... very nice.

He was pretty awesome in those, I agree.

Yup, he did have it... Not all of his choices for roles turned out well.

Yeah, sadly. He was good in Chuck too, I thought.

Craig is better than everyone.

At least, Craig is the best reinvention of Bond since Connery.

Craig is the best, second Connery

Originally posted by queeq
At least, Craig is the best reinvention of Bond since Connery.

while I agree that Craig is way better by leaps and bounds than lame duck wooden Brosnan who couldnt act if his life depended on it,I think people are getting way too carried away here saying he is the best Bond since Connery or even saying he is the best Bond ever.He doesnt look the part at all is my only beef with Craig.

Asd I have said before in the past,Connery and Moore are the only true James Bond actors.All the others are just a bunch of phony wanna be imposters so the discussion on craig or Brosnan is really mute.

Originally posted by queeq
At least, Craig is the best reinvention of Bond since Connery.

He's the only real reinvention, imo. Dalton was a sort of reinvention, but I don't think he was different enough, or well executed enough, to really count.

Brosnan, Moore and whatsisface were very much in the Connery mould imo.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
while I agree that Craig is way better by leaps and bounds than lame duck wooden Brosnan who couldnt act if his life depended on it,I think people are getting way too carried away here saying he is the best Bond since Connery or even saying he is the best Bond ever.He doesnt look the part at all is my only beef with Craig.

Asd I have said before in the past,Connery and Moore are the only true James Bond actors.All the others are just a bunch of phony wanna be imposters so the discussion on craig or Brosnan is really mute.

lol. Watch more Brosnan.

Connery>Moore>Brosnan>Craig. The rest are forgetable.

I think by today's standards, Moore's a pretty boring Bond. He hardly does anything, except raise an eye brow.

Yes, most movies in that day are outdated but Casino Royal absolutely put me to sleep. I always got a laugh out of the older bond movies.

you are right

Originally posted by queeq
I think by today's standards, Moore's a pretty boring Bond. He hardly does anything, except raise an eye brow.

He isnt ANYWHERE near as boring as Brosnan.Not even close.He can at least act. Brosnans acting is so terrible, until the actions scenes get going,his bond movies are hard not to fall asleep in.

When he got cast as Bond,I hoped that he wouldnt be near as horrible as he was in that tv show Remington Steel i was forced to watch because my parents did,it came on right before a show i liked I remember so the last 15 minutes or so,i had to painfully sit through his dullness.

True to form though,to my fears,his acting as Bond was every bit as horrible as it was on Remington Steel.I thought same old Pierce.Nothing has changed.

Moore keeps it exciting with his sarcasm. and Craig come compared to Moore,same thing.while a much better actor than Brosnan,compared to Moore though,he's dull.


silent bomber over here on this thread,nailed it for me.Its cool to see someone else out there that thinks exactly as I do about the Bond actor cause thats exactly how I rank them as well below.I totally agree with him as well on his comments on Dalton.he shouldnt be ranked so low.He should easily be rated higher than both Brosnan and Craig.

Hmmmm

1. Roger Moore (I don't care if he's a bit campy, I find him more entertaining to watch than Sean Connery)

2. Sean Connery (very smooth, much better for fight scenes than Moore)

3. Timothy Dalton (Cool and serious)

4. Daniel Craig (I like him, does a good job)

5. Pierce Brosnan (a bit too much of a wimpy poseur to me)

6. George Lazenby (wet fish)

I don't get why so many are putting Dalton low, I always felt that Daniel Craig was kind of following in Dalton's shadow, they're very similar Bonds (see License to Kill)

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=556033&pagenumber=4

Originally posted by COG Veteran
Connery>Moore>Brosnan>Craig. The rest are forgetable.

I like your listing of Connery and Moore in first and second obviously.Good man.

I agree with you whole heartedly that they are the two best,the only thing I dont agree with you on obviously though is that after Connery and Moore,all the others are ALL forgettable.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
He isnt ANYWHERE near as boring as Brosnan.Not even close.He can at least act. Brosnans acting is so terrible, until the actions scenes get going,his bond movies are hard not to fall asleep in.

When he got cast as Bond,I hoped that he wouldnt be near as horrible as he was in that tv show Remington Steel i was forced to watch because my parents did,it came on right before a show i liked I remember so the last 15 minutes or so,i had to painfully sit through his dullness.

True to form though,to my fears,his acting as Bond was every bit as horrible as it was on Remington Steel.I thought same old Pierce.Nothing has changed.

Moore keeps it exciting with his sarcasm. and Craig come compared to Moore,same thing.while a much better actor than Brosnan,compared to Moore though,he's dull.


silent bomber over here on this thread,nailed it for me.Its cool to see someone else out there that thinks exactly as I do about the Bond actor cause thats exactly how I rank them as well below.I totally agree with him as well on his comments on Dalton.he shouldnt be ranked so low.He should easily be rated higher than both Brosnan and Craig.

Hmmmm

1. Roger Moore (I don't care if he's a bit campy, I find him more entertaining to watch than Sean Connery)

2. Sean Connery (very smooth, much better for fight scenes than Moore)

3. Timothy Dalton (Cool and serious)

4. Daniel Craig (I like him, does a good job)

5. Pierce Brosnan (a bit too much of a wimpy poseur to me)

6. George Lazenby (wet fish)

I don't get why so many are putting Dalton low, I always felt that Daniel Craig was kind of following in Dalton's shadow, they're very similar Bonds (see License to Kill)

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=556033&pagenumber=4

the 15 minutes ran out so i didnt get to say the rest of what I wanted to say as well that Moore also keeps it exciting as well with his charm,charisma,and excellent acting skills.

Like in Octopussy when he is talking to that villian about detonating a bomb and blowing up a city,he really gets into it saying-you dont give a damn about what happens to all those people.

I have seen other actors before who have said similiar lines in smiliar circumstances in movies where they put NOTHING into their acting,that they sounded like they werent really enjoying what they were doing,that they were just saying the lines cause they had to be there.and thats always been my problem with Pierce.

He just never sounded like he wanted to be there doing what he was paid to be doing.That he wasnt having fun with it like Moore and Connery you could tell always did,that he was just there for the paycheck.

Brosnan was a better, more laid back bond than moore imo. Better performer too, and actually came across more as a badass than moore.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
He isnt ANYWHERE near as boring as Brosnan.Not even close.He can at least act. Brosnans acting is so terrible, until the actions scenes get going,his bond movies are hard not to fall asleep in.

When he got cast as Bond,I hoped that he wouldnt be near as horrible as he was in that tv show Remington Steel i was forced to watch because my parents did,it came on right before a show i liked I remember so the last 15 minutes or so,i had to painfully sit through his dullness.

True to form though,to my fears,his acting as Bond was every bit as horrible as it was on Remington Steel.I thought same old Pierce.Nothing has changed.

Moore keeps it exciting with his sarcasm. and Craig come compared to Moore,same thing.while a much better actor than Brosnan,compared to Moore though,he's dull.


silent bomber over here on this thread,nailed it for me.Its cool to see someone else out there that thinks exactly as I do about the Bond actor cause thats exactly how I rank them as well below.I totally agree with him as well on his comments on Dalton.he shouldnt be ranked so low.He should easily be rated higher than both Brosnan and Craig.

Hmmmm

1. Roger Moore (I don't care if he's a bit campy, I find him more entertaining to watch than Sean Connery)

2. Sean Connery (very smooth, much better for fight scenes than Moore)

3. Timothy Dalton (Cool and serious)

4. Daniel Craig (I like him, does a good job)

5. Pierce Brosnan (a bit too much of a wimpy poseur to me)

6. George Lazenby (wet fish)

I don't get why so many are putting Dalton low, I always felt that Daniel Craig was kind of following in Dalton's shadow, they're very similar Bonds (see License to Kill)

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=556033&pagenumber=4

Cant stress this post enough by this poster.He really nailed it.cool that there are some people out there who understand how extremely underrated Dalton really is.He should never have been replaced.He should have stayed on for many,many more pictures.

Brosnan must have special connections like Adam sandler or something,another actor that cant act but has connections is how he made it in hollywood.same thing.one of those actors.

Dalton is extremely underrated as Bond sadly.while not near as good as Moore or Connery,he should not be be rated as low as he always gets.

He is easily better by leaps and bounds than Both Brosnan and Craig,I was sad to see him only last two pictures.worst thing to happen in the bond franchise after not ending it after Moore retired like they should have.

Like he said so well,Dalton was good cause he was cool and serious.

I'll take him anyday of the year over Brosnan and craig.

With Craig,while a fine actor,he looks NOTHING at all like James Bond.Matter of fact,I feel like i am watching Joe Montana on screen more than anything else.hee hee.the resemblence of him and Montana is very close.

With Brosnan,this poster hit the nail right on the head,wimpy poseur.could not have said it better.he nailed it.wooden line delivery and wimpy poseur.

the last two Bonds just dont measure up to Dalton.

One is a very good actor but doesnt look the part

while one DOES look the part but cant act and is very wooden.

damn hollywood for at LEAST not ending it after Dalton.

He really nailed it as well saying its cool that Daniel Craig followed in Daltons path,sort of anyways.Like he said,their Bonds are very similiar.

I just wish Craig had fit the part like dalton did and then,I would be cool with Craig as Bond.

I don't get it. Moore is an extremely limited actor. And a boring Bond.

Lazenby and OHMSS are criminally underrated.

Very true. ALthough I still can't get my head around Lazenby (Bond in a skirt?????), the movie itself is very well made. It just doesn't 'feel' like a Bond movie.

Originally posted by queeq
I don't get it. Moore is an extremely limited actor. And a boring Bond.

No he isnt.He is easily leaps and bounds far more exciting to watch than any of the others since him.as I said before,I'll even take him over Connery cause of his sarcasm he brought to it.Like in The spy who loved me where he is fighting jaws,i STILL roll in the chair laughing when he tricks Jaws into looking up and getting his metal teeth attached to the metal magnet he is lowering and quips-Hows that Grab you? His sarcasm and delivery of lines makes him far more exciting than any of the others.no contest.

I cant help it if you dont have a very good sense of humor.I cant do anything for that.

Interesting topic! Having been a fan of James Bond for most of my life, my ultimate favorite Bond was (and always will be), Sean Connery even though Roger Moore (who I like as well) was playing the role of Bond as I was growing up through the 70's and 80's. In later years, once Moore retired, I thought Timothy Dalton was the perfect replacement and was eager to see him mature in the role for many pictures to come. Unfortunately, he only last two pictures which was a crying shame. But still, if Dalton had to go, I thought Pierce Brosnan was an excellent choice and I was a big fan of his portrayal of Bond. Fortunately we got him for four pictures but he, like Dalton, should have starred in a few more. As for Daniel Craig, I strongly feel that he's the worst James Bond ever! I've seen the three Bond pictures he's been in and can honestly say I can't wait for him to be replaced. The past three Bond pictures resemble nothing of the Bond pictures I've watched all my life and have been stripped of everything I love about a James Bond movie. Craig stomps around like an angry ape who's too dark and depressed. Not to mention, why would they cast a blond Bond? Good grief! Bring back the real James Bond! I wonder who would be a good replacement???

Originally posted by CryptKeeper
Interesting topic! Having been a fan of James Bond for most of my life, my ultimate favorite Bond was (and always will be), Sean Connery even though Roger Moore (who I like as well) was playing the role of Bond as I was growing up through the 70's and 80's. In later years, once Moore retired, I thought Timothy Dalton was the perfect replacement and was eager to see him mature in the role for many pictures to come. Unfortunately, he only last two pictures which was a crying shame. But still, if Dalton had to go, I thought Pierce Brosnan was an excellent choice and I was a big fan of his portrayal of Bond. Fortunately we got him for four pictures but he, like Dalton, should have starred in a few more. As for Daniel Craig, I strongly feel that he's the worst James Bond ever! I've seen the three Bond pictures he's been in and can honestly say I can't wait for him to be replaced. The past three Bond pictures resemble nothing of the Bond pictures I've watched all my life and have been stripped of everything I love about a James Bond movie. Craig stomps around like an angry ape who's too dark and depressed. Not to mention, why would they cast a blond Bond? Good grief! Bring back the real James Bond! I wonder who would be a good replacement???
There is no true real Bond. Actors will show different versions of a charcter and you should do well to enjoy the positives of each.

Originally posted by Vensai
There is no true real Bond. Actors will show different versions of a charcter and you should do well to enjoy the positives of each.
So if the next actor to play the role of James Bond after Craig is Steve Carell we should just accept it and look for the positive points??? So smart cast doesn't really matter??? I'm sorry, but I don't agree with your post. And let's not forget, the character of James Bond has been totally stripped down and reinvented to the point where he doesn't resemble the character we all came to enjoy and love over the years. C'mon, a muscular blond Bond with unruly eyebrows? Personally, I think Craig would have played a much better villain. But hey, I'm not saying everyone has to agree with me; I was stating my opinion. Now that Ithink about it, I would take Steve Carell over Daniel Craig as Bond. LoL.

Originally posted by CryptKeeper
So if the next actor to play the role of James Bond after Craig is Steve Carell we should just accept it and look for the positive points??? So smart cast doesn't really matter??? I'm sorry, but I don't agree with your post. And let's not forget, the character of James Bond has been totally stripped down and reinvented to the point where he doesn't resemble the character we all came to enjoy and love over the years. C'mon, a muscular blond Bond with unruly eyebrows? Personally, I think Craig would have played a much better villain. But hey, I'm not saying everyone has to agree with me; I was stating my opinion. Now that Ithink about it, I would take Steve Carell over Daniel Craig as Bond. LoL.
I'm just saying one shouldn't be too cynical about any one interpretation.
There's numerous possibilities and you can't expect there to be one perfect actor for the job.

Sean Connery.

Originally posted by CryptKeeper
Sean Connery.
No one will be around forever.

Yeah, I know. Who would you get to replace Craig?

Originally posted by CryptKeeper
Yeah, I know. Who would you get to replace Craig?
I have no idea.

Originally posted by CryptKeeper
Interesting topic! Having been a fan of James Bond for most of my life, my ultimate favorite Bond was (and always will be), Sean Connery even though Roger Moore (who I like as well) was playing the role of Bond as I was growing up through the 70's and 80's. In later years, once Moore retired, I thought Timothy Dalton was the perfect replacement and was eager to see him mature in the role for many pictures to come. Unfortunately, he only last two pictures which was a crying shame. But still, if Dalton had to go, I thought Pierce Brosnan was an excellent choice and I was a big fan of his portrayal of Bond. Fortunately we got him for four pictures but he, like Dalton, should have starred in a few more. As for Daniel Craig, I strongly feel that he's the worst James Bond ever! I've seen the three Bond pictures he's been in and can honestly say I can't wait for him to be replaced. The past three Bond pictures resemble nothing of the Bond pictures I've watched all my life and have been stripped of everything I love about a James Bond movie. Craig stomps around like an angry ape who's too dark and depressed. Not to mention, why would they cast a blond Bond? Good grief! Bring back the real James Bond! I wonder who would be a good replacement???

well we sure are on board with each other about the JFK assassination but I feel the same way about Brosnan that you do about Craig.I thought Brosnan was the worst choice possible for the role of Bond back then.I hated it and got royally pissed when Dalton was let go and Brosnan replaced him.

The only actor to play Bond that I thought came even close to his horrible acting was Lazenby but I let Lazenby slide since he had such a horrible script to work with. Craig is just acting that way cause thats the new direction of the Bond films they are going with.They want a more serious side of him exposed.

I like Craig cause even though he doesnt look the part,he can for sure act.

Brosnan always gave me the impression he was just there cause he HAD to be cause he was getting a paycheck,that he really didnt want to be there.He always sounds wooden in all his movies.at least as Bond and in remington steel.

But thats the way I have always found him to be.I dreaded him becoming Bond like they were talking about back then because I always found his acting to be just horrible when I used to watch Remington Steel having being forced to watch it before MY show came on back then.

when i saw him as Bond,I was like same old Pierce.He STILL cant act.

I do agree with you obviously though that it was a crying shame we had to watch "Dalton" go.

Oh and dont want to put a damper on your day or anything,"especially since your on board with me on JFK and understand how everything is messed up now around the world because of those events."

But better get used to having Craig around for a very long time.He has been signed on for 5 more Bond films.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f65/t560118.html

and with the major blockbuster of his last film being a huge hit and all,expect one with him made sometime in the next couple years again.

Hey I had to suffer through it for those four films when Brosnan was playing Bond all those years so I've had my share of letdowns.

I know the torment your going through personally being there myself,so you have my sympathy.

I know your pain mate.I been through it all myself at one time. I been down that road your going.I know that frustration your going through.I felt your pain your feeling now.Been there,done that.

Ok, so I had a rocky start with Craig after seeing Casino Royale (not that he was bad, just the script) I haven't seen any of the other films with him.

Now I heard Skyfall was "the best" by many websites. Was it? Or was the hype just cuz Adele did the theme song?

It's okay, they can keep Craig for all I care. Even if they found an actor I really liked to play Bond, I'd still have a hard time accepting the film since they stripped away all the things I loved about a Bond film. The past three Bond films share no resemblance to any of the other Bond films and I dislike it very much. This whole concept about rebooting a franchise is idiotic, IMO. I'm afraid they'll eventually do the same to Snake Plissken when they get around to remaking those films. It's also the reason why I couldn't stand any of the Batman movies with Christian Bale. They better never even think about rebooting Indy or I'll be on a rampage!

Dont worry they'll give it all a reboot. Plisken, Jones among other classics, hell Robocop and Scarface are getting rebooted. I've never seen a good remake. There're pretty much dressed up to look good for the trailers but theres no soul in the films. I weep for the future.

Originally posted by CryptKeeper
It's okay, they can keep Craig for all I care. Even if they found an actor I really liked to play Bond, I'd still have a hard time accepting the film since they stripped away all the things I loved about a Bond film. The past three Bond films share no resemblance to any of the other Bond films and I dislike it very much. This whole concept about rebooting a franchise is idiotic, IMO. I'm afraid they'll eventually do the same to Snake Plissken when they get around to remaking those films. It's also the reason why I couldn't stand any of the Batman movies with Christian Bale. They better never even think about rebooting Indy or I'll be on a rampage!

wow this is another one were not even close on as well.as far as batman goes,The first two Batman movies with Christian Bale are the ONLY Batman movies I can stand.The last one,I did not like.All the others previous to Batman Begins were a disgrace,not loyal to the comicbook at all. when begins came along,I said many times-thank god for chris nolan back then.

Yeah I know there were a few things not entirely accurate in Bales movies as well but unlike the previous films,the positives far outweighed the negatives.Bale was really the one and only true batman.

I say that because all the others except for Clooney,were all good as either good as bruce but terrible as batman,or good as batman,but terrible as Bruce.where Bale excelled in BOTH.But this is the James Bond section so thats a different story for another thread.

i think, brosnan is better actor than craig but i love craig's stunts!!