Worst Bond ever
franky
Posts: 1MI6 Agent
I am a big bond fan having watched all the current Bond movies and some of the earlier Bond movies including those up to and including Pierce Brosnan numerous times.
Having seen the latest Bond Casino Royale I was very disappointed and it made me think could Daniel Craig be the worst Bond ever. Perhaps in my recollection he might be better than George Lazenby but that would be about it in my view.
He must have had the least dialogue of any Bond and he lacked the charm and charisma which is typical of Bond. We actually re-watched and bought Timothy Dalton in living daylights and thought he did a pretty good job in comparison and it was unfortunate that he only did the two Bond movies-perhaps they could have brought Tim back which would have being hugely preferable to Daniel Craig. My personal view and that of my partner is that Pierce Brosnan was the best in modern times and perhaps the best ever and to my knowledge earnt Eon Productions the most money since any Bond before him and Die another day was no exception. If Daniel Craig was that successful as Bond then how come they had to re-release so many of the old Bond DVD's in an effort to prop up earnings. Was it a change for changes sake. If you look back at John Glen who directed numerous Bond epics as well as John Barry doing the musical scores and yet since the Pierce Brosnan series they have changed directors practically every movie. Is it for the betterment of the movie or is it change for changes sake. Or perhaps is it about money-perhaps Daniel Craig came at a cheaper price.
Having seen the latest Bond Casino Royale I was very disappointed and it made me think could Daniel Craig be the worst Bond ever. Perhaps in my recollection he might be better than George Lazenby but that would be about it in my view.
He must have had the least dialogue of any Bond and he lacked the charm and charisma which is typical of Bond. We actually re-watched and bought Timothy Dalton in living daylights and thought he did a pretty good job in comparison and it was unfortunate that he only did the two Bond movies-perhaps they could have brought Tim back which would have being hugely preferable to Daniel Craig. My personal view and that of my partner is that Pierce Brosnan was the best in modern times and perhaps the best ever and to my knowledge earnt Eon Productions the most money since any Bond before him and Die another day was no exception. If Daniel Craig was that successful as Bond then how come they had to re-release so many of the old Bond DVD's in an effort to prop up earnings. Was it a change for changes sake. If you look back at John Glen who directed numerous Bond epics as well as John Barry doing the musical scores and yet since the Pierce Brosnan series they have changed directors practically every movie. Is it for the betterment of the movie or is it change for changes sake. Or perhaps is it about money-perhaps Daniel Craig came at a cheaper price.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
There is a thread dedicated to CR reviews (and a host of others slagging or praising DC in the role). Please can you try to add to the existing discussions and - as a new member - give everyone the courtesy of finding out what they think and have posted in the past 2 years.
http://www.ajb007.co.uk/index.php?topic=27098&cpage=25