Who was the best James Bond?
Well, now... that's a question for the ages. I'm just asking for trouble by even bringing up the subject in the first place. But, like James Bond himself... trouble is my middle name.
No, wait, it's Walter. Anyway, I actually think James Bond fans have been lucky in that all of our leading men who played the part have been fantastic. That isn't to say they've all been in fantastic films... and that's what I think it comes down to. The question of which Bond was "best" is a false one, in my opinion. I don't exclusively watch films by any one of the six actors, since all of them have been in some that were good and some that were terrible (except for Lazenby, who was only in one... and it was awesome!).
So while I'm admitting it's stupid to rank them at all, rank them I must. But I'm going to take into account several factors, including charm, acting ability, and the quality of the films on which they appeared. That might not seem fair, but let's face facts: Roger Moore in For Your Eyes Only is better than Sean Connery in Never Say Never Again. But you can rest assured that Roger Moore isn't going to win this competition.
And, also for the record, I'm only going to be discussing the EON Bond films, and not the original Casino Royale or the original Bond film starring Barry Nelson. Casino Royale was a parody and I never saw the Nelson film, and I don't really care to.
From Russia With Love
You Only Live Twice
Diamonds Are Forever
Never Say Never Again
In the minds of most people, Sean Connery is James Bond, while all others are just trying to fill his shoes. And, for the most part, they're right. Connery is a wonderful actor and his charm can't be denied. The character Ian Fleming created was no doubt a stroke of brilliance on his part, but it's hard to believe the series would have taken hold of the world in such a way without casting the perfect actor in the leading role. And Sean Connery was the perfect actor. He was amazing, and when at his best, his films were some of the best in the series.
But, out of the seven films in which he appeared as James Bond, only three are actually all that good. But that's ok because they actually aren't just good, they're amazing.
Dr. No, From Russia With Love, and GoldFinger are brilliant films by any account, with perfect scripts, great direction, and wonderful, charming performances by Connery. When people think of the James Bond films, whether intentionally or not, they're thinking of these three (the three first).
But after that, the series went downhill. Thunderball wasn't bad, it was just boring. But what film wouldn't be boring after GoldFinger, arguably the very best Bond film of all. Then came You Only Live Twice, which was probably the first truly bad film in the series. Diamonds are Forever was a little bit better, but only because it was so bad it was campy fun. But, even at their worst, Connery's lesser films are worth watching because he's always so good. And that doesn't just for for his Bond films, but for all of his films in general.
And then, over ten years later, he returned for the non EON (and, thus, no cannon) Never Say Never Again. What a piece of crap. Let's NEVER SAY anything about this film (N)EVER AGAIN.
Bottomline, Sean Connery is handsome, athletic looking, charming, funny, and a great actor. He's the only Bond actor to have won an Oscar, though not for a Bond film.
Final Score: 6 out of 6
On Her Majesty's Secret Service
How to judge poor George Lazenby, the long forgotten second James Bond? The Australian model-turned-actor only starred as Bond in one film, but it's one of the absolute best of the series, and one of my all-time favorites. But, as likable as Lazenby is, this is a great film because the script and story and direction and action are fantastic. Lazenby is ok, but this movie would've been amazing had Sean Connery agreed to star.
But how was Lazenby? To be honest, I like George Lazenby and think he deserved better. Had he not quit from the series (because he honestly thought it was holding back his career, if you can believe that), I think he would've improved and received a far better judgment from history. But as his only film indicates... he was ok. He was definitely the weakest actor who ever played Bond, but he's also pretty charming and likable in his own way. He's very good at the physical stuff, and his comic timing makes him well suited for the one liners, but he's pretty wooden when he's doing anything else.
The highlight of the film is the middle section when he's going undercover at Bloefeld's hideout. When I first saw this film, I was blown away by Lazenby's performance. His entire voice and inflection changed completely when he went undercover as a posh, British professor. But, years later, I learned that a different actor actually dubbed over his lines for that entire section of the film. So that pretty much explains why his performance in that section of the film was so great.
But, still, I like Lazenby. He wasn't a great actor, but he was a pretty good Bond. I wish he had made some more films so I could judge him better.
Final Score: 2 out of 6
Live and Let Die
The Man With the Golden Gun
The Spy Who Loved Me
For Your Eyes Only
A View to a Kill
While Roger Moore and Sean Connery have both technically played James Bone seven times, Moore gets the career win because Never Say Never Again doesn't really count as a part of the EON series of films. And it sucked. But it was still better than Moonraker. Or maybe not. Once the series gets that bad, it's hard to decide which of the films are the absolutle worst of the worst. But to be sure, many of Moore's films are on that list.
But still, Moore was a great James Bond. It's a true testament to his talents, and his charm, that he was able to keep the series alive and financially successful over the course of seven fairly mediocre films. While some of Moore's films are my very favorites (like Golden Gun, Octopussy, and Eyes Only), they're all actually pretty bad.
And Moonraker, Live and Let Die, and (ugh) A View to a Kill are completely worthless pieces of crap.
Moore will always have a place in my heart, however, because was James Bond when I was born. In fact, while A View to a Kill wasn't the first Bond film I saw, it was the first I saw in the theatre. And I loved it! The opening ski chase was off the hook, and the rest was just incredibly silly and cool and fun. But, rewatching it again as an adult, it sucks. It's just a terrible, terrible movie. Tanya Roberts is so bad, the plot about an evil microchip salesman was laughable, and Chris Walken hammed it up in his of his all-time worst performances (long before he turned hamming it up in bad movies into an art form). Oh, and the scene where James Bond actually had sex with Grace Jones was the absolute low point in the series.
But he was still a really good actor, incredibly handsome, funny, and a convincing physical presence. He was also the first Bond who was actually English. He was classy. I also think he was the best at being genuinely funny. I liked the guy. Connery's performance helped to create the character in the public conscious , but Moore's kept it alive and relevant for over ten years.
Final Score: 5 out of 6
The Living Daylights
License to Kill
Like George Lazenby before him, Dalton has the distinction of never appearing in a bad Bond film, though a lot of people will argue with that claim. But Lazenby got off lucky by being forgotten. Tim Dalton is almost universally hated.
But he's my personal favorite.
After Moore's almost cartoonish entries in the series, the powers that be decided to go darker with the character. That resulted in casting Tim Dalton, who brought an almost Shakespearan air to the character. In my opinion, he's probably the finest classically trained actor who's ever played the part. But most people found him a little too dark and maybe a little too dry. I will admit that he doesn't quite have the charm of, well, all of the other actors in the series, he was closer to the character in the books than we had yet seen. But people didn't want the character from the books. They wanted Sean Connery or Roger Moore.
Another thing a lot of people will tell you is that Dalton's films were bad, but I would disagree with that as well. The Living Daylights is one of the best spy thrillers of all time, even if it doesn't really feel entirely like a James Bond picture. And License to Kill is just an awesome action movie, with Robert Davi as one of the best Bond villians of all time.
Another reason why these two films failed to register all that much with the public is how the late 80s saw the appearance of a kinder, gentler James Bond. The character went darker, true, but he also became somewhat... monogamous. And where's the fun in that?
But if you want to watch a couple of well written, action-packed thrillers, you can't go wrong with Dalton's two entries in the series. But they maybe aren't as much "fun" as some of the others. But I love them.
Final Score: 3 out of 6
Tomorrow Never Dies
The World is Not Enough
Die Another Day
Who doesn't love Pierce Brosnan? He's a wonderful, talented, effortlessly charming actor. Riding high off of the success of the much loved detective series Remington Steele, Brosnan had more good will coming into the series than any other actor in history. It was generally accepted as fact that he was the perfect actor to play the part. And he would've been... if only his movies hadn't sucked so bad.
Well, maybe it's not fair to judge the Brosnan films against the earlier films, since by that time the Soviet Union had collapsed, long time producer Albert Broccoli had died, and cold war had come to an end. How then to make relevant a character that, at his very essence, was a product of the 1960s? Well, had I been in charge, I would've made all of the Bond films period pieces that took place in the late 50s/early 60s. But I wasn't asked so they just completely changed the character, making him a product of the 90s.
And therein lies the problem. They just weren't making James Bond movies anymore. With each new actor, the series was that much different than the character that came before. By this point, we were so removed from the original character that he may as well have been a completely different character with a completely different name.
Anyway, I hate these movies. They're unwatchable, in my opinion. They are perfectly competent action movies, but they aren't James Bond movies. And Pierce Brosnan's charm and undeniable action talent did nothing to save them. He was better as Remington Steele.
Final Score: 1 out of 6
Quantum of Solace (Yet to be released)
After the era of Pierce Brosnan, Daniel Craig (and his film Casino Royale), appeared as something of a revelation. The first Bond film that was actually based on one of Fleming's original novels in over 25 years, Royale was a reboot for the franchise that attempted to bring the character back to his roots. Gone are Q, the silly gadgets, and outlandish plots and terrible one liners.
And it worked to smashing success. It's one of the best films in the entire series, but not quite my favorite. Afterall, I like Q and some of the silly gadgets. With the Craig films, they managed to finally find a tone (and acting performance) that combined the dark realism of the Dalton films and the over the top action sequences of the Brosnan films.
So it was a great film. But how was Daniel Craig?
He was amazing! In just one film, he somehow managed to combine all of the best traits of every actor who came before him. To be honest, I was actually a fan of him even before he was announced as Bond, so when I heard he got the part, I knew this latest chapter in the series would be good.
He's still somewhat young and new to the part, so he isn't quite as indelible in the public memory as Connery or Moore, but if I redo this list after he's made a few more films, he might someday surprise us all.
Final Score: 4 out of 6
Overall winner: Sean Connery