Dalton really put in an effort to be the Bond of the novels. There are more differences between Craig and Dalton. Daltons Bond was not only grittier than Craig, but also smarter. Dalton is the only Bond I´ve seen frisk anyone, and the way he tricks the KGB agents into believing that it is Kara standing in the Telephone booth is just priceless. It´s details like that, which makes the difference.
Dalton is way better than Craig as Bond. Dalton changed the standard of what it means to be Bond. Sure, Craig puts in the work -- with his gym body and angry face but he also has the backing of a much bigger production outfit to his advantage so it looks like he's made it bigger when it's the really team behind him that works to make it bigger. Dalton didn't have that. LTK was marketed on such a small advertising budget and opened against family friendly movies. Then came the legal problems. Dalton didn't have too many gadgets. He's a low-tech Bond (between his two movies, he had the lighter and the key ring as his key gadgets) so he relies on his wit. From a popularity standpoint, the movies were done so well without generation-specific tech that they're still so relevant and watchable today. I hate that Dalton is so underrated.
Yes, I think you're totally right. Couldn't have said it better. Dalton did rely mostly on his wits and that is actually closer to the original character in the books, (I've read them all-twice). I too wish he wasn't so underrated. Having said that though, I have just only recently seen Dalton's first effort, The Living Daylights and it was a lot better than I thought. Licence to Kill I had already and it's a lot darker. Look at it this way though, it's always better to be underrated than overrated, because you last longer. Timothy Dalton's efforts will be more appreciated as time goes on and forever after.
What an excellent review. I feel Dalton was the only one to have read the books. He just looked awkward around the women. I love how he was depicted as a sniper in both films, which is more in keeping with the actual tasks one is asked to do in the service of the crown. Plus, license to kill, apart from the upending of a plane was a plausible story, not far fetched at all, great theme tune and the BEST villain in Robert Davi. In personal preference, it’s right up there.
Keep in mind that Dalton didn't get a third movie because of the lawsuit that was going on which delayed production several years, not because of his box office numbers. There might have been some things going on behind the scenes but I believe he later stepped down as Bond on his own terms before Bronson was taken on.
both dalton and bond were grim stoic serious bonds but tim dalton had a sense of flair and eloquence that craig cant match daniel craig was a blunt instrument,dalton is a sophisticated side arm
I prefer Dalton to Craig and I liked both Dalton films. Before Craig came along, Dalton had already read all the Fleming Bond books and had brought Bond's grittier, darker side out. And Dalton was the first to really get involved in doing his stunts. Craig just copied that and reading Bond books off of him, which is what makes him good, but Dalton was way better. Craig has the aid of today's great technology and cinematic effects, and a much larger budget to work with, given how Bond has evolved from Dalton's time to Craig's present time. Dalton gave more to the role while Craig had the advantages of a revival and .. well, he makes that face. And of course, Connery is the best of them all. He is the reason why the franchise became so big and popular in the first place.
Mine was the living daylights, and he took my breath away and the accent, which like a shot glass for whiskey, and those eyes oh my God wow I really wish she could’ve done more movies. Just too because he was the bomb Diggity long for me.
I think Dalton was closer to the Book Version of Bond and is an amazing Bond.....wished he had done some more films :( When I read the books I see Dalton's version of Bond lol.
Dalton’s Bond was the right interpretation of the Bond character but unfortunately like they said in the video....the right Bond at the wrong time. However if Timothy Dalton would have taken the role instead of Roger Moore, I think things would have been much more different. I respect Roger Moore as Bond but his movies were too silly. After Sean Connery (Lazenby doesn’t count on my book) Dalton was offered the role but didn’t take it because he believed he was too young, I feel that was his mistake, but at the end of the day, he got to interpret HIS JAMES BOND and I would have loved for him to have gotten one more film. I respect him and Daniel Craig took what Dalton started. Dalton was the “prototype” Bond at the time and Craig is the result.
I enjoy Roger Moore's later films more than his earlier ones (with the exception of the wonderful "Live and Let Die"). I think Roger was very good in "For Your Eyes Only" and "Octopussy", I have no complaints; although I agree that Dalton is as good as Bond can get, he portrays the soul of Fleming's Bond like no other actor.
At the time, Dalton's Bond was my favorite, but Craig's bond redefined the character. No gadgets, just violence, booze and pain killers when needed or not LOL. But the gadgets have always been a part of Bond, so the slow introduction of them was not only time but expected, and welcomed. Judy Dench as M was a surprise, but she was brilliant, and in a lot ways, the only Mum that Bond ever really had. I do wish that Dalton had done more than 2 films, they were like the books, dark and deadlier.
Timothy Dalton in real life is as classy as the character. Daniel Craig's rougher round the edges, like a friendly bouncer. Dalton is easily my favourite Bond ever - he is equally likeable to men as to women. He is the New Romantic Bond era really, very charming yet with a solid rod of mysterious ruthlessness to him when required. Dalton's Bond wouldn't allow himself to be called a sexist mysogonist - women would fancy him regardless of his job. Dalton also doesn't lower himself to the bare knuckle boxer level as Craig did. Dalton's Bond didn't need dust on his jacket to seem in the moment. I suspect that Lazenby might be my second choice - he shouldn't have been hung out to dry just because the crew found him to be high and mighty. It's what's on screen that matters and On Her Majesty's Secret Service frequently gets highly rated.
I didn't find Dalton charming at all. I especially didn't like in LTK, and was grateful when Brosnan too over. I get it that he's closer to Flemming's Bond. But cinema goers don't want to watch a constipated accountant.
I like Dalton and I think this put a finger on why. His Bond is less arrogant. More of the "stranger." But I think this analysis does kind-of overlook the quality of the films. Sitting down to watch "Casino Royale," I wondered how this could possibly stand up against the superhero films and such of the time, but it blew me away. By contrast, "Licence to Kill," was a good film but there was so much else that year in the action/adventure genre.
Loved Connery and Moore, and Lazenby's single outing was great and he had the toughest task of being the first other Bond. But Craig and Dalton are closest to Fleming's original source material. Dalton was way ahead of his time and should have had a third film in between 1989 and 1995. The Bond of the novels was a guilt-ridden man and his murders hung heavy on his conscience.
I would've loved to see Dalton handle a Casino Royale esque movie with a deep love interest and painful torture scene. I feel Dalton has more vulnerability that would've added to the power of scenes like those Craig had
Had he taken the offer of doing bond the 1st time he was approached, Dalton would have been the greatest by the time of his farewell. He was approached back in 1967/69, but he didn't want to do it right after Sean Connery's retirement from the franchise....
Timothy Dalton’s bond was excellent, he definitely made the man three dimensional. I think there was two generations of people who were too used to Roger Moore who played bond throughout the 70s and 80s. Also there were people who were expecting Pierce Brosnan to play bond which he effectively was at the front of the line according to brosnan, and the press kept hyping this up. However it didn’t happen due to his T.V contract Remington Steel being renewed and Dalton was then hired. I think there was a resentment from the general public who felt robbed that they didn’t get Brosnan as well as the fans of Moore not Wanting a gritty bond. I think people just felt alienated by Dalton’s presence and just looked for a reason to complain rather than giving the man a fair chance. It’s like “This man is not our James Bond” and unlike Lazenby Dalton was seen as a legitimate replacement for Moore. Dalton’s films weren’t bombs at the box office, in fact the Living Daylights grossed more than Roger Moore’s previous two films and even more than some of Connery’s. Licence to Kill did average business but that was due to a poor marketing campaign and heavy competition that year. So many sequels and big movies out in 1989. Dalton was expected to return for one more film in 1991 or 1992 however lawsuits with Eon and MGM prevented that from happening in 1993 Dalton’s contract expired, however Cubby Broccoli still wanted Dalton back. Once the lawsuit was over Dalton said he would like to do 1 more but Cubby said something to the effect of “Tim you can’t do just one more after 5 years of absence, you have to plan on 3-4.” Dalton felt it was too much and politely declined to return in 1994. However time has been kind to Dalton’s films thanks to Daniel Craig’s films, Living Daylights is a flawed yet entertaining entry and Licence to Kill is a tightly made Bond film that both keeps traditions and breaks them all at once. A criminally underrated entry that in my opinion is a classic bond film.
I actually saw this when it first went up, but I've never had the gumption to comment and say how marvelous I find your essays. You add to the conversation rather than parrot, and I look forward to more. I like the Dalton the best, btw.
Dalton did a great job. Aside from Craig he's been my favourite Bond. If he'd had a few more flicks before Craig we could have avoided Brosnan altogether.
I've been a Bond fan since I was thirteen. Avid reader of Fleming's novels. Over and over again. In my opinion the Bond we read about in the books is an in between Dalton and Craig. That of course would be a perfect Bond for us Fleming's followers. Back to reality. Dalton was not only ahead of his time when portraying Bond. He insisted on and exaggerated into bringing a new Bond on. Lazenby had the task of being the first other Bond and Dalton had the task of dethroning the Moore era. Quite difficult for, as much as I hate to admit, Moore had established himself. For Craig, the right approach to Bond and the fact that Brosnan did not leave a strong impression of himself on the character, made the right combination. Best Bond? Craig, Lazenby (yes, hard to imagine), Dalton, Connery and Moore. In that order. Only if old chap Ian was alive. He would agree with me.
Dalton was the better Bond but Craig, it can be argued starred in the better films. I prefer Dalton all day long. Craig was too unpolished, less sophisticated more brute strength and hand to hand combat skills. He was more Bourne than Bond
If Dalton had the production of Craig films,on his own canon(a reboot with 5 films),and also had Craig physical trainer and wardrobe,Timothy Dalton could have become the best Bond ever,even better than Connery. Unfortunately Dalton films were good,thanks to his acting,but had many flaws. The Living Daylights had a very weak main Villain(Joe don Baker)(Necros was great),and his ONLY Bond girl was very forgetable. Licence to Kill had a great Villain(R.Davi) and Carey Lowell was one of the best Bond Girls,but the story wasn't as spectacular as we want on a Bond film. In Craig saga,Casino Royale,Skyfall and No Time to Die,were vehicles to Daniel Craig great performance
To quote the HISHE Casino Royale gun barrel sequence: Connery: I was the original *and* the best, I get to shoot him. Dalton: You wish you were the best.
The Bond series was up in limbo in the 80s. Roger Moore was turning a 100 yrs old at the 1st of next year. The Roger Moore movies we’re getting cartoony & quite frankly dull. Then walks in Timothy Dalton. A guy that, ironically enough, turned down the part of Ian Fleming’s “On her Majesty’s Servive”(He felt how too young at the time which to his offense he was).
It wasn't Timothy's fault. Everyone was used to the Roger Moore style and then came along a more brusque, angrier character along with a less flamboyant story. It was all different . Timothy was great and is my favourite. His character is believable and hard working. It was probably the fault of the writers, in so much as, if you watch it today then you probably find some of the support characters a little childish ( Russian General for example ). I could see Timothy taken further along doing Pierce Brosnans Bond movies. Anyway too late now.
Judy Dench said that the Daniel Craig bond films were too gloomy and it missed the humor of the ones before Daniel Craig came in. She also said that his films were too serious.. Timothy Dalton was the right mix of grittynes and bond tradition..I guess the audience and critiques of the 80s were not ready for a gritty and realistic tone after the campy too long Roger Moore era..
as for Dalton's Bond not liking himself. Who would like himself if he were a person who does not follow his own or generally accepted sense of morality and murders people because that is his job? How many men come out of combat feeling hunky dory about what their job was? ( no matter how much it was needed). bond often kills people who are just like him and Q and M only on the other side. A thinking person would at least see the irony in this.
I appreciate what you’re saying, but it seems the presumption here is that I’m stating “Dalton’s Bond does not like himself.” The point that's being made is what is stated in the essay: that Dalton’s Bond “does not seem to like himself”. Similarly, it’s said that Craig’s Bond “doesn't seem beset by the moral weariness that Dalton presented us with.” It’s not saying that Craig’s Bond or other Bonds that project an inner contentment are without moral weariness or trauma. As said, "A contented Bond (outwardly, at least) ... would appear to be something audiences have come to anticipate and expect..."
Great analysis. It would have been interesting if the scripts had pushed the world-weariness even further in Dalton's films, but they were quite a radical departure as it was.
Dalton is a superior actor. The scripts were plodding. Even the music dragged. Craig, who is as good as Connery, has benefited from superior scripts, and production value.
Are you Australian? I really like your insights. Easy sub from me, and I look forward to seeing more of your work. Edit: My only advice would be to boost your commentary volume over the music. By the way, the music was a very nice addition.
Yes, Australian ... though often asked if I'm English. Glad you found the commentary of interest. Re. balance of commentary-to-music, I think that's John Barry and Thomas Newman working their spell over the commentator! Cheers! (Btw, hope to do more of these, but always run out of time. Argh!)
The Living Daylights is one amazing movie. Music. Atmosphere. Drama. Thrilling film. Tim Dalton was amazing. All it lacked was a better actress to play Kara. She couldn't act for s hit.
Tim Dalton was far better than craig as bond..dalton was better than brosnan also...Shame tim only did 2 films as he deserved goldeneye and a few more.
Dalton was a great Bond he alone has captured the literary Bond and brought that to screen. Connery had swagger and sex appeal and looked the part. Lazenby was grossly miscast, Roger Moore was witty and charming but not really an action hero, Brosnan had charm and could pull off the action and love scenes but he had terrible scripts to work from and finally Craig he was wonderful as a rough around the edges newly minted 00 agent in Casino Royale in his prime deadly and a ladykiller but after that his other films have used and rehashed this tale of a washed up past his prime almost nihilistic Bond. How he went from newly 007 to a has-been with nothing in between is still odd.
What’s being supported in the essay is that, on the evidence of films such as The Rocketeer, Dalton had the capability to bring greater humour and élan - qualities typically associated with charismatic star power - to his characterisation as Bond. But that apparently was not his ambition (and the filmmakers seemed largely in support of this), at least not for the two films he ultimately made.
And the last movie that Craig was in for Bond was just say this it’s dog shit, and it pissed me off when they brought me on the DB five in the Aston Martin vanquish give me a break and Timothy Dalton is my bond and I will never except Daniel Craig give me a break looks like a burnt and he doesn’t have it glad it’s over because all those movies were made for just nothing but action and not bond films
I know I'm probably in the minority, but Moore was the best Bond. Best humor, and the charming charisma of a real movie star. Craig is humorless and Dalton just didn't have that star quality.
Dalton really put in an effort to be the Bond of the novels. There are more differences between Craig and Dalton. Daltons Bond was not only grittier than Craig, but also smarter. Dalton is the only Bond I´ve seen frisk anyone, and the way he tricks the KGB agents into believing that it is Kara standing in the Telephone booth is just priceless. It´s details like that, which makes the difference.
Niels Christiansen Exactly! You're 100% on point. Nothing to add.
I’m a big Dalton fan and quite correct, he was smart, but not as tough as DC, in a fight DC could beat him with a arm tied.
@@sphericalempirical9359 oh ya all those overchoreographed Hand fights we see today. Hopefully something Else Will happen at some point soon.
@@niels25chr1
I was talking about a REAL fight, DC would sh!t all over him.
Dalton is way better than Craig as Bond. Dalton changed the standard of what it means to be Bond. Sure, Craig puts in the work -- with his gym body and angry face but he also has the backing of a much bigger production outfit to his advantage so it looks like he's made it bigger when it's the really team behind him that works to make it bigger. Dalton didn't have that. LTK was marketed on such a small advertising budget and opened against family friendly movies. Then came the legal problems. Dalton didn't have too many gadgets. He's a low-tech Bond (between his two movies, he had the lighter and the key ring as his key gadgets) so he relies on his wit. From a popularity standpoint, the movies were done so well without generation-specific tech that they're still so relevant and watchable today. I hate that Dalton is so underrated.
Yes, 1989 was a truly golden year for movies.
dalton didn't have as many gadgets? Are you forgetting the most gadget laden bond vehicle in the whole series in his aston martin in living daylights.
I 100%agree with ya mate 👍
Yes, I think you're totally right. Couldn't have said it better. Dalton did rely mostly on his wits and that is actually closer to the original character in the books, (I've read them all-twice). I too wish he wasn't so underrated. Having said that though, I have just only recently seen Dalton's first effort, The Living Daylights and it was a lot better than I thought. Licence to Kill I had already and it's a lot darker. Look at it this way though, it's always better to be underrated than overrated, because you last longer. Timothy Dalton's efforts will be more appreciated as time goes on and forever after.
Totally agree..Dalton was a very under rated bond and was not given enough films to really prove himself as bond.
Dalton was top class.
Such a shame dalton only did 2 films. He would have been great in goldeneye. Him and Craig are the closest too Fleming’s Bond
He was supposed to do 3 movies but the third one got cancelled due to a lawsuit
At least Dalton was handsome though. Craig looks creepy to me.
His Third Bond film was going to be in 1991 called Property of a Lady.
@@wcs494
However, “Property of a Lady” was used as the name of the Fabergé egg in Octopussy. It was a short story and they combined the two.
I heard that Goldeneye was originally written with Dalton in mind...
Dalton was the best Bond.
After Connery, it is Dalton for me. Some fan said it best, "of all the actors, Dalton seemed like he could kill someone in real life".
Daniel Craig too.
I think it was the director John Glen who said that.
@@Modernww2fare yeah but at least Dalton was handsome though. Craig just looks plain creepy.
What an excellent review. I feel Dalton was the only one to have read the books. He just looked awkward around the women. I love how he was depicted as a sniper in both films, which is more in keeping with the actual tasks one is asked to do in the service of the crown. Plus, license to kill, apart from the upending of a plane was a plausible story, not far fetched at all, great theme tune and the BEST villain in Robert Davi. In personal preference, it’s right up there.
Keep in mind that Dalton didn't get a third movie because of the lawsuit that was going on which delayed production several years, not because of his box office numbers. There might have been some things going on behind the scenes but I believe he later stepped down as Bond on his own terms before Bronson was taken on.
Bronson???
Only because he would have had to do 3 to 4 more films
Licence to kill, my fav bond movie.
both dalton and bond were grim stoic serious
bonds
but tim dalton had a sense of flair and eloquence that craig cant match
daniel craig was a blunt instrument,dalton is a
sophisticated side arm
Dalton rules! God I miss the John Barry scores.
I prefer Dalton to Craig and I liked both Dalton films. Before Craig came along, Dalton had already read all the Fleming Bond books and had brought Bond's grittier, darker side out. And Dalton was the first to really get involved in doing his stunts. Craig just copied that and reading Bond books off of him, which is what makes him good, but Dalton was way better. Craig has the aid of today's great technology and cinematic effects, and a much larger budget to work with, given how Bond has evolved from Dalton's time to Craig's present time. Dalton gave more to the role while Craig had the advantages of a revival and .. well, he makes that face.
And of course, Connery is the best of them all. He is the reason why the franchise became so big and popular in the first place.
I was 17 at the time and I saw Licence to Kill five times in the cinema. I loved Dalton's take on James Bond.
Mine was the living daylights, and he took my breath away and the accent, which like a shot glass for whiskey, and those eyes oh my God wow I really wish she could’ve done more movies. Just too because he was the bomb Diggity long for me.
He is the beneficiary (Daniel Craig) of the previous (Timothy Dalton)experimention.
That line hit me deeper than anything else did.
I think Dalton was closer to the Book Version of Bond and is an amazing Bond.....wished he had done some more films :( When I read the books I see Dalton's version of Bond lol.
In the late '80s and early '90s it was clear that John Gardner was also seeing Dalton while he was writing the Bond novels.
Dalton’s Bond was the right interpretation of the Bond character but unfortunately like they said in the video....the right Bond at the wrong time. However if Timothy Dalton would have taken the role instead of Roger Moore, I think things would have been much more different. I respect Roger Moore as Bond but his movies were too silly. After Sean Connery (Lazenby doesn’t count on my book) Dalton was offered the role but didn’t take it because he believed he was too young, I feel that was his mistake, but at the end of the day, he got to interpret HIS JAMES BOND and I would have loved for him to have gotten one more film. I respect him and Daniel Craig took what Dalton started. Dalton was the “prototype” Bond at the time and Craig is the result.
I enjoy Roger Moore's later films more than his earlier ones (with the exception of the wonderful "Live and Let Die"). I think Roger was very good in "For Your Eyes Only" and "Octopussy", I have no complaints; although I agree that Dalton is as good as Bond can get, he portrays the soul of Fleming's Bond like no other actor.
Moore's tenure should've ended with octopussy.
A view to a kill would have been great az a Tim Dalton entry
@@randomhuman97 yes and goldeneye would of been a good dalton film also
@@randomhuman97 Dalton would really have suited For Your Eyes Only Too.
At the time, Dalton's Bond was my favorite, but Craig's bond redefined the character. No gadgets, just violence, booze and pain killers when needed or not LOL. But the gadgets have always been a part of Bond, so the slow introduction of them was not only time but expected, and welcomed. Judy Dench as M was a surprise, but she was brilliant, and in a lot ways, the only Mum that Bond ever really had. I do wish that Dalton had done more than 2 films, they were like the books, dark and deadlier.
dalton should have done goldeneye, world is not enough. best bond actor, even better than connery.
he was lined up for those films so in essence brosnan would of stepped aboard later.
Timothy Dalton in real life is as classy as the character. Daniel Craig's rougher round the edges, like a friendly bouncer. Dalton is easily my favourite Bond ever - he is equally likeable to men as to women. He is the New Romantic Bond era really, very charming yet with a solid rod of mysterious ruthlessness to him when required. Dalton's Bond wouldn't allow himself to be called a sexist mysogonist - women would fancy him regardless of his job. Dalton also doesn't lower himself to the bare knuckle boxer level as Craig did. Dalton's Bond didn't need dust on his jacket to seem in the moment. I suspect that Lazenby might be my second choice - he shouldn't have been hung out to dry just because the crew found him to be high and mighty. It's what's on screen that matters and On Her Majesty's Secret Service frequently gets highly rated.
I didn't find Dalton charming at all. I especially didn't like in LTK, and was grateful when Brosnan too over. I get it that he's closer to Flemming's Bond. But cinema goers don't want to watch a constipated accountant.
I like Dalton and I think this put a finger on why. His Bond is less arrogant. More of the "stranger." But I think this analysis does kind-of overlook the quality of the films. Sitting down to watch "Casino Royale," I wondered how this could possibly stand up against the superhero films and such of the time, but it blew me away. By contrast, "Licence to Kill," was a good film but there was so much else that year in the action/adventure genre.
best two Bonds...reflect Fleming's Bond best
Intriguing comparison between the two Bonds and an excellent character analysis of Dalton narrated over a perfect soundtrack.
Loved Connery and Moore, and Lazenby's single outing was great and he had the toughest task of being the first other Bond. But Craig and Dalton are closest to Fleming's original source material. Dalton was way ahead of his time and should have had a third film in between 1989 and 1995. The Bond of the novels was a guilt-ridden man and his murders hung heavy on his conscience.
Surely Timothy Dalton is the best Bond!
Yes, and stop calling me "Shirley."
I think you presented a good case & I agree with you. Dalton is closest to Fleming's Bond. I have always said that. Thanks forcyou insights! :-)))
Dalton was a fantastic Bond! Steely and smart. I love Craig too, but Dalton is my man.
I would've loved to see Dalton handle a Casino Royale esque movie with a deep love interest and painful torture scene. I feel Dalton has more vulnerability that would've added to the power of scenes like those Craig had
Excellent point!
Had he taken the offer of doing bond the 1st time he was approached, Dalton would have been the greatest by the time of his farewell. He was approached back in 1967/69, but he didn't want to do it right after Sean Connery's retirement from the franchise....
He also felt too young which is understandable but yes I agree
Timothy Dalton’s bond was excellent, he definitely made the man three dimensional.
I think there was two generations of people who were too used to Roger Moore who played bond throughout the 70s and 80s. Also there were people who were expecting Pierce Brosnan to play bond which he effectively was at the front of the line according to brosnan, and the press kept hyping this up. However it didn’t happen due to his T.V contract Remington Steel being renewed and Dalton was then hired. I think there was a resentment from the general public who felt robbed that they didn’t get Brosnan as well as the fans of Moore not Wanting a gritty bond. I think people just felt alienated by Dalton’s presence and just looked for a reason to complain rather than giving the man a fair chance. It’s like “This man is not our James Bond” and unlike Lazenby Dalton was seen as a legitimate replacement for Moore. Dalton’s films weren’t bombs at the box office, in fact the Living Daylights grossed more than Roger Moore’s previous two films and even more than some of Connery’s. Licence to Kill did average business but that was due to a poor marketing campaign and heavy competition that year. So many sequels and big movies out in 1989. Dalton was expected to return for one more film in 1991 or 1992 however lawsuits with Eon and MGM prevented that from happening in 1993 Dalton’s contract expired, however Cubby Broccoli still wanted Dalton back. Once the lawsuit was over Dalton said he would like to do 1 more but Cubby said something to the effect of “Tim you can’t do just one more after 5 years of absence, you have to plan on 3-4.” Dalton felt it was too much and politely declined to return in 1994.
However time has been kind to Dalton’s films thanks to Daniel Craig’s films, Living Daylights is a flawed yet entertaining entry and Licence to Kill is a tightly made Bond film that both keeps traditions and breaks them all at once. A criminally underrated entry that in my opinion is a classic bond film.
love the respect you have for this most intriguing complex and special Bond.
I actually saw this when it first went up, but I've never had the gumption to comment and say how marvelous I find your essays. You add to the conversation rather than parrot, and I look forward to more. I like the Dalton the best, btw.
I could see the comparison when CASINO ROYALE came out, but Craig's movies have not been kind to his 007 IMHO. Dalton still stands tall at this point.
Dalton & Lazenby were the true BOND closely to Ian Fleming Books
Dalton did a great job. Aside from Craig he's been my favourite Bond. If he'd had a few more flicks before Craig we could have avoided Brosnan altogether.
I much prefer Brosnan to both
I've been a Bond fan since I was thirteen. Avid reader of Fleming's novels. Over and over again. In my opinion the Bond we read about in the books is an in between Dalton and Craig. That of course would be a perfect Bond for us Fleming's followers. Back to reality. Dalton was not only ahead of his time when portraying Bond. He insisted on and exaggerated into bringing a new Bond on. Lazenby had the task of being the first other Bond and Dalton had the task of dethroning the Moore era. Quite difficult for, as much as I hate to admit, Moore had established himself. For Craig, the right approach to Bond and the fact that Brosnan did not leave a strong impression of himself on the character, made the right combination. Best Bond? Craig, Lazenby (yes, hard to imagine), Dalton, Connery and Moore. In that order. Only if old chap Ian was alive. He would agree with me.
Dalton was the better Bond but Craig, it can be argued starred in the better films. I prefer Dalton all day long. Craig was too unpolished, less sophisticated more brute strength and hand to hand combat skills. He was more Bourne than Bond
If Dalton had the production of Craig films,on his own canon(a reboot with 5 films),and also had Craig physical trainer and wardrobe,Timothy Dalton could have become the best Bond ever,even better than Connery.
Unfortunately Dalton films were good,thanks to his acting,but had many flaws.
The Living Daylights had a very weak main Villain(Joe don Baker)(Necros was great),and his ONLY Bond girl was very forgetable.
Licence to Kill had a great Villain(R.Davi) and Carey Lowell was one of the best Bond Girls,but the story wasn't as spectacular as we want on a Bond film.
In Craig saga,Casino Royale,Skyfall and No Time to Die,were vehicles to Daniel Craig great performance
To quote the HISHE Casino Royale gun barrel sequence:
Connery: I was the original *and* the best, I get to shoot him.
Dalton: You wish you were the best.
I really wish Dalton would've gotten that third movie. All new Bonds hit their stride on the third movie.
I feel like craig is the spiritual successor of daltons.
Timothy was a very underrated 007...
The Bond series was up in limbo in the 80s. Roger Moore was turning a 100 yrs old at the 1st of next year. The Roger Moore movies we’re getting cartoony & quite frankly dull.
Then walks in Timothy Dalton. A guy that, ironically enough, turned down the part of Ian Fleming’s “On her Majesty’s Servive”(He felt how too young at the time which to his offense he was).
It wasn't Timothy's fault. Everyone was used to the Roger Moore style and then came along a more brusque, angrier character along with a less flamboyant story. It was all different . Timothy was great and is my favourite. His character is believable and hard working. It was probably the fault of the writers, in so much as, if you watch it today then you probably find some of the support characters a little childish ( Russian General for example ). I could see Timothy taken further along doing Pierce Brosnans Bond movies. Anyway too late now.
Excellent video essay
Judy Dench said that the Daniel Craig bond films were too gloomy and it missed the humor of the ones before Daniel Craig came in. She also said that his films were too serious..
Timothy Dalton was the right mix of grittynes and bond tradition..I guess the audience and critiques of the 80s were not ready for a gritty and realistic tone after the campy too long Roger Moore era..
Timothy Dalton said he though Daniel Craig was great for role in 2007. The 2 Bond I don't like George Lazenby & Pirece Brosnan.
Well they can´t be any worse than Roger Moore who just did a subtle parody out of it all.
I Thought Sean Connery was the best as his successors say today.
@@nightmarepublicenemy4885 Brosnan for me
Very interesting take!
Craig was the man that killed James Bond! Dalton was the man that made James Bond!!
I'm glad this video isn't narrated in an unnecessarily slow, menacing whisper... oh wait...
Perto de Timothy Dalton quem é Craig na fila do pão?
as for Dalton's Bond not liking himself. Who would like himself if he were a person who does not follow his own or generally accepted sense of morality and murders people because that is his job? How many men come out of combat feeling hunky dory about what their job was? ( no matter how much it was needed). bond often kills people who are just like him and Q and M only on the other side. A thinking person would at least see the irony in this.
I appreciate what you’re saying, but it seems the presumption here is that I’m stating “Dalton’s Bond does not like himself.” The point that's being made is what is stated in the essay: that Dalton’s Bond “does not seem to like himself”. Similarly, it’s said that Craig’s Bond “doesn't seem beset by the moral weariness that Dalton presented us with.” It’s not saying that Craig’s Bond or other Bonds that project an inner contentment are without moral weariness or trauma. As said, "A contented Bond (outwardly, at least) ... would appear to be something audiences have come to anticipate and expect..."
Great analysis. It would have been interesting if the scripts had pushed the world-weariness even further in Dalton's films, but they were quite a radical departure as it was.
Basically its not being in content with himself but rather a touch of charisma. Maybe even a facade.
Dalton is the best Bond, by far.
Dalton is a superior actor. The scripts were plodding. Even the music dragged. Craig, who is as good as Connery, has benefited from superior scripts, and production value.
I beg to differ in regards to soundtrack. The Kiving Daylights is bar far the best music in the Bond franchise thanks to John Barrys wondrous score!
Are you Australian? I really like your insights. Easy sub from me, and I look forward to seeing more of your work.
Edit: My only advice would be to boost your commentary volume over the music. By the way, the music was a very nice addition.
Yes, Australian ... though often asked if I'm English. Glad you found the commentary of interest. Re. balance of commentary-to-music, I think that's John Barry and Thomas Newman working their spell over the commentator! Cheers! (Btw, hope to do more of these, but always run out of time. Argh!)
I liked Craig's Bond but I can't unsee him in that vodka commercial and now in an lgbtq movie not to mention he was retired in most of his films.
Aid to Craig's Bond, 9/11 and the Bourne Identity.
The Living Daylights is one amazing movie. Music. Atmosphere. Drama. Thrilling film. Tim Dalton was amazing. All it lacked was a better actress to play Kara. She couldn't act for s hit.
Terrific video.
다이얼 !! 007~ 쭉~
Brosnan Moore Connery Dalton Craig Lazenby.....I like my Bonds to be smooth suave charismatic cool killers, no fun and escapism = No Bond
+1 sub
Tim Dalton was far better than craig as bond..dalton was better than brosnan also...Shame tim only did 2 films as he deserved goldeneye and a few more.
Dalton was a great Bond he alone has captured the literary Bond and brought that to screen. Connery had swagger and sex appeal and looked the part. Lazenby was grossly miscast, Roger Moore was witty and charming but not really an action hero, Brosnan had charm and could pull off the action and love scenes but he had terrible scripts to work from and finally Craig he was wonderful as a rough around the edges newly minted 00 agent in Casino Royale in his prime deadly and a ladykiller but after that his other films have used and rehashed this tale of a washed up past his prime almost nihilistic Bond. How he went from newly 007 to a has-been with nothing in between is still odd.
Brosnan Moore Connery Dalton Craig Lazenby
rotfl... you try to support dalton's acting / star appeal by referencing two flop films he did. Not sure you're helping ol tim. lol
What’s being supported in the essay is that, on the evidence of films such as The Rocketeer, Dalton had the capability to bring greater humour and élan - qualities typically associated with charismatic star power - to his characterisation as Bond. But that apparently was not his ambition (and the filmmakers seemed largely in support of this), at least not for the two films he ultimately made.
Excellent point! Great essay btw. Dalton Bond is the best for reasons you so eloquently stated!
@@andrewmcness
권총에 재원 독일제 1962년 이정권 태어나기전 부터 스타트 '스펙터, 냉전시대에? 유튜브 해설통해
007 이편이 지남에 세월에도 어느분은
얼마전 90세 생일 이글을 통해서 축하합니다 제 국적인 🇰🇷대한민국 네글자로 변경됨 숀코랠리 이글에 매력 다른이는 알아서 전 !숀 코랠리~
저희 고유에 명절 고정 편성 프로 추석 구정(설날)!
TD is Bond! Craigh is not handsome or good looking as in the novel & not gorgeous too! Daniel in my opinion like a face of assassins!
And the last movie that Craig was in for Bond was just say this it’s dog shit, and it pissed me off when they brought me on the DB five in the Aston Martin vanquish give me a break and Timothy Dalton is my bond and I will never except Daniel Craig give me a break looks like a burnt and he doesn’t have it glad it’s over because all those movies were made for just nothing but action and not bond films
I know I'm probably in the minority, but Moore was the best Bond. Best humor, and the charming charisma of a real movie star. Craig is humorless and Dalton just didn't have that star quality.
Or….maybe he just needed a shorter haircut and a speedo.