LATEST NEWS

Roger Moore fucking sucks at Bond. You fail massively

Sean Connery and Pierce Brosnan were the best and then Roger Moore...I won't watch Daniel Craig in any of the Bond films (including the first one he did)...He lacks the suaveness, believeability and balance Sean, Pierce and Roger were able to continue bringing to the role.

Sean C. is the best. I really enjoyed Brosnan as Bond, Craig is much more stylized but Royale was amazing. Who knew that Poker could be that interesting in a film?

I have to say, that when it comes to bond movies Connery brought the toughness and great one liners. Moore brought the suave. Brosnan brought both...I think when Brosnan first came out...He too had a luke warm reception, just like Craig is having. I'll give Craig another film to prove he can be bond.

Connery will always the original, Brosnan was also excellent but Craig make them all look like wussies. Can't wait on the next Craig 007!!!

Connery & Brosnan were the best. Stylish, mature & smart. Daniel on the other hand is rough, macho & real. He lacks the style & Royale Casino lacked the gadgetry, but the movie was more real than any other Bond movie before. I believe Daniel is givin a new look to Bond. And since Bond is a long tradition, v need more time to c if this new image might fight Bond. I'm definitely hopin that it does.

Pierce brosnan was a great bond, so were connery and moore, Daniel Craig is an amazing bond as well. It annoys me how people think that hes crap without even watching Casion Royale!, what kind of bond fans are those?!

sean was the real bond moore the amusing bond dalton the wannabe bond lasonby the wuss bond brosnan the modern bond craig the emo tough bond - seems like they all fit the time of production GoldFinger baby

First, Connery is *the* bond - Moore was an acceptable substitute given that we had no other choice but to tolerate his presence. Second, people forget that James Bond was a novel and *then* a film - a series of novels, actually, that were quite good fiction. It is worth noting that Connery and Craig, and only Connery and Craig, gave Bond the sense of roughness that was *ACTUALLY* found in the Bond books. The books really did have a hard-bitten edge of realism in them, something vaguely related to that of hard-boiled detective novels, and Craig brings that to the fore - even if he does so with a bit more muscle than is strictly needed. As Craig's bond matures I expect him to become more like Connery's; a raised-by-the-docks roughneck under the veneer of culture and civilization. That alone is a more entertaining character than someone that keeps hor'derves on emotional parity with murder. The Bond acted out by people like Moore and Brosnan is a pathetic caricature of Bond-as-written, and in being so over-stylized and immune to the degradation of the work he undertakes he loses the feel of verisimilitude that is the hallmark of good fiction.

Roger Moore portrayed the Bond character as a comedy. I always hated that about him. Sean Connery is the definitive Bond. If Daniel Craig lives up to the standard he set in Casino Royale; he will become a serious challenge to Connery's #1 status.

You left out the original Casino Royale (1967) starring Peter Sellers as James Bond.

Is this a rhetorical question? Obviously Sean Connery tops the list. But this article is retarded. "So far I'm quite impressed with Craig as Bond, but he still doesn't beat Roger Moore or even Sean Connery." As if implying that Moore is better than Connery. My order would be: Sean Connery Pierce Brosnan Roger Moore Daniel Craig (too early to tell so I put him in the middle because he is decent) George Lazenby Timothy Dalton

The key to Craig's portrayal of Bond is in the final scene. After the loss of his first love he makes a transformation to "Bond...James Bond". In that scene he resembled Connery. The next movie should be interesting. We should get to see Craig play a more mature, suave and sophisticated Bond.

Sean Connery will always be THE Bond to compare all others against. With that said Craig is definately a close number 2. If the writing continues to be excellent (and doesn't fall back into technology trickery) than I think Craig will become the new standard bearer. On a side note, we need a Q. The only thing missing is Q. I miss the Connery/Desmond fueding, even if it was only for a few minutes. John Cleese could be good, just tone down the slapstick.

Craig blew me away as Bond.

Moore was terrible as Bond - the whole franchise needed a restart *because* of the image he made it into - I don't think the franchise ever recovered from him completely. There was something always creepy about the geriatric Moore chasing much younger women; it made Bond into a dirty old man. Craig so far seems terrific, although we have only one movie to base anything on (I sure hope the writing holds up). I don't fault his portrayal of Bond in Casino Royale because that was supposed to be the *start* of his career as "the" James Bond. So over the next few films we'll see him evolve into the Bond character we think we know. Connery was great, but I have to admit I'm probably biased because he was first. If there was no previous history and you had to choose Connery vs Craig, it'd be pretty tough to choose between the two.

In Moore's defence, I don't think the other guys would be as good as The Saint either.

Everyone needs to realize that people in general are sick and tired of these franchises sticking with the same old prescription to the movies. People want a different version and they want a new story, not the same freaking story everyone has heard 20 times before. Batman Begins was so successful because they redefined the franchise and Bale redefined Batman. Sorry to everyone that wants to be bored with the same thing all day every day but the James Bond franchise has been redefined and Craig has redefined Bond himself. That is why he's probably going to be the best Bond, he's not afraid to be his own character. He's the Bond of today and he did it beautifully. And, yes, how can you say that Craig is "never Bond and never will be Bond" if you haven't even seen him play the role.

I'd have to say to Craig is doing great as the new Bond. It's a bit back to the original Bond films with Connery; more acting, action, and storylines, less reliance on gadgets and special effects. I never felt that Moore made a great Bond, as people have state before, it was embarrassing and downright unbelievable to see an old man doing those stunts and ending up in bed with young girls. I hope they'll continue in the style of Casino Royale.

You forgot one of Connery's movies: Never Say Never Again... so he's up to 7

I am soooo tired of people plugging some and putting other Bonds down. THEY WERE ALLLLL GOOD: Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan, Craig. IF ANYONE SUCKED it was because THE WRITING SUCKED. Uhhh...Octopussy and Man With the Golden Gun, Golden Eye, Living Daylights, Licence to Kill, Die Another Day... if not silly then far fetched or ridulous or low brow gag jokes. The actor's can only do so much. The writing has to be strong to begin with. I lament for Moore and Dalton. The topper was Die Another Day...INVISIBLE CAR? DO MOVIE PATRONS HAVE "IDIOT" WRITTEN ON THEIR FOREHEADS? Bond is about class, sophistication, aplomb and sexy banter, sexy style, sexy sleuthy and sexy smart solutions. Hey! Adding my two cents worth was too Fun! Lastly, I recommend everyone give George Lazenby (On Her Majesty's Secret Service) some accolade. Thanks! Girl Fan of Many Years

Roger Moore was terrible as Bond, he came off as a rich playboy. Just because he was in the most Bond films doesn't necessarily mean that he was the best, either. Moonraker is god awful. I actually liked Lazenby quite a bit and feel like if he had a second chance he probably would have been even better.

What are you talking about guys?! TIMOTHY DALTON is the best Bond past, now and future! He looks like James Bond and if you would read the bond novels you would know that he is the same kind of bond than Ian Fleming's bond was. Dalton had five, six chances to act Bond but in 1969 he thought he was too young and in 1991 Bond-producers made a lot of mistakes so "The Property Of A Lady" never saw daylight. Timothy Dalton was also considered to act in Original Goldeneye (1993). He really can act and he looks great! He is not some kind of womanizer or alcoholic, he is James Bond! My order is: 1. Timothy Dalton (perfect actor!)

I think all the actors that have and are playing Bond are great. They all have their pluses and minuses. The thing that makes a great Bond movie is the writing. Moonraker and A View to a Kill are just horribly written and boring to the max, while Die Another Day just has a bunch of bull crap inventions and CGI scenes. Keeping gadgets to minimum(Casino Royale, Dr. No) and a well written story(License to Kill, Goldfinger) make a great Bond film in my book. P.S. To all you people who keep mentioning Never Say Never Again as a forgotten Bond film on the list, it is not an official Bond film, and it's basically a remake of Thunderball.

Going back to the beginning of the article, I must protest Roger Moore's ranking over Sean Connery. Clearly Moore was good, if fact he was great. But the title of "Quintesental Bond" must go to the original, Connery was the perfect blend of humor, subtle masuculinity, and outright ass-kicking. While I can't remember who said it (It might have been no one of consequence) but it isn't so much that Connery was a great Bond and others have been emulating his role, rather that Connery was and, in some sense, still is Bond and all others are following in his footsteps.

I was getting ready to add that you had forgotten one (Sean Connery) Bond movie but I see übermonkey beat me to it. You could also add David Niven who played Sir James Bond, retired, in the original spoof 'Casino Royale'. Regarding the best Bond, has to be Connery. However if they had let Brosnan play the part to his full ability (think 'Thomas Crown Affair' he wold have been the best. Funny that they had to use a Scott and an Irish to do Bond...

Daniel Craig brings an air of authority and realism to Bond, you have to consider he is not meant to be the suave unruffled hero of previous films this is about the rookie agent winning his spurs, his 00. I look forward to seeing him develop into the tough, cynical and ruthless bastard that Bond has tried to be portrayed as before, with limited success. Forget the gadgets we want a fallible hero who can cut it with the toughest. Craig is the man. BJ

OK, here's how I would rate what made the Bond movies popular, and while the actors are key, each era had their other tie in that drove Bond as a franchise. Sean Connery vs The destinations. The 60s was the era where most people hadn't experienced much more than the country they live in. The english knew Europe, but most had not been to America or the far east. It seems that Bond was about escapism at this point. And of course, cold war espionage. It was gritty work, and gadgets simply weren't "fancified" as of yet. Roger Moore vs The Gadgets. Q was almost the star of the Roger Moore Bond years. Who didn't wait impatiently for the debriefing on the new gadgets with Q? I sure did. The gadgets, Loti, planes, boats, etc, were Roger's great equalizer. Sure he was old and loved a one liner after a nasty baddy death, but if it weren't for the gadgets (INClUDING JAWS), Roger Moore years would have sucked. As it were, they were a good sophomoric years. Timothy Dalton vs Lame plots. Sorry, I never liked the Dalton movies, especially Licensed to Kill, which felt like it was made by the guys who produced The A Team. This film was miserable because all the actors were American. The US wants escapism, not the same old characters we see all the time! He was pretty much a dead fish as far as actors went, but he needed not to be so smug as Moore, who pretty much made Bond into a cartoon. Pierce Brosnan vs Technology. Let's face it. There were no scary World Crises going on about the time of the Brosnan Bonds. That and all the original novels were during the cold war, which was now history. Brosnan then ends up battling impossibly ridiculous businessmen who want to take over the world or are mad and want to plunge the world into chaos. The world had basically developed REAL gadgets that did the stuff or were close enough to the previous Bond Gadgets, that, they just didn't matter anymore. And the BMW sellout will forever suck. I know product placement is everything, but come on. It was pretty lame if you ask me. Daniel Craig vs The Old Guard. This guy had to erase all the preconcieved notions of Bond. He did it with that Martini recipe in the Casino. Probably the best "bow" to the old Bonds, and yet, creating a totally new twist on the Martini, pun intended. Awesome. His sensitivity and realness really show. This Bond sweats. He bleeds. He kills. He loves. He even dies. Bond is not protected by a bubble, he's touchable, but in the end, he's unstoppable. THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. Craig is an awesome Bond. I was so pumped when I saw the movie I was rewinding parts in my head for days. The Range Rover parking job, the Martini scene, the torture scene, even him getting cleaned up after the fight with the terrorists. Holy Kick Ass. I would say, the only lame part was probably the final fight in the Venitian Villa. That was a little too corny and didn't really flow with the rest of the movie. So I guess my list would be: 1. Craig (if he continues in this way) 2. Connery 3. Moore (even though he was corny, the movies were more enjoyable than....) 4. Brosnan (His NBC clause killed him as a quintessential Bond, too little, too late) 5. Dullton (no need to comment) 6. Lazenby (not even worth mentioning, it's so long ago) Craig brought me back into the Bond world. I was bored with Pierce after 2 movies, and didn't see the last two until they were shown on TV, didn't even watch them on DVD first. I will definitely see ANY Craig Bond movies in the theaters. He was awesome in Layer Cake, and he'll be awesome as Bond.

Pierce Brosnan is the best James Bond on the other hand Daniel Craig is ok as james bond ,So he will be a so- so bond !!! But He is no Pierce Brosnan .!!!! To me Pierce Brosnan will always be James Bond .I own ever James Bond movie thaT Pierce Brosnan HAS DONE .

Dalton was the best actor to play Bond- he played the role perfectly, as a somewhat cynical, vulnerable spy who did his job out of sense of duty, and killed because he had to, not because he wanted to. Moore was a total buffoon; it was Dalton's great misfortune that he followed him, the contrast was too great for a lot of viewers who grew up with Moore's cartoonish antics (I'm one of them, but I always appreciated Dalton.) Connery was excellent and of course the original will always be the most appreciated. Lazenby was ok but his one film was a bit too maudlin and dull. Brosnan did ok for exactly one film, then he looked bored and afraid to muss his hair for the last four. "Tomorrow Never Dies" might have been as bad as "Moonraker," and that's saying a LOT. "The Property of a Lady" (1991) and "Goldeneye" (1993) would have been wonderful with Dalton. What a shame that legal problems derailed his Bond career. Our loss.

This isn't even a contest. Sean Connery IS James Bond. Period. Anyone else in the role is simply doing a Connery impression. It's comparable to traveling at the speed of light. That is, impossible - or approachable, at best.

Bring me back, i want new chance!

Craig is a great James Bond, but hasn't yet compared to Sean Connery who is a incredible Bond! But if Craig keeps playing Bond the way he does I think that he will be the new James Bond!

Barry Nelson, an MGM contract player during the 1940s who later had a prolific theater career and was the first actor to play James Bond on screen, has died. He was 89.

Brosnan sucked and was great at the same time, if that is at all possible. In my opinion he didn't do quite so bad as BOND, but yet was not up to par as others, such as Connery, Moore, and Craig. End of story, Brosnan played that sleeke and suave, and in my opinion it is the only thing he can play, it seems fitting to obvious the Bond Films, yet How many movies like Mrs. Doubtfire, where it carries over can he play?

Casino Royale was the best James Bond film? If you cut out all the parts where people are talking into or looking at cellphones, the film is roughly 45 minutes long. The product placement for cellphones was REALLY over the top. From the opening scene in Madagascar to the final scene with Mr. White, someone is yammering away at, looking at, or turning off a cellphone. Ridiculous. "Ellipses" "they are extracting LeChiffre...Mathis needs me" (two looking at cellphones moments, within seconds of eachother)

To the person above me- I think you hit the nail on the head with that one.

P.S. I really like comment 17. Kudos to you, James, for recognizing the underpinnings of what makes good fiction (and a good Bond)! Some people simply don't know what they're talking about. For me, Casino Royale 2.0 was mind-blowing and a true mental reboot. I couldn't stop watching Craig's face and posture. There was no doubt in my mind that he understood the actual character and so did the director. It was bloody brilliant. The last scene with Mr. White really sealed the transformative process and was entirely necessary--not as epilogue but as a capstone on what we have learned about 007's creation. At that moment, he is the sum total of what Vesper and M have taught him. Being a Double-0 isn't a game, it's a sacrifice. Brilliant.

What, like I didn't grow up on Bond? ;D I can handle a reboot. The other films were what they were... These will be different. Doesn't hurt my brain or feelings any.

Sean, Daniel and Pierce are the best. just under them is Roger Moore and Timothy Dalton. i really try to like George Lazenby but i just don't. at all....George Lazenby sucks.

pierce is amazing james bond,and great actor.more power pieirce!

the new trailer is up and The Quantum Of Solace looks like a proper Bond film. I like the trailer because it doesn't really give any of the plot away =)

I wonder if anyone has a body count on some of the bond films... It would be interesting to go back and see just how many dead guys Bond left behind in the previous films. I bet Roger Moore has the most rack-up of anyone. Just a hunch, mind you.

Of course you're not impressed... That's because cellphones are entirely ubiquitous. That's the point. Everyone has a cellphone attached at the hand--absolutely everyone. My doctor carries his cellphone and his PDA around, everyone I know has a cell that they whip out just to check the time (nobody wears watches, why bother?). At the place I hang out, it's like round-robin cell phone tag. One person drops out of the conversation to answer their cell just as another finishes a conversation, etc. Nobody bats an eyelash unless a juicy conversation is going on. I get calls from my husband while I'm in line in the grocery store, and we trade text messages while he's at work. I mean... it's just a fact of life now. It was used as a plot device, but it was hardly out of place. He hasn't gotten to all his gadgets yet. He'll get there.

Maybe half of Quantum of Solace involves the use of Global Positioning Systems, or maybe Bond's new car has (gasp) A DVD PLAYER!! ZOWIE! I swear, I half expected that jackass in goofy glasses and overalls from the ATT commercials to show up in Casino Royale to let Bond know that his signal was still clear.

Don't get me wrong; I liked Casino Royale. I thought the use of cellphones was badly overdone, that's all- in fact, I thought they repeatedly interrupted the flow and acted as clutter. Strange in a movie refreshing for it's lack of stupid gadgets. And I totally agree with the Dalton comment; if you read above, you'll see I was a big fan of Dalton's portrayal of Bond and the down-to-earth, script-centered films he was in.

Dame Judi is hawt. I don't care what anybody says.

I cant wait for the new James bond movie to come out. First the last guy was right Roger moore wasnt very good at James bond. My order is Sean, Daniel, Roger, Pierce, Dalton, Lasonby. I have a good feeling that Craig will pass Sean if he keeps up what he is doing Casino Royal was one of the best bond movies ever i hope he does as much as Roger moore if not more.

Ian Fleming must haved turned in his grave knowing about the choice of Daniel Craig as James Bond, and the poor performance he does in Casino Royale 2006. Almost only one expression on his face, and what a terrible face!!!! Can you imagine that the Broccoli/Wilson Bond team has not been able to find a great and hansome actor among the billion of people living on our planet!!! Craig can't even wear a smoking jacket!! He looks like a delayed student in it!!! No class at all. Well, one thing... everybody agrees that he would have been perfect as a bad guy. Yes, we simply expect him to die after each of his actions in the movie. I hope to see again at the end of the next Eon production "James Bond will be back"!!! Daniel Craig is no James Bond.

Dear readers, Never forget that Sean Connery was the original, the first actor chosen by the original Bond producers (C. Broccoli + H. Saltzman), and that THE AUTHOR, Mr. Ian Fleming shared their enthusiasm. Obviously with Mrs. Barbara Broccoli, we have a proof that talent and taste are not hereditary!!! Only the sense of making money!! Not mentionning the overbid of violence, a competition between movie makers for decades!!! K on Oct 28, 2007 : "remember that casino royale was supposed to be about bond at the BEGINNING of his career. he wasn't supposed to be perfectly suave and slick; he was still learning. craig did a perfect job with the character that he was supposed to portray." Well doctor, it's really sad if at more than forty years old James Bond is not educated yet!!! lol I think that we see a lot of Daniel Craig in that character. He is not acting, he is just himself! lol An elephant entering a porcelaine store!! And it's all about this movie. KB on Oct 28, 2007 : "Craig's performance cannot yet be judged on par with others' performances in other Bond movies - that he will grow into a version of Bond similar to Connery's - more suave and polished but not to the Moore- or Brosnan-like extent. He will (hopefully) maintain a gritty undercurrent." Come on!!! Craig has done this movie and must be critized (positively or negatively) for his performance. Did critics had to wait 2 or more Bond film to appreciate Connery's performances!! Girl Fan of Many Years on Oct 29, 2007 : "IF ANYONE SUCKED it was because THE WRITING SUCKED. Uhhh…Octopussy and Man With the Golden Gun, Golden Eye, Living Daylights, Licence to Kill, Die Another Day… if not silly then far fetched or ridulous or low brow gag jokes. The actor's can only do so much. The writing has to be strong to begin with." Absolutely true. Some of the plots were waisted by consternant gadjets specially in the Moore area (that gondola!!!). But I don't think the writing is particularly original for Casino Royale 2006. The story is mostly boring or too violent. I had refused to see the movie on a theater and waited to buy the DVD for cheap (I bought a Zone 1 and second hand!! lol). I was so bored that twice I had to give up watching the movie. Only a third time I finally made it, and felt so disappointed. Yes, boring the scenes in the casino, and all that talking with the cell phones. Every body is boring to watch in that movie, from Craig's limitated expressions on his face, to Mads Mikkelsen, and Eva Green, the saddest Bond girl ever. She wasn't paid enough for that role, maybe? lol. And that yamakasi opening sequence!!! dejà vu, from a french movie (Yamakasi) released in 2001!!!! and we can see that the writers tried hard to have Bond following the jumper, and they made him avoid the most difficult scenes by tricks. The jumper could have shot Bond so many times in that sequence!! In that sequence Craig very often runs as an imitation of Pierce Brosnan's robotic move. I almost forgot!!!!! THAT music by David Arnod (a cheap John Barry plagiarist when at his best): it's heard too much and too loud, not very inventive. Well to conclude, nothing breathe in that movie. ArmageddonKitten on May 16, 2008 : "this isn't a film about James Bond, this is a film about the MAKING of James Bond." Did we need to see how James Bond was made? Is that movie a James Bond recepe?? lol If so, Eon productions should have made a version with a young actor, as it was done with the series "Smallville" for Superman. I am not just kidding!! Because Daniel Craig looks really retired in playing that role.!! John on Jul 6, 2008 : "I swear, half of "Casino Royale" consisted of people looking at cellphones, talking into cellphones, setting off bombs with cellphones- enough already. I'm not impressed by technology most ten-year olds have in their backpacks." I totally agree. A lake of imagination, simply. But enough to impress billion of small minds in this earth!! helàs!! Boring, boring (did I say it before?).... I think that the actual Bond team Barbara Broccoli/Michael Wilson forgot what was the original motivation when the series started, approved by Ian Fleming until he died a few months before the release of "Godfinger," and that was perpetued (with more or less success) for decades until this "n'importe quoi" Casino Royale 2006: Entertainment. PS: pardon my English!!

Hey Sylvain. This has no relevance but when I read your posts I hear the voice of Sacha Baron Cohen in the character of Jean Gerrard from Talladega Nights. Mmmmwa! I taste of America.

madbax68 on Aug 3, 2008 said minutes ago: "Hey Sylvain. This has no relevance but when I read your posts I hear the voice of Sacha Baron Cohen in the character of Jean Gerrard from Talladega Nights. Mmmmwa! I taste of America." Sorry but I have better things to do than watch american series. And actually I don't think this one exists in France. I even don't watch the French series, even worst than the Americans. So I don't know what you're talking about; but my little finger tells me that it must not be that nice!! looooool

OMFG! LOL! I did not realize that French was a race... I guess I should feel insulted when I see the word "Yankee" and don't get me started on how the French smell... This is the best thread ever!

Oh snap! You sure pwned me there.

my favorites 1. roger moore( he had the best storylines)very good 2. pierce brosnan ( best attitude, should have come back for a fifth and final one)very good 3. sean connery ( classic bond, should have stopped after his fifth one)good 4. daniel craig ( an ok bond, not much personality)fair 5. timothy dalton ( an ok bond, like dc to dark)fair 6. george lazenby ( should never have been bond)poor

"The Bond movies of the last 15 years sparlkle like diamonds compared to the previous movies." Really- where to start in answering this ridiculous comment? "GoldenEye," "Tomorrow Never Dies" (which was just hideous, almost as bad as "Moonraker,") "Die another Day" sparkle like Diamonds compared to which films? Dr No? Goldfinger? Thunderball? "The first half dozen or more movies in the series were made at a time when the art of movie making was still in it's infancy." Infancy? How old do you think infants get to be? The first Bond film was made in 1962- that would be the SIXTH DECADE of full-length filmmaking. And again- are you really telling us that in your opinion, the Brosnan films and "Casino Royale" are vastly superior to the Connery films of those early, experimental days of filmmaking, the 1960s? :>). You can't be serious.

timothy dalton almost killed the franchise!

I think that might be a little unfair, Lisense To Kill wasn't Dalton's fault.

as the bond budgets get bigger it gets harder to be as successful. when the bond budgets were 7,000,000 back in the early seventies it was easier to make back the money. the budget of the living daylights was 40,000,000 compared to dads 142,000,000 ( not 150,000,000) and YES pierce brosnan did save the franchise. the company was bankrupt and brosnan reinvented the character for modern times. Die another day also made so much more money than tim daltons ever would. something timothy dalton didn't do. it wasn't good for audiences at the end of the eighties because people actually wanted a light hearted bond with a the trouble going on in the world, with the berlin wall and the persian gulf war. but i do think tim would be a good bond if he were younger and doing it right now in are time.

You are entitled to your own opinion, you are not entitled to your own facts. 1. It wasn't "easier" for the earlier Bond movies to make far and beyond their budgets because money was worth more then; that's just totally illogical, almost juvenile, thinking. It's all relative. My father made $30,000 in 1972, I make $55,000 in 2008. Do I make more than my father? Hell no I don't. Would "License to Kill" have made a huge amount of money if the budget was far bigger (including a decent advertising budget, instead of virtually zilch like it had in reality?) Who knows? Relative to the amount the film cost, it was far more profitable than "Die Another Day." Anyone over the age of ten should be able to grasp this concept. Discuss this with an older friend who owns a calculator. You might as well argue that Brosnan's movies crushed the Connery movies because none of them made even close to what Brosnan's did. Totally irrelevant unless you compare the production budgets. 2. If the company was "bankrupt" (and it wasn't) it had so little to do with Timothy Dalton that Dalton was signed to do "Goldeneye" all the way up to the spring of 1994, when he backed out after yet another delay in the script rewrite. Doesn't sound like a studio disenchanted with Dalton. 3. "The Living Daylights" made more money than Moore's last two films. I posted this earlier, but you clearly chose to ignore it, because it clashes with your narrative. Again- you are entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts. 4. Brosnan "reinvented the character?" In what way? He was a hybrid of Moore and Dalton, closer to Dalton. There was nothing especially unique about the way Brosnan portrayed Bond. 5. And again- Brosnan was such a savior of the Bond franchise that he was unceremoniously dumped in favor of virtual unknown Daniel Craig. Brosnan has said in interviews that he was "shocked and saddened" by his dismissal. But the FACT is that Brosnan's films were very expensive rolls of the dice that were only modestly successful compared to the other Bond films. "Brosnan saved the franchise"-please, do your homework.

as you say money isnt worth as much today, so it should be harder for the new bond films to make more money. but brosnans worst efforts still make as much as tims. by the way tim dalton was shaddened and shocked by his leaving bond. He didnt expect the company to almost go bankrupt(which it did) ( watch lisence to kill bonus features on the dvd) Brosnan made a true comeback. the series had faded and was being upstaged by movies like die hard and other new action movies. Brosnan brought bond back into the public. he hadnt been seen in six years. Sure tim dalton made his first bond movie good, the living daylights. Yea it was a little better than the previous roger moore adventure. but the way he wanted to make bond darker and darker just wasn't good for the franchise at that time.( remember what i wrote above) The living daylights only made a little more than octopussy. and that was because of inflassion. he still didnt outgross rogers MOONRAKER! which wouldnt be outgrossed until goldeneye. Pierce brosnan reinvented the character by bringing the charm and wit that tim dalton had nothing of. tim dalton was signed on to goldeneye to spring 94 thats correct but he backed out because he was fed up with the argueing and loss of money when the studio nearly went bankrupt! im signing off now. ive got better things to do than chat up a storm with you and waste my time. the names struan, dirk struan

Oh and BTW "The Living Daylights" made more money than "Octopussy" even when adjusted for inflation. I can tell by your diction and your failure to grasp an argument that you think getting an education is a waste of time. I hope you are heading out to buy your self a dictionary now. And a clue.

Deal. I'll take Oddjob "pushing" Connery around Fort Knox and you can have Pierce Brosnan digitally surfing on a wave caused by a collapsing glacier before he gets back to his invisible car ANY DAY.

Crawling back in my hole. Thanks for the insults John.

It's I "too," "john" is a proper name and should start with a capital letter, "I" shoujld be capitalized for the same reason, it's "too," not "to," "appear" rather than "sound" smart since one can't hear posts, "an" is to be used before a word beginning with a vowel, and "Bond" should be capitalized for the same reason as "John." Oh, and you should end your posts with a period. That's the way we know the rant is over. Now here's a quick quiz: Which of the following is more correct: A. "Don't worry Pounding Metal..." OR B. "dont worry pounding metal..." Have fun!

I think Lance is right. John, your mean and stupid.

I saw the preview for Quantum of Solace on a theater a week ago. Huge on the screen. What a consternant vision again, dark images, same loud sound when somebody uses his gun (in case you don't notice the action on the screen!! lol) and about that terrible trytobeanactorcraig: same pinched lips, same attitude whatever he does, a loser look. It seems he really enjoyed that chair the last time!!! And again a scene in a scaffold (they have imagination at EON!! LOL). They really shoud have bring back that chair for another exciting sequence, and by chance this 00000000Craig would give up the Bond movies. One can dream, helas..helas....

Daniel Craig is ruining the great series of bond. I have seen each movie about 100 times, know all the scripts by heart. James Bond got lost after goldeneye. It turned downhill before that actually with the death of broccoli. The worst bond until craig was without a doubt Lazenby. Craig took over that dubious honor. He isn't bond period. He doesnt have the style, the humor nor the finesse. Hell he doesn't even have the right haircolor. Also the style got lost. I wonder if the director even saw all the bond movies since the series just went haywire the last couple of years. James Bond had a great cast, it doesnt anymore. Soundtrack was way better when john barry and others composed. Do it right please or stop milking the bond brand. And i disagree with people that say Connery was best. I still feel Moore is the best one. Sean Connery was great as well but he is such a great actor he can play any role fabulously.

fuck it IM THE REAL BOND... RESPECT YA'll

Yes, we are more than ready for a black president. I'm voting for him, but as far as James Bond goes, it's not a race thing, it's a character thing. You can't have a black Bond, that would be like having a white Shaft. and as far as will smith (who I really like) and puff daddy (who doesn't act) go, they arn't from Europe and I don't think anyone think's an American (regardless of what color his skin is) should ever play Bond. Again though, Bond's character isn't an African American, he's a British man with a Scottish bloodline. It'd be like getting Tom Cruise to play Blade....just doesn't work. To number 135- "I wonder if the director even saw all the bond movies since the series just went haywire the last couple of years. " I think he might have seen them taking in to consideration he had also directed GoldenEye. Now you can dislike whatever actor you want for whatever reason you have and I can disagree and neither of us would be wrong but I like when you read the books you see that Craig, Dalton, and Connery reflect the character the best. esp Craig though i love the Connery films. Though we have only seen one Craig film so far which isn't a lot to go on. You do however see that when his kill's arn't clean (like the intro and the stair fight) it strongly effects him though he doesn't admit to anyone, esp the girl. He is also now a much more introspective character like in the books. feel free to disagree, this was all just IMO.....aside from the part about the director that's a fact, look it up on IMDB.

haha, actually yeah it kind of does. I clearly don't know anything about you but I'd vote for you to play him over Will Smith or Puff Daddy I don't see how it's racist to say that a character that was written to be white and british would feel more than a little bit off if P Diddy were playing him.

GOLDEN OLDIES Sean Connery- Seen as he was the first bond it is normal for people to see his as the best bond because he was the first. Sean had the swagger and voice superb. Roger Moore- Roger moore carried on the sauve tradition and made some great films out of the two oldies i prefer roger moore as i thought he had the charm of sean and could act so brill MODERN BOND Pierce Brosman- For me he is top atm because he was so charasmatic and captured all our hearts as bond Daniel Craig- For starters i have to say the change of look for the new bond i doubted at the start and was slightly worried for the bond films but having seen both casino royale and the new film i have so much respect for him because he had many doubters but he has done a great job casino royale was one of the best movies i have ever seen. For me pierce is no1 buuuuut the next bond film starring craig should see him in a more usual bond fashion which means we can compare him to the others. so here is my order Pierce Brosman Daniel Craig Roger Moore Sean Connery and the other two nobody cares too much

What a birdl brain some people must have!!!! comment #145 from smart pseudo "ILoveDanielCraig!!!" says: "I'VE SEEN THE NEW BOND YESTERDAY, QUANTUM OF SOLACE, AND I LOVE IT!! I'M INTO HEAVEN, THE GREATEST MOVIE EVER!!!!" The greatest movie ever!!!! I'm scared dear Craig fan, please try not to be a member of the "Academy Awards" jury, of the "Mostra" jury, of the "Berlin International Film Festival" jury, or the "Cannes Film Festival" jury!!! LOL. A movie with big explosions and noise with a limited expressions actor would have all its chance to win!!! Please #145, try to see some of the real greatest movies ever made in history, and please reconsider your impressions about the last Bond movie. So far, for me, the best review published on this page is by Kevin (# 144). Even if I share only parcially his enthusiasm for "You Only Live Twice" that I like anyway. But there may not be a perfect Bond movie!!! It's obvious that in several years the EON productions will change direction. The Bond movies have often been followers of the cinematographique actuality. People nowdays like dark stories and dark heroes: c'est dans l'air du temps. At the time of "Star Wars" and "Close Encounter of the Third Kind" Eon productions were not scared to send Bond in space with "Moonraker." As a joke there's even an excerpt of the "Close Encounter..." music theme when Roger Moore rings at Drax's laboratory in Venice. The gunfight sequence was omitted in "Casino Royale". A remain is at the end of "Quantum of Solace." An official sign showing that in time those Craig movies will be apart from the rest of the Bond movies. To put together with "Never Say Never Again." Yes Kevin, we miss the FUN in that Daniel Craig area. I hope those dark hours won't last too long. Can't wait to see the new actor!!!

When I wrote the article which is now #145, it was then #146. I didn't know that what I wrote would cause pseudo "ILoveDanielCraig!!!" author to remove its article. Well, I must have been right I guess, or Mr. pseudo "ILoveDanielCraig!!!" doesn't have a sense of humor!!! read the beginning of my article and you'll know about it.

How disappointing for Bond. I refuse to support any further James Bond films until they get a decent actor. Daniel Craig is sloppy, unsuave and can not hold a candle to the previous Bonds...any of them. There aren't even any cool villians! We want more realistic? How boring! Have we lost imagination and having some fun with the characters? They have lost track of what made Bond famous, a classy killer with quick wit and cool gadgets in a tux. The new movie even took out the famous "The name is Bond, James Bond". They are plenty of shoot em up action, violent movies out there if that is what you have to have. If people want all action with no acting, go find another movie, but leave Bond alone. All you have done is make it a cookie cutter format that every other action movie is. How sad to follow change the format! I'll watch Sean, George, Pierce, Roger and Timothy anyday and never get bored. I saw Craig's first movie and that is certainly the last. Sorry Craig, you don't cut the mustard in my book as a Bond. You need special effects to make the movie sell! Shame on the writers!!!!!! People can disagree with me if they like, but you still can't deny that the new bond is not like the old. In this case, the change was not good!

After reading Sylvain's posts I'm forced to change my opinion of Daniel Craig, who I, for a very brief period of time, thought was the best Bond so far. But I now completely reverse my opinion on the matter..........because I sorely miss my brain. Thanks Syl!

Certainly Craig has the potential for being an incredible Bond, if only he is given a chance to rattle off a few cynical witticisms. When told by Felix he had only 30 seconds, Bond replied, "well that doesn't give us very much time." I was elated by what seemed to be one of the few smart-ass remarks I'd expect from a cool, calm, intelligent Bond who has a sense of humor. Yet, the rest of the movie was mostly about action, and brawn, which we already have Jason Bourne for. For now, Sean Connery seemed to have the best balance of ruggedness, wit and charm. Please let there be some wit and charm to Daniel Craig in upcoming movies.

the best bond movie in my opinion is for your eyes only any body agree

Doesn't beat Roger Moore? What are you, retarded? How can you put Sean Connery behind Roger Moore? Craig destroys Roger Moore, the worst Bond ever...

Far and away the best bond since Connery is Daniels, none other has brought the ruggedness to the character than these 2, for me Moore was the absolute worst the constant one-liners ruined the stories which ultimately killed the movies for me, Brosnan continued the drab one-liners which ruined his chances for me. A few witty remarks in a movie is ok, action and story (or story pushed by action) makes the movie for me, and in Daniels movies we get to understand what pushes Bond, honestly look at the 2 movies so far, as a new bond he is responsible for the deaths of at least 3 women and he's only been a 00 for what less than half a year? Daniels Bond is fleshing out a character that we never got to see with earlier bonds, this more rugged driven bond is a true breath of fresh air, I wish with all my heart I could forget Moores bond and his awful acting and whimsically dull one-liners that got to be too much. For me Connery and Daniels represent a more real character, I can imagine a secret service agent just like their character, on the edge of out of control, working his hardest to save the day, do his duty... Daniels represent a new more real Bond, someone much more believable than the Joke that was Moore, or the less than believable Brosnan, so I say more, more Craig Daniels Bond, more realism of character, more story pushed by action, AND more story, flesh that Character out let Craig do his thing and lets see the franchise grow with him.

Pierce Brosnan saved Bond franchise and after his great work. They replaced him because, they wanted someone younger. New Bond's are copies of the Jason Bourne character movies. My order would be: Sean Connery Pierce Brosnan Roger Moore Daniel Craig George Lazenby Timothy Dalton

5 More..god no! Craig is easily the most repulsive actor to ever portray JB! Absolutely does not fit the bill in a Fleming way at all. He doesn't look one stitch the way the character is described by Fleming, nor does he behave largely like him. Craig is basically playing Red Grant - a thug, rather than the urbane yet lethal secret agent Bond, James Bond. Seems the film producers are intent in making JB a Jason Bourne (another JB??) clone. He didn't need to be reinvented just better stories(i.e. scripts) needed to be written. Or better yet, take James bond back to his proper era; fighting Cold-war era foes rather than trying to shoehorn him in our times. Connery is still the man! Clive Owen WOULD have been a much better choice.

just benched 300 lbs

I have to say that Lazenby was a complete failure as Bond.

Son of a... Just read the comment that they sould take bond retro - Royale would have been PERFECT! Ah well...

danial craig is a terrible bond

Roy Keane the former football player of man.utd will be the next Bond.

ho, I think i am the only who think like this. very

Thought I'd drop by and offer my two cents on the Best of Bond: -- Sean Connery: The greatest. The perfect blend of suave sophistication and steely toughness. His first three performances were as close to perfection as any Bond actor has ever come. And his natural charisma remains unequalled in the history of the series. Unfortunately, he seemed to grow bored with the role in later years, and it showed in his last couple of performances. -- George Lazenby: The most underrated Bond. Better than he had any right to be, given his lack of acting experience. He remains the most naturally athletic James Bond, and he handled the romantic aspects of his unique Bond script quite well. On the other hand, he sometimes seemed to be trying too hard to match or outdo Connery, rather than finding his own approach to the role. -- Roger Moore: The man who guaranteed the survival of the Bond series in the wake of Connery's departure. The ultimate English gentleman, with a witticism for every occasion, he re-defined the James Bond character to a greater extent than is generally acknowledged. Every subsequent Bond has labored in the shadow of Rog. Unfortunately, he often took the humor too far, and he comes off as a bit of a wuss compared to Connery and some of the other guys. -- Timothy Dalton: The most faithful to Fleming. He tends to be very popular with hardcore Bond fans because his interpretation of the character remains the closest to Bond creator Ian Fleming's original vision of the character. Dalton perfectly captured the cynicism and world-weariness of the literary Bond, particularly in the later novels. On the other hand, Dalton has always been a character actor, not really movie star material, and thus has always been less popular with the public at large than with the fan base. -- Pierce Brosnan: The most overrated James Bond, but still pretty good. He brought unsurpassed style and elegance to the role. Also, he always strove to bring some depth and humanity to the series of weak scripts he was handed. Ultimately, Brosnan's Bond plays like a compromise between Roger Moore's lighthearted approach and Timothy Dalton's hard-boiled interpretation. On the other hand, Brosnan also runs neck-and-neck with Moore for the dubious title of Most Effeminate Bond. -- Daniel Craig: The best Bond since Connery. He's more of a bona-fide movie star than Lazenby or Dalton and more of a masculine tough guy than Moore or Brosnan. His approach to the role is faithful enough to Fleming to satisfy the fan base, and his Steve McQueen-esque charisma has made him a hit with the public at large. By the time he's done, he will clearly rank a close second among the James Bond actors.

July 13,2010. M G M in financial trouble, and no more Bond films. Where do the lies come from? Ian Flemming wrote Bond as a self centered pleasure seeker who carried out the dirty work of his job with great. Bond had hatred in his heart due to torture by the Russians. Bond was NOT a clown, Not one step away from Steve Martin playing a cop That was Roger Moore. Connery was close, the censorship Bond kept his sadism in check. Daniel Craig(after Connery,} Daniel craig is a fucking wild wrecking machine who seems to not mind dyin. If anyone has time to watch each Bond film one hundred times, should take the time to read a Bond book or two.

How anyone could think that Roger Moore is the "quintessential Bond" is a joke to me. I mean each to their own but Moore was a bit of a pansy. He never looked natural holding a gun or throwing a punch. He only looks natural with a cup of tea by a fire to me. Anyone who is a fan of the books knows that Moore is no quintessential Bond. Sean Connery is the actor who created the cinematic Bond so he is the quintessential Bond. Everyone Bond after him has imitated in one way or another what he brought to the role. Lazenby pretty much was trying to duplicate it, and Moore focused on the wit and humor for his portrayal. Moore's Bonds at times felt more like parodies or spoofs of the films that Connery made. He was also too old for the part through most of the films. he practically needed a walker by A View To A Kill. Make no mistake, with out Connery Bond would not have found such a large audience, the right cinematic formula, or endured for as long as it has. It's good to hear that Craig will be keeping the legend alive for a while to come.

Sean connery was always my favorite James Bond,that is until I watched Daniel Craig as Bond in his 2 Bond films so far.this is the Bond I think the writer of the books and the readers always envisioned.but still I dont want to take anything away from Connery.he was the best but sorry to say theres a new Bond.

I have to question some of the choices made since Connery.  Moore was charming but he and Dalton were both regrettable as Bond.  Brosnan was effective but handicapped by politics and ridiculous storylines.  Fans were hoping to see Pierce in the more realistic Royale, which meant Craig and his legacy as Bond started in a hole. The recent material has been much better.  No death rays from space, no face transplants.  Casino Royale was a big hit but it's hard to compare Craig to the rest.  Any Bond would look good in these last coupla movies.