Home | Site Map | Facebook | Contact | Photography | Share   

Op Ed: The Bond Comparison

By Greg Lamont
January 7, 2005


OK........I am starting to be really confused about this "who is the best Bond Crap? I need to provide a perspective few people have viewed before. First off, I don't like people disrespecting Roger Moore or only respecting Connery. We all know Connery was the first and original screen Bond, but that doesn't always mean anything. I base comparisons on things like this:

Sean Connery
  1. I can watch and enjoy From Russia With Love it is a great Bond Movie, but it is a bit more difficult then say a viewing of The Spy who Loved Me.
  2. Connery was obviously Scottish. (Moore being the only TRUE Brit to play the role)
  3. My mother recently told me, and I don't know who I am shocking with this, that Connery was wearing a RUG in his last two to three Bond movies.

Now I am a Connery fan, hands down, he is a legend and deservedly so, I won't deny him that. But has anyone ever thought that maybe the "literary Bond" isn't as entertaining on the silver screen without a few minor alterations. I am more willing to believe that a womanizing secret agent that likes gambling, liquor, and alcohol is a skillful agent/wisecracker than the dry-mouth that Connery brought with it sometimes. Goldfinger was his best work, but that movie is a symphony. Now to Moore and others.

Roger Moore was great for not trying to be Connery, it might have been a franchise-saving move. The lighthearted approach worked for him and by Moonraker, people had forgot Connery (just ask the makers of Never Say Never Again, out grossed by Octopussy). When I see Connery, I see a handsome actor, but Moore actually LOOKS like an agent to me and he has a sinister look that you can't really see because of his up-beatedness. Moore stuck it out for 12 years and seven movies, Connery has run from James Bond ever since he stopped playing him, and didn't care about the role much after that, going so far as "advising" potential new Bonds about the downside of playing Bond. But Moore has nothing but good memories playing the character, and only quit when he was too old to continue because he wanted you to have BOND. The same of Moore applies to Brosnan, love them or not, no one at the time could do it better.

Christian Bale
I just hate that Pierce's movies weren't that good, save the first two, because he was an excellent Bond. And like Moore, he gave you that British gentleman aristocratic feel that was so cool for a womanizing agent. Bond is like a comic book character, so who cares if he is serious-minded or not, how about if he is entertaining to watch and listen to. Dalton was the best "actor" to play Bond. His two movies are excellent and people need to stop complaining about the way that License to Kill deviates from the scheme. If you don't change things up once in a while they get stale.

My idea of the perfect James Bond, and I know it ain't gonna happen because he already has a franchise brewing, is Christian Bale. If you need proof just check out American Psycho and just remember, he is really British in real life. If not him, then I think I would go with Hugh Grant (yes Grant, very British and has the look). Or perhaps Eric Bana, even though he chose to shoot the role down (let's see what kinda movies he gets over time just to see if it was a blunder or not). I picture these guys in a tux and they have the look, which is important. But Jude Law would be great too, I would love opinions and feedback on these. I want the best for future Bond movies, and I think the casting is important and I want to see an old school approach to these new ones because Bond is turning into the routine action film. And that isn't good for the long run.

Article written by Greg Lamont

Also in Universal Exports' Editorials Section

 Home      Contact      Discuss      RSS Feed    

Univex Mall