I think you may be correct. When there were two Bonds (Moore, Connery not Lazenby) I remember as a 14 year old stating I liked Roger Moore. I hadn't seen any Connery at that point but what I stated felt right.
Older people said I was wrong, that Connery was better. I now believe each decade gets the Bond they deserve, but my love for Moore (especially The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker) grows more every year.
The first Bond movie I ever saw was Octopussy, and I still have a great attachment to it. But the first *Bond* I really got was Timothy Dalton in The Living Daylights. Still a little sad he never got a third swing.
My first Bond was Moore. I saw Moonraker in a multiplex in Jackson Heights, Queens, with Spanish subtitles. And I will admit that as he was the Bond in the theaters and the Bond on TV the most - it would be years till I started to see the Connery films - Moore was James Bond for me to the degree that I even went to see Ffolkes in the theater.
But he's kind of at the bottom of the charts for me now. Even if his Bond lacks some of the harsh misogyny of the Connery era (and of Connery), those films are sort of silly even by Bond standards. The other Bonds are either better actors or benefit from better scripts and production values. Even Lazenby. But who knows? Maybe if I find the chance to revisit Moore, my old affection will return.
I was born in 1982 so James Bond was more of a force in pop culture than he is now. I was certainly aware of the character during the Dalton era but didn't start watching until the Pierce Brosnan run. All that being said, Daniel Craig is the best James Bond. Maybe it's because he was Bond when I became more aware of the political landscape and he perfectly mirrors it. Or, for an even simpler explanation, if you locked all the actors that have played James Bond in a room and only one could come out the one that walked out would be Daniel Craig.
My dad introduced me to Connery as Bond and those movies are really the only ones that I think of as Bond movies. Never got into the Moore movies and, while I enjoy the Craig movies, it just feels like a different series to me. Not that it's necessarily a bad thing.
I think it's possible to revise one's opinion in hindsight. My first Bond was Roger Moore. While I liked him at the time, I would say my favorite Bonds have been Brosnan and Dalton.
Here is thing. Me not actually remember which Bond movie me saw first. They just ingrained in childhood. Papa Cookie introduced me to 007, and me spent many lazy Sunday afternoons watching Bond movies indiscriminately. So me more or less simultaneously started with Connery and Moore, before me was old enough to have critical faculty enough to distinguish. And then first Bond me saw in theater was Timothy Dalton. (No way was Mama Cookie going to sign off on 8-year-old monster going to see movie called Octopussy)
So me not really have definitive actor, me just have platonic ideal of James Bond as character, and each actor bring something different to that. For many years as adult, me would have said Moore was least favorite, but now me like his take on Bond and just regret that he ended up in lot of bad movies. And while Connery is gold standard (pretend me sung that to tune of Goldfinger), Craig is favorite, although who knows how much of that recency bias. And least favorite might be Brosnan. His hyper-competent Bond (and very competent acting) have less character than any other actor. (And he got saddled with bad movies too apart from Goldeneye, although me have soft spot for World Not Enough.)
I went into The World Is Not Enough with low expectations (and also arrived super late, like last year), and I really liked it because it tried to tip the usual tropes on their side. I didn't quite make it there, but it suited the times and it sort of suited Brosnan, who got stuck playing the part between the end of the Cold War and the utter reexamining of what Bond means during the current era.
It certainly have dumb moments, but me absolutely loved central conceit (spoiler for 20-year-old movie), that Bond finally meet woman who good match for him... and she turn out to be villain. That brilliant subversion of Bond template and me surprised it took 19 movies to get there. Carlyle was largely wasted, but in fairness his character was fake-out, as he not really main villain after all.
Anyway, for my money, "You can't kill me James, you'd miss me too much." "I never miss.", followed by wordless exchange between Bond and M right after, is favorite acting moment in whole series, although me think Craig does better acting overall.
This is a topic I've discussed a lot lately, especially as I've introduced by almost-12-year-old son to James Bond with Skyfall over the weekend and No Time to Die last night. I was born in the early '70s so Roger Moore is my first Bond -- and as you guys put it, your first Bond is theoretically your favorite Bond. But while the Gen Xer in me appreciates the knowing goofiness of Moore, the film critic in me loves Daniel Craig the most for all the complexity and vulnerability he's shown in the role. Part of that is the writing, of course, and the willingness to let the character evolve and reveal some depth. But Craig also seems better equipped for that challenge than any actor who's played Bond before him. He can be dashing and roguish and sexy, but he's also deeply compelling in Bond's darker, introspective moments. Thanks for posing this question!
I grew up in the 70s and 80s watching Bond movies when they’d play on tv on Sunday nights, those were mostly Moore. The Moore ones were also the first ones I saw in the theater. My dad was a Bond enthusiast who preferred Connery and I couldn’t understand that as a kid.
As an adult Bond obsessive, it’s hard to pick between Connery (as the archetype) and Craig (as the most grounded). I’d never pick Moore as my favorite, though I do enjoy the camp of his era. Connery’s run isn’t as consistently good as Craig’s but From Russia with Love and Goldfinger are (obvs) the cloth from which all subsequent Bonds are cut. Bond needs a measure of brutishness, and perhaps even psychopathy, and that was largely missing between the Connery and Craig eras.
Side note, I’m glad to see OHMSS getting its due credit. Lazenby certainly isn’t the best actor of the lot, but that film is absolutely one of the best of the series.
The first Bond film I saw any of was Moonraker on ITV in the UK, just at the boat chase that ends with Bond hang-gliding away - I was immediately hooked. So Roger Moore was the first Bond I saw, but Timothy Dalton was the actor currently in the role at that point and he is definitely my favourite. I will forever be upset that Licence to Kill was rated 15 in the UK so 9 year old me was unable to go and see it - I was limited to re-reading the Licence to Kill section of The James Bond Movie Book over and over and being sure Sanchez was going to kill Bond with a machete based on one of the stills!
For me though, I love all of the Bond films made in the proper Cubby Broccoli era (1962 - 1989). Mentally I treat the post-Licence to Kill films as a totally different set of films that I just don't love as much, but conversely never have such high expectations for. The Brosnan run is particularly bad sadly. The shared cast and crew that ran through those first 27 years (so many of the crew that I can name due to their credits in multiple opening titles sequences - camera operators, stuntmen, special effects artists) really contributed to some sense of consistent production that just works for me. As well as all practical effects of course (Roger Moore rear projection skiing aside) - as practical as No Time to Die is there are too many obvious CG inserted backgrounds etc that I miss that feeling that they really visited locations (even though they actually did in a number of cases).
This is probably also proving a point about nostalgia as I love the films I saw when I was 7 and I'm less enamoured by the ones that came out from when I was 15... All I can say is that being from Edinburgh I had to be brave to say that Timothy Dalton was my favourite Bond and not Sean Connery! If only he'd done many more the world would be a better place.
I was six years old when GoldenEye came out, and remember seeing posters for it everywhere, and for some reason being fascinated by them, despite having no idea what 007 was. I saw it when I was 8 or so after staring at it at the video store for a year, and quickly ate up the Bond back-catalog (also thanks to the same video store) as well as the N64 game in time to be hyped up for The World is Not Enough.
Even seeing all the Connery and Moore entries fast behind his, and having Casino Royale come out when I was just the right age for it, Brosnan still left the biggest impression on me, and is absolutely the one I think of when I think of Bond, for better or worse.
My first was Goldeneye and I do have a specific fondness for the Brosnan bond films as a whole, both for that portrayal and their depiction of an interbellum between the Cold War and 9/11. Still, though, some of the earlier Bonds like From Russia With Love, OHMSS, You Only Live Twice, and The Spy Sho Loved Me are my favorites—though again, it might be because those are the ones that most influenced the Austin Powers films that I ALSO grew up with.
I couldn't agree more - I, too, was born into Moore and have no issue with that. Part of it is that I only know Moore as Bond, knowing nothing of his career before or since. Pierce Brosnan was already Remington Steele in my mind, and Daniel Craig was already Daniel Craig - so they don't feel like Bond so much as actors I know playing Bond. Dalton fits that anonymity factor, but he just seemed dull to me (or maybe it was the movies themselves as you suggest), but he certainly didn't have that twinkle in his eye that I loved from Moore.
Ironically, Dalton has that twinkle in everything else I have seen him in. I liked him in The Living Daylights, but if only he'd brought just a bit of his swagger from The Rockeeter or Hot Fuzz with him.
My first experience was Connery, my second was Moore. I liked them both, I'd say equally. The exchange from Connery to Moore seemed fluid to me. I'm not downplaying the quality of the other Bonds when writing this. It's just when I think of James Bond, these are the two with whom I identify the character. So the answer to your question is yes. I also recall fondly driving in the car and hearing McCartney singing Live and Let Die on the radio. Fond memories from my teenage years.
Asking me to pick my favorite Bond is like asking me to pick my favorite beer: the variety is part of the fun! I'm close to your age, Keith, so Moore was my introduction to the character, and I definitely have a soft spot the wild chases and stunts from that era. But if I make a Top 5 Bond Films list, it's going to have 3 or 4 different Bonds on it (depending on the day). The best Bond films are spread so widely across the actors that it makes it difficult to pick only one to hold dear.
Connery laid the groundwork and set the stage for so many imitators. Moore's style is very different, and I admit I may give it more credit than it's due because of my early imprinting on him, but his run still has so much charm. Dalton had a good take on the character, but uninspiring films. Brosnan had a strong start with Goldeneye, but he was saddled with a writing/production team that didn't really figure out how to bring Bond into a new era, along with some of the worst "Bond Girls" ever. Craig's introduction was instantly one of the best Bond films ever, and how do you follow that up?
I will say this: All of Connery and a chunk of Moore were all created before I was aware of the character, so when I watch them I specifically watch them as "period pieces". And when I watched Dalton forward I watch them as of the time. I'm certain that makes my opinion and understanding and fondness of them different.
no edit button here, huh? I'd like to change my criticism of the Bond Girls: the blame truly rests on the writing and production team, not on them personally
I don't think so, but I suppose it may depend somewhat on what one likes/loves about Bond the character versus the Bond films. The first Bond I saw was Roger Moore in "The Spy Who Loved Me." I'm not sure why my mom took her one-month-shy-of-six-years-old son to it, but she did. (I suppose since I had seen "Star Wars" earlier that summer, what was the big deal?)
I remember loving Bond right away, even though I was scared to see "Moonraker" because Jaws's metal teeth terrified me, and I was nervous to see him again. Yes, back then, I remember all the adults saying Connery was the better Bond, and I didn't get it because how could that other guy be Bond. But as Moore's films seemed to get weaker with each outing—and fell progressively more 1980s nighttime soap—and I saw the Connery films for the first time, I began to understand.
What made me soooo excited for Dalton's future after seeing "The Living Daylights" was not that mediocre entry, but rather that by then, I had read most of the original novels and stories, and in Dalton's Bond, I thought I saw the closest approximation to Fleming's character as introduced in "Casino Royale." Daniel Craig was well-served by the decision to reboot the film franchise by going back to that original novel, allowing for the greatest reinterpretation of the character, which certainly by the time Brosnan was done had become pretty tired and beyond formulaic. I had always wished Dalton had had the chance to do that, though certainly a "Casino Royale" in the late '80s would have differed greatly from the one we got with Craig. I don't think it's coincidence that once they had used-up all the novels and began combining and building off short stories, the storylines took a negative turn.
I think Craig was fantastic, but I still wish we had seen Dalton have a chance with better material, and I miss the Clive Owen Bond who never was. But I think in totality, Moore was my first Bond, but at best my third favorite.
I appreciate the first Moore movies more than the latter ones;
"I miss the Clive Owen Bond who never was." Me too. I was hoping he would be picked after Brosnan. Daniel Craig is fine, but I would have loved to see Clive Owen's take on the part.
I think you may be correct. When there were two Bonds (Moore, Connery not Lazenby) I remember as a 14 year old stating I liked Roger Moore. I hadn't seen any Connery at that point but what I stated felt right.
Older people said I was wrong, that Connery was better. I now believe each decade gets the Bond they deserve, but my love for Moore (especially The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker) grows more every year.
No. Or at least, I don't think so.
The first Bond movie I ever saw was Octopussy, and I still have a great attachment to it. But the first *Bond* I really got was Timothy Dalton in The Living Daylights. Still a little sad he never got a third swing.
My first Bond was Moore. I saw Moonraker in a multiplex in Jackson Heights, Queens, with Spanish subtitles. And I will admit that as he was the Bond in the theaters and the Bond on TV the most - it would be years till I started to see the Connery films - Moore was James Bond for me to the degree that I even went to see Ffolkes in the theater.
But he's kind of at the bottom of the charts for me now. Even if his Bond lacks some of the harsh misogyny of the Connery era (and of Connery), those films are sort of silly even by Bond standards. The other Bonds are either better actors or benefit from better scripts and production values. Even Lazenby. But who knows? Maybe if I find the chance to revisit Moore, my old affection will return.
I only caught ffolkes on cable, but I did really enjoy seeing him do something other than wink and goof.
He was pretty good in The Saint, which is what got him the job as Bond.
I was born in 1982 so James Bond was more of a force in pop culture than he is now. I was certainly aware of the character during the Dalton era but didn't start watching until the Pierce Brosnan run. All that being said, Daniel Craig is the best James Bond. Maybe it's because he was Bond when I became more aware of the political landscape and he perfectly mirrors it. Or, for an even simpler explanation, if you locked all the actors that have played James Bond in a room and only one could come out the one that walked out would be Daniel Craig.
My dad introduced me to Connery as Bond and those movies are really the only ones that I think of as Bond movies. Never got into the Moore movies and, while I enjoy the Craig movies, it just feels like a different series to me. Not that it's necessarily a bad thing.
I think it's possible to revise one's opinion in hindsight. My first Bond was Roger Moore. While I liked him at the time, I would say my favorite Bonds have been Brosnan and Dalton.
Here is thing. Me not actually remember which Bond movie me saw first. They just ingrained in childhood. Papa Cookie introduced me to 007, and me spent many lazy Sunday afternoons watching Bond movies indiscriminately. So me more or less simultaneously started with Connery and Moore, before me was old enough to have critical faculty enough to distinguish. And then first Bond me saw in theater was Timothy Dalton. (No way was Mama Cookie going to sign off on 8-year-old monster going to see movie called Octopussy)
So me not really have definitive actor, me just have platonic ideal of James Bond as character, and each actor bring something different to that. For many years as adult, me would have said Moore was least favorite, but now me like his take on Bond and just regret that he ended up in lot of bad movies. And while Connery is gold standard (pretend me sung that to tune of Goldfinger), Craig is favorite, although who knows how much of that recency bias. And least favorite might be Brosnan. His hyper-competent Bond (and very competent acting) have less character than any other actor. (And he got saddled with bad movies too apart from Goldeneye, although me have soft spot for World Not Enough.)
I went into The World Is Not Enough with low expectations (and also arrived super late, like last year), and I really liked it because it tried to tip the usual tropes on their side. I didn't quite make it there, but it suited the times and it sort of suited Brosnan, who got stuck playing the part between the end of the Cold War and the utter reexamining of what Bond means during the current era.
It certainly have dumb moments, but me absolutely loved central conceit (spoiler for 20-year-old movie), that Bond finally meet woman who good match for him... and she turn out to be villain. That brilliant subversion of Bond template and me surprised it took 19 movies to get there. Carlyle was largely wasted, but in fairness his character was fake-out, as he not really main villain after all.
Anyway, for my money, "You can't kill me James, you'd miss me too much." "I never miss.", followed by wordless exchange between Bond and M right after, is favorite acting moment in whole series, although me think Craig does better acting overall.
This is a topic I've discussed a lot lately, especially as I've introduced by almost-12-year-old son to James Bond with Skyfall over the weekend and No Time to Die last night. I was born in the early '70s so Roger Moore is my first Bond -- and as you guys put it, your first Bond is theoretically your favorite Bond. But while the Gen Xer in me appreciates the knowing goofiness of Moore, the film critic in me loves Daniel Craig the most for all the complexity and vulnerability he's shown in the role. Part of that is the writing, of course, and the willingness to let the character evolve and reveal some depth. But Craig also seems better equipped for that challenge than any actor who's played Bond before him. He can be dashing and roguish and sexy, but he's also deeply compelling in Bond's darker, introspective moments. Thanks for posing this question!
I grew up in the 70s and 80s watching Bond movies when they’d play on tv on Sunday nights, those were mostly Moore. The Moore ones were also the first ones I saw in the theater. My dad was a Bond enthusiast who preferred Connery and I couldn’t understand that as a kid.
As an adult Bond obsessive, it’s hard to pick between Connery (as the archetype) and Craig (as the most grounded). I’d never pick Moore as my favorite, though I do enjoy the camp of his era. Connery’s run isn’t as consistently good as Craig’s but From Russia with Love and Goldfinger are (obvs) the cloth from which all subsequent Bonds are cut. Bond needs a measure of brutishness, and perhaps even psychopathy, and that was largely missing between the Connery and Craig eras.
Side note, I’m glad to see OHMSS getting its due credit. Lazenby certainly isn’t the best actor of the lot, but that film is absolutely one of the best of the series.
The first Bond film I saw any of was Moonraker on ITV in the UK, just at the boat chase that ends with Bond hang-gliding away - I was immediately hooked. So Roger Moore was the first Bond I saw, but Timothy Dalton was the actor currently in the role at that point and he is definitely my favourite. I will forever be upset that Licence to Kill was rated 15 in the UK so 9 year old me was unable to go and see it - I was limited to re-reading the Licence to Kill section of The James Bond Movie Book over and over and being sure Sanchez was going to kill Bond with a machete based on one of the stills!
For me though, I love all of the Bond films made in the proper Cubby Broccoli era (1962 - 1989). Mentally I treat the post-Licence to Kill films as a totally different set of films that I just don't love as much, but conversely never have such high expectations for. The Brosnan run is particularly bad sadly. The shared cast and crew that ran through those first 27 years (so many of the crew that I can name due to their credits in multiple opening titles sequences - camera operators, stuntmen, special effects artists) really contributed to some sense of consistent production that just works for me. As well as all practical effects of course (Roger Moore rear projection skiing aside) - as practical as No Time to Die is there are too many obvious CG inserted backgrounds etc that I miss that feeling that they really visited locations (even though they actually did in a number of cases).
This is probably also proving a point about nostalgia as I love the films I saw when I was 7 and I'm less enamoured by the ones that came out from when I was 15... All I can say is that being from Edinburgh I had to be brave to say that Timothy Dalton was my favourite Bond and not Sean Connery! If only he'd done many more the world would be a better place.
Short answer: probably yes.
I was six years old when GoldenEye came out, and remember seeing posters for it everywhere, and for some reason being fascinated by them, despite having no idea what 007 was. I saw it when I was 8 or so after staring at it at the video store for a year, and quickly ate up the Bond back-catalog (also thanks to the same video store) as well as the N64 game in time to be hyped up for The World is Not Enough.
Even seeing all the Connery and Moore entries fast behind his, and having Casino Royale come out when I was just the right age for it, Brosnan still left the biggest impression on me, and is absolutely the one I think of when I think of Bond, for better or worse.
My first was Goldeneye and I do have a specific fondness for the Brosnan bond films as a whole, both for that portrayal and their depiction of an interbellum between the Cold War and 9/11. Still, though, some of the earlier Bonds like From Russia With Love, OHMSS, You Only Live Twice, and The Spy Sho Loved Me are my favorites—though again, it might be because those are the ones that most influenced the Austin Powers films that I ALSO grew up with.
I couldn't agree more - I, too, was born into Moore and have no issue with that. Part of it is that I only know Moore as Bond, knowing nothing of his career before or since. Pierce Brosnan was already Remington Steele in my mind, and Daniel Craig was already Daniel Craig - so they don't feel like Bond so much as actors I know playing Bond. Dalton fits that anonymity factor, but he just seemed dull to me (or maybe it was the movies themselves as you suggest), but he certainly didn't have that twinkle in his eye that I loved from Moore.
Ironically, Dalton has that twinkle in everything else I have seen him in. I liked him in The Living Daylights, but if only he'd brought just a bit of his swagger from The Rockeeter or Hot Fuzz with him.
My first experience was Connery, my second was Moore. I liked them both, I'd say equally. The exchange from Connery to Moore seemed fluid to me. I'm not downplaying the quality of the other Bonds when writing this. It's just when I think of James Bond, these are the two with whom I identify the character. So the answer to your question is yes. I also recall fondly driving in the car and hearing McCartney singing Live and Let Die on the radio. Fond memories from my teenage years.
Asking me to pick my favorite Bond is like asking me to pick my favorite beer: the variety is part of the fun! I'm close to your age, Keith, so Moore was my introduction to the character, and I definitely have a soft spot the wild chases and stunts from that era. But if I make a Top 5 Bond Films list, it's going to have 3 or 4 different Bonds on it (depending on the day). The best Bond films are spread so widely across the actors that it makes it difficult to pick only one to hold dear.
Connery laid the groundwork and set the stage for so many imitators. Moore's style is very different, and I admit I may give it more credit than it's due because of my early imprinting on him, but his run still has so much charm. Dalton had a good take on the character, but uninspiring films. Brosnan had a strong start with Goldeneye, but he was saddled with a writing/production team that didn't really figure out how to bring Bond into a new era, along with some of the worst "Bond Girls" ever. Craig's introduction was instantly one of the best Bond films ever, and how do you follow that up?
I will say this: All of Connery and a chunk of Moore were all created before I was aware of the character, so when I watch them I specifically watch them as "period pieces". And when I watched Dalton forward I watch them as of the time. I'm certain that makes my opinion and understanding and fondness of them different.
no edit button here, huh? I'd like to change my criticism of the Bond Girls: the blame truly rests on the writing and production team, not on them personally
I don't think so, but I suppose it may depend somewhat on what one likes/loves about Bond the character versus the Bond films. The first Bond I saw was Roger Moore in "The Spy Who Loved Me." I'm not sure why my mom took her one-month-shy-of-six-years-old son to it, but she did. (I suppose since I had seen "Star Wars" earlier that summer, what was the big deal?)
I remember loving Bond right away, even though I was scared to see "Moonraker" because Jaws's metal teeth terrified me, and I was nervous to see him again. Yes, back then, I remember all the adults saying Connery was the better Bond, and I didn't get it because how could that other guy be Bond. But as Moore's films seemed to get weaker with each outing—and fell progressively more 1980s nighttime soap—and I saw the Connery films for the first time, I began to understand.
What made me soooo excited for Dalton's future after seeing "The Living Daylights" was not that mediocre entry, but rather that by then, I had read most of the original novels and stories, and in Dalton's Bond, I thought I saw the closest approximation to Fleming's character as introduced in "Casino Royale." Daniel Craig was well-served by the decision to reboot the film franchise by going back to that original novel, allowing for the greatest reinterpretation of the character, which certainly by the time Brosnan was done had become pretty tired and beyond formulaic. I had always wished Dalton had had the chance to do that, though certainly a "Casino Royale" in the late '80s would have differed greatly from the one we got with Craig. I don't think it's coincidence that once they had used-up all the novels and began combining and building off short stories, the storylines took a negative turn.
I think Craig was fantastic, but I still wish we had seen Dalton have a chance with better material, and I miss the Clive Owen Bond who never was. But I think in totality, Moore was my first Bond, but at best my third favorite.
I appreciate the first Moore movies more than the latter ones;
"I miss the Clive Owen Bond who never was." Me too. I was hoping he would be picked after Brosnan. Daniel Craig is fine, but I would have loved to see Clive Owen's take on the part.