Originally Posted by Violinist
yea, but why?
Here's my view on why I like Sean Connery the best. Let' start with what I didn't like about the others:
- Lazenby - only around for one movie - many hail it as one of the best - I thought it was an incredible bore (perhaps I just couldn't get past Telly Savalas) - Lazenby did nothing to distinguish himself as Bond, IMHO
- Moore - too "foppish" for lack of a better word - he was good at the suave part, and he certainly delivered the quips better than anyone, but I just had trouble seeing him as an action star - also, some of his films went above and beyond in the "camp" department
- Dalton - his movies weren't particularly well written (not his fault) - also, much like Moore was too foppish, Dalton played the part of the action star well, but looked out of place in his tuxedo
- Brosnan - had the potential to be the best Bond - the movies were substandard, for the most part, however (invisible car!!!???) - he was definitely good at both the suave side and the action star side
This leaves us with Connery. As with Brosnan, he could play both the suave side and the action star side. This leaves us with the content of the films themselves. I just find the Connery films to be better. Thus, I prefer Connery over Brosnan.
If I had to list them, I'd go:
Of course, the jury's still out on Daniel Craig.