Search found 5 matches: Daniel Craig

You probably could skip the weaker ones to be honest. I've watched all of them because as a kid my family had a Christmas tradition of marathoning mulitple Bond films every year, and later when I was older I seeked out the few I had missed, but would I ever, now, actually recommend someone to watch all 26 of them? Probably not. Especially since the worst ones are actually kinda unwatchable. If you want to watch of all them, sure, go ahead, but I don't think it's necessary at all. Or even necessary to watch them in any particular order (although I would recommend watching all the Daniel Craig ones in order)

Interesting, about a month ago I made my own ranking of every James Bond film, just for fun, not knowing this thread was a thing.

Anyways, my ranking, without commentary:

1. Goldfinger
2. From Russia With Love
3. Skyfall
4. The Spy Who Loved Me
5. Dr. No
6. Casino Royale (2006)
7. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
8. Octopussy
9. Thunderball
10. Diamonds Are Forever

11. You Only Live Twice
12. The Man With the Golden Gun
13. For Your Eyes Only
14. Never Say Never Again
15. The Living Daylights
16. A View to a Kill
17. Moonraker
18. License to Kill
19. Tomorrow Never Dies
20. Live and Let Die

21. Goldeneye
22. Casino Royale (1967)
23. The World is Not Enough
24. Quantum of Solace
25. Die Another Day

I haven't seen Spectre yet, so it's not included. Most of the films I watched over a decade ago and have only a hazy recollection.



Best Bonds:

1. Sean Connery
2. Daniel Craig
3. Roger Moore
4. George Lazenby
5. Timothy Dalton
6. Pierce Brosnan
7. David Niven


Despite how many people dislike them, I feel like Lazenby had the best physicality among all Bonds but the worst comedic timing and Moore had the best comedic timing and the worst physicality. Connery wasn't the best at either but still had ample amounts of both and therefore hit the perfect sweet spot. Dalton was dry and dull. Brosnan just came across as smarmy to me, although maybe I'm being overly harsh on him, simply because the movies he was in were all so terrible. Craig's bond is a very different creature, and is hard to compare to others but he brought a unique take and much greater depth to the character than any actor before.

ShogunRua wrote:The attempts to make Bond serious and gritty, as in Casino Royale or with Daniel Craig are pathetic and foolish. That's not what the appeal of the character or series has ever been.

I'm about the furthest thing from a Bond expert, but I could not agree with you more on this point. I think I might have liked the Craig movies more if they were exactly the same, but with names changed so I didn't know I was watching a Bond movie. But seeing a Bond that has true human emotions and worse, weaknesses!, is just not what I'm looking for when watching a Bond movie.

Rumplesink wrote:Post

You clearly watch the Bond films from a diametrically opposite perspective than either myself or most people. A more serious perspective.

To me, they're amazing, epic adventures. Fantastical and largely divorced from reality. Thrilling action, exotic locations, and a lot of humor.

The attempts to make Bond serious and gritty, as in Casino Royale or with Daniel Craig are pathetic and foolish. That's not what the appeal of the character or series has ever been. It makes sense that some of the people who like the newer Bonds wouldn't care for the older ones, and vice versa.

1. Casino Royale (2006)

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
V

2. All the other ones

I don't really get why the Bond movies are so popular. Some of them are okay for killing a couple of hours, but most are garbage. I had high hopes for the franchise after Casino Royale but QoS, while technically proficient, and interesting in that it was looking like a straight up revenge flick, ended up being pretty dull and featured one of the worst villains of the whole series. Skyfall was decent, I suppose.

A good villain is one of the keys to a good Bond film, and Mads Mikkelsen was spot on in Casino Royale. I quite liked Michael Lonsdale as Hugo Drax in Moonraker, but the film itself sucked balls. The emphasis on stupid gadgets, double entendres and extraneous bimbos made the films with Moore the weakest of the lot. Auric Goldfinger was fun, and that film was one of the better entries. Nothing to write home about though.

I would rate Daniel Craig as the best Bond by far - both in terms of acting ability and portraying Bond as he was intended - a no-nonsense bastard who would do anything to get the job done. Roger Moore was the worst, and the ones he was in got so dumb they lapsed into parody. And the problem with Moore is that I just can't take him seriously in a fight against anyone. Sean Connery was tough but cheesy as fuck. Brosnan was okay, but the Bond movies he did were boring generic action flicks. Dalton never had a chance, with the terrible entries he was part of, and Lazenby just seemed really out of place.

Hopefully Spectre is decent, but I'm not holding my breath.