If there is a previous poll on this, I apologize. I know we’ve had threads, but I’m not sure if I have seen an actual poll on it.
I worded it as “best/favorite”, though I admit that you may have a favorite you acknowledge is not the best. When in doubt, choose the one you think is genuinely the best Bond.
While I grew up with Roger Moore and think of him first as Bond, I did vote for Lazenby. His movie is my favorite of the early Bond movies and I think he is unfairly overlooked by most Bond fans.
My second choice is Dalton. I think License to Kill is also a great movie and is the only Bond film I have in my personal collection. I think the portrayal of Bond is excellent and I like the “darkness” he brings to the role.
Daniel Craig is a good “update” of Bond and I am glad they got rid of some of the baggage the series had carried for years and has got me interested in Bond again.
Connery far and away still my sentimental favorite, although I think Craig really IS Bond now. Dalton is unfairly maligned IMHO, but just isn’t in their league.
I grew up watching Sean so he was the gold fingered standard. Craig is easily my second favorite and a worthy successor. He’s a differnt Bond but I’m very happy with the changes he’s brought.
Dalton was okay but to me he’ll always be Heathcliff first.
Lasenby was interesting enough. Had he (or his agent) not been so greedy we might have become quite used to him.
I never had much use for Roger Moore or Pierce Brosnan in anything at all. Remmington Steele? Please.
I always thought Moore represented Fleming’s character the best, but he was getting old by the time his turn came around. Fleming also thought Moore’s portrayal of the Saint made him a good Bond. OTOH, it’s not like the movies had all that much basis in the books anyway.
Connery was traditionally considered the best, because he was the first exposure to Bond for most. But his acting was wooden, and he couldn’t pull off the comic quips. However, if his acting was wooden, Lazenby’s was made of basalt.
I don’t like any of the newer Bonds, or the films. The character and concept are anachronistic.
I can’t disagree more. I started reading the books after I saw some bond movies on TV with Connery, and the first movie I saw that the theatres was "the Spy who loved me " (1979) with Moore. In the books, and is a bad ass. I cold hearted mofo. The earlier Connery and present Craig capture the books that the films were based on.
Moore portrayed 007 as a parody or a buffoon.
To me it’s not even close. There is Connery. With Craig as a very far second.
Connery by far, but I have a soft spot for Moore, imho the most underappreciated Bond.
Yeah, the guy really camped it up, especially there towards the end (Octopussy, anyone?). But that’s really more the fault of the filmmakers, than of him. The guy had excellent comic timing and really made the best of the material he was given.
Also, the '70s Bond flicks are pretty interesting artifacts of the filmmaking trends of their time. You have the Blaxploitation Bond of “Live and Let Die,” the undersea adventure Bond of “The Spy Who Loved Me,” and the “failed attempt to capitalize on the success of Star Wars” Bond, **Moonraker. **
Connery, without a shadow of a doubt, is the iconic movie Bond. I voted for Craig because his portayl in Casino Royale is wayyyy closer to the books than anyone else.