Why did the best Bond only get two movies?

Why did the best Bond only get two movies?

Attached: images-7.jpg (477x268, 17K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=wlZyeel-n9w
youtube.com/watch?v=B5Dxk2oGaEk
youtube.com/watch?v=6w6FV8P7HXg
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>Goldeneye
>Tomorrow Never Dies
>The World is not Enough
>Die Another Day

Learn to count

Is he really the best or are you just being contrarian

Sure he was better than Moore but honestly I think Brosnan and Connery are on even keel. Fuck Craig

Only one of those is good
He was fantastic, but it was such a different take on the character after 15 years of Moore that people weren't ready for it.

Only Goldeneye is good, TND are TWINE are mediocre, DAD is one of the worst in the franchise

I fuckin love TLD. As other user said, it was a nice break from Moore

>Since Dalton was contracted for three Bond films, the pre-production of his third film began in 1990, in order to be released in 1991. What was confirmed is that the story would deal with the destruction of a chemical weapons laboratory in Scotland, and the events would take place in London, Tokyo and Hong Kong. The film was cancelled due to legal issues between UA/MGM and Eon Productions, which lasted for four years.
>The legal battle ended in 1993, and Dalton was expected to return as James Bond in the next Bond film, which later became GoldenEye. Despite his contract having expired, negotiations with him to renew it took place. Dalton surprised everyone on 12 April 1994 with the announcement that he would not return as James Bond. At this time, he was shooting the mini-series Scarlett.

Attached: james bond licence to kill pam.webm (1918x812, 849K)

I really like Dalton, since he was the best at portraying a believable ruthless professional. However he lacked the Bond charm and levity, so his interactions with the women fell flat. He could portray the "playboy" dimension of the Bond character. I still rate him second after Connery.

For OP

Attached: Sir Timothy Dalton.jpg (1768x2658, 1.05M)

I like Craig although his movies are hit or miss

Attached: stop_getting_bond_wrong.jpg (599x337, 19K)

Because movie rights went into a legal shitstorm and took way too long to clear up. By the time they knew who got what Dalton was long gone.

Personally I feel it's the take on the character. There's a seriousness to him that he plays with and the movies are so over the top, but handle some more topical subjects. If he got to do at least one more it would be no contest because he would have made it his own, but we never will know just how far he could go.

Never did make a bad movie either, unlike the majority of the actors.

Brosnan on the other hand kept slipping into nonsense much like Craig is going and Moore did as well. Their take on the character also lacked the depth that Dalton brought. Not going to argue against Connery, I can respect that opinion.

he got 7

Attached: rogermoore.jpg (2250x1371, 159K)

It's really not fair, user. Dalton's era should be the example of how to "modernize" the series. Just create great Bond stories through a modern lens. None of this fan service or pandering nonsense.

Hahahahaha Brosnan was shit and admitted it himself

Based.

Dalton is Bond.

youtube.com/watch?v=wlZyeel-n9w

Attached: Webp.net-resizeimage (25).jpg (400x400, 230K)

Every bond had something unique. Dalton had this sort of nervous energy about him. Like he is really conveying the stress of his job despite being able to handle it

Tommorrow Never Dies is /ourbondfilm/, it calls out the media jews around the world, the plot is literally a jew journalist manipulating the media to start a war he can cover with his company

Dalton was offered Bond in ‘69 but turned it down because he felt he was too young for the part

>craig
>bond

Attached: bond girls laughing.jpg (565x430, 48K)

based

Doesn't the way he delivers the end line in this scene bug anyone else?

Instead of saying

"better make that two" as in two hours, he says

"better make that's two."

And it makes no sense. It's always bugged me mang

MGM/UA bankrupcy
Basically Pathé tried to buy MGM, took bad decisions, ran short of money and Credit Lyonnais took over.

Brosnan's time as Bond is literally a downward line of quality. It starts out excellent and ends as shit, with very few pauses or upward turns along the way

His cheesy, comedy Bond has aged badly but Roger was such a classy gentlemanly motherfucker that I don't even care. Great guy.

I don't hear it, user. I think Dalton just has really punctuated T's.

Might just be his welsh accent slipping through

movies in general went downwards from mid 90s through 2000s with over reliance on cgi instead of practical effects
youtube.com/watch?v=B5Dxk2oGaEk
at 2:00 they were using models, aged a lot better than DAD with
youtube.com/watch?v=6w6FV8P7HXg

Perhaps so anons

His voice is sheer class either way, I usually picture his voice in my head for Bond when I'm reading the Fleming books

Same here. Connery was great, but had the luxury of playing the role in a period closer to the era the books were written. Dalton nailed the tone of the novels better than anyone.

Source?

based
Moore is the patricians choice

Attached: EE910CD5-38B8-42F9-8AA9-22B784EB0F03.jpg (243x240, 20K)

It feels crazy to me that they haven't already attempted a Bond film set in the 60s. Perfect opportunity to do so after Craig leaves the role

I think he's mentioned it in interviews before. Good call, honestly. OHMSS is a good film that was brushed aside for a long time, but anyone who would have taken the part would have had a massive uphill battle. Even if they were a trained actor and not an Australian model.

I've always stood by the idea of them keeping Bond constant but updating the world around him, mostly because that's how it's always been. But taking it back to the 60's might be the best way to preserve the character moving forward. I honestly thought that's what Casino Royale was going to be before it came out.

I heard that's what Tarantino had an interest in doing, while keeping Brosnan on board

Quality rather than quantity. If he had any more they'd have pushed him into late Roger Moore shenanigans.

He's the only so far who actually looks the most like what Ian Fleming was thinking of

Attached: Fleming007impression.jpg (254x400, 21K)

i like roger, he looks like a beta male which makes it easier to identify with bond

>Roger Moore
>beta male
Now that's some serious bait, mate.

Why do people hate Die Another Day so much? It's one of the comfyest "so bad it's good" movies I've ever seen.

i don't watch James Bond for 'so bad it's good'

the first hour or so is fun as hell but it drops off pretty quick and the ice palace onwards is just awful

They're bringing back Dalton's Aston Martin V8.

Attached: aston-martin-confirms-bond-25-cars-during-royal-set-visit.jpg (1920x1080, 225K)

These dudes get it. Dalton is my favourite Bond. He was the perfect mix of modernizing, realism, and the campy fantastical stuff. Still felt realistic and like there were actual stakes, even though he is such a proficient soldier. Not like the quasi-superhero stuff. Kinda sucks that the best Bond had some of the most munter Bond girls tho

Attached: 1562267537803.jpg (588x767, 68K)

>aged
The tsunami surfing scene was shitty when it came out. I saw it in the cinema and was amazed at how ridiculous in both conception and execution that scene was.

Brosnan still best Bond

Based and Architectpilled

Attached: 1554472735176.png (1791x792, 1.64M)

When did he say that?
Is the character actually stated to be Jewish? I don't remember that. It is a great film either way.
I like TND better than Goldeneye.
OHMSS being good is a tiresome forced meme.

Its a damn shame. The V8 is my favourite one and I think a lot of people hated it due to its shape and angles. Don't want to sound like a hipster but it's annoying people will like it again.