I liked Dalton, his Bond was darker and closer to the character of Ian Fleming's books than arguably any other especially following on from Roger Moore, who really wasn't anything like the true Bond Fleming intended.
You could say Daniel Craig's role as Bond is most similar to Dalton and he was getting rave reviews for being a darker character.
Okay, I have to say this cause you people are relentless. Now, I realize that Bond started in the 60s and we didn't have a long history of film making back then. But at least now, in 2008, we know something, we've learned something.
A movie based on a book is not made for the people who love the book. There, I said it. I think we've seen time and time again that a movie that tries to stay true to the story in a novel ends up being deeply flawed in all sorts of ways. It's like trying to flush your cat down the toilet, it's possible (I assume) but noone would admire you for it. The movie is made for a different audience, a new one, a larger one. It gives people who never heard about the book a chance to enjoy the story, not the exact same story, but a similar story.
So Broccoli didn't make Bond like Ian Flemming wrote. Why would I care? I saw the movies, I liked them, especially as a teenager, that's really all I need to know. I haven't read the books and I have no plans to read them. The movies themselves make a perfectly good foundations to base opinions about Bond on.
For me Pierce Brosnan's films were truelly terrible, (although I liked Goldeneye but that was more to do with the N64 game) and his last one was laughable!
you didn't like his personality?
Buy on AliExpress.com
). Main locations were Hamburg, Saigon. It was Brosnan's second movie, Goldeneye was also good.
