Holiday (James) Bonding

by Duane Burghard
©2014

The truth is that, while I’m not ever shy about sharing my opinion (particularly if I’m asked), I don’t particularly like debates or arguments, and this fact is primarily due to a flaw in my character that comes up frequently; I believe that, in most cases, there is an empirical right and wrong. As a result,  in most debates someone is just, well, wrong, and they should either wise up or shut up (or both). 

There is, however, an important exception to this rule of mine, I don’t mind (and even enjoy) debates when the subject being debated is either completely or significantly subjective and there is very clearly no empirically right or wrong answer. For example, what’s the best part of neopolitan ice cream, the strawberry part or the chocolate part (vanilla part fans should stay out of this, you’re just wrong). What I’m saying is that I don’t mind arguing at all if what we’re arguing about is completely silly, and this point brings me to one of my favorite holiday season debate topics; who is the best James Bond (or for real fans, which is the best Bond film).

The question of “Best Bond” has been around since about 1973 (when Roger Moore took over the role … there wasn’t any serious discussion before that arguing that George Lazenby was better than Sean Connery, but Moore definitely has his own set of fans), but the debate didn’t really have a season. Then, about 30 years ago (1985), media mogul Ted Turner made another one of the truly brilliant moves of his career; he got hold of MGM/UA, giving him the rights to broadcast all of the Bond films. Very shortly thereafter, the holiday season became synonymous with the “7 days of 007” (and like promotions) on his TBS and TNT cable TV stations (today the tradition continues in places like the MGMHD movie channel). And because the holidays are often about gathering with your family to argue about ridiulous crap at the dinner table, the debate about who is the best James Bond has become at least somewhat linked with two times of the year; the holidays, and any time a new Bond film is released (it is also true that debating who is the best James Bond is, well usually anyway, significantly less explosive than national politics or the results of trying to deep fry a frozen turkey).

While it is shocking to no one, I have an opinion on this subject, and it is one that is sure irritate many of you (which is something of an unintentional hobby of mine). Despite how strongly I hold some positions, the fact is that I can’t decide who my favorite Bond is. My answer to the question is that they are each my favorite in different ways for different reasons and, since this is my blog, I’ll explain why AND I’ll get to engage in one of my other favorite things in life; sprinkling in lots of “Did you know?” stuff that I find interesting and/or relevant (for those who don’t know, my mind has one of the world’s largest “DVD commentary” tracks of occasionally relevant trivia). If nothing else, what you will gain is amunition for supporting whoever you like best.

Sean Connery, the man Bond creator Ian Fleming originally didn’t like and then later was so enamored with that he altered the character (changing his heritage and giving him more of a sense of humor), literally defined the role. Connery had and has a number of advantages as Bond, but three in particular leap out at me. First, he had access to Fleming (who died in 1964); second, no one else had played the role so he had carte blanche to define it; and of course third, he was very VERY good. Connery’s Bond reflected the extreme misogyny of the times (even moreso than subsequent iterations of the character), but he did so in a way that was strangely less offensive than it should have been to most viewers (including women). He was cool, smart, confident, sexy and exuded an entire range of characterisitics that fit him perfectly into the phrase “women wanted him and men wanted to be like him.” He’s a common choice for Best Bond, but I say not so fast.

Connery tired of the role after five films (at one point saying he was fed up and even that he wanted to kill James Bond) and left in 1967 after You Only Live Twice (which is probably my favorite Bond film of all). He was talked in to returning in 1971 for Diamonds Are Forever and then, of course, for Never Say Never in 1983 (a film that was decidedly not a part of the main franchise). But Connery’s departure opens the door to one of my favorite side stories about the Bond films; casting.

It is generally accepted that Connery got the role of James Bond because of Albert Broccoli’s wife, Dana, but what is less known is that one of the other actors which the producers originally wanted and sought to play the *first* James Bond was … Roger Moore, and you’ll see something of a theme emerge here as we go on. Moore was unavailabe because of his television commitments (specifically Maverick and then The Saint), so Connery was eventually chosen. But this is where it gets funny/ironic/interesting. When Connery quit after You Only Live Twice, the producers originally wanted and even offered the role of James Bond to … wait for it, Timothy Dalton, who turned down the role because he felt he was too young and that he didn’t have what it took to succeed Connery. After Diamonds Are Forever, Moore (an original finalist for Bond) was available, and so he became Bond. When Moore quit/was fired (probably a couple of films later than he should have left or been retired), the studio (and just about everyone in the world) wanted Pierce Brosnan to take over as James Bond, but Brosnan couldn’t get out of his TV contract to do another season of Remington Steele (and here is that pattern) so the producers went back to Dalton. After Dalton’s two films, they moved on to Brosnan. There are tons of “what if” games that Bond fans can play in their heads regarding these facts (and I certainly find it fascinating), but let’s go back to Connery’s original departure.

After Timothy Dalton turned down the role (and Roger Moore was still unavailable), the producers chose unknown Australian car salesman/model George Lazenby. There are a number of stories online about what happened next, but according to the DVD “The James Bond Story” which includes interviews with the main people involved, the short version is this; while stories that Lazenby and (On Her Majesty’s Secret Service) director Hunt did not get along, the fact is that it was Lazenby’s agent who essentially spoke out of turn and soured the relationship between Lazenby and Broccoli et al. The result of this row was Lazenby’s ouster and one of the most significant film changes in the history of the franchise. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service was supposed to have a very happy ending (the wedding scene with them driving off, roll credits etc.). The producers knew they wanted to start Diamonds Are Forever off with the murder of Mrs. Bond and, rather than worry about the ability to get actress Diana Rigg back, they decided to film the murder scene at the time. When Lazenby’s future as 007 abruptly ended, the end of the film was re-edited to include the murder scene (the ending we all know), giving it a “downer” ending which many people feel affected audiences impression of the film. My take on Lazenby is that he didn’t really get a fair shot at playing Bond and we’ll never know how good he could have been, but as it is, he doesn’t really figure in my calculations about what he brought to the role because he and the film are such an outlier.

In any case, after On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, the studio ran back to Connery for Diamonds Are Forever before settling in for more than a decade with Roger Moore. Moore was “my” James Bond in that, given when I was born (1965), he was the first Bond I was old enough to go see at the movies. Moore’s great claim to fame as James Bond was his humor. His Bond was a good deal funnier than Connery’s and people like me who appreciate humor naturally gravitated towards his portrayal of the role. The movies quickly reflected that change in a number of ways, including incorporating funny recurring characters (e.g. Clifton James as the completely hilarious Sherrif J.W. Pepper). Moore’s Bond also saw the “Bond gadgets” element of the franchise go into high gear, and that may have led to a kind of fan blowback (after Moonraker in particular); the general perception of many fans was that James Bond was moving too deeply into science fiction (which for me, as a science fiction fan, wasn’t a problem at all). Ultimately, the only real knock on Roger Moore’s Bond that I agree with is that he stayed at least 1 and arguably 2 films too long before bowing out (although the last film had as much to do with casting issues as anything else).

Timothy Dalton took over the role of James Bond in an era where the Cold War was ending and the AIDS crisis was exploding, and his films reflected an unusual cultural awareness to the times. But while Dalton’s Bond is rarely singled out as anyone’s #1 favorite, I feel strongly that Dalton’s Bond was the best and most pure representation of what Fleming intended, which is to say that Dalton emphasized the fact that Bond was more obsessive and crazy (psychotic in fact) than glib or sauve. But Dalton’s hairline and his age by the time he got the chance to play the role were both working against him from day one, and after two films, he was gone.

With Dalton out of the way, audiences who had been clamoring for years at that point for Brosnan to play the role, finally got their wish. In my opinion, Brosnan is *impossible* not to at least like in the role, and one of the reasons I like him so much is that I consider him to be the “amalgamated” Bond, incorporating the best of all of his predecessors. He exuded the cool and sauve of Connery, the humor of Moore, the edge that Dalton brought, and then he added a tension and emotional power that was uniquely his own. In a way, Brosnan wasn’t *a* James Bond, he was *all* the James Bonds. I’ve heard a lot of stories about Brosnan’s departure from the role, and none of them are very pleasant, so suffice it to say that he and the producers had a falling out, and he was gone. 

After a  hiatus, the “re-imagining” craze of the early 21st Century came to the Bond world, and the series was rebooted as a FAR more serious and dark story with Daniel Craig in the role. Craig does an excellent job of taking the most emotionally serious and tense parts of Brosnan’s character and building on them in a way that was appropriate for the personality of the re-boot. His Bond is a lot colder and tougher, but his films (until Skyfall) are also, in my opinion, a lot less fun and not nearly as fun to watch as those of the Bonds before him (again, Skyfall being an exception and definitely my favorite of his Bond films).

So I'm pretty useless in the Best Bond debate because I like them all. In fact, if you were to ask me what makes a really good Bond film,  pretty much the last thing I would list as a criteria would be the actor in the title role, but at least when it comes to best Bond movie, I have a lot more specific opinions. I’ve spent no small amount of spare time trying to answer the “favorite Bond film” question for myself (I can’t argue that this has been an effective use of my spare time, but we all have silly things we think about), and the big thing that’s come out of that search for me is learning WHY I think a given Bond film is good (i.e. what my criteria is). Earlier I noted that, if I had to choose a single James Bond film as my favorite, I would probably choose You Only Live Twice. The film captures its time well and has a fun and interesting story along with interesting characters etc., but the real reason I like it, and the thing it has in common for me with my runners up like The Man With The Golden Gun and Die Another Day is sweeping, grand scale cinematography and very effective use of music and sound.

Debates about things that are as subjective as James Bond are, of course, largely silly, but that’s one of the reasons I don’t find them as distressing as other more serious arguments that can erupt at the holiday dinner table. They also allow us to learn something about the people we’re debating with (specifically why they think what they think) which more often than not gives us insight into their characters and tends to bring us closer together. You could even say that it’s a way of … Bonding with your friends and relatives this holiday season. Good luck.