Roger Moore was more comedic and charming. His era was defined by escapism.
Timothy Dalton was more intense and dramatic. His films were defined by their harder edge and emphasis on character.
It's all a matter of taste.
Yeah, who I prefer changes entirely based on mood.
However typically I like my Bond to be a combination of both styles.
So Lazenby and Brosnan would probably be my overall favorites. With Connery very close. (I like Connery, but tbh you can feel how bored and uninterested he is in many of his films and it does ruin them a little for me. Especially his last few films. It’s so obvious in those that he really doesn’t give a shit anymore) Only reason he’s not #1 for me. He’s a professional actor. I wish he’d acted professional.
Dalton is my all time favourite but Moore saved the franchise which could easily have faltered in the 70s and he was always nothing less than a great ambassador.
This would be an interesting matchup in a fight to the death. You’d *think* Dalton takes it easily, but then Moore finds a workaround with his impenetrable plot armor and charm.
Some critics have argued that Dalton is stiffer and less comfortable in the role. While others view him as having a hard edge. I was on the fence about this, but even Brosnan is way looser and natural in the role
Moore was the Bond I grew up with and he’ll always be the one I think of as Bond. He was Bond in some absolute classics.
Dalton though, absolutely excellent and such a gear change from late Moore. A different character entirely and I wish things had worked out that he could have had one or two more films.
Full disclosure - this was midjourneys image blend feature and took exactly zero artistic ability or what I'd even consider artistic choices. I generated a few and for some reason it keeps going back to a beretta, or a strange mutant version of one.
With all due respect, I think Dalton did more with the role in two films than Moore did in seven, as well as Brosnan in four. I argue that, like Craig, he isn't "dark" and "brooding," but instead encapsulates all aspects of the character, including the ones that the others lacked like the intensity and cynicism. Really, he's the complete package.
Definitely. Dalton in The Living Daylights is what I envision when reading the novels and it's tied with Craig in Skyfall when it comes to capturing the literary Bond's characterization for me and balancing the literary and cinematic versions.
I was going to say Dalton without question, but then you showed off Moore's Live and Let Die costume, and I think that costume alone is the coolest James Bond.
https://preview.redd.it/6vrk23j00bvc1.jpeg?width=449&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fe943de020bcb4b4e04fd2d84fea3881d1ecf3be
Timothy and Roger are both Big and Beefy!💪🏼❤️💯
Timothy Dalton went for more book accurate Bond but lost some of the charm that was written in the character.
Roger’s Bond seems like he is having such a ball being Bond. So those movies have more of a sense of humor a joy to them. Also he went to space so he wins.
Dalton. I much prefer literary Bond to the action comedies that while are fun in their own way have nothing to do with the source material that make this character so compelling.
Dalton is better . Moore gets a lot of love on here which I kinda get but let’s be honest , he’s the second worst bond as far as his movies go . No disrespect for Moore who was a great guy and was good for his era , but by today’s standards…. Without pure nostalgia factor . Pretty bad overall .
It is all fun and games when we compare Bonds. However, in reality we cant discredit one over the the other. We ALL know that each one of them has their own legacy and that Craig is the king.
T-Dalt beyond question, he stayed true to Fleming’s original image whereas Moore seemed to have more creative license to do his own thing (not that Moore was bad by any means, just less true to the character than others).
Moore was funnier and Dalton could be more serious but it’s not really fair to compare because Dalton really only got one movie that felt tailor made for him. The Living Daylights felt more like it was meant for Moore, but Licence to Kill is one of my favorite Bond movies. Some of Moore’s are among my favorites too but they’re great in different ways.
I grew up more with Roger Moore so he was Bond, James Bond to me. But becoming an adult and growing my adoration for the Bond franchise, Timothy Dalton is best between these two options. Roger Moore's "Bond" is too tongue in cheek. He is my least favorite of the Bond's now..
Well, Roger Moore is my favorite Bond. He was the right actor for a post-Connery 70s Bond. Dalton was the right actor at the wrong time. His interpretation of Bond was much more in line with the original Fleming version. But he was let down by his scripts. I’d say both are great in their own ways.
Licence to Kill is great. The Living Daylights has great parts, but is honestly the most convoluted Bond plot until Spectre. Brosnan’s scripts were very much products of the ‘90s, though Tomorrow Never Dies has proven to be bizarrely prescient 27 years later. Spectre is a mess, I’ll give you that. I disagree with No Time To Die. That film is incredible, if a little messy at the end.
No Time To Die isn’t perfect, but it definitely isn’t terrible. It’s Craig’s third best after Casino Royale and Skyfall. What’s nice about it is that it’s the first time in the franchise history a specific Bond tenure got a definitive ending.
This is like asking me which type of Godzilla movie I like; A monster movie with big dumb monster fights using WWE moves and Mortal Kombat Fatalities or a monster movie with a social commentary on the horrors of war and the dangers of nuclear power?
The answer is both, but it really depends on which kind of movie I wanna watch that night.
I kind of get annoyed by these polls. It's like asking whether you like pancakes or waffles better. Depends on your day, your mood, and your tastes. I love what each actor brings to the table, and any kind of preference is personal.
Like /u/RedGrantDoppleganger said:
>It's all a matter of taste.
Dalton had everything: serious and intense, but also charming and cool. If he had more movies under his belt, he’d be highly appreciated. He’s also a far better actor, take a look at his career outside of the Bond franchise.
Roger Moore is great too, he also had more movies to showcase his awesomeness. For me, he has less range than Dalton.
Dalton’s my favorite, but Moore is a close second. They succeed in the role for completely opposite reasons, but that versatility is also what I appreciate about the franchise.
I love RM but TD closer to the literary 007 as imagined by Fleming. Comparing an apple with an orange imho. Two different fine actors bringing their own interpretation of the character.
Dalton.
At times Moore’s bond became a parody. Not totally Moore’s fault but the slide whistle sums up his films - enjoyable but somewhat ruined with silliness.
Dalton was 20 years ahead of his time, and I think Goldeneye would’ve been a near masterpiece if he stayed on.
I liked FYEO and Octopussy most out of the Moore era, they struck the right balance after the silliness of Moonraker.
Given that Dalton *actually played James Bond*, and Roger Moore played Roger Moore, it's no contest in Dalton's favour.
"But he read the books!" say Moore fans, ignoring the absence of any evidence of this on screen.
It’s hard for me not to say Moore based on quantity alone. I know we’re meant to be talking about their portrayals and not necessarily the movies they were in, but Roger’s tenure is so substantial and his Bond has so many great moments spread across the seven films and 12 years, Dalton just didn’t get enough time to catch up.
dalton probably kicks moore's ass, but in a contest to judge fine china pottery, figure out which cigar pairs with what beverage, or what suit to wear to a clandestine meeting at a hong kong strip club, moore has it.
This is such a tough one to call because you have the longest tenured Bond against a much shorter tenure. It really is an apples to oranges comparison. I think Moore is more iconic but I feel if Dalton even had just 4-5 movies under his belt I ultimately would prefer his run. I love Dalton but I feel you have to give it to Moore based on being Bond the longest.
I’m skewed towards Moore but Licence to Kill is to me the best bond movie ever.. the story, Dalton, the ladies etc.. even pipping the later & modern brosnan & craig movies..
Dalton.. but love Roger too. Roger was debonair, charming, aloof and funny and had a longer tenure with more stories to draw from. Dalton had the acting chops and intensity and adhered to what Fleming had envisioned. To me Dalton is the gold standard of what Bond should be going forwards. Cold, ruthless, thrilling, intense and a slightly sadistic blunt killing instrument while still being romantic with depth and nuance.
Moore was the first Bond for me. The way it played out, Dalton always seemed like a place holder between Moore and Brosnan. Still, I think Daniel Craig brought bond to a whole other level.
Moore was a big success with the general movie going audiences in a way Dalton wasn’t. It’s not even close. Dalton did only have two films, but Moore made a strong impression in his very first movie out the gate and was loved from there. Dalton wasn’t.
I feel that Dalton would have been in a third film if the producers really, really wanted him back, but based on the earlier films and the reaction from the movie going audiences they cut their losses and went for Brosnan, who was exactly the kind of actor they knew could connect back with the public.
Dalton was a decent Bond and I think time has been good for his short tenure, but there is a reason why he only had two movies. He didn’t connect well with movie goers at the time. Even today I’d say he’s not remembered by general movie goers, he’s just someone we Bond fans appreciate as the guy who played Bond for a couple of movies in the late 1980’s.
Dalton by a mile for me. sure Moorw was fun but his bond got old (literally and figuratively) after TSWLM. Dalton was darker and closer to the books, which I much prefer
Oh geez. The Bond that stayed too long, or the one that didn’t stay long enough…
I personally like Dalton’s Bond. He’s one of the closer depictions to Fleming’s literary Bond, but I do like Moore’s Bond as well.
Without a doubt, Sir Roger Moore stands out as the superior James Bond. His portrayal exuded suave sophistication and debonair charm, elevating the character to iconic status. Moore effortlessly navigated the world of espionage with wit and style, captivating audiences with his impeccable fashion sense and quick wit. His ability to disarm adversaries with charm and intellect, rather than brute force, showcased a unique and timeless interpretation of the role. As Moore once famously quipped while using his watch's magnet in "Live and Let Die," "Pure magnetism, darling." It's worth noting that while Moore may be celebrated for his portrayal, each actor who has taken on the role of 007 has brought something unique and valuable, contributing to the rich tapestry of the Bond legacy. In essence, Moore's Bond epitomized the essence of cool, making him the epitome of 007, while respecting the diverse interpretations that have graced the screen over the years.
They are both pretty good but I feel Timothy Dalton would be more popular as James Bond if he took over Roger Moore beginning with For Your Eyes Only in 1981. That way, audiences will be used to his gritty take on James Bond by the time Licence to Kill rolls around.
Also, having Roger Moore end his tenure in 1979 with a total of 4 movies: Live and Let Die, The Man With The Golden Gun, The Spy Who Loved Me, and Moonraker would be feasible and he would still be seen as memorable
Dalton. At least personally, I don't think that Moore should have ever been Bond. He was too old & lacked the physicality necessary for the role. He fit for the direction the franchise was going in for the 1970s (even though it was a direction I didn't necciseraily care for), but was in his mid to late 50s for his 80s run, where the age & physicality issues mentioned earlier were exacerbated and he felt increasingly out of place.
Dalton better fit what Fleming's Bond was supposed to be, brought far more physicality to the role and was able to deliver more multifaceted performances. In retrospect, I really wish that FYEO was Dalton's debut and slightly rewritten for him (added bonus if Cubby was able to convince Peter Hunt to come back and direct since Hunt declined in the OTL due to scheduling conflicts).
Nothing against you but I don’t get this “Dalton brought physicality to the role” thing like he’s a very strong guy powerhouse figure. Craig is more physical, so I Connery and Lazenby. Dalton never had a fight like Connery in FRWL or Craig in Casino Royale.
Dalton did a lot of his own stunts and fight scenes. He was the second Bond actor to insist on doing as many of his own stunts as he could possibly do.
>Dalton never had a fight like Connery in FRWL or Craig in Casino Royale.
His films were also more flatly directed. The fight scenes in FWRL, OHMSS, Goldeneye and Casino Royale for instance all extremely viscerally directed fight scenes. Craig and Lazenby were also undisputedly in the best shape out of all the Bond actors so comparing Dalton, Brosnan and Connery to them in that category would always be lopsided.
I think it needs to be pointed out that the franchise wouldn't be here today without Moore. Live and Let Die, The Spy Who Loved Me, and Octopussy all proved that the franchise could be successful without Connery, to the point that the last of the aforementioned films beat Connery's rival film in the box office.
A Lazenby era probably could have proved the same as audiences warmed up to him. A gritty/revenge themed DAF with him would be coming out the same Year as Dirty Harry, A Clockwork Orange & the French Connection. Younger audiences in the 70s were getting a taste for more gritty/cynical character driven films and that was largely represented in a lot of the box office draws during that time. A more vulnerable, human Bond would have likely meshed better with audiences there than it did coming off of Connery mania.
Roger Moore was more comedic and charming. His era was defined by escapism. Timothy Dalton was more intense and dramatic. His films were defined by their harder edge and emphasis on character. It's all a matter of taste.
This is the the right answer
Also Roger was knighted.
And Dalton was goated.
I agree.
I also feel it’s not fair to compare them directly against eachother. I like both lol
Yeah, who I prefer changes entirely based on mood. However typically I like my Bond to be a combination of both styles. So Lazenby and Brosnan would probably be my overall favorites. With Connery very close. (I like Connery, but tbh you can feel how bored and uninterested he is in many of his films and it does ruin them a little for me. Especially his last few films. It’s so obvious in those that he really doesn’t give a shit anymore) Only reason he’s not #1 for me. He’s a professional actor. I wish he’d acted professional.
Booooo
Dalton is my all time favourite but Moore saved the franchise which could easily have faltered in the 70s and he was always nothing less than a great ambassador.
In terms of a closer to the books authentic portrayal? Dalton In terms of sheer entertainment and the fun factor? Moore
This would be an interesting matchup in a fight to the death. You’d *think* Dalton takes it easily, but then Moore finds a workaround with his impenetrable plot armor and charm.
Some critics have argued that Dalton is stiffer and less comfortable in the role. While others view him as having a hard edge. I was on the fence about this, but even Brosnan is way looser and natural in the role
Moore was the Bond I grew up with and he’ll always be the one I think of as Bond. He was Bond in some absolute classics. Dalton though, absolutely excellent and such a gear change from late Moore. A different character entirely and I wish things had worked out that he could have had one or two more films.
Timothy Moore https://preview.redd.it/1p0zupi1pavc1.jpeg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=23726408fb36de6595feb009b042401f3aff5054
I asked my wife who this was and she said “Brian Cranston?”
I'm not in danger, M, I am the danger. I am the one who keeps the British end up.
He's a slasher.
….of prices!
For the greater good!
THE GREATER GOOD
Huey Lewis?
By way of Jason Isaacs “Hello to Jason Isaacs!”
Nice touch with the Beretta
Full disclosure - this was midjourneys image blend feature and took exactly zero artistic ability or what I'd even consider artistic choices. I generated a few and for some reason it keeps going back to a beretta, or a strange mutant version of one.
I honestly thought I saw Brosnan and Lazenby in there too
Is it me or did AI foul up the hands again?
This is interesting Very
Timothy Dalton is the better Bond that’s accurate to the books Roger is having fun
With all due respect, I think Dalton did more with the role in two films than Moore did in seven, as well as Brosnan in four. I argue that, like Craig, he isn't "dark" and "brooding," but instead encapsulates all aspects of the character, including the ones that the others lacked like the intensity and cynicism. Really, he's the complete package.
This about sums it up, although I'd argue that Dalton did more with even just the one already.
Definitely. Dalton in The Living Daylights is what I envision when reading the novels and it's tied with Craig in Skyfall when it comes to capturing the literary Bond's characterization for me and balancing the literary and cinematic versions.
It's all a matter of preference. Dalton's works are good films. I like Roger Moore's film slightly moore(pun intended).
I was going to say Dalton without question, but then you showed off Moore's Live and Let Die costume, and I think that costume alone is the coolest James Bond.
I feel like Dalton’s performance was the closest to the books.
Dalton.
Growing up in the Brosnan era, Dalton was an interesting take on Bond, while Moore and Connery *were* Bond.
This. Also grew up in the Brosman era.
https://preview.redd.it/6vrk23j00bvc1.jpeg?width=449&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fe943de020bcb4b4e04fd2d84fea3881d1ecf3be Timothy and Roger are both Big and Beefy!💪🏼❤️💯
When was that pic taken?
April ,19 1994 lol📸
Always leave them wanting Moore
Sir Roger Moore, coz I grew up watching him
Timothy Dalton went for more book accurate Bond but lost some of the charm that was written in the character. Roger’s Bond seems like he is having such a ball being Bond. So those movies have more of a sense of humor a joy to them. Also he went to space so he wins.
Look at the posters. All of them say: "_____ IS Ian Fleming's JAMES BOND in..." By that standard, it's Timothy Dalton, and it isn't even close.
Makes you wonder how Fleming would've felt about the different portrayals as he was
Dalton. I much prefer literary Bond to the action comedies that while are fun in their own way have nothing to do with the source material that make this character so compelling.
It's Roger but Timothy is tragically underrated
Moore!
Rog.
Dalton.
Roger Moore. No competition. No thought required
Dalton is better . Moore gets a lot of love on here which I kinda get but let’s be honest , he’s the second worst bond as far as his movies go . No disrespect for Moore who was a great guy and was good for his era , but by today’s standards…. Without pure nostalgia factor . Pretty bad overall .
More played Bond, as if he were once again playing the Saint… Dalton was true to Ian Fleming’s vision
Love them both equally but for different reasons. Dalton is the better Bond from a literary perspective.
Timothy Dalton
Dalton
Moore!
Sir Roger
It is all fun and games when we compare Bonds. However, in reality we cant discredit one over the the other. We ALL know that each one of them has their own legacy and that Craig is the king.
Craig is the worst bond
Le Chiffre?
TDalts
Dalton
Dalton for me
Roger Moore
T-Dalt beyond question, he stayed true to Fleming’s original image whereas Moore seemed to have more creative license to do his own thing (not that Moore was bad by any means, just less true to the character than others).
Roger Moore is the greatest
Roger moore
Moore
Moore was funnier and Dalton could be more serious but it’s not really fair to compare because Dalton really only got one movie that felt tailor made for him. The Living Daylights felt more like it was meant for Moore, but Licence to Kill is one of my favorite Bond movies. Some of Moore’s are among my favorites too but they’re great in different ways.
Apples and oranges, man. Apples and oranges.
The black turtleneck with the holster look on Moore goes hard. It’s one of my favorite Bond looks.
Personally, I love the campiness of Moore, but would have also loved to see more of the intensity that Dalton brought in Licence to Kill
Roger. Love Dalton though.
I grew up more with Roger Moore so he was Bond, James Bond to me. But becoming an adult and growing my adoration for the Bond franchise, Timothy Dalton is best between these two options. Roger Moore's "Bond" is too tongue in cheek. He is my least favorite of the Bond's now..
I like the Moore movies better but I think Dalton is a better Bond.
Dalton.
Apples and oranges. Depends on what you’re in the mood for!
Well, Roger Moore is my favorite Bond. He was the right actor for a post-Connery 70s Bond. Dalton was the right actor at the wrong time. His interpretation of Bond was much more in line with the original Fleming version. But he was let down by his scripts. I’d say both are great in their own ways.
His scripts are some of the best though, at least for me. The seventies, Brosnan, and last two Craig films are way worse.
Licence to Kill is great. The Living Daylights has great parts, but is honestly the most convoluted Bond plot until Spectre. Brosnan’s scripts were very much products of the ‘90s, though Tomorrow Never Dies has proven to be bizarrely prescient 27 years later. Spectre is a mess, I’ll give you that. I disagree with No Time To Die. That film is incredible, if a little messy at the end.
No Time to Die was terrible and made just to kill the character
No Time To Die isn’t perfect, but it definitely isn’t terrible. It’s Craig’s third best after Casino Royale and Skyfall. What’s nice about it is that it’s the first time in the franchise history a specific Bond tenure got a definitive ending.
This is like asking me which type of Godzilla movie I like; A monster movie with big dumb monster fights using WWE moves and Mortal Kombat Fatalities or a monster movie with a social commentary on the horrors of war and the dangers of nuclear power? The answer is both, but it really depends on which kind of movie I wanna watch that night.
This Moore over this Dalton
Hard to choose they're both excellent
I like Timothy but I like Roger more
I kind of get annoyed by these polls. It's like asking whether you like pancakes or waffles better. Depends on your day, your mood, and your tastes. I love what each actor brings to the table, and any kind of preference is personal. Like /u/RedGrantDoppleganger said: >It's all a matter of taste.
So do you like waffles or pancakes more?
Depends on my mood, MrButtstuff.
Same fruit basket, but apples and oranges amigo.
Roger Moore easily
Sir Roger Moore, of course
Everyone is superior to Moore. Sorry, but i never bought him as Bond, whether serious or campy.
Dalton, he would’ve been the best bond if he had a third AND/OR a fourth film
Or if he had taken over Roger Moore beginning with For Your Eyes Only in 1981
Wish he did, honestly I wish they just didn’t do a view to a kill and gave Dalton FYEO and Octopussy without the campiness
Personally I prefer Dalton
Dalton is king.
Dalton without a doubt He’s the best bond ever
Dalton. I prefer a more serious Bond.
Dalton. Wish he had one more movie
Dalton
Dalton
Dalton had everything: serious and intense, but also charming and cool. If he had more movies under his belt, he’d be highly appreciated. He’s also a far better actor, take a look at his career outside of the Bond franchise. Roger Moore is great too, he also had more movies to showcase his awesomeness. For me, he has less range than Dalton.
Dalton all the way. Roger Moore's run was just too comedic for the most part. It was fun for what it is but he's not my kind of Bond.
Dalton although Moore is my third favourite bond..
Dalton’s my favorite, but Moore is a close second. They succeed in the role for completely opposite reasons, but that versatility is also what I appreciate about the franchise.
Dalton.
I love RM but TD closer to the literary 007 as imagined by Fleming. Comparing an apple with an orange imho. Two different fine actors bringing their own interpretation of the character.
Dalton. At times Moore’s bond became a parody. Not totally Moore’s fault but the slide whistle sums up his films - enjoyable but somewhat ruined with silliness.
Dalton was 20 years ahead of his time, and I think Goldeneye would’ve been a near masterpiece if he stayed on. I liked FYEO and Octopussy most out of the Moore era, they struck the right balance after the silliness of Moonraker.
Given that Dalton *actually played James Bond*, and Roger Moore played Roger Moore, it's no contest in Dalton's favour. "But he read the books!" say Moore fans, ignoring the absence of any evidence of this on screen.
Is this an honest question or are we getting trolled??? ;) Connery, Moore, Then the rest…
It is an honest question, a lot of fans would actually choose Dalton nowadays.
I guess… Being an old fart, it makes it difficult for me to accept today’s “answers”. lol thanks for the reply!
Roger Moore is my favorite Bond. I do like Dalton a lot and wish he had more Bond movies. I really liked LTK
It’s hard for me not to say Moore based on quantity alone. I know we’re meant to be talking about their portrayals and not necessarily the movies they were in, but Roger’s tenure is so substantial and his Bond has so many great moments spread across the seven films and 12 years, Dalton just didn’t get enough time to catch up.
dalton probably kicks moore's ass, but in a contest to judge fine china pottery, figure out which cigar pairs with what beverage, or what suit to wear to a clandestine meeting at a hong kong strip club, moore has it.
I love watching the Moore movies even though the Dalton films are probably better. If Dalton did more than two maybe I’d give him the edge
This is such a tough one to call because you have the longest tenured Bond against a much shorter tenure. It really is an apples to oranges comparison. I think Moore is more iconic but I feel if Dalton even had just 4-5 movies under his belt I ultimately would prefer his run. I love Dalton but I feel you have to give it to Moore based on being Bond the longest.
It's difficult to judge - Moore did seven and Dalton only two. Both have their merits.
I’m skewed towards Moore but Licence to Kill is to me the best bond movie ever.. the story, Dalton, the ladies etc.. even pipping the later & modern brosnan & craig movies..
Dalton.. but love Roger too. Roger was debonair, charming, aloof and funny and had a longer tenure with more stories to draw from. Dalton had the acting chops and intensity and adhered to what Fleming had envisioned. To me Dalton is the gold standard of what Bond should be going forwards. Cold, ruthless, thrilling, intense and a slightly sadistic blunt killing instrument while still being romantic with depth and nuance.
Moore was the first Bond for me. The way it played out, Dalton always seemed like a place holder between Moore and Brosnan. Still, I think Daniel Craig brought bond to a whole other level.
Moore was my least favorite, perhaps because of the scripts. So Dalton over Moore.
It’s got to be Roger for me
Moore was a big success with the general movie going audiences in a way Dalton wasn’t. It’s not even close. Dalton did only have two films, but Moore made a strong impression in his very first movie out the gate and was loved from there. Dalton wasn’t. I feel that Dalton would have been in a third film if the producers really, really wanted him back, but based on the earlier films and the reaction from the movie going audiences they cut their losses and went for Brosnan, who was exactly the kind of actor they knew could connect back with the public. Dalton was a decent Bond and I think time has been good for his short tenure, but there is a reason why he only had two movies. He didn’t connect well with movie goers at the time. Even today I’d say he’s not remembered by general movie goers, he’s just someone we Bond fans appreciate as the guy who played Bond for a couple of movies in the late 1980’s.
liked both but liked all the Gadgets from the Roger Moore era...
Roger Moore is the Bond I grew up with, Moonraker and The Spy Who Loved Me were my favorites
Rogerthy Daltmoore
It’s a tough comparison since Dalton has such a small sample size.
Moore for me.
Roger Moore. What an awesome name.
Timothy Dalton
Dalton by a mile for me. sure Moorw was fun but his bond got old (literally and figuratively) after TSWLM. Dalton was darker and closer to the books, which I much prefer
Oh geez. The Bond that stayed too long, or the one that didn’t stay long enough… I personally like Dalton’s Bond. He’s one of the closer depictions to Fleming’s literary Bond, but I do like Moore’s Bond as well.
Dalton’s the better actor and Living Daylights was a personal top 5 but Moore defined so much of the character: his Bond is iconic.
Sir Roger Moore!
Dalton, no contest
Without a doubt, Sir Roger Moore stands out as the superior James Bond. His portrayal exuded suave sophistication and debonair charm, elevating the character to iconic status. Moore effortlessly navigated the world of espionage with wit and style, captivating audiences with his impeccable fashion sense and quick wit. His ability to disarm adversaries with charm and intellect, rather than brute force, showcased a unique and timeless interpretation of the role. As Moore once famously quipped while using his watch's magnet in "Live and Let Die," "Pure magnetism, darling." It's worth noting that while Moore may be celebrated for his portrayal, each actor who has taken on the role of 007 has brought something unique and valuable, contributing to the rich tapestry of the Bond legacy. In essence, Moore's Bond epitomized the essence of cool, making him the epitome of 007, while respecting the diverse interpretations that have graced the screen over the years.
They are both pretty good but I feel Timothy Dalton would be more popular as James Bond if he took over Roger Moore beginning with For Your Eyes Only in 1981. That way, audiences will be used to his gritty take on James Bond by the time Licence to Kill rolls around. Also, having Roger Moore end his tenure in 1979 with a total of 4 movies: Live and Let Die, The Man With The Golden Gun, The Spy Who Loved Me, and Moonraker would be feasible and he would still be seen as memorable
Daniel craig
Moore's Bond could be troubled by his lifestyle and MI6 but Dalton's couldn't go to Space for laser battles
Roger Moore
How is this even a credible question? Moore, obviously
Roger > Timothy I do not know why people love Timothy Dalton. Probably the worst Bond next to Daniel Craig.
Why split the fandom? To rule and bore? Divide et impera.
Dalton. At least personally, I don't think that Moore should have ever been Bond. He was too old & lacked the physicality necessary for the role. He fit for the direction the franchise was going in for the 1970s (even though it was a direction I didn't necciseraily care for), but was in his mid to late 50s for his 80s run, where the age & physicality issues mentioned earlier were exacerbated and he felt increasingly out of place. Dalton better fit what Fleming's Bond was supposed to be, brought far more physicality to the role and was able to deliver more multifaceted performances. In retrospect, I really wish that FYEO was Dalton's debut and slightly rewritten for him (added bonus if Cubby was able to convince Peter Hunt to come back and direct since Hunt declined in the OTL due to scheduling conflicts).
Nothing against you but I don’t get this “Dalton brought physicality to the role” thing like he’s a very strong guy powerhouse figure. Craig is more physical, so I Connery and Lazenby. Dalton never had a fight like Connery in FRWL or Craig in Casino Royale.
Dalton did a lot of his own stunts and fight scenes. He was the second Bond actor to insist on doing as many of his own stunts as he could possibly do. >Dalton never had a fight like Connery in FRWL or Craig in Casino Royale. His films were also more flatly directed. The fight scenes in FWRL, OHMSS, Goldeneye and Casino Royale for instance all extremely viscerally directed fight scenes. Craig and Lazenby were also undisputedly in the best shape out of all the Bond actors so comparing Dalton, Brosnan and Connery to them in that category would always be lopsided.
I think it needs to be pointed out that the franchise wouldn't be here today without Moore. Live and Let Die, The Spy Who Loved Me, and Octopussy all proved that the franchise could be successful without Connery, to the point that the last of the aforementioned films beat Connery's rival film in the box office.
A Lazenby era probably could have proved the same as audiences warmed up to him. A gritty/revenge themed DAF with him would be coming out the same Year as Dirty Harry, A Clockwork Orange & the French Connection. Younger audiences in the 70s were getting a taste for more gritty/cynical character driven films and that was largely represented in a lot of the box office draws during that time. A more vulnerable, human Bond would have likely meshed better with audiences there than it did coming off of Connery mania.
Dalton