Would Lazenby have made a good Bond??

Discussion in 'Movies' started by David Coleman, Sep 5, 2005.

  1. David Coleman

    David Coleman Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2000
    Messages:
    764
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    110
    With all the talk on who the new Bond will be i'm sure it is nothing compared to who would originally replace Sean Connery back in the 60's.

    Well not remembering that era but reflecting back to the choice of Lazenby has me wondering??

    Would Lazenby have made a good Bond?

    OHMSS is actually one of my favorites from the series!! I actually think it's the best story of them all. I can look back at the older films and enjoy OHMSS as much as any of the Connery films

    Looking back I thought he always had the right "look" for Bond and he delivered the humorous lines well enough. I don't think he had alot of dramatic weight to his acting but I sensed if he had stayed with the series he could have grown as an actor and grown into the role.

    I know alot of people look upon him with disdain but I think he could have made a fine Bond.

    What do you all think?
     
  2. Peter M Fitzgerald

    Peter M Fitzgerald Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 1999
    Messages:
    1,902
    Likes Received:
    568
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Real Name:
    Peter Fitzgerald
    I think George Lazenby was a good Bond in OHMSS (an awkward line reading here and there, likely due to his relative acting inexperience at the time, and his first attempts to exchange his Aussie accent for an English one...and even there, actor George Baker looped his lines when Lazenby was undercover as "Sir Hilary Bray"), who gets an undeserved bad rap to this day. His "intimate" acting, with Diana Rigg in the snowbound barn, and during the tragic final moments of the film, were quite well done.

    Physically, Lazenby was (and remains) the best fighter of all the Bond actors, relying less on a stunt double than the others (especially compared to Connery in YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE). If he had stayed (and, most importantly, if the subsequent films remained at a high level, with a similar, mostly-serious tone), I think he would've grown into a truly great 007, perhaps even equal to Connery's best, or at least better than the actors that followed him (though Timothy Dalton was damn good).

    Funny that you created this post when you did, David, as it's George Lazenby's 66th birthday today. Many happy returns, George! [​IMG]
     
  3. David Coleman

    David Coleman Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2000
    Messages:
    764
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    110
    Wow Peter it is ironic as indeed. I had no idea it was his birthday.

    As for him being Bond. I remember when I was young I really didn't care for his portrayal as it wasn't Connery and it wasn't Moore. With an adult perspective I can say that George did a pretty decent job and honestly it would have been exciting to see what he could have done with subsequent roles. If there is anything that is unfair to George is that the story was a bitter heavier than the atypical Bond. If he had debuted in something a little lighter he would have made a better initial impression.
     
  4. Adam_ME

    Adam_ME Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2002
    Messages:
    930
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0

    That's the problem right there. The next three Bond movies were not serious in tone. Plus they were mediocre films. As much as I would've liked to have seen Lazenby play Bond a few more times, maybe he was right to bail when he did(although not for the reasons he quit).
     

Share This Page