Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Telegram Live Sex ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

Which James Bond movie should I start with? (Patreon)

Published:
2021-01-20 17:48:25
Imported:
2021-05

Content

Hey guys! Looks like James Bond will be the next movie we watch together! I'm super excited to check out something new that is so iconic and that I've heard so much about. FINALLY! I will get to see the "shaken, not stirred" reference :)

I do want to say that I don't plan on watching all of these films. There are just too many James Bond films to get through and I'm more concerned with focusing on the MCU as my main series of films to watch. I really appreciate some folks' suggestions to watch a couple from each actor. I think that is a good idea, but I don't necessarily plan on watching a bunch of James Bond movies back to back. I would likely space these out a lot and include them in polls for the future.

With all that in mind, which one do you think I should watch first? These are the few that seemed the most obvious to start with from comments and research online. Lmk your thoughts! 

Comments

SendingRavens

You’ll really dig Casino Royale!

Anonymous

I'd recommend watching at least one of each actor. They each have their own flair. But that can be a lot of movies.

The Hedge Knight

I would have recommended Goldeneye to start, but Casino Royale is a good runner up.

Anonymous

Always go release order

Anonymous

Casino royale from 2006 right not 1967?

Anonymous
>>51829021

Yeah, cause there's so much consistency to the Bond films.

Anonymous

The Daniel Craig (as Bond) films are a more-recent, more-relevant arc: best of the bunch. Casino Royale (2006) FTW!

Anonymous

2006 Casino Royale

Anonymous

I picked Casino Royale (not the earlier comedic version with David Niven) because it tells the story of how James Bond became James Bond. That said, if you do any more, you should go back to the start, with the first few Sean Connery films, Dr. No, From Russia with Love, and Goldfinger.

Patrick Egan

Don't start with From Russia With Love. If you want to watch the Daniel Craig movies in order before going to the classics that' ok, but if you want to do the older ones first(which I recommend), start at the beginning with Dr, No. There IS a bit of continuity between them, especially during the Connery run, so it's highly recommended to watch them in order.

Eric Janssen

Oh, you people: "Do Hobbit Trilogy before LOTR, that's the one I saw!" "You'll never understand Star Wars without Rogue One!" "Fantastic Beasts took place BEFORE Harry Potter!" “Casino Royale invented the NEW Bond movie!” FACT: Sean Connery 007 movies did not officially become Sean Connery 007 Movies until Ursula Andress walked up onto the beach in Dr. No. Period. End of discussion. :) (I voted From Russia With Love because it was more of an official classic, but I’m not seeing another virgin generation corrupted.)

Anonymous

I hate that Bond won. They're just the very lowest in quality(compared to the other options). Not as fun as Karate Kid, and even though after Rocky 1 the movies take a sharp decline at least the first one is a great film. I don't think I need to justify how The Godfather is the best of the bunch.

Christian Rennie

I think starting with modern Bond, Casino Royale, is the best idea. The older movies have not aged well. But, if you want to watch them ironically to learn tropes and references, then, have at it. Then, an appropriate follow up would be Austin Powers.

Andy Crawley

I’d argue Casino Royale is the best Bond film and therefore you should watch first. Live And Let Die is also a good one to go for, the Roger Moore films are more camp and less serious, plus the theme song is a banger!

G. T. Blackwell

I think Dr. No is the appropriate place to start, if for no other reason than that it introduces you to Connery's Bond before you see Craig's modern Bond. I think following Dr. No with Casino Royale is the way to go.

Adam B

I’m hoping Dr. No wins out. The Daniel Craig films (Casino Royale) is deconstructing the character and the previous Bond films. If you haven’t seen at least a few of the past films and former Bond actors a lot of the film you’d end up missing.

Krieger

2006 Casino Royale is my vote. There is no advantage to watch the first movie out, I would stick to the recent Bond films (Daniel Craig) with some of the older classics mixed in To see how things have evolved.

Anonymous

This article makes a lot of sense to me, and suggests Casino Royale first and Dr. No second. https://screencrush.com/james-bond-movie-viewing-order/

George Baxter

As much as I appreciate all the Bonds, for a modern viewer starting in 2021 without the nostalgia it makes sense to start with Casino Royale. It establishes the character and world well without the baggage. The appeal of Bond was travel, luxury and thrills in a troubled world. Craig captures that

Eric Janssen
>>51829373

I heard one other reactor watch Indy/Last Crusade and say "Who's that guy playing Indy's dad, he looks so familiar?" If we have a reactor generation that doesn't know WHY they should know Sean Connery when they see him, all the Cool Daniel Craig "Old Bond is so last-generation!" fan arguments in the world aren't going to overrule that.

Drzergberg

I love Goldeneye myself but Casino out of this list.

Stephen W. Evans

I feel like starting with Craig Bond will make it harder to enjoy older Bond. The tones are so different and it may color explanations. Casino Royale is, without a doubt, one of the best Bond films ever but I feel like that needs to be earned.

Anonymous

2006 Daniel Craig Casino Royale is a true James Bond film

Eric Janssen
>>51829384

There's the Roger Moore films before The Spy Who Loved Me, which were still gritty adventures, and those after, which adhered to the modern popcorn summer blockbuster. Live and Let Die was a better example of the earlier ones.

Eric Janssen
>>51829592

The arguments here for Casino, besides the obvious "That's the one I lived to see in theaters, and it's cooler than the ones my parents saw!" seems to be "Oh, we learn his origin!" Okay, I'll concede that point--It's a prologue, seeing as he's already on the job by the time Dr. No's story opens. That's IT. Backstory only, and then straight back to 60's martini-era gold, shaken, not stirred. :)

Elisa H.

Oh I thought u would go in order of the bond so u can appreciate the development and how things like effects and the treatment and portrayal of women in the series went changing. Starting with new Bond might not let u appreciate old Bond and where the series came from.

David Crabtree

Just watch the Austin Powers films.

RebRox65

I’d prefer it to be the original Casino Royal with such a great cast and British humour which inspired Austin Powers Movies.

Jack Mellor

Speaking as a Bond fan, I think it might be best to start with Dr No, that way you can gain an understanding of how the series evolved over the years so that when you come to the modern Bonds you’ve got that appreciation there. Then again, I did watch Casino Royale as my first Bond film I watched properly from start to finish. It might be best to do it in the kinda chronological order of Bond’s career, i.e you start with Casino Royale, his first adventure, then the sequel Quantum of Solace (if you must, saying that because I think it’s a terrible film) because those two films back to back function as a Bond origin story. Then perhaps you could go back to Dr No and then work through them from 1962 to 2002 in order of release, then to Skyfall, because then you’ve seen everything and Skyfall works so well if you’ve seen all the other movies before it. Just a suggestion, again, speaking as a Bond fanboy.

Anonymous

If you don't want to go through forty Bonds, at least start with Brosnan and Goldeneye.

Matthew Periolat

Even without doing them all, I’d argue to start with Dr. No. it’s the first, it gave us Sean as the original.

Anonymous

Or perhaps select two or three of each Bond actor's most famous films and watch some of those for context. But it's all entirely up to you!

Nerd Going Outside

The newer Bond movies succeed because they work to deconstruct the older films. Without the context of the older films, at least in part, I really wouldn't bother - they'll just feel like sort of generic action films.

Bruce Bromley

Who are these no-accounts picking Casino. Please screw with them and watch the original with Woody Allen as Bond. You have to at least start with Connery. I'll pick From Russia With Love, because Robert Shaw is in it as well.

Anonymous

I voted for Dr. No only because it was the first. But in my humble opinion, the Daniel Craig films are the best. It could also be a good idea to watch only the first movie of each actor in order i.e. Dr No, Live and Let Die, The Living Daylights, Goldeneye, and then finish with all the Craig films. Just another suggestion to mull over.

Gath Bard

I don't know what to say. The idea that somebody could knowingly decide to start watching the series from anything other than "Dr No" as their first ever Bond movie is so baffling to me that I'm at a loss for words.

Anonymous

Casino Royale was the first book that Ian Flemming wrote...

Anonymous

You definitely HAVE to watch Moonraker! If for no other reason than to see how absolutely insanely ridiculous it is. 😂

Pig FlibJarb

You would have more fun with the show "Community", but people are going to tell you to watch the newer bond film. How did you get roped into picking Bond? lol That is not a norm for most reactors. Great films though up until that last one couple with brosnan.

Pig FlibJarb
>>51832925

Nobody has any love for good films these days. It is basically black and white, so 90 percent of people will say it is bad. I blame Vines.

mranderson

Might just be me, but I'm not a huge fan of people commenting negative stuff about movies that are options in the polls :/ Like, if a movie wins then clearly most people who have voted wants that movie, and negative stuff being written about it can just potentially influence the viewing before she can make up her own mind! Again, might just be me overreacting, but I don't get the point about writing negative. If it's that bad then it most likely won't win :)

Troy B.

*pulls up a soapbox* Okay, I realize this is all utlimately up to a vote and all, but the Casino Royale movie will give you an incredibly skewed perspective on the Bond franchise going into it for the first time. It is a huge departure fro everything that came before it, and even though it's the "first" Bond book, it is super late in the Bond franchise, and alludes to things that came before. And you won't get the iconic lines you know. Daniel Craig is a good actor and is a decent Bond (in most of his outings at least), but to start with him would be like starting a Star Trek viewing with "Star Trek: Discovery." In my opinion (to be taken with a grain of salt), if you ever intend to watch Dr. No, you might as well get it out of the way first rather than try to go back to it after seeing faster-paced, slicker, modern Bond fare. [Edit to add: Of course, do whatever feels right to you, but thanks to my name, this is a franchise I've given a lot of thought to. YMMV.]

Kevin Bartelen

I say Dr. No because there are things from the older movies that the new ones kind of expect you to know even though they are prequels. Nothing specifically plot relevant, but stuff like "I know that thing... oh so that's why it's relevant here".

It Hurt A Lot
>>51829871

I agree. Sentimentality and nostalgia can make us think a movie is better than it actually is to a new viewer

Kevin Mowery

I say Dr. No because it is the start of the movie franchise, and while continuity is pretty loose, there is *some* over the years. Also, I don't think you can really see why the franchise survived for 60 years if you start with Daniel Craig instead of Sean Connery.

Rusty Childers

If you want to do a best of list, I'd do the following: From Russia with Love, Thunderball, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, The Man with the Golden Gun, The Spy Who Loved Me, The Living Daylights, Goldeneye, The World Is Not Enough, Casino Royale, and Skyfall. That gives you two with each actor (except George Lazenby, who only did a single movie, and Timothy Dalton, who only did two) and also lets you skip most of the really bad ones.

Rusty Childers
>>51833863

While Casino Royale will definitely make the older ones a bit harder to watch by comparison, Craig's portrayal of the character is much more in sync with Fleming's version in the books. So there's that.

Krash Koi

Goldeneye

Red Claw

I never could get into the Craig Bonds. I enjoyed the older ones more. Even Brosnan I don't enjoy as much. You can pretty much say, that the older the Bond movie, the higher the chance I enjoy it more.

It Hurt A Lot

These past 2 polls might be the most worked up I've seen people in the comments. I love it

Anonymous
>>51835973

I'd out The Man With the Golden Gun personally. Scaramanga is a fairly classic villain and the golden gun itself is iconic, but the film as a whole always seemed really weak to me. Campy in a way that doesn't work and just feels cheap and poorly put together. Live and Let Die or A View to a Kill would both work much better IMO as the second Moore film in the set.

Eric Janssen
>>51831495

There are those who say Timothy Dalton's "Licence to Kill" is the second-worst Bond movie. I forgot why, and then I watched Quantum of Solace. (It was the SAME MOVIE.)

Anonymous

The first several sean connery films are connected I believe. I personally think starting with the sean connery SPECTRE arc films would be good, then jumping to Craig-verse films. While I love Brosnan and all his films, I'd be happy if you saw Goldeneye at the very least.

Anonymous

If you haven't seen any of the classics I suggest at least watching "Goldfinger", Sean Connery is with a reason the most beloved Bond actor of them all.

Jason Dolan

At this stage of the game, I'd start with Craig - watch his series that will hopefully take you up to No Time to Die which concludes his series, then I'd do Pierce Brosnan's 4 films, then I'd do Dalton's 2 films, then I'd do Roger Moore's series and END with Connery. Going backwards makes the most sense to me.

Ken

People will quibble about watch order but Royale's a great movie in and of itself and I think you'll like it. I do like the Bond sampler idea of only watching the top 1 or 2 films from each actor. I'm a fan of variety and don't like getting too bogged down in franchises

Darryl Low

A couple of movies from each Bond is a great idea and will give a good taste of the character throughout the years.

Alan Kobb

I think the 2006 Casino Royale is a good choice. Not to be confused by the 1967 Bond Parody Casino Royale! Actually any of those three would be a good choice. The shot in Dr. No of Ursula Andress walking out of the ocean in that white bikini is one of the most iconic shots in all of flim. By the way, there is a connection between this movie and the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Sony gained the rights to Spiderman from MGM, partly in exchange for the rights to Casino Royale, which permitted Eon Prodictions to remake this.

Max du Coudray

First four Connery, Live and Let Die, Spy Who Loved Me, then modern Casino Royale. The quality strongly drops off after these seven.

Anonymous

Casino Royale is my favorite Bond movie. Continuity isn't as important in the Bond franchise, so I may suggest watching 4 of the best movies of the franchise instead of watching in order. Something like Goldfinger, Goldeneye, Casino Royale, Skyfall.

Scott Greene

Early Connery is a good one to start with, but I'm not surprised Daniel Craig is in the lead. I started with Roger Moore because he was Bond when I was a kid, and caught up with Connery later. I'm sure you'll enjoy these films no matter the order you see them in (except for Craig, those you should def watch in order).

Baron

I voted for the other guy... Bond is kinda a tough cookie to crack. First they are amazing books by Ian Fleming seriously awesome books, the only writer I like more than Ian Fleming is Trevanian I have no idea why they have not made more movies based on this persons works really amazing spy fiction. Just a suggestion but checking out the Ian Fleming books and then watching the new movies might be the best way for you to enjoy the James Bond universe. So many bond movies so little time.

darby72

Sorry, from the looks of the poll I guess I'll be skipping these, my Bond is over the top and fun, and the Craig movies are incredibly boring and unnecessary in a time period in which there are far better action movies to watch.

wroot

I see that people vote for Dr. No. Maybe because it is first one and i agree that it is good to see first one (how it started), but From Russia With Love was better for me.

John

Casino Royale is a good one to start with even though it's not the first film released. It is; however, the first Bond story Ian Flemming released and serves as an origin story for Bond. I definitely recommend going back to the original films, starting with Dr. No. You may like them. You may hate them. They are interesting period pieces and they have a very different feel. Early Bond is much more suspense and drama than the action of the Craig, or even Brosnan eras. They are all very much films of their time.

Nicholas Sulikowski

Casino Royale is an excellent first choice. Easily one of the best Bond films. The only thing I should add though is that the Daniel Craig Bond films are atypical of the series. They're very specifically set in their own reboot timeline. (Whereas many of the others sorta vaguely fit in the same universe, as later movies sometimes reference the earlier ones.) The Craig films are also know for being quite grounded in reality and gritty, meanwhile all the other films tend to be more larger than life, albeit sometimes camp. Remember, things like Austin Powers and arguably a little bit of Archer are parodies of classic Bond. So for the classic Bond films, although Dr. No is first, I barely remember it, and From Russia with Love is definitely a better film. (It's the second in the series.) Personally, my favorite classic Bond film is GoldenEye. It's just the right middle ground between larger than life classic Bond tropes, yet not too silly. It still has enough weight and emotion in it. I would also argue it's another good place to jump into classic Bond for the first time. And Sean Bean is in it. (Plus I played the N64 video game first, so it feels like a video game movie to me. :D)

PickettsChargingPort

Personally, I think you should go in order. The first casino royale would be good. The one with Daniel Craig is not really a bond film. I mean, it IS a bond film but they've been watered down into generic action movies by that point. If you are going to do modern Bond I would start with GoldenEye which is arguably the best modern bond film.

Chris Gronau

Personally, I'd go with Casino Royale (2006) because the Daniel Craig movies are basically a "rebooting" of the Bond franchise. The one caveat with starting with the Daniel Craig movies, though, is that they contain a lot of sly references to the earlier movies. Skyfall even contains a sly reference to The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, which isn't even a James Bond movie. I'm not sure Nat would get all the references if she hasn't seen the earlier movies.....

Robert Carroll

One film from each actor is a great way to experience this franchise without watching 26/27 films. 1. From Russia with Love 2. On Her Majesty's Secret Service 3. Live and Let Die 4. The Living Daylights 5. Goldeneye 6. Casino Royal It'll be fun to watch the reactions anywho cause it's Nat :-)

Holly R

Starting with Casino Royale is a terrible choice. Yes, I understand that those who grew up with the Craig films in the theaters connect with them more (not to mention the more modern styles) but the movies were made in an order. While the Bond films don't necessarily have continuity, each was made with the knowledge of what the previous ones did. There are elements of Casino Royale (and all of the Craig films) that exist and work based on the decades of Bond adventures that came before. Yes, they can be enjoyed ignorant of the others, but they certainly cannot be fully appreciated. Casino Royale will win the poll, which is unfortunate, but just wanted to put this out there. Essentially, ALWAYS watch in release order.

Holly R
>>51851813

"Sly references" is an understatement. Looking at Casino Royale, massive elements such as casting, characterization, and even wardrobe are all connected to the earlier Bond films, either in a manner that parallels and develops nostalgia, or in one that specifically juxtaposes in order to create surprise. The movie works on it's own, and is, in a way, a 'rebooting' of the character, but it does its best job at this relying on the knowledge of what came before. Heck, even the final line of the movie has zero meaning for someone with no reference, but becomes a giant pivotal character moment when seen outside of a vacuum.

Bruce Bromley
>>51854459

Only good thing about Casino is seeing Mads Mikkelsen before he hit it big with Hannibal.

Holly R
>>51854136

One from each actor would be good...but I think for a full development of Bond's world, it'd require two from each (well, not Lazenby, of course). Posted a suggested list in the previous poll.

Chris Lane- Venturi 3D

Casino Royale is my choice. It's a great modern take on Bond and no, it doesn't have the crazy gadgets and one liners of some of the others, it's a really good way to get into the movies, though beyond that the Craig era movies are like way up and down, quality wise.

Brandon Scott

What about Tomorrow Never Dies? Brosnan gets no respect.

Brent Fugett

If you're starting Dr No is the ticket. It's not the best one but it's the first of the Connery Bonds and set the pace for the rest. Russia is the best of these but I think you really need to give this one it's place.

Vonlinchen

I think the bond which people identify most with is the one who they grew up with.

Bandaloop

If you're doing Bonds from each actor, try "You Only Live Twice" with Connery. Screenplay by Roald Dahl. Really raised the bar the big evil plot and super secret lair tropes. "Goldfinger" is also good. George Lazenby only did one, "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" but is notable because he marries Diana Rigg. Roger Moore - "The Spy Who loved Me." Or not. Timothy Dalton - Maybe skip those and do a MCU instead. Daniel Craig - all good. "Casino Royale" is excellent.

Anonymous

You should compare and contrast the Daniel Craig and Dvaid Niven versions of Casino Royale...

Anonymous
>>51862788

Maybe I'm an outlier - I grew up in the Roger Moore era, but my favorite is actually Timothy Dalton.

It Hurt A Lot
>>51833055

This is funny. For some reason Moonraker was my favorite Bond movie as a kid. Then I watched it again as an adult and ...oh boi

Anonymous

Okay, So I really enjoyed Dr. No. I am not saying it s a perfect movie, but from the choices I never really "felt" "From Russia" or the Daniel Craig movies. Pierce Brosnan did a fantastic job with Goldeneye. There are so many movies to pick from.. I would pick "Dr. No" to start with.

Anonymous

I think a sampling of each Bond would be great for comparison. Timothy Dalton does not get enough love

JayWantsACat

If you're going to start with Connery, I think you then have to start with the very first film: Dr. No, If you want to start with Daniel Craig, then I think watching through all of those then circling back to Dr. No is the way to go.

Aaron Taft

I don't think I've ever watched a James Bond film

Anonymous

Personally, if I've never seen any movie from a certain franchise, I'll watch the more recent movies 1st for the special effects and modern film editing, etc. Casino Royale for me!

Anonymous

Casino Royale is one of my favourites, with a smashing soundtrack! I do believe it is important to have a look at some of the older ones, but more in order to understand the development of the understanding of who James Bond is supposed to be. In some ways Daniel Craig is more nuanced than many of his predecessors, both being harder and softer, and you sometimes get a glimpse behind the facade of the myth in a way that is often overlooked.

Anonymous

If you want a good base of where a lot of the bond themes come from in the movies start with Dr. No.

Anonymous

I don't think it's really feasible to watch all the Bond flicks, but there might be a way to select some of the standouts and watch them in release order. Start with the first and then vote to skip some of them might be a somewhat organic way of doing it. Casino Royale was such a good movie because it was so shockingly gritty and grounded compared to the direction the Pierce Brosnan bonds went.

Andy Jordan
>>51833710

Amen, Peter. And no matter how bad one might think something is, there's always someone else who likes it, and neither opinion is wrong, since art is subjective. If Star Wars taught us anything, it's not to give into hatred. Let's keep this forum an arena for positivity.

RebRox65

Casino Royale is never gonna work, the continuity is all wrong, female M, different Q, and everything in the secret service has changed from the original bond films, Nat has take the same stance as she did with the Star Wars movies, she has to watch in original release order. Dr.No

Eric Janssen
>>51918430

Agreed: Goldeneye and Casino were both shaken up by the end of the Cold War, and the changing satellite role of MI6, so there was a lot of deconstructive "Is 007 still a part of the modern world?" attempts to "reinvent" the story to feel "relevant"--But say "James Bond", and you immediately picture the 60's Riviera, girls, martinis, spy-gadgets and world-domination madmen, and that's Connery. All over.

Anonymous

And keeping M male is important why?

Cripkie

I would start with the reboot casino royal Nat with Daniel Craig, ive watched the original and i just cant relate. the gen gap is too big. Its one of those rare reboots thats a masterpiece tho.

Eric Janssen
>>51951860

By "The original Casino", do you mean the 50's TV drama, or the wildly unfunny 60's comedy? I'll agree the latter hasn't aged well, but neither one's exactly a representative sample.

Anonymous

I haven't watched a full Bond film, but I'd still like to suggest at least starting with the original Bond - Sean Connery. I agree with many others who have suggested perhaps watching one or two of each actor's films to get a feel of the whole franchise. There are WAY too many for Nat to watch, especially if we want her to have time to continue the MCU films amidst others on her list.

RebRox65

Totally agree we don’t want Natalie to tied to just Bond movies, that’s why I suggested that she could make it a feature like the last Friday of every month watch a bond movie from the beginning.

Anonymous

Dr No, Goldeneye, Casino Royale. That's all you gotta watch.

Anonymous
>>52021817

Goldeneye is definitely the only Brosnan worth seeing.. well, the others are worth seeing just because they get progressively worse so quickly. There's probably a couple of other Connery Bond movies worth seeing, at least From Russia With Love, if not also including Goldfinger. It would also be a bit of a disservice to Natalie if she didn't see at least one Roger Moore Bond flick, if only just to use as a device to compare and contrast the other ones.

This_Jedi_crafts

I think Daniel Craig would be a great place for Nat to start (with the Bond franchise). While the movies had always had a thrilling, action-and-adventure feel (mixed with flirtations with "Bond Girls") the Casino Royale film begins an amazing journey. The special effects are amazing, stunts breathtaking and the performances are very well done.

Anonymous

It will be interesting to see her reactions to the blatant sex and violence aspect to Bond. Its a trope for a reason, I am goingvto laugh when she rolls her eyes a lot.

swoop_13-37
>>52063743

Frankly I think it's more flash. shoulda started with sean. Where do you think she should have started in star wars. Episode 3?

Anonymous

Of the 3, I think Dr. No contains the most iconic Bond scenes & references. So I vote for that one.

Anonymous

I feel like the only Pierce Brosnan must watch is Goldeneye, even though I enjoy all of his.

RebRox65

If you’re all trying to predict which film Natalie would enjoy the most, then it’s gotta be ON HIS MAJESTY SECRET SERVICE, why? Because it’s got everything that Nat, would enjoy Great locations, Romance, action. Relationship issues, great soundtrack and of course tragedy. It may not be our favourite, but it’s not about us guys we’re talking Natalie here.

Jeremy Vickers

On his Majesty Secret Service is the weakest film in the entire James Bond catalog. I’d even go so far as to say unwatchable. There’s a reason why he wasn’t James Bond more than once.

Jeremy Vickers

A nice smattering of Connery A dip into Moore... The pierce Brosnan years aren’t all that bad the first step in to the modern age James Bond. Timothy Dalton that’s a give or take. And the reboots with Craig were all pretty solid.

Anonymous
>>52099465

I think the 2012 poll of the greatest Bond films, run by 007 magazine, which put OHMSS at #1, would disagree with you, along with most modern viewers, who rank the film highly on lists of the best Bond movies.

Anonymous

Dr. No! Start at the beginning and move chronologically, whichever films you choose. It would be fun to see you react to changes in the character and themes in relation to shifting cultural attitudes over time. Your reactions to changes in filmmaking, costume design, score, etc. would be great to see as the franchise progresses through the decades too.

Grigsy

Start with the modern movies and move backwards.

Anonymous

I always felt like the Roger Moore films bordered on silly.