[Tainan]

"...I like Bond movies that are fun. Gadgets, smarmy remarks, fantastic scenery, fast cars (and women) all make the movie more fun though admittedly less realistic.
Connery was best but I liked Brosnan and I even came to enjoy Moore. Jill St John was a fave Bond gal along with Jane Seymour and a bunch of others.
When Craig came on board I tried to like him but he just doesn't do it for me. Same thing with the herky-jerky film style. Good Lord when will that style (that started I believe at Carnegie Mellon and the graduates who went on to do Hill Street Blues and that genre TV) of photography finally die?
Skyfall looks interesting but I won't go to see it. When it's out on BluRay torrents I might get will DL it."

Agree with your main points. Connery was, of course, the ultimate Bond. Brosnan was/is my choice for #2. I thought he developed well into the franchise.
Hate the "herky-jerky" cinematography also. Craig has the potential, but I think he will be gone soon...one more I think and then its casting-call all over again.
(I am pushing for Jason Strahthan...Craig opened the doors for a 'shorter' Bond)

[KevinDavis]

I agree with Connery being the ultimate Bond, but I also like Brosnan. Craig is doing a good job as Bond. Moore was OK at the start, but at the end it was more of a comedy. Dalton was ahead of his time. The audience was not ready for a rough Bond. Couldn’t stand Lazenby..