Sigh
Why I liked George Lazenby as James Bond better than Pierce Brosnan.
1) I loved the movie "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" in general. Less emphasis on gadgets, GREAT fights and choreography.
2) On that line of thought, George more than held his own in aforementioned fight scenes. When he hits people, it's believable. Kinda like Sean. With Pierce, I never could believe that such a scrawny guy like him could really beat up all them thugs.
3) Nice low voice. Roger Moore got away with not having a low, intimidating, powerful yet suave voice. Not Pierce.
4) UA was all set to offer George more Bond movie roles. It was George Lazenby who was a dumbass at the time and thought he'd be better off doing other movies. He wasted his chance.
Of course, that's just my two cents. I can understand that those who like Pierce love the fact that he IS arguably the most "sophisticated" and "suave" James Bond. But for ME, James Bond is not about MERE sophistication and suave. I remember that Bond is also a ruthless killer, fighter and, as Dr. No called him, a "policeman". It is THAT aspect of Bond that I couldn't reconcile with Pierce's portrayal of him.
Of course, you know who best fits the Bond of Ian Fleming's novels? TIMOTHY DALTON.