Yes to the first bit... I have no idea to the second bit.

#sings# AHHHHHH AH AH AHHH The Living Daylights
All Right, Hold on Tight Now
It's Down, Down to The Wire.........

OK so i'm an 80's child and listened to A-ha sometimes - sue me

One of these days you'll learn to use google..

---

"Daylights" is very old slang for the human eyes, dating back to at least the early 18th century. This makes a certain amount of sense, since the eyes are the "source" of all the light we see. And the practice of equating the eyes with lights or windows is very old: one Latin word for "eye" was "lumen," which literally meant "light."

"To beat (or scare) the daylights" out of someone therefore, originally meant to beat or frighten someone so badly that the person's eyes, at least figuratively, popped out. "Daylights" was also used in an extended sense in this context to mean any vital organ or consciousness itself, so to beat or scare "the daylights out of" someone could just as well mean to pummel or frighten the victim into unconsciousness.

Anybody in the mood for a weird coincidence? It turns out that there is another kind of "light" in the human body. The word "daylight," of course, refers to the kind of "light" you can see. The other English word "light" (meaning "not heavy" is completely unrelated, but it comes from the same source as the word "lung," and human lungs used to be called "the lights" (because lungs, being full of air, are not as heavy as other organs). In fact, the lungs and other internal organs of animals are still referred to as "the lights" in England, and in "Huckleberry Finn," Mark Twain wrote of scaring "the liver and lights out of" someone. But since the "daylight" kind of light and the "not heavy" kind of light came from two different sources, the fact that you can "beat the daylights" out of someone by punching him in "the lights" is just a linguistic coincidence.

---

^ the knowledge eh?!!?!


i knew someone would have to sing that song..i was!

---

by Dangermouse
OK so i'm an 80's child and listened to A-ha sometimes - sue me

---

how much are you worth?

*goes off singing "the sun always shines on tv"

---

by Dangermouse
OK so i'm an 80's child and listened to A-ha sometimes - sue me

---

I'm also firmly of the opinion that Dalton was the best Bond!

*shudder*

Is there a problem here?

Well the only thing Living Daylights had was the theme tune. He managed to pull back *some* grace with Licence to Kill, but in my opinion the list should read

Sean Connery
Pierce Brosnan
David Niven
Roger Moore
Timothy Dalton
and that aussie fella .. George thingy

Anyway, haven't had my *daylights* scared out of me yet - talk about a tangent

To be fair to George Lazenby, he did a pretty good job in 'OHMSS' and it had one of the best endings to a Bond movie.

And Dalton, IMO, is above Brosnan. He portrayed Bond in a similar vein to Connery insomuch as he brought the darker side to the fore again.

There's just something about Brosnan that just doesn't fit. It isn't helped, of course, that the Bond era he inhabits is more about effects than a decent story/plot.

Dalton was great.

Personally, Connery comes top as the 'iconic' Bond of Goldfinger, Dalton comes a close second for being the grittiest and closest to the Bond of the novels, Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan both started well (Live and Let Die and Goldeneye) before disappearing up their own backsides (invisible cars, I ask you!).

Lazenby had an impossible task following Connery, did a decent job in a surprisingly good movie and as Whistler has said, fantastic ending with a great Louis Armstrong song.

That's pretty much the reason I liked Dalton too - he came closest to the mental image I'd formed from reading Fleming's books and to how I imagined someone in that line of work would be - rather ruthless, not really a gentleman but polished enough to pass for one when required.