Roger Moore thinks the James Bond films are "ridiculous."

JimmyBond0129

"To me, the Bond situations are so ridiculous, so outrageous. I mean this man is supposed to be a spy and yet, everbody knows he's a spy." - Roger Moore (Credited to James Bond 007: MI6 The Home of James Bond.)

You know as much as I don't like Roger Moore's portrayal of James Bond, he does have a point at least in the Fleming novels, Bond had a good reason for being such a well known spy. But in the movies everybody knows who Bond is and how Bond's identity became public knowledge is unknown, it's like Bond is a world famous celebrity or something.

Higgins

well, as you don't like Roger, just read his lines:
"To me the Bond situations are so ridiculous, so outrageous"
and re. the rest of your post, what exactly is your point? ?:)

JimmyBond0129

I'm saying Roger Moore is right, there is a ridiculousness factor to the Bond films because everybody knows who Bond is and MI6 didn't advertise it at least in Casino Royale the novel we know that Bond was compromised because of Vesper but in Casino Royale the 2006 movie an anchorwoman knew Bond's identity and his identity was supposed to be a secret. (And that happened before Vesper came into the picture.) I've never worked for the CIA but I bet it's hard to be an efficient spy when everybody knows who you are.

Also I don't have to like someone in order to agree with that person's point of view...since when has that been unwritten rule? (I don't have a problem with Roger Moore *the man* I just have a problem with every Bond film in between Diamonds Are Forever and The Living Daylights but I suppose that's not Sir Roger's fault.)

Higgins

Well, the quote above is Roger Moore's standard reply to questions, how realistic the cinematic Bonds are.

The question, how 007 can keep his cover as everybody knows him from cinema and/or novels is a pretty old approach, too and could be asked soon after the CR novel or Dr. No Movie.

The mistake is to take all this for real. Ok, let's follow it for one second:
If James Bond is well-known over the globe, what else could he do than approach in talkshows, shaking hands and sign autographs? Wouldn't that be boring for all of us?
Why are all these villains disclosing their evil plans in public?
Are they so stupid to ignore the large amounts of cameras, which are taping all evidence against them?
And for all people who praise the new realism in the Craig area: How comes, that an Aston Martin flips over 7-fold by a driver's mistake on a plain road?
How can 007 afford all these cars, apartments, watches, suits etc with his public salary?
Would the british taxpayer accept all these luxury flight and hotel bills?
As the 007 movies are advertised on TV, why are the bad guys not influencing the storylines BEFORE everything happens in reality?
Aren't they a bit concerned that they receive a huge paycheck from a british film production company?
-
-

This could be going on forever. So, you see, this can't be solely limited to the period, when Roger was in the tux.

So, I think, it may be better to lean back and take the escapist way and accept, that Bond is something totally fictional.

Like someone said in the other thread: The Bond movies are meant to entertain, to give us some FUN and not to carbon-copy reality

Manxman

I'd have to agree with what Moore says. The big difference between the literary and film characters is that the literary Bond was a discreet man: he dressed down and went about his business quietly, as a real secret agent would. In most (but by no means all) of the films, Bond is a showoff, who does everything he can to attract attention, and whose exploits have included wrecking whole fleets of police cars and driving a tank through the middle of a city. This simply isn't convincing: were a real-life agent to behave like this, it would cause serious diplomatic incidents and severely compromise the British government.

Higgins

.. but don't we all love spectacular car-chases and stuff and wouldn't it be a shame to leave them out of any James Bond movie for the sake of realism?

Number24

Roger has a point. Bond is very flamboyant in most (all?) movies and everybody seems to know him. But from what I have read and seen in documentaries, there is some truth in it too.
Most agent who have been "players" for a while are known to other inteligence agencies who have files on them. Operations that require agents who are unknown to the oposition use young, fresh agents.

walther p99

Manxman wrote:

whose exploits have included wrecking whole fleets of police cars and driving a tank through the middle of a city.

Thats part of why I love Bond, even if it makes no sense in reality,and i dont wanna see Bond doing paperwork or constantly looking at someone through binoculars, I want him to cruise around in a Tank with his theme blaring even if its completely unrealistic but thats just me.

chrisno1

So Sir Roger thinks all Bond films are ridiculous? And what's the news here?
This from the actor who brought us the Saint and the Persuaders where the heroes always seemed to be known to the villains and the situations got a healthy pinch of salt in them - although they never went into outerspace or comandeered tanks and stuff, at least not that I recall.....

Napoleon Plural

Moore's Bond just picked up where Connery left off. Thing is, once you take a hero beyond his three films, it becomes implausible (the reason most heroes only last for three movies unless the rest is a reboot like Batman, or a prequel).

To keep Bond on an even keel from Goldfinger onwards just wouldn't have worked, it had to be bigger and better. You have to acknowledge the implausiblity to the audience before they do.

thesecretagent

During service in the British army I have worked on the periphery of intelligence in the past - serving in Northern Ireland working predominently as a driver assigned to 14 Intelligence Company, but often working on foot carrying out surveillance drills. Armed, dressed in plain clothes and carrying out surveillance as part of a well-organised team. I have also briefly come into contact with people from SIS and the Security Service. Now let me say, if Bond were close to real life, nobody would go to see the films. The work I endured was the most boring I have ever done, before or since and that went for the intelligence officers I was supporting. The faces from our two civilian intelligence services are the most dullest and stuck-up idiots I have ever met, or ever hope to meet. And sitting in a car with a Browning digging into your hip, rubbing it until it bleeds, whilst staring through the drizzle on the windscreen while your SIS/MI5/14 intcomp passenger chain-smokes their way to death (and yours too) is so boring I would rather lick envelopes for a living...
Bond is about escapism and adventure. The work he does in every film is a compellation of what someone in his line of work may have to do a small percentage of during a twenty-years service. Some may get shot at and drive like hell to avoid, some may have to shoot back, and some may have to get into a fight. But not much, and certainly not very often. But more often than not if you work in SIS or MI5 you won't do any of that. You will watch all day long, and if there is any dirty work to do you will do a great deal of paperwork to get various units of the armed forces to do all that for you. And when it happens it won't be a smart young man with Tom Ford suits and a collection of Omega watches, but a whole unit of very ugly, and very tough young men who will work together, with a great deal of support to do what the intelligence officers can't - and that is get their hands dirty and take life-threatening risks.
The catalist of the films is that intelligence work offers many different scenarios, and many potential threats. To plunge just one man into the midst of it, giving him all this clandestine world has to offer makes for a great genre.
The Moore era of films came along in pretty grim times for Britain. Countless strikes and trade union disputes, an international oil crisis, electricity supply problems, bad inflation and monetary values - all needed escaping from, and Moore's films did just that. And as I have said before elsewhere on this site - he was up against Smokey and the Bandit and so many similar films. This would sway the box office, and the Bond producers were in business after all...

Number24

What Thesecretagent writes is probably how it is for allmost all inteligence agents all over the world. But I have read the memoirs of SOE agents and what they lived through in WWII, and boredom and monotony was a part of the job. But action, danger and fighting was pretty common too. I guess WWII was a bit different, with low tec and full on war, but I love to think there are individuals who have lives a bit like that today too.

Napoleon Plural

See, I wouldn't mind Craig's Bond covering the boredom angle, say as he's waiting for a new assignment to start. If not with Craig, then with whom? It's a new angle on Bond.

Loeffelholz

Napoleon Plural wrote:

See, I wouldn't mind Craig's Bond covering the boredom angle, say as he's waiting for a new assignment to start. If not with Craig, then with whom? It's a new angle on Bond.

I'm with you there; IMO it would be worth a two-minute scene to explore Bond's well-known (to book readers ) loathing of desk work. This, and three minutes with May, would inject a new spin on the proceedings.

chrisno1

Loeffelholz wrote:

Napoleon Plural wrote:

See, I wouldn't mind Craig's Bond covering the boredom angle, say as he's waiting for a new assignment to start. If not with Craig, then with whom? It's a new angle on Bond.

I'm with you there; IMO it would be worth a two-minute scene to explore Bond's well-known (to book readers ) loathing of desk work. This, and three minutes with May, would inject a new spin on the proceedings.

Oh god, no, sorry, the Scottish housekeeper???
that was so out of date even when Fleming wrote it,
what sort of "secret agent" could Bond possibly be with a darling little woman making his breakfast and his bed... no wonder Tiffany Case left Bond, there could hardly be room to breathe.... the Scots woman is in sufferable
May only confirms the upper class aspirations of J.B. and frankly I would hate that in any cinematic James Bond; one of the best things about Gardner was he did away with the silly woman.
If Bond can't even be bothered to cook his own eggs in the morning, well, I am hardly surprised he struggles with desk work....

Loeffelholz

chrisno1 wrote:

Oh god, no, sorry, the Scottish housekeeper???
that was so out of date even when Fleming wrote it,
what sort of "secret agent" could Bond possibly be with a darling little woman making his breakfast and his bed... no wonder Tiffany Case left Bond, there could hardly be room to breathe.... the Scots woman is in sufferable...

As nothing from the books is ever translated directly to film (especially these days!), what I've envisioned is something of a derivation...it's frequently met with reactions such as yours, which is fine. I just disagree, and would argue that it would all depend upon execution. It's an opportunity to view the character of Bond through a different prism---his home life. My scene would include his early morning exercise regimen, his hot-then-cold shower, and a perfectly prepared breakfast by a woman who might be neither 'little' nor 'darling'...but it would be someone Bond respects (on a different level than the ubiquitous Dame Judi).

I've got a definite idea of how it would work, with a new wrinkle or two...but it will never happen, of course, since Eon insists upon not hiring me ) Just a daydream...

chrisno1

Loeffelholz wrote:

chrisno1 wrote:

Oh god, no, sorry, the Scottish housekeeper???
that was so out of date even when Fleming wrote it,
what sort of "secret agent" could Bond possibly be with a darling little woman making his breakfast and his bed... no wonder Tiffany Case left Bond, there could hardly be room to breathe.... the Scots woman is in sufferable...

As nothing from the books is ever translated directly to film (especially these days!), what I've envisioned is something of a derivation...it's frequently met with reactions such as yours, which is fine. I just disagree, and would argue that it would all depend upon execution. It's an opportunity to view the character of Bond through a different prism---his home life. My scene would include his early morning exercise regimen, his hot-then-cold shower, and a perfectly prepared breakfast by a woman who might be neither 'little' nor 'darling'...but it would be someone Bond respects (on a different level than the ubiquitous Dame Judi).

I've got a definite idea of how it would work, with a new wrinkle or two...but it will never happen, of course, since Eon insists upon not hiring me ) Just a daydream...

I take on board some of the points re. the early morning routine (this has NEVER been featured in a 007 movie, but I just don't agree with the housekeeper thing; people just don't (very rarely) have one.
One of the things I love in The Ipcress File (yes, I know it isn't a 007 movie) is that Harry Palmer takes care of himself in his little flat . It was believable when he made omelettes for his 1NS. Yes, part of the success is because it is unexpected and new cinematic product. But it does make the viewer associate with Palmer as a common man. Bond has never been a common man.
Unfortunatley even the down to earth Craig couldn't help but look a little silly if a "wee woman" cooked his brekkie and tucked in his sheets.
I'd love to see DC at home stretching and exercising and fixing "Oueff a la Ian Fleming" but please, no housekeeper, it just isn't of our time

Loeffelholz

Can be... :v

chrisno1

ok, IYO 8-)

Loeffelholz

No need to break out the rolleyes 8-) I said it was just a daydream, didn't I. But of course you know best, and I concede the folly of my notion. Quite sorry to have brought it up.

Back on topic ...Sir Roger's extemporaneous take on the Bond films ironically mirrors Fleming's own self-deprecating attitude toward the novels. As I indicate in my signature, Fleming made it clear that he knew he wasn't engaged in high-brow art...

chrisno1

Loeffelholz wrote:

No need to break out the rolleyes 8-) I said it was just a daydream, didn't I. But of course you know best, and I concede the folly of my notion. Quite sorry to have brought it up.

Back on topic ...Sir Roger's extemporaneous take on the Bond films ironically mirrors Fleming's own self-deprecating attitude toward the novels. As I indicate in my signature, Fleming made it clear that he knew he wasn't engaged in high-brow art...

That last point is how I feel about Sir Rog in general; I am not a great fan of his films, except the middle three, but I concede he is much more "Ian Fleming" than any of the others, although Craig probably has the coldness of the book's hero better than anyone.
Sorry about the eyes! I'd just come back from the pub! One should never post after 6 pints of IPA!

8420

HE has a point in a way , James bond is appose to be a spy yet Nearly everyone knows he is one Wait that sounds confusing?

Napoleon Plural

We've discussed May the housekeeper on another thread. It doesn't have to be exactly as the book, most people have a cleaner if they're over £35 K and are busy. Or she could be a neighbour. There is a problem here though, with good reason we rarely see Bond's abode as it allows the ordinary joe to project himself into Bond's lifestyle. See his house and if it's notably plush, especially in central London, many guys will feel alienated.

chrisno1

What's all this about employing a cleaner if you earn over £35k.... that's a load of hog wash
I know couples struggling to keep a two up two down who earn way more than £35k and they sure as hell do not employ a cleaner (trust me... I have been to their houses!)
and if she's a neighbour... tell the old lady to butt out - no old dear would making a brekkie of mine unless she was my wife or respectable other... I reckon Mr J.B. c.2009 might feel the same.
And I tell you now, James Bond should never ever ever and never have a cleaner!!!!!
Just the thought is enough to make me sprout red hair and turn into a German....
And I would quite like to see 007s pad. We saw it once in the '60s and once again in the '70s (he had clearly moved abode) so I think a tasteful introduction to the netherworld of 007 would be in order

p.s. just to clarify, I've had another 6 pints tonight..... oh dear lord

Loeffelholz

All criticism/derision/drunken rants, re: the idea of bringing Bond's Scottish Treasure to the films should be directed here...

http://www.ajb007.co.uk/topic/28384/bonds-scottish-treasure/

thesecretagent

chrisno1 wrote:

What's all this about employing a cleaner if you earn over £35k.... that's a load of hog wash
I know couples struggling to keep a two up two down who earn way more than £35k and they sure as hell do not employ a cleaner (trust me... I have been to their houses!)
and if she's a neighbour... tell the old lady to butt out - no old dear would making a brekkie of mine unless she was my wife or respectable other... I reckon Mr J.B. c.2009 might feel the same.
And I tell you now, James Bond should never ever ever and never have a cleaner!!!!!
Just the thought is enough to make me sprout red hair and turn into a German....
And I would quite like to see 007s pad. We saw it once in the '60s and once again in the '70s (he had clearly moved abode) so I think a tasteful introduction to the netherworld of 007 would be in order

p.s. just to clarify, I've had another 6 pints tonight..... oh dear lord

I'd rather picture Bond with a cleaner than pushing the vaccum cleaner around between asignments. I'm sure he can fix himself breakfast, or better still go out for some, but Bond cleaning mildew in the shower? No...

Napoleon Plural

What a grouchy mood you are in chris1.

A couple earning 70K between them probably could employ a cleaner. Whether they do or not is up to them.

If a killing goes wrong, Bond could do with a 'cleaner'...



Now scrub that mildew and make that shower sparking Mr Reno! )

Dan Same

chris1, I have to second NP on this. Perhaps, it's different in Melbourne, but it's not uncommon at all here for middle-class families to employ cleaners. Seeing Bond employ a cleaner wouldn't be so incongruous to me.

Higgins

we have a similar concept here.
It's called marriage ;%

Dan Same

Bondtoys wrote:

we have something similar here.
It's called marriage ;%

) Good one. -{

Higgins

I am waiting for the boooooohs