Agent Lee, many Bond fans haven't read any of the Bond books. We all
Have different tastes and ways of enjoying Bond, so if it's movies for you then
That's great. {[]
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Also, I think the fact that I spend my time writing long posts on a James Bond fan community site qualifies me as a serious Bond fan more than whether or not I've read every single Fleming novel, but that's just me.
Of course.
I started out strictly a Cinematic Bond fan, but in my 30's read all the Fleming novels so now I count myself as a literate Cinematic Bond fan. )
Agent Lee, many Bond fans haven't read any of the Bond books. We all
Have different tastes and ways of enjoying Bond, so if it's movies for you then
That's great. {[]
{[] Cheers Thunderpussy. I do love the books, though I never quite got around to reading all of them. These days I stick mostly to the movies, but my love for them is deeply influenced by my love for Fleming's world. And I would like to pick up the ones I haven't read yet eventually
Just The Spy Who Loved Me and Octopussy and The Living Daylights. And I got about a third of the way through The Man With the Golden Gun but never finished it for some reason.
I read the books as a Teen and then basically didn't read them again for years )
So I can hardly call myself a " Fleming purist " whatever you enjoy about Bond
Is fine, for instance many here collect loads of Bond collectables, yet I have no
Interest in collecting at all. but it is nice to know there are experts here, only
To happy to help, with any advice or questions.
So keep enjoying your Bond, in any format you like, {[] and keep posting your
Views and opinions.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Just The Spy Who Loved Me and Octopussy and The Living Daylights. And I got about a third of the way through The Man With the Golden Gun but never finished it for some reason.
Just The Spy Who Loved Me and Octopussy and The Living Daylights. And I got about a third of the way through The Man With the Golden Gun but never finished it for some reason.
Seeing "Spy" and Moonraker tempted me; but I had to wait until 9 or 10 to read the books. Read the entire books over six months. Had to wait until the films appeared on TV or the cinema to see them.
I am a combined literary and cinematic Bond fan..
1. For Your Eyes Only 2. The Living Daylights 3 From Russia with Love 4. Casino Royale 5. OHMSS 6. Skyfall
There was a time in my life where I had dismissed the Moore era altogether.
Sad, I know. But as my love for Bond grew I gradually turned into one of those obnoxious "Fleming purists" (no offense, to whom it may concern ).
The first Bond film I ever saw was Tomorrow Never Dies. I was 9 years old and my parents had rented it from Blockbuster. From there I was hooked. Being the vintage Bond fans that they were, my parents systematically rented me a handful of the classics from the Connery and Moore eras (my dad had grown up with Connery and my mom with Moore). With each new adventure I became more and more engrossed in the world of Bond. A few years down the road I started picking my own, the ones lesser known to my parents that I hadn't seen yet. Among these were Goldeneye, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, and the Timothy Dalton Bonds. Then I started reading the books. In High School I became very enamored with the literary 007 and grew to really appreciate Timothy Dalton's sincere and successful attempt at capturing the spirit of Ian Fleming's James Bond. Licence to Kill became my favorite Bond film. I still remember being incredibly frustrated my freshman year of High School (2004) when I had my friends over to watch LTK in the hopes that I would convert them to the Dalton era. It was to no avail as this was a generation raised on the 90's metro flare of Brosnan's Bond. I specifically remember burning up when one of my friends told me point blank "Dude, nobody likes Timothy Dalton. Everybody likes Pierce Brosnan." I can't be sure, but this event may have even further cemented my Flemingist attitude toward the films.
I came to make the gross mistake of comparing Roger Moore's films to the darker, more serious tone of my favorite Bonds; FRWL, OHMSS, LTK, GE; not to mention the Fleming and Gardner novels. That's when I decided that Roger Moore was simply NOT my Bond. I dismissed him for years as a weak imitation of Fleming's creation. Granted, no Bond had yet captured the Bond of the books perfectly in my eyes, but at least there were stark moments where Fleming's Bond shown through. Even Pierce Brosnan had managed to capture at least some small essence of Fleming in his finest moments. This was a dark time when I would scoff at anyone who dared say Roger Moore was their favorite Bond, or ask me which Bond was my favorite. "Connery and Dalton" I would say, to which I would usually get the reply "You like Timothy Dalton? He sucks. Roger Moore is way better." This only fueled and exacerbated my hatred for Moore.
I was a senior in High School when Casino Royale came out. It was the Bond film I had been waiting for my whole life. A true return to Ian Fleming's James Bond. Upon my first viewing in theaters (at midnight at my local theater in Provo UT), there were moments when I couldn't believe my eyes. Sure, Daniel Craig was blonde, but his steely blues eyes, rugged good looks, and brilliant re-invention of the character was the Bond I pictured vividly when I read Casino Royale, Live and Let Die, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, and even For Special Services. Not only that, the masses loved him AND Casino Royale. Finally, everyone else was on my side. Fleming's Bond was the RIGHT Bond.
Now here's the twist. With the arrival of the Craig era came my re-discovery and newfound love for Roger Moore. Here's how: because the Bond films had taken such a harsh turn in my favor, and because Casino Royale was a "reboot" of the series, it led me to re-explore the series as a whole and see each Bond actor in a new light. Now that Craig had completely re-invented the character, and Bond was finally speaking to MY generation in a very visceral way, I realized that each era of Bond brought its own unique spin to the table. Furthermore, I realized that Roger Moore had succeeded in doing what Daniel Craig is doing today; reinventing the character to fit his sensibilities and speak to a new generation of Bond fans.
Fast forward to today. Skyfall is only second to From Russia With Love as my favorite Bond film of all time, and I still look to Fleming as the gold standard upon which every good Bond film should build itself. I've read most of the Fleming novels, and I for whatever reason I see them in a much different light than I did when I was younger. Now I see that there is just as much fun camp as there is serious violence in the books; and I see that both of those elements are represented by the Moore era, only emphasized differently than Connery or Craig.
And guess what? I love Roger Moore! Granted, he's still probably my least favorite Bond, but I've grown to really appreciate and even cherish what he brings to the character. When I've ruminated enough on the darkness of Bond through Connery, Craig or Dalton, it's good to know I can turn to LALD or TSWLM (my two favorite Moore films) for a fun, charming, and exciting version of my favorite secret agent. There are even times when I feel that I--a tall, lanky, bright-eyed kid from Utah--can relate to Moore's Bond better than the others (but only sometimes...I do have a dark side -{ ). Connery was right when he said that Roger Moore's take on Bond was a sort of parody of the character he had created for the screen. But that's far from a bad thing. Especially since Roger is so darn delightful at it
And as much as I love the classic dress style of Connery or Craig, there are times when I'm really jealous of Roger Moore's fantastic '70's suits!
Now my question for all of you is: Has there ever been a time where you really despised one of the Bonds in particular? And has your opinion of him and his films changed over the years?
Great post, Agent Lee! Some folks around here would label me a "Roger Moore hater" because I have repeatedly stated (too often for some!) that to me he is the least convincing, and therefore my least favorite Bond. Nevertheless, I do watch Moore's Bond films and I am generally entertained by them. I am a HUGE Bond movie fan, but I have also read some, although not all of the novels. I think that's enough to qualify me to hang out with you guys! ) My favorite Bond is Connery, and Dalton and Craig vie for second place (I think Craig is leading right now).
Roger Moore is as convincing in his version of James Bond as Sean Connery is in his. I've not had a problem with him at all -- it's just some of his films aren't as good.
If Roger had been Bond from 1962 then I'm sure we'd have some different views, a younger, tougher Moore Bond would no doubt change a few of the doubters, he'd have been great in OHMSS, better than Lazenby and even, dare I say it, Connery.
If Roger had been Bond from 1962 then I'm sure we'd have some different views, a younger, tougher Moore Bond would no doubt change a few of the doubters, he'd have been great in OHMSS, better than Lazenby and even, dare I say it, Connery.
Wasn't he favoured by Fleming too?
Good point. I mean, I hate to imagine a world where Sean Connery was never James Bond, but I do think had Moore been the first, I would probably have a different opinion of him and a different outlook on Bond in general.
It probably would've sold half if Moore were Bond in the earlier films so he came at just the right time I'd say.
Moore could have done just as good a job as Connery, I think. He would have played them more seriously than his films in the 70s. Have you seen The Saint?
I didn't say he wouldn't have been as good. Just that he wouldn't sell as much and probably not have been as lucky.
James Bond and Sean Connery was the right match at the right time, and while Connery did have skill, like all success in life, luck is the driving factor. Every high level of success in life is luck. If Bill Gates were born in 1960 or 1950 instead of 1955, he wouldn't have almost certainly wouldn't have been a billionaire.
The first Bond film I ever saw was Tomorrow Never Dies. I was 9 years old and my parents had rented it from Blockbuster. From there I was hooked. Being the vintage Bond fans that they were, my parents systematically rented me a handful of the classics from the Connery and Moore eras (my dad had grown up with Connery and my mom with Moore). With each new adventure I became more and more engrossed in the world of Bond. A few years down the road I started picking my own, the ones lesser known to my parents that I hadn't seen yet. Among these were Goldeneye, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, and the Timothy Dalton Bonds. Then I started reading the books.
Interesting. I had a similar introduction to Bond. The first Bond film I ever saw was The Man With the Golden Gun, and I still have a soft spot for that film, despite it being one of the weaker ones in the series. I don't remember how old I was at the time, but I was younger than 9, and it was back in the mid to late 1980s when I lived in Hong Kong at the time.
A few years later, I started watching the classics from the Connery era which I truly enjoyed. I also began borrowing the Fleming novels from the library and slowly got through each one of them, and it was then that I truly appreciated what a fine job Connery did portraying as Bond, especially in his first two films. Whenever I read Fleming's books, I tend to picture Connery in my mind rather than any other Bond.
I then started watching the other Bond films - Moore, Dalton and Brosnan Bonds (GoldenEye was the first Bond I saw at the cinema), but thought that the Brosnan Bonds weren't very 'Fleming-esque'.
In High School I became very enamored with the literary 007 and grew to really appreciate Timothy Dalton's sincere and successful attempt at capturing the spirit of Ian Fleming's James Bond. Licence to Kill became my favorite Bond film. I still remember being incredibly frustrated my freshman year of High School (2004) when I had my friends over to watch LTK in the hopes that I would convert them to the Dalton era. It was to no avail as this was a generation raised on the 90's metro flare of Brosnan's Bond. I specifically remember burning up when one of my friends told me point blank "Dude, nobody likes Timothy Dalton. Everybody likes Pierce Brosnan." I can't be sure, but this event may have even further cemented my Flemingist attitude toward the films.
The more I read Fleming, the more I like Dalton's performance as Bond. I think he played the literary Bond perfectly.
I came to make the gross mistake of comparing Roger Moore's films to the darker, more serious tone of my favorite Bonds; FRWL, OHMSS, LTK, GE; not to mention the Fleming and Gardner novels. That's when I decided that Roger Moore was simply NOT my Bond. I dismissed him for years as a weak imitation of Fleming's creation. Granted, no Bond had yet captured the Bond of the books perfectly in my eyes, but at least there were stark moments where Fleming's Bond shown through. Even Pierce Brosnan had managed to capture at least some small essence of Fleming in his finest moments. This was a dark time when I would scoff at anyone who dared say Roger Moore was their favorite Bond, or ask me which Bond was my favorite. "Connery and Dalton" I would say, to which I would usually get the reply "You like Timothy Dalton? He sucks. Roger Moore is way better." This only fueled and exacerbated my hatred for Moore.
Connery and Dalton are my favourite Bonds today and Moore my least favourite, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that I have a "hatred" for him. After all, I couldn't possibly "hate" someone I've never met. Besides, in certain clips where he had been interviewed, he has been a complete gentleman and an all round nice guy.
But that's the polar opposite of the literary Bond character. I think the fact that he was an all round nice guy is a detriment to his portrayal of Bond. In a way, Moore was "too nice" to be Bond. Sure, others can point out the kills that Moore's Bond had made, but it isn't just the act of killing that makes the character, but also the way he goes about it, and his behaviour and mannerisms.
Upon my first viewing in theaters (at midnight at my local theater in Provo UT), there were moments when I couldn't believe my eyes. Sure, Daniel Craig was blonde, but his steely blues eyes, rugged good looks, and brilliant re-invention of the character was the Bond I pictured vividly when I read Casino Royale, Live and Let Die, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, and even For Special Services. Not only that, the masses loved him AND Casino Royale. Finally, everyone else was on my side. Fleming's Bond was the RIGHT Bond.
That was probably my first reaction when I saw Casino Royale too. Sure, it wasn't entirely an accurate adaptation of the novel, but there are certain elements of the novel that have been incorporated into the film, each of which I recognised and was grateful for. Even more surprising for me was Craig's performance as Bond. I'm ashamed to say that back when Craig was announced, I didn't think he was the right choice because he has the wrong hair colour, and is too short. But it didn't take long for me to be convinced that I was wrong, and EON got it right.
There were elements that I did not enjoy. I didn't think the early action sequences involving Bond chasing the bomber was plausible. That's not the Bond I know from the books - he isn't super-fit, he isn't super-human. The literary Bond would probably have jumped in his Bentley to chase him, then shot him with the .45 Colt that he keeps in his car.
But there were also elements that I truly enjoyed. I think the stairwell fight scene was very well done. It was a sequence that is right up there with the best of the cinematic Bond fight scenes, and one that I can easily picture the literary Bond doing.
Fast forward to today. Skyfall is only second to From Russia With Love as my favorite Bond film of all time, and I still look to Fleming as the gold standard upon which every good Bond film should build itself.
Yes. I think the Fleming novels are the standard by which all Bond films are to be judged. But I wouldn't go quite so far as to say Skyfall was my second favourite. No, I don't think any Bond film made from now on will crack my top 5 for their accuracy to Fleming - or, for that matter, my top 7 (including the two Dalton films at 6 and 7, as Dalton played Bond the closest to the literary character of any actor).
I've read most of the Fleming novels, and I for whatever reason I see them in a much different light than I did when I was younger. Now I see that there is just as much fun camp as there is serious violence in the books; and I see that both of those elements are represented by the Moore era, only emphasized differently than Connery or Craig.
This is where I disagree. Sure, some of the plots in the Fleming novels were rather outlandish, Bond had always been played with a straight face. Bond's humour in the books is best described as witty, which is why I strongly disagree with elements of slapstick that have been included in the Moore films (not to mention Brosnan in Die Another Day) - JW Pepper was absolutely unnecessary in either of the two films he starred in; the hovercraft gondola and the clown suit, and some of Moore's one-liners were cringeworthy, compared to Connery's dry wit which is far more fitting of the Bond character.
And guess what? I love Roger Moore! Granted, he's still probably my least favorite Bond, but I've grown to really appreciate and even cherish what he brings to the character.
As mentioned, I have a soft spot for The Man With the Golden Gun as it was the first Bond film I saw. Aside from those, my favourite Moore films are For Your Eyes Only and Live and Let Die, in that order - because they are the most Fleming-esque of films that Moore had starred in. So yes, he is still my least favourite Bond, but I do appreciate some of his films.
1. OHMSS is not a "darker, more serious" story. It is wildly over-the-top and pure escapist fantasy. A mountain lair of brainwashed beauties who are being used for spreading biological warfare. Sounds like a perfect job for Roger Moore. Anyway, you almost got this one by saying, "there is just as much fun camp as there is serious violence in the books."
Maybe not, but it is a more accurate portrayal of the novel. I agree that the plot was somewhat outlandish, and I did not enjoy reading this book as much as I enjoyed the others, but it gets marks for being very accurate to the novel.
2. Roger's Bond is easily identifiable as Fleming's Bond, although certainly playing to a different set of strengths. Just the way Roger talks seems to be lifted straight from Fleming's pages. "Just what I read in the papers, sir." or "Thank God you're safe." He can also be ruthless when necessarily and has racked up some of the coldest kills in the series. For example, TSWLM, he swats his tie away from a desperate henchman, shoots a defenseless Stromberg at point blank, and kills two baddies in one shot with a spear gun and knocks another down the stairs before making a graceful escape on the monorail. And don't even get me started on what a cold-hearted bastard he is in TMWTGG; Nearly breaking Maud's arm, firing rifle at gunmakers groin, pushing kid into the river, and his reluctance to work with a female agent is very similar to the Casino Royale novel.
The same can be said for every other Bond. Connery's shooting of Professor Dent, interrogating Mr Jones the chauffeur, shooting Vargas with a spear gun; Dalton's interrogation of General Pushkin, feeding Killifer to the sharks, shooting one of Krest's men with a spear gun ... need I go on? In light of the above, sure, Moore's Bond had made a few kills - every Bond has to, it's part of the character, but it's not just the act of killing that matters. Behaviour and mannerisms play a part, too.
Also, I think Connery's somewhat sharp, aggressive voice lends itself well to playing Bond and may lead to a perception that he is more aggressive and violent. In contrast, Moore is somewhat softly spoken, especially with his RP accent and rounded vowels. Just as it isn't the act of killing that matters, it's also not the lines themselves that matters, but the delivery of them.
Connery and Dalton are my favourite Bonds today and Moore my least favourite, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that I have a "hatred" for him. After all, I couldn't possibly "hate" someone I've never met. Besides, in certain clips where he had been interviewed, he has been a complete gentleman and an all round nice guy.
But that's the polar opposite of the literary Bond character. I think the fact that he was an all round nice guy is a detriment to his portrayal of Bond. In a way, Moore was "too nice" to be Bond. Sure, others can point out the kills that Moore's Bond had made, but it isn't just the act of killing that makes the character, but also the way he goes about it, and his behaviour and mannerisms.
This is a point I have often tried to make myself, although not quite as eloquently as you have here. -{
This is where I disagree. Sure, some of the plots in the Fleming novels were rather outlandish, Bond had always been played with a straight face. Bond's humour in the books is best described as witty, which is why I strongly disagree with elements of slapstick that have been included in the Moore films (not to mention Brosnan in Die Another Day) - JW Pepper was absolutely unnecessary in either of the two films he starred in; the hovercraft gondola and the clown suit, and some of Moore's one-liners were cringeworthy, compared to Connery's dry wit which is far more fitting of the Bond character.
Another point with which I wholeheartedly agree. {[]
Comments
Have different tastes and ways of enjoying Bond, so if it's movies for you then
That's great. {[]
I started out strictly a Cinematic Bond fan, but in my 30's read all the Fleming novels so now I count myself as a literate Cinematic Bond fan.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
{[] Cheers Thunderpussy. I do love the books, though I never quite got around to reading all of them. These days I stick mostly to the movies, but my love for them is deeply influenced by my love for Fleming's world. And I would like to pick up the ones I haven't read yet eventually
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/wish-i-was-at-disneyland/id1202780413?mt=2
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/wish-i-was-at-disneyland/id1202780413?mt=2
So I can hardly call myself a " Fleming purist "
Is fine, for instance many here collect loads of Bond collectables, yet I have no
Interest in collecting at all.
To happy to help, with any advice or questions.
So keep enjoying your Bond, in any format you like, {[] and keep posting your
Views and opinions.
Don't feel bad. Fleming didn't finish TMWTGG either.
AJB007 Favorite Film Rankings
Pros and Cons Compendium (50 Years)
Apart from the Films and Books, my other main interest in the Series are the Comics :007)
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/wish-i-was-at-disneyland/id1202780413?mt=2
I am a combined literary and cinematic Bond fan..
Great post, Agent Lee! Some folks around here would label me a "Roger Moore hater" because I have repeatedly stated (too often for some!) that to me he is the least convincing, and therefore my least favorite Bond. Nevertheless, I do watch Moore's Bond films and I am generally entertained by them. I am a HUGE Bond movie fan, but I have also read some, although not all of the novels. I think that's enough to qualify me to hang out with you guys!
Wasn't he favoured by Fleming too?
Good point. I mean, I hate to imagine a world where Sean Connery was never James Bond, but I do think had Moore been the first, I would probably have a different opinion of him and a different outlook on Bond in general.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/wish-i-was-at-disneyland/id1202780413?mt=2
AJB007 Favorite Film Rankings
Pros and Cons Compendium (50 Years)
Moore could have done just as good a job as Connery, I think. He would have played them more seriously than his films in the 70s. Have you seen The Saint?
James Bond and Sean Connery was the right match at the right time, and while Connery did have skill, like all success in life, luck is the driving factor. Every high level of success in life is luck. If Bill Gates were born in 1960 or 1950 instead of 1955, he wouldn't have almost certainly wouldn't have been a billionaire.
AJB007 Favorite Film Rankings
Pros and Cons Compendium (50 Years)
…and you've been a Bond fan for what…almost 6 months now? 8-)
I must admit you are a fast learner though. -{
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
AJB007 Favorite Film Rankings
Pros and Cons Compendium (50 Years)
I'm proud to be a Fleming purist
Interesting. I had a similar introduction to Bond. The first Bond film I ever saw was The Man With the Golden Gun, and I still have a soft spot for that film, despite it being one of the weaker ones in the series. I don't remember how old I was at the time, but I was younger than 9, and it was back in the mid to late 1980s when I lived in Hong Kong at the time.
A few years later, I started watching the classics from the Connery era which I truly enjoyed. I also began borrowing the Fleming novels from the library and slowly got through each one of them, and it was then that I truly appreciated what a fine job Connery did portraying as Bond, especially in his first two films. Whenever I read Fleming's books, I tend to picture Connery in my mind rather than any other Bond.
I then started watching the other Bond films - Moore, Dalton and Brosnan Bonds (GoldenEye was the first Bond I saw at the cinema), but thought that the Brosnan Bonds weren't very 'Fleming-esque'.
The more I read Fleming, the more I like Dalton's performance as Bond. I think he played the literary Bond perfectly.
Connery and Dalton are my favourite Bonds today and Moore my least favourite, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that I have a "hatred" for him. After all, I couldn't possibly "hate" someone I've never met. Besides, in certain clips where he had been interviewed, he has been a complete gentleman and an all round nice guy.
But that's the polar opposite of the literary Bond character. I think the fact that he was an all round nice guy is a detriment to his portrayal of Bond. In a way, Moore was "too nice" to be Bond. Sure, others can point out the kills that Moore's Bond had made, but it isn't just the act of killing that makes the character, but also the way he goes about it, and his behaviour and mannerisms.
That was probably my first reaction when I saw Casino Royale too. Sure, it wasn't entirely an accurate adaptation of the novel, but there are certain elements of the novel that have been incorporated into the film, each of which I recognised and was grateful for. Even more surprising for me was Craig's performance as Bond. I'm ashamed to say that back when Craig was announced, I didn't think he was the right choice because he has the wrong hair colour, and is too short. But it didn't take long for me to be convinced that I was wrong, and EON got it right.
There were elements that I did not enjoy. I didn't think the early action sequences involving Bond chasing the bomber was plausible. That's not the Bond I know from the books - he isn't super-fit, he isn't super-human. The literary Bond would probably have jumped in his Bentley to chase him, then shot him with the .45 Colt that he keeps in his car.
But there were also elements that I truly enjoyed. I think the stairwell fight scene was very well done. It was a sequence that is right up there with the best of the cinematic Bond fight scenes, and one that I can easily picture the literary Bond doing.
Yes. I think the Fleming novels are the standard by which all Bond films are to be judged. But I wouldn't go quite so far as to say Skyfall was my second favourite. No, I don't think any Bond film made from now on will crack my top 5 for their accuracy to Fleming - or, for that matter, my top 7 (including the two Dalton films at 6 and 7, as Dalton played Bond the closest to the literary character of any actor).
This is where I disagree. Sure, some of the plots in the Fleming novels were rather outlandish, Bond had always been played with a straight face. Bond's humour in the books is best described as witty, which is why I strongly disagree with elements of slapstick that have been included in the Moore films (not to mention Brosnan in Die Another Day) - JW Pepper was absolutely unnecessary in either of the two films he starred in; the hovercraft gondola and the clown suit, and some of Moore's one-liners were cringeworthy, compared to Connery's dry wit which is far more fitting of the Bond character.
As mentioned, I have a soft spot for The Man With the Golden Gun as it was the first Bond film I saw. Aside from those, my favourite Moore films are For Your Eyes Only and Live and Let Die, in that order - because they are the most Fleming-esque of films that Moore had starred in. So yes, he is still my least favourite Bond, but I do appreciate some of his films.
True, but as a Fleming purist, this irks me.
Maybe not, but it is a more accurate portrayal of the novel. I agree that the plot was somewhat outlandish, and I did not enjoy reading this book as much as I enjoyed the others, but it gets marks for being very accurate to the novel.
The same can be said for every other Bond. Connery's shooting of Professor Dent, interrogating Mr Jones the chauffeur, shooting Vargas with a spear gun; Dalton's interrogation of General Pushkin, feeding Killifer to the sharks, shooting one of Krest's men with a spear gun ... need I go on? In light of the above, sure, Moore's Bond had made a few kills - every Bond has to, it's part of the character, but it's not just the act of killing that matters. Behaviour and mannerisms play a part, too.
Also, I think Connery's somewhat sharp, aggressive voice lends itself well to playing Bond and may lead to a perception that he is more aggressive and violent. In contrast, Moore is somewhat softly spoken, especially with his RP accent and rounded vowels. Just as it isn't the act of killing that matters, it's also not the lines themselves that matters, but the delivery of them.
That's not what Moore himself said:
"I like Bond. But it's silly to take it seriously. It's just a great big comic strip."
Source: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000549/bio?ref_=nm_dyk_qt_sm#quotes
Sorry, I can't agree. For a textbook interrogation, just look at Dalton in The Living Daylights.
Dalton played that Scene brilliantly
This is a point I have often tried to make myself, although not quite as eloquently as you have here. -{
Another point with which I wholeheartedly agree. {[]
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
well, we all tend to get grumpy with advanced age.
So following this logic, BL would be TERRIBLY grumpy
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Actually, that's a fairly apt comparison.
Thank you for noticing! {[]