Nice Write-up in Defense of Sir Roger

Miles Messervy

Thought I'd post this article. I am a big fan of the Craig films, and I think he's been an excellent Bond, but for me Roger will always be my favorite 007. Here's to hoping that a new appreciation of his take on Bond is underway.

http://www.mrporter.com/journal/the-read/the-man-with-the-golden-pun/548?cm_mmc=Email-_-JournalDigestC-_-221015-_-USTHEREAD

Napoleon Plural

Yeah, good writing, though all writers can't resist frontloading any defense with a load of criticism of Rog.

And I must join in, I mean that pic of Rog and Sean together - Jimmy Hill chins, surely! Quite protruding. But you don't ever really see that in their films do you? Odd, and just as well.

Devereaux

Nice line in the article...' this is the era when movie stars had style, rather than stylists'...and Roger looks great in the shots.

Blackleiter

"He was too smart, too charming, simply too well-mannered, and with a far too highly developed sense of his own ridiculousness, to insult the audience’s collective intelligence by playing the frankly preposterous character of Mr Ian Fleming’s Bond – wine snob, womaniser, stuffed shirt, a loner who saves all from the megalomaniac Armageddon every time – for anything other than chuckles."

So Moore was the best Bond because he made no attempt to actually portray the character Fleming created? Okay, thanks. 8-)

Thunderpussy

Strangely out of all the actors after Connery, only Moore and Craig have made
the role totally their own . ( just my opinion, of course)

heartbroken_mr_drax

Blackleiter wrote:

"He was too smart, too charming, simply too well-mannered, and with a far too highly developed sense of his own ridiculousness, to insult the audience’s collective intelligence by playing the frankly preposterous character of Mr Ian Fleming’s Bond – wine snob, womaniser, stuffed shirt, a loner who saves all from the megalomaniac Armageddon every time – for anything other than chuckles."

So Moore was the best Bond because he made no attempt to actually portray the character Fleming created? Okay, thanks. 8-)

I don't agree with what the author is saying on this. Yes, LALD, TMWTGG and to a lesser extent TSWLM aren't so "Flemmingey", but his latter films are. Roger pulls both style of films off with conviction. The Producers chose to make his first few films a departure from SC - which leads to Roger being able to own the role. A mistake that was made with Lazenby (along with plenty of others).

Roger is my fav by a mile and I don't think he needs defending. Dalton and Lazenby do, mostly to non-Bond fans. I think Roger is an acquired taste as Bond, and even people who don't necessarily like him as Bond (SC/DC lovers), he still gets appreciated.

Agent Purple

Thunderpussy wrote:

Strangely out of all the actors after Connery, only Moore and Craig have made
the role totally their own . ( just my opinion, of course)

It's a bold statement for sure.

I can back you up on Sir Roger, not so much on Craig, even if the latter's era has brought a new direction for the movies (which is a fact).

Blackleiter

heartbroken_mr_drax wrote:

I think Roger is an acquired taste as Bond, and even people who don't necessarily like him as Bond (SC/DC lovers), he still gets appreciated.

I am definitely in this category. And I appreciate the fact that you don't agree with the excerpts from the article that I posted. It seems to me that the author undercuts his argument that Moore was the best Bond by insinuating that Moore isn't really playing Bond. Although Moore's take on the character is my least favorite, he is still 007 and I am able to enjoy his Bond movies for what they are.

Jarvio

Thunderpussy wrote:

Strangely out of all the actors after Connery, only Moore and Craig have made
the role totally their own . ( just my opinion, of course)

Moore and Craig are the best 2 bonds IMO!

Agent Lee

Miles Messervy wrote:

Thought I'd post this article. I am a big fan of the Craig films, and I think he's been an excellent Bond, but for me Roger will always be my favorite 007. Here's to hoping that a new appreciation of his take on Bond is underway.

http://www.mrporter.com/journal/the-read/the-man-with-the-golden-pun/548?cm_mmc=Email-_-JournalDigestC-_-221015-_-USTHEREAD

Nice article. Though I do love my heroes gloomy and brooding (especially Bond) Sir Roger remains unmatched in pulling off the lighter, more humorous side of Bond with incredible panache and insatiable charm.

heartbroken_mr_drax

Blackleiter wrote:

It seems to me that the author undercuts his argument that Moore was the best Bond by insinuating that Moore isn't really playing Bond.

The article is a tad pretentious and argument searching. Although I do admire anyone who has a love for old Rog!

Miles Messervy

Blackleiter wrote:

"He was too smart, too charming, simply too well-mannered, and with a far too highly developed sense of his own ridiculousness, to insult the audience’s collective intelligence by playing the frankly preposterous character of Mr Ian Fleming’s Bond – wine snob, womaniser, stuffed shirt, a loner who saves all from the megalomaniac Armageddon every time – for anything other than chuckles."

So Moore was the best Bond because he made no attempt to actually portray the character Fleming created? Okay, thanks. 8-)

The author doesn't say that a more serious approach to the role is invalid. He is simply arguing that it wouldn't have worked for Roger. And frankly, Roger has more or less stated as much over the years, so I'm not sure it's controversial.

Miles Messervy

heartbroken_mr_drax wrote:

Roger is my fav by a mile and I don't think he needs defending.

While Roger is generally appreciated by the dedicated variety of Bond fans that populate this community, he seems to be maligned by the general populace and the media. I think these attitudes attitudes will shift as filmgoers become less enamored with tortured heroes. But at the moment, it remains a fact.

heartbroken_mr_drax

Miles Messervy wrote:

While Roger is generally appreciated by the dedicated variety of Bond fans that populate this community, he seems to be maligned by the general populace and the media. I think these attitudes attitudes will shift as filmgoers become less enamored with tortured heroes. But at the moment, it remains a fact.

Yes and no - I think Lazenby gets more abuse out of ignorance. Most people haven't even seen OHMSS, they just think because he only did one, he's the worst. These same people usually say SC is the best and don't have much of an opinion about the others...

Miles Messervy

heartbroken_mr_drax wrote:

Miles Messervy wrote:

While Roger is generally appreciated by the dedicated variety of Bond fans that populate this community, he seems to be maligned by the general populace and the media. I think these attitudes attitudes will shift as filmgoers become less enamored with tortured heroes. But at the moment, it remains a fact.

Yes and no - I think Lazenby gets more abuse out of ignorance. Most people haven't even seen OHMSS, they just think because he only did one, he's the worst. These same people usually say SC is the best and don't have much of an opinion about the others...

You are correct about Lazenby and OHMSS. But you underestimate the ill-will toward Roger. Especially among media types. A quick scan of the negative reviews for SPECTRE and you'll spot the criticism that they've gone "too Roger Moore."

heartbroken_mr_drax

Miles Messervy wrote:

You are correct about Lazenby and OHMSS. But you underestimate the ill-will toward Roger. Especially among media types. A quick scan of the negative reviews for SPECTRE and you'll spot the criticism that they've gone "too Roger Moore."

Fair point, I guess I actually avoid mainstream reviews and media coverage of Bond because they water it down and appeal to the masses. This will sound very elitist, but I've moved on from standard media coverage of Bond. I don't even enjoy respected reviews of Bond films because they don't really do anything for me.

The media is likely to criticise Moore because he's perceived as an easy target as a misconstrued, so-called "unliked" Bond.

chrisisall

Critics (paid or otherwise) can kiss my freckled butt. TMWTGG rocks. :v

Virgil37

Roger Moore himself says the best Bond ever is Daniel Craig. "To me, he looks like a killer. He looks as though he knows what he’s doing. I look as though I might cheat at backgammon". However, I disagree with him. I said it somewhere else. Roger could play a tough SOB very well, if he wanted to. In OP he shoots a soldier between the eyes. If that's not a killer who knows what he's doing, it's pretty close.

Absolutely_Cart

Roger Moore was a great Bond.

heartbroken_mr_drax

Virgil37 wrote:

Roger Moore himself says the best Bond ever is Daniel Craig. "To me, he looks like a killer. He looks as though he knows what he’s doing. I look as though I might cheat at backgammon". However, I disagree with him. I said it somewhere else. Roger could play a tough SOB very well, if he wanted to. In OP he shoots a soldier between the eyes. If that's not a killer who knows what he's doing, it's pretty close.

I agree. Perhaps Roger says that yes he looks like a killer - but he has the personality of the killed person

Absolutely_Cart

Muhammad Ali said Tyson was a better boxer. But we all know that's not true.

Blackleiter

Miles Messervy wrote:

Blackleiter wrote:

"He was too smart, too charming, simply too well-mannered, and with a far too highly developed sense of his own ridiculousness, to insult the audience’s collective intelligence by playing the frankly preposterous character of Mr Ian Fleming’s Bond – wine snob, womaniser, stuffed shirt, a loner who saves all from the megalomaniac Armageddon every time – for anything other than chuckles."

So Moore was the best Bond because he made no attempt to actually portray the character Fleming created? Okay, thanks. 8-)

The author doesn't say that a more serious approach to the role is invalid. He is simply arguing that it wouldn't have worked for Roger. And frankly, Roger has more or less stated as much over the years, so I'm not sure it's controversial.

For me, it isn't merely that the more serious approach wouldn't have worked for Roger. It's that Moore's approach to the role seems less suited to playing the character that Bond is supposed to be. Again, there are obviously many fans who enjoy and appreciate what Moore did with the role more than what the other actors have done. I just don't happen to be one of them. In my opinion Roger Moore just doesn't project the sense of danger and menace that I will forever associate with the character of James Bond. That's not to say that the cinematic incarnation of Bond can't include a few lighter, more humorous aspects. All of the other actors have shown a bit of that side, even Connery, my favorite. The difference is that they're all more convincing demonstrating Bond's tougher, more ruthless side. There have been several attempts to include that in Moore's portrayal, for example in FYEO which I believe is his most successful attempt. But overall Moore fails on that count, and that's one reason I could never view him as the best Bond.

chrisisall

Virgil37 wrote:

Roger could play a tough SOB very well, if he wanted to. In OP he shoots a soldier between the eyes. If that's not a killer who knows what he's doing, it's pretty close.

OP had some of Roger's best moments. -{

heartbroken_mr_drax

chrisisall wrote:

Virgil37 wrote:

Roger could play a tough SOB very well, if he wanted to. In OP he shoots a soldier between the eyes. If that's not a killer who knows what he's doing, it's pretty close.

OP had some of Roger's best moments. -{

Certainly did. He's the most comfortable in this role as well because of the fun, the humour and the seriousness. He kicks ass in OP.

chrisisall

heartbroken_mr_drax wrote:

He kicks ass in OP.

And backed up by a great Barry score. -{

Virgil37

chrisisall wrote:

Virgil37 wrote:

Roger could play a tough SOB very well, if he wanted to. In OP he shoots a soldier between the eyes. If that's not a killer who knows what he's doing, it's pretty close.

OP had some of Roger's best moments. -{

So true. -{

Firemass

Napoleon Plural wrote:

though all writers can't resist frontloading any defense with a load of criticism of Rog.

No kidding! What complete rubbish. It reminds me of your typical Moore-hater here on AJB who will grudgingly offer some faint praise for Roger by saying, "Okay, I suppose his films are good for a laugh or two, since all other films are so overly serious."

1. There's nothing wrong with the one-liner "Just keeping the British end up!" Why would that ever draw attention as being cringe worthy compared to any other Bond innuendos ?

2. Roger didn't play the role for laughs. In fact, I recall him being pretty damn serious about 95% of the time.

3. Yes, actually many Bond fans DO like Timothy Dalton quite a bit.

4. That's not what Roger was wearing when we first saw him in Live and Let Die.

Anyway, I kinda gave up reading the article halfway through because I was getting too offended.

DR NO-ah

I am a huge fan of the books but I personally feel people get too caught up between the two mediums and how "Fleming" the films are. I personally view them as two separate things all together which every now and then have some crossover and familiar threads. I mean the James Bond franchise is 60 odd years old and encompasses so many things from Fleming Books, continuation novels, comic books, Eon films, 'non official' films, video games, toys etc etc. Just my opinion anyway.

Also, Roger Moore's bond is awesome! -{

Loeffelholz

A very nice little article. Thanks very much for sharing! -{

Most people here know my opinion of Sir Roger as Bond...but some might not realize precisely how much I really do love him. In the right mood, Sir Roger's Bond is just the ticket---like the Marx Brothers, really, just slightly more deadpan and with people dying violently.

The other day I watched TSWLM, and was very grateful for the two hours of smiles it afforded me. His Bond was very much of his time, and there's no denying his great moments in the role. TMWTGG is my favourite of his, followed by LALD, but I very much enjoy FYEO and TSWLM on occasion. There's no denying his part in keeping the whole thing going in dicey times, and a better ambassador Eon has never had.

Long life, and good health sir -{

DEFIANT 74205

DR NO-ah wrote:

I am a huge fan of the books but I personally feel people get too caught up between the two mediums and how "Fleming" the films are. I personally view them as two separate things all together which every now and then have some crossover and familiar threads. I mean the James Bond franchise is 60 odd years old and encompasses so many things from Fleming Books, continuation novels, comic books, Eon films, 'non official' films, video games, toys etc etc. Just my opinion anyway.

But Bond is Fleming's character. That is why I believe Fleming's novels is the standard by which Bond films are to be judged, and the Fleming way is the only way to play Bond. In my view, every film should seek to interpret the literary Bond as faithfully as possible; the only difference being the time and place that the character's missions take place.

The franchise may be 60 years old. But the Bond character is very well defined by Ian Fleming. I don't believe EON should be allowed to stray from that.

Agent Purple

It'd be boring if Bond films were serious all the time.

The humor aspect is one of the things that draws me to Bond films.