I have mixed views. He was my "youth" Bond and the one who made me discover the character back in the mid-eighties (thanks to ye olde video rental shop), so there are memories of Sunday afternoons with the family laughing out loud with the most outrageous stunts. But then came Dalton, Brosnan and, of course, Craig, who imho have continuously meant a step above the previous iteration for the franchise.
The Ultimate Edition DVDs have been a (sad) eye-opener: his movies haven't aged well, and I cannot say I see him as the character anymore. That being said, there is a quirky nostalgic feeling that makes them enjoyable in a half-hearted way.
IMHO, he trivialized the part with his cartoonish "acting."
I don't think that "trivializing the role" had as much to do with Moore's acting skill as it had to do with the scripts provided. Keep in mind that Diamonds Are Forever was written as a "lighter" Bond adventure, and even with Sean Connery in the title role, it completely stank. Moore's Bond was definitely unlike Fleming's Bond in a lot of ways -- particularily with regard to humour -- but he made it work (being himself a very witty person) and continued the success of the franchise.
I agree with a lot that you have to say.However. I'm no lover of Moore's films, and even in the only saving grace (LALD) he always lacked the neccessarry physicality to convince for me. However the rot started in YOLT in terms of Cartoon nature and the superb 'back to bascis' OHMSS provided a momentary blip before the truly poor DAF. in LALD EON did what they subsequently always do with a new actor, gone back to core principles and reconnect with the source in terms of character and produce a better film. I see this more in terms of an arc that the series takes. You can see this again as the wasted opportunity that was DAD (great first half) precedes the vastly superior CR.
What was different with Moore was that he was never a convincing 'action man' as were Both Connerry and even more so Lazenby before him. Even in the very beggining he (Moore) was getting a bit long in the tooth for the role, and he was in place soooo long that his weaknesses by neccessity became something that the series had to deal with and incorporate by boosting the humourous aspects, and playing to his strength (his undeniable charm).
'My' Bond is charamatic, but not neccessarily charming.
This means that although for me Moore' is by far the least satisfactory Bond to date for me, all of the 'blame' should not be levelled at him as an Actor, but seen as a trajectory that the series takes. No doubt if the incumbent remains long enough (which I doubt) we would most likely see hollowed out Volcanoes and invisible cars until the next actor shows up. I think this is only unlikely with Craig as I doubt that he would be interested in continuing long enough for that to happen or make 'that' kind of Bond movie.
I actually quite enjoy the Moore Bond films, even though they are often too silly for their own good. There are a lot of really good spy movies buried under the jokes and slapstick, though, and I feel like you could remove about 10% from each Moore film (JW Pepper, Bibi Dahl, etc.) and you'd have almost perfect movies.
Live and Let Die. Half blaxploitation, half Smokey and the Bandit. A weaker entry but still fun, and I have a soft spot for it since I grew up watching it over and over (and over and over). The voodoo aspect is interesting, there are some great (if unnecessary) car stunts, Jane Seymour is an interesting and beautiful Bond girl, and Moore gives a solid debut that quickly makes him stand apart from Sean Connery. If we could just get rid of some of the unfortunate racism, JW Pepper, and Yaphet Kotto's exploding head, we'd be on our way to a much better film.
The Man with the Golden Gun. A solid espionage movie buried under bad jokes and an obsession with bums. The spy plot is solid and Christopher Lee is great, plus it has my all-time favorite Bond stunt (the car jump). Alas, we also have karate schoolgirls, sumo wrestlers with wedgies, and a godawful fight with NickNack (whose inclusion in the film is never embarassing until the end). Oh, the movie this almost is...still decent, though, for what it does have.
The Spy Who Loved Me. Everything the two prior Moore films wanted to be but didn't quite manage. It's big, over the top, silly in the right ways, with a gorgeous and capable Bond girl, stunning locales, amazing action, a menacing henchman, and a wonderful title song and sequence. The villain is a tad dull and his scheme is just You Only Live Twice underwater, but other than that it's a great flick!
Moonraker. Really an embarassment for all involved, although it's still fun in a very non-Bond sort of way and has some good moments. It's so ridiculously absurd and over the top (in a bad way), though, that it can't recover. And that chase past all the billboards is the most blatant case of product placement ever. And Jaws turning good and falling in love? Are you kidding? Ughh. I still love that pigeon-shooting scene, though.
For Your Eyes Only. A terrific espionage film, by far my favorite of the Moores and one of the best in the whole series, IMO. We have a great plot that never gets bogged down by action (even though there's a TON of it), a multi-layered Bond girl, a solid villain, stunningly gorgeous locales, great stunts, and a greater script. If not for the inclusion of Bibi Dahl, this would be in my top 3 Bond films of all time. As it stands, it's at number 5.
Octopussy. Another solid entry that gets a bit more bogged down in silliness than it needs to (the Tarzan yell, for instance). The plot is terrific, though, with some good old fashioned espionage involving betrayals and twists. Good villain, great stunts, very interesting Bond girl, and a great henchmen (the one with the sawblade, that is). The India locations aren't nearly all they could have been and some of the film is too jokey and slapsticky for its own good, but still a solid effort.
A View to a Kill. Wow, this film gets such a bad rap! I realize it has flaws, but I also feel its pros outweigh its cons. A good plot (yes, yes, I know it's just Goldfinger again, but who cares? No one seems to care that TSWLM is just YOLT rehashed), some great stunts, a perfect John Barry score, a menacing villain, and some interesting subplots (the genetics testing, the KGB rivalry). Unfortunately, it has a weak screamer of a Bond girl and a very strange villainous henchman (Mayday), and Bond's sex scene with the latter is the most embarassing moment of the series. And Roger Moore was FAR too old to be playing James Bond, and he looks it the whole way. Still, though, the PTS is great, the title song is the best of the series, and the climax is fun. I'm just going to come out and say it: I like A View to a Kill! Now I'll run and hide before I get beaten up....
i know roger was very popular (in some polls more popular than connery), but he did do the films for far too long. and Dalton had no chance in replacing him, because of this.
"You're in the wrong business... leave it to the professionals!"
James Bond- Licence To Kill
If there were 5 people in the frame, Roger stood out just like Sean Connery - you knew he was Bond. If it was Dalton in the frame with 5 others - you wouldn't know who the henchman is and who Bond is...sorry, Dalton looks more like a theater actor than a spy.
Roger's Bond brought a fine mix of toughness, debonair, suave, skill, humour and sex. My favorite era is always going to be the Connery/Moore era. Moore should be saluted for carrying the Bond films thru the competitive 70's (era of the Blockbusters like The Godfather and French Connection) and the 80's and popularizing Bond into farther territories. By the time Connery exited the role, there were any number of parodies done on the 007 character in both TV and film.
Most people criticize that Moore's Bond as not being the cold killer like Connery. I remind them of the following:
1.) The fight in Saida's changing room in TMWTGG. Moore is roughed up by 3 guys but still takes the time to smash a guy into the mirror face first.
2.) Moore casually dropping Sandor off of the building during their kick-ass fight in Egypt.
3.) Moore shooting Stromberg not only in the groin , but twice more in the heart. The groin shot was enough.
4.) Bye Bye Mr. Drax - into space - instantaneous death.
5.) Moore kicking Locque's car off the cliff. That was a pure Bond moment.
6.) Moore shooting the Russian solider straight in the middle of his skull. Understandable that this scene is always edited when OP is shown on TV.
But my most favorite moment of Moore showing that he is the cold-hearted killer that earns him the title "Licensed To Kill":
7.) In Stacy's mansion he takes her shotgun and starts shooting the henchman Zorin sent to convince Stacy to take the $5 million payoff. Now Moore thinks that this is a real shotgun, and what does he do? At point blank range he blasts a guy in the face, and another guy in the behind. When Moore sees that neither henchman have expired, he inquires what the shotgun is filled with, to which Stacy replies "Rocksalt".
The look of disgust on Moore's face shows how dismayed he is that there weren't real bullets. He wanted them dead.
If there were 5 people in the frame, Roger stood out just like Sean Connery - you knew he was Bond. If it was Dalton in the frame with 5 others - you wouldn't know who the henchman is and who Bond is...sorry, Dalton looks more like a theater actor than a spy.
You mean Craig looks like the henchman, right?
I like the Moore films, I grew up with them. I can sit down and watch them with the family, there's always a bit of fun and a great set piece around the corner. I can't say that about OHMSS where there's barely one laugh that registers and the 'Oh Sir Hilly!' scenes with Ruby are just awful, embarrassing. You know where you are with a Moore Bond, but in the others they're usually trying to bring things down a bit, in a contrived way. You may find some of the Moore stuff embarrassing, but I find Dalton's attempts to crack a funny a dealbreaker. Moore looks like he's having fun, whereas Brosnan has this stiff demeanour, like he knows Babs is fobbing him off with rubbish after the first one to lure him in. Much like Craig should be turning any time soon should he make it back on screen.
I don't understand the criticism of Dalton looking like a "theatre actor" but IMO he had the perfect looks, the dark handsome hero. As a matter fact Dalton bears a resemblance to the illustrations of 007 used by Pan books. This one here in particular:
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Physically, I've always thought that Dalton was very nearly perfect...but I'll have to agree with NP (gasp! ) that Dalton's obvious discomfort with the comedic aspects of the role---IMO stubborn remnants from the Moore era---detracted from his brief tenure.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Physically, I've always thought that Dalton was very nearly perfect...but I'll have to agree with NP (gasp! ) that Dalton's obvious discomfort with the comedic aspects of the role---IMO stubborn remnants from the Moore era---detracted from his brief tenure.
I actually do agree on that point. Fleming himself thought there an fundemental difference between books and film, you have to be more charasmatic on screen and Dalton lacked that charisma. Still, I would liked to seen at least one Dalton film that was well written.
You'll get no complaints from me Ricardo for showing us the classic cover of FRWL, though the artist obv never read the item where Bond is horrified about the suggestion he should use oil in his hair... anyhow, for me it suggests that a darker Sean Bean, or Rupert Everett (I know...) would have been great Bond, certainly the character's expression uncannily anticipates the young Sean Connery. But Dalton? Not really, he seems 10 years younger, less dour and less of a receding hairline.
You'll get no complaints from me Ricardo for showing us the classic cover of FRWL, though the artist obv never read the item where Bond is horrified about the suggestion he should use oil in his hair... anyhow, for me it suggests that a darker Sean Bean, or Rupert Everett (I know...) would have been great Bond, certainly the character's expression uncannily anticipates the young Sean Connery. But Dalton? Not really, he seems 10 years younger, less dour and less of a receding hairline.
Interesting. I really struggle to see Connery in this fellow but more of Dalton's swarthiness and overall looks. I guess it's harder to imagine since Timmy was from a different decade and as you said, he was more dour.
IMHO, he trivialized the part with his cartoonish "acting."
I don't think that "trivializing the role" had as much to do with Moore's acting skill as it had to do with the scripts provided. Keep in mind that Diamonds Are Forever was written as a "lighter" Bond adventure, and even with Sean Connery in the title role, it completely stank. Moore's Bond was definitely unlike Fleming's Bond in a lot of ways -- particularily with regard to humour -- but he made it work (being himself a very witty person) and continued the success of the franchise.
I agree. While my dislike for Moore's Bond isn't anything to do with the skills of Moore as an actor, I strongly disagreed with the way that the character was written during that era. Moore's Bond is unrecognisable as a Fleming character. To me, likeness of the on-screen Bond to the Fleming Bond, both in appearance and in character, are essential elements to what makes a good Bond film.
Personally, having been a fan of both the books AND the films, I really liked RM. Granted his more comic take was VERY different to Fleming's character but I think he still had a good Etonian look and a typically British charm that Fleming would have liked.
Saying that however I don't think his tongue in cheek style would suit todays generation (he would probably admit that himself). His movies did (occasionally) lapse too far into self parody and comic book territory (Moonraker being the most obvious example) but then again this also happened to other actors in the role (Sean Connery - Diamonds are Forever and Pierce Brosnan - Die Another Day).
In short, whilst Moore was much more of a joker than the literary character - and far less complex - he did have a twinkle in his eye and was highly entertaining (even if he was admittedly too old to believably beat off bad guys towards the end).
Might I also add that Brosnan is often mentioned alongside Moore as being one of the more "campy" Bonds. IMO this is not true; in fact (I believe) the two actors have quite different interpretations. Moore purposefully sent up the humorous aspects of the James Bond films. He maintained that they were larger-than-life fantasies and thus should not be taken completely seriously. He disliked the level of violence that was sometimes used and admitted that he had reservations about the well known "car kicking" scene in FYEO.
Pierce, by contrast, played it much straighter, more in the vain of Connery I suppose. Despite some cheesy lines (which Connery also had) Brosnan's Bond came across as someone who had a certain vulnerability about him (anyone remember the graveyard scene in Goldeneye or the scene with him drinking alone in TND?). Its been reported that Brosnan himself was interested in making the character darker and stripping down the more "gimikey" elements that hampered him in DAD, a film which he now acknowledges was flawed.
You'll get no complaints from me Ricardo for showing us the classic cover of FRWL, though the artist obv never read the item where Bond is horrified about the suggestion he should use oil in his hair... anyhow, for me it suggests that a darker Sean Bean, or Rupert Everett (I know...) would have been great Bond, certainly the character's expression uncannily anticipates the young Sean Connery. But Dalton? Not really, he seems 10 years younger, less dour and less of a receding hairline.
Really interesting aout the receeding hairline. At the time I never noticed it, as compared to the geriatric Rog TD looked positiively youthful and full of vigour. In retrospect it's much more apparent. However the face on the book jacket screams pure Dalton to me.
Might I also add that Brosnan is often mentioned alongside Moore as being one of the more "campy" Bonds. IMO this is not true; in fact (I believe) the two actors have quite different interpretations. Moore purposefully sent up the humorous aspects of the James Bond films. He maintained that they were larger-than-life fantasies and thus should not be taken completely seriously. He disliked the level of violence that was sometimes used and admitted that he had reservations about the well known "car kicking" scene in FYEO.
Pierce, by contrast, played it much straighter, more in the vain of Connery I suppose. Despite some cheesy lines (which Connery also had) Brosnan's Bond came across as someone who had a certain vulnerability about him (anyone remember the graveyard scene in Goldeneye or the scene with him drinking alone in TND?). Its been reported that Brosnan himself was interested in making the character darker and stripping down the more "gimikey" elements that hampered him in DAD, a film which he now acknowledges was flawed.
I really don't see Brosnan as camp. I find him a pretty good Bond who was let down by parts of the script and lastly some awful cgi effects. People say he's camp, but I just don't get it. I spent just over eight years in the paras - so I know tough and I know camp, and Brosnan ain't camp. If anything Craig has had a few campish expressions, walks in tight trousers and the odd attempt at humour which comes over as camp, especially bantering between the leading ladies...
Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:
Might I also add that Brosnan is often mentioned alongside Moore as being one of the more "campy" Bonds. IMO this is not true; in fact (I believe) the two actors have quite different interpretations. Moore purposefully sent up the humorous aspects of the James Bond films. He maintained that they were larger-than-life fantasies and thus should not be taken completely seriously. He disliked the level of violence that was sometimes used and admitted that he had reservations about the well known "car kicking" scene in FYEO.
Pierce, by contrast, played it much straighter, more in the vain of Connery I suppose. Despite some cheesy lines (which Connery also had) Brosnan's Bond came across as someone who had a certain vulnerability about him (anyone remember the graveyard scene in Goldeneye or the scene with him drinking alone in TND?). Its been reported that Brosnan himself was interested in making the character darker and stripping down the more "gimikey" elements that hampered him in DAD, a film which he now acknowledges was flawed.
I really don't see Brosnan as camp. I find him a pretty good Bond who was let down by parts of the script and lastly some awful cgi effects. People say he's camp, but I just don't get it. I spent just over eight years in the paras - so I know tough and I know camp, and Brosnan ain't camp. If anything Craig has had a few campish expressions, walks in tight trousers and the odd attempt at humour which comes over as camp, especially bantering between the leading ladies...
I agree. I think Brosnan gets harsh criticism. He's not my ideal Bond by any means, I see him as a 'composite Bond' A dash of Dalton, a hint of Roger and stir, but I dont see him as camp.
Glad people agree with me. I'd say Moore was the only Bond that can be described as "camp" out of all of them tbh. Maybe Pierce singing in Mama Mia didn't do him any favours though
Admittedly I am no fan of Roger Moore's Bond. In fact, he is my least favorite actor to play the role. But I can appreciate the admiration he garner's from those who enjoyed his lighter touch and humorous way with a quip. However, you lose all credibility when you suggest that "toughness" was part of Moore's mix when he was Bond. Moore never appeared to be even remotely "tough" except in maybe one or two isolated scenes. I will give it to him for the scene in FYEO when he kicked the car over the cliff. I can't really recall any others, but I will give him the benefit of the doubt and concede that there may have been another such scene. But a couple of arguably tough moments in seven Bond films?! Not enough "toughness" if you ask me. And Moore's lack of athleticism was for me a HUGE flaw in his take on Bond. Don't get me wrong, I think Roger is a skilled actor in the right type of role, but he was all wrong for 007, and that is painfully apparent when you compare him to ANY of the other Bond actors.
If there were 5 people in the frame, Roger stood out just like Sean Connery - you knew he was Bond. If it was Dalton in the frame with 5 others - you wouldn't know who the henchman is and who Bond is...sorry, Dalton looks more like a theater actor than a spy.
Roger's Bond brought a fine mix of toughness, debonair, suave, skill, humour and sex. My favorite era is always going to be the Connery/Moore era. Moore should be saluted for carrying the Bond films thru the competitive 70's (era of the Blockbusters like The Godfather and French Connection) and the 80's and popularizing Bond into farther territories. By the time Connery exited the role, there were any number of parodies done on the 007 character in both TV and film.
Most people criticize that Moore's Bond as not being the cold killer like Connery. I remind them of the following:
1.) The fight in Saida's changing room in TMWTGG. Moore is roughed up by 3 guys but still takes the time to smash a guy into the mirror face first.
2.) Moore casually dropping Sandor off of the building during their kick-ass fight in Egypt.
3.) Moore shooting Stromberg not only in the groin , but twice more in the heart. The groin shot was enough.
4.) Bye Bye Mr. Drax - into space - instantaneous death.
5.) Moore kicking Locque's car off the cliff. That was a pure Bond moment.
6.) Moore shooting the Russian solider straight in the middle of his skull. Understandable that this scene is always edited when OP is shown on TV.
But my most favorite moment of Moore showing that he is the cold-hearted killer that earns him the title "Licensed To Kill":
7.) In Stacy's mansion he takes her shotgun and starts shooting the henchman Zorin sent to convince Stacy to take the $5 million payoff. Now Moore thinks that this is a real shotgun, and what does he do? At point blank range he blasts a guy in the face, and another guy in the behind. When Moore sees that neither henchman have expired, he inquires what the shotgun is filled with, to which Stacy replies "Rocksalt".
The look of disgust on Moore's face shows how dismayed he is that there weren't real bullets. He wanted them dead.
Admittedly I am no fan of Roger Moore's Bond. In fact, he is my least favorite actor to play the role. But I can appreciate the admiration he garner's from those who enjoyed his lighter touch and humorous way with a quip. However, you lose all credibility when you suggest that "toughness" was part of Moore's mix when he was Bond. Moore never appeared to be even remotely "tough" except in maybe one or two isolated scenes. I will give it to him for the scene in FYEO when he kicked the car over the cliff. I can't really recall any others, but I will give him the benefit of the doubt and concede that there may have been another such scene. But a couple of arguably tough moments in seven Bond films?! Not enough "toughness" if you ask me. And Moore's lack of athleticism was for me a HUGE flaw in his take on Bond. Don't get me wrong, I think Roger is a skilled actor in the right type of role, but he was all wrong for 007, and that is painfully apparent when you compare him to ANY of the other Bond actors.
.
I agree with that assessment. Moore's shortcomings are always very obvious when you see him in juxtaposition to the other actors, such as in some of the fan flicks that Renard has made. He appears to be wimpy in every scene, whether it be a physical scene or a romantic scene.
Interesting that you mention the kicking Locque off the cliff scene, as Moore has said he did not like that scene. A completely miscast actor who milked his tenure for all he could.
I wasn't around in the 70s so I couldn't pretend to know what people wanted in those days, but I wouldn't consider many of the Moore films to be among my personal favourites. I think they would have just been a lot better if they'd taken themselves more seriously, and cut back on the gimmicky villains and OTT humour.
"Live and Let Die" went for a more grounded plot than it's predecessor, which was a nice change in approach, but it let itself down by trying to mix a fairly gritty drug-related plot with some Hollywood Voodoo nonsense, J W Pepper and a Blaxploitation approach (which admittedly might just be victim to the trend falling out of fashion).
"The Man with the Golden Gun" falls into the same problems. Christopher Lee as James Bond's villainous counterpart? That should be awesome as Hell, but falls into the trap of being gimmicky and silly (J W Pepper came back, which I think says it all).
"The Spy Who Loved Me" was over the top but it was a very enjoyable film that got that balance of sillyness and adventurism just right for the 1970s. Unfortunatley they undid all the good will it made via "Moonraker", which was TSWLM transplanted to Space for the Star Wars generation and reverts back to being too cheesy and leaving your sense of adventure totally underwhelmed. And Jaws falls in love and instantly becomes a good guy? Really, movie?
"For Your Eyes Only" was a good movie that recovered well from it's really dumb and unnecessary opening sequence, and I think it's at this point that Moore should have left on a relative high note, because by the time of "Octopussy" and "A View to a Kill" he looks too old for the part and the movies themselves were relativley forgettable anyway.
I think Moore's Bond suffered from the silly elements of the movies he was in. Like I said, I'd have liked to have seen that era taken far more seriously by the film makers.
That's a Smith and Wesson, and you've had your six.
Firstly I have to admitt that I'm one of the few who liked Sir Roger as Bond.(never had a problem with any actor playing the part,apart from one) But I do feel that he takes alot of flack when (and I might be very wrong in this) the Bonds of the 70's were basicly a comittee effort.
So RM would of with the support of producers/directors and writers decided on the direction of the movies. RM could be more violent when needed I'm thinking of "the sea wolves" and
"the sicillian cross" in which he broke a mans neck( I have to admitt I've only seen this once on TV so don't know how good/bad it was),"the wild geese" forcing the drug lords son to take is own poisioned drugs.
So I'm simply saying The Bond team decided to go in a more Family friendly direction with the series, after all I do remember one quote from H Saltzman that Bond was "sadisum for the family"
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
I agree - Sea Wolves, The Wild Geese, even North Sea Hijack. Roger Moore could be a hell of a lot more ruthless than his Bond persona. I've said it before, blame the seventies and the comedy of the time. It all got a bit slapstick and a bit silly. They obviously wanted to get some of this audience. But hell, at least we grew up with Bond because of it. My son and daughter won't be watching Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace until they're into their teens. The scene in QOS where he waits for the guy he stabbed in the neck to bleed out wasn't anything like the Bond films I've grown to love....
Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:
It's funny that almost everybody who has mentioned to me that they did not like RM cause he was not tough enough seem to recall 3 or 4 scenes from this movie or that movie where he displayed toughness. He was tough when he needed to be, and like others have said on this particular thread, they can see RM play any number of SC films with ease.
I just saw the Blu Ray of TMWTGG - fantastic visuals and one heck of a film. Chris Lee goes down as one nasty villian, and boy do Maud and Britt look fantastic in Blu-Ray. Seeing RM in the Far East for this film reminded me of watching SC in the Far East for his film YOLT.
I just saw the Blu Ray of TMWTGG - fantastic visuals and one heck of a film. Chris Lee goes down as one nasty villian, and boy do Maud and Britt look fantastic in Blu-Ray. Seeing RM in the Far East for this film reminded me of watching SC in the Far East for his film YOLT.
I really wish they maintained Moore's personality as written in Golden Gun. He was still a bit of a dandy but at the same time a total ass hole in a hilarous way; That scene where he threatened that armaments maker gets me every time. )
I think in many ways just as Many slate RM Bond's for being too jokey,slapstick etc,That with DC we now have the Anti-RM, in that I think this Bond is now too lacking in humor giving us a Bond who is a bit of a morose depressed figure.If anything the pendulum has swung too far from one extreme to another.Hopefully the next outing will adress this a little.I not talking about a gag every line but just a little more of the one-liners.As you pointed out Ricardo C. the early RM Bond films had the right mix
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
I rather enjoy the balance of humour in the last two films...but I'll concede that a bit more in the next one would go a long way toward recentering the bubble.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Moore said you just could'n't believe in Bond as a spy, added to which he didn't respect the fact he killed people with guns, so opted for a send-up of it all which is a bit much. Then again, popular culture was different back then; generally people were less disposed to take Bond seriously whatever we think now.
Comments
T
The Ultimate Edition DVDs have been a (sad) eye-opener: his movies haven't aged well, and I cannot say I see him as the character anymore. That being said, there is a quirky nostalgic feeling that makes them enjoyable in a half-hearted way.
I agree with a lot that you have to say.However. I'm no lover of Moore's films, and even in the only saving grace (LALD) he always lacked the neccessarry physicality to convince for me. However the rot started in YOLT in terms of Cartoon nature and the superb 'back to bascis' OHMSS provided a momentary blip before the truly poor DAF. in LALD EON did what they subsequently always do with a new actor, gone back to core principles and reconnect with the source in terms of character and produce a better film. I see this more in terms of an arc that the series takes. You can see this again as the wasted opportunity that was DAD (great first half) precedes the vastly superior CR.
What was different with Moore was that he was never a convincing 'action man' as were Both Connerry and even more so Lazenby before him. Even in the very beggining he (Moore) was getting a bit long in the tooth for the role, and he was in place soooo long that his weaknesses by neccessity became something that the series had to deal with and incorporate by boosting the humourous aspects, and playing to his strength (his undeniable charm).
'My' Bond is charamatic, but not neccessarily charming.
This means that although for me Moore' is by far the least satisfactory Bond to date for me, all of the 'blame' should not be levelled at him as an Actor, but seen as a trajectory that the series takes. No doubt if the incumbent remains long enough (which I doubt) we would most likely see hollowed out Volcanoes and invisible cars until the next actor shows up. I think this is only unlikely with Craig as I doubt that he would be interested in continuing long enough for that to happen or make 'that' kind of Bond movie.
Live and Let Die. Half blaxploitation, half Smokey and the Bandit. A weaker entry but still fun, and I have a soft spot for it since I grew up watching it over and over (and over and over). The voodoo aspect is interesting, there are some great (if unnecessary) car stunts, Jane Seymour is an interesting and beautiful Bond girl, and Moore gives a solid debut that quickly makes him stand apart from Sean Connery. If we could just get rid of some of the unfortunate racism, JW Pepper, and Yaphet Kotto's exploding head, we'd be on our way to a much better film.
The Man with the Golden Gun. A solid espionage movie buried under bad jokes and an obsession with bums. The spy plot is solid and Christopher Lee is great, plus it has my all-time favorite Bond stunt (the car jump). Alas, we also have karate schoolgirls, sumo wrestlers with wedgies, and a godawful fight with NickNack (whose inclusion in the film is never embarassing until the end). Oh, the movie this almost is...still decent, though, for what it does have.
The Spy Who Loved Me. Everything the two prior Moore films wanted to be but didn't quite manage. It's big, over the top, silly in the right ways, with a gorgeous and capable Bond girl, stunning locales, amazing action, a menacing henchman, and a wonderful title song and sequence. The villain is a tad dull and his scheme is just You Only Live Twice underwater, but other than that it's a great flick!
Moonraker. Really an embarassment for all involved, although it's still fun in a very non-Bond sort of way and has some good moments. It's so ridiculously absurd and over the top (in a bad way), though, that it can't recover. And that chase past all the billboards is the most blatant case of product placement ever. And Jaws turning good and falling in love? Are you kidding? Ughh. I still love that pigeon-shooting scene, though.
For Your Eyes Only. A terrific espionage film, by far my favorite of the Moores and one of the best in the whole series, IMO. We have a great plot that never gets bogged down by action (even though there's a TON of it), a multi-layered Bond girl, a solid villain, stunningly gorgeous locales, great stunts, and a greater script. If not for the inclusion of Bibi Dahl, this would be in my top 3 Bond films of all time. As it stands, it's at number 5.
Octopussy. Another solid entry that gets a bit more bogged down in silliness than it needs to (the Tarzan yell, for instance). The plot is terrific, though, with some good old fashioned espionage involving betrayals and twists. Good villain, great stunts, very interesting Bond girl, and a great henchmen (the one with the sawblade, that is). The India locations aren't nearly all they could have been and some of the film is too jokey and slapsticky for its own good, but still a solid effort.
A View to a Kill. Wow, this film gets such a bad rap! I realize it has flaws, but I also feel its pros outweigh its cons. A good plot (yes, yes, I know it's just Goldfinger again, but who cares? No one seems to care that TSWLM is just YOLT rehashed), some great stunts, a perfect John Barry score, a menacing villain, and some interesting subplots (the genetics testing, the KGB rivalry). Unfortunately, it has a weak screamer of a Bond girl and a very strange villainous henchman (Mayday), and Bond's sex scene with the latter is the most embarassing moment of the series. And Roger Moore was FAR too old to be playing James Bond, and he looks it the whole way. Still, though, the PTS is great, the title song is the best of the series, and the climax is fun. I'm just going to come out and say it: I like A View to a Kill! Now I'll run and hide before I get beaten up....
James Bond- Licence To Kill
If there were 5 people in the frame, Roger stood out just like Sean Connery - you knew he was Bond. If it was Dalton in the frame with 5 others - you wouldn't know who the henchman is and who Bond is...sorry, Dalton looks more like a theater actor than a spy.
Roger's Bond brought a fine mix of toughness, debonair, suave, skill, humour and sex. My favorite era is always going to be the Connery/Moore era. Moore should be saluted for carrying the Bond films thru the competitive 70's (era of the Blockbusters like The Godfather and French Connection) and the 80's and popularizing Bond into farther territories. By the time Connery exited the role, there were any number of parodies done on the 007 character in both TV and film.
Most people criticize that Moore's Bond as not being the cold killer like Connery. I remind them of the following:
1.) The fight in Saida's changing room in TMWTGG. Moore is roughed up by 3 guys but still takes the time to smash a guy into the mirror face first.
2.) Moore casually dropping Sandor off of the building during their kick-ass fight in Egypt.
3.) Moore shooting Stromberg not only in the groin
4.) Bye Bye Mr. Drax - into space - instantaneous death.
5.) Moore kicking Locque's car off the cliff. That was a pure Bond moment.
6.) Moore shooting the Russian solider straight in the middle of his skull. Understandable that this scene is always edited when OP is shown on TV.
But my most favorite moment of Moore showing that he is the cold-hearted killer that earns him the title "Licensed To Kill":
7.) In Stacy's mansion he takes her shotgun and starts shooting the henchman Zorin sent to convince Stacy to take the $5 million payoff. Now Moore thinks that this is a real shotgun, and what does he do? At point blank range he blasts a guy in the face, and another guy in the behind. When Moore sees that neither henchman have expired, he inquires what the shotgun is filled with, to which Stacy replies "Rocksalt".
The look of disgust on Moore's face shows how dismayed he is that there weren't real bullets. He wanted them dead.
You mean Craig looks like the henchman, right?
I like the Moore films, I grew up with them. I can sit down and watch them with the family, there's always a bit of fun and a great set piece around the corner. I can't say that about OHMSS where there's barely one laugh that registers and the 'Oh Sir Hilly!' scenes with Ruby are just awful, embarrassing. You know where you are with a Moore Bond, but in the others they're usually trying to bring things down a bit, in a contrived way. You may find some of the Moore stuff embarrassing, but I find Dalton's attempts to crack a funny a dealbreaker. Moore looks like he's having fun, whereas Brosnan has this stiff demeanour, like he knows Babs is fobbing him off with rubbish after the first one to lure him in. Much like Craig should be turning any time soon should he make it back on screen.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I actually do agree on that point. Fleming himself thought there an fundemental difference between books and film, you have to be more charasmatic on screen and Dalton lacked that charisma. Still, I would liked to seen at least one Dalton film that was well written.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Interesting. I really struggle to see Connery in this fellow but more of Dalton's swarthiness and overall looks. I guess it's harder to imagine since Timmy was from a different decade and as you said, he was more dour.
I agree. While my dislike for Moore's Bond isn't anything to do with the skills of Moore as an actor, I strongly disagreed with the way that the character was written during that era. Moore's Bond is unrecognisable as a Fleming character. To me, likeness of the on-screen Bond to the Fleming Bond, both in appearance and in character, are essential elements to what makes a good Bond film.
Saying that however I don't think his tongue in cheek style would suit todays generation (he would probably admit that himself). His movies did (occasionally) lapse too far into self parody and comic book territory (Moonraker being the most obvious example) but then again this also happened to other actors in the role (Sean Connery - Diamonds are Forever and Pierce Brosnan - Die Another Day).
In short, whilst Moore was much more of a joker than the literary character - and far less complex - he did have a twinkle in his eye and was highly entertaining (even if he was admittedly too old to believably beat off bad guys towards the end).
Pierce, by contrast, played it much straighter, more in the vain of Connery I suppose. Despite some cheesy lines (which Connery also had) Brosnan's Bond came across as someone who had a certain vulnerability about him (anyone remember the graveyard scene in Goldeneye or the scene with him drinking alone in TND?). Its been reported that Brosnan himself was interested in making the character darker and stripping down the more "gimikey" elements that hampered him in DAD, a film which he now acknowledges was flawed.
Really interesting aout the receeding hairline. At the time I never noticed it, as compared to the geriatric Rog TD looked positiively youthful and full of vigour. In retrospect it's much more apparent. However the face on the book jacket screams pure Dalton to me.
I really don't see Brosnan as camp. I find him a pretty good Bond who was let down by parts of the script and lastly some awful cgi effects. People say he's camp, but I just don't get it. I spent just over eight years in the paras - so I know tough and I know camp, and Brosnan ain't camp. If anything Craig has had a few campish expressions, walks in tight trousers and the odd attempt at humour which comes over as camp, especially bantering between the leading ladies...
http://apbateman.com
I agree. I think Brosnan gets harsh criticism. He's not my ideal Bond by any means, I see him as a 'composite Bond' A dash of Dalton, a hint of Roger and stir, but I dont see him as camp.
I agree with that assessment. Moore's shortcomings are always very obvious when you see him in juxtaposition to the other actors, such as in some of the fan flicks that Renard has made. He appears to be wimpy in every scene, whether it be a physical scene or a romantic scene.
Interesting that you mention the kicking Locque off the cliff scene, as Moore has said he did not like that scene. A completely miscast actor who milked his tenure for all he could.
"Live and Let Die" went for a more grounded plot than it's predecessor, which was a nice change in approach, but it let itself down by trying to mix a fairly gritty drug-related plot with some Hollywood Voodoo nonsense, J W Pepper and a Blaxploitation approach (which admittedly might just be victim to the trend falling out of fashion).
"The Man with the Golden Gun" falls into the same problems. Christopher Lee as James Bond's villainous counterpart? That should be awesome as Hell, but falls into the trap of being gimmicky and silly (J W Pepper came back, which I think says it all).
"The Spy Who Loved Me" was over the top but it was a very enjoyable film that got that balance of sillyness and adventurism just right for the 1970s. Unfortunatley they undid all the good will it made via "Moonraker", which was TSWLM transplanted to Space for the Star Wars generation and reverts back to being too cheesy and leaving your sense of adventure totally underwhelmed. And Jaws falls in love and instantly becomes a good guy? Really, movie?
"For Your Eyes Only" was a good movie that recovered well from it's really dumb and unnecessary opening sequence, and I think it's at this point that Moore should have left on a relative high note, because by the time of "Octopussy" and "A View to a Kill" he looks too old for the part and the movies themselves were relativley forgettable anyway.
I think Moore's Bond suffered from the silly elements of the movies he was in. Like I said, I'd have liked to have seen that era taken far more seriously by the film makers.
So RM would of with the support of producers/directors and writers decided on the direction of the movies. RM could be more violent when needed I'm thinking of "the sea wolves" and
"the sicillian cross" in which he broke a mans neck( I have to admitt I've only seen this once on TV so don't know how good/bad it was),"the wild geese" forcing the drug lords son to take is own poisioned drugs.
So I'm simply saying The Bond team decided to go in a more Family friendly direction with the series, after all I do remember one quote from H Saltzman that Bond was "sadisum for the family"
http://apbateman.com
I just saw the Blu Ray of TMWTGG - fantastic visuals and one heck of a film. Chris Lee goes down as one nasty villian, and boy do Maud and Britt look fantastic in Blu-Ray. Seeing RM in the Far East for this film reminded me of watching SC in the Far East for his film YOLT.
I really wish they maintained Moore's personality as written in Golden Gun. He was still a bit of a dandy but at the same time a total ass hole in a hilarous way; That scene where he threatened that armaments maker gets me every time.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Roger Moore 1927-2017