49 replies to this topic

[BMT-216A]

moore? ruthless? i never knew those 2 words could happen in 1 sentance... umm moores is the least ruthless, try watching james bond movies and u mite see

~~

[Willowhugger]

I never saw Connery use a woman as a shield he was kissing.

No offense but have you actually seen Moore's films? He locks a guy in a bioweapon's lab to die horribly in Moonraker and then later ejects Hugo Drax out to suffocate to death.

The other bonds never kill villains sadistically. Moore does it all the time.

[Publius]

While Connery's Bond did it, Moore is also known to have used a woman as a shield for a gunman.

In Spy? That's even more questionable than in Thunderball.

Anyway, once you discount the faceless, uniformed armies that presumably died in all those blown-up command centers, the main argument for Moore's Bond as deadliest seems to be that he got the most TOTAL kills, which given his seven movies to, say, Laz's one, or Dalton's two, or Craig's one (so far), I should "hope" he was able to achieve that.

What's more, a lot of the gruesome deaths attributed to Moore's "coldness" have become amazingly overstated in recent times. The scientists in Moonraker are a real stretch (he just rushed out of the room, then watched with surprise and interest), as is Locque in FYEO (if you'll notice, the car started to fall before he kicked it).

And if we're talking cold-blooded "satisfaction" in his killing, then that's something I wouldn't celebrate anyway. I like a Bond who's believable as an assassin, and doesn't hesitate to use his license to kill when and where appropriate (or simply necessary), but not one who delights in something so disgustingly animalistic. Heck, I prefer him to be torn about it. It's only human, and definitely a major part of the character.

So, Moore being the most lethal Bond? Arguable. Moore being the most ruthless? Also debatable, but I would think it's nothing to cheer about if you're right.

[Willowhugger]

It's not a compliment that Moore's Bond is the most ruthless but an observation. Ironically, Roger Moore considered his Bond one of the least violent because so much of the violence is conducted in a cartoonish manner. Roger Moore has more means of dispatching his foes without drawing a gun on them than Bugs Bunny. If you stop and treat these actions seriously then Roger Moore's character becomes something of a sadist though. This version of James Bond is the only one to take genuine delight in slaughtering his foes.

All the quips become rather cold blooded in that respect.

[TheSaint]

Topics merged.

[Publius]

It's not a compliment that Moore's Bond is the most ruthless but an observation. Ironically, Roger Moore considered his Bond one of the least violent because so much of the violence is conducted in a cartoonish manner. Roger Moore has more means of dispatching his foes without drawing a gun on them than Bugs Bunny. If you stop and treat these actions seriously then Roger Moore's character becomes something of a sadist though. This version of James Bond is the only one to take genuine delight in slaughtering his foes.

All the quips become rather cold blooded in that respect.

True, and that's something I don't care for. I think his movies often treated death too lightly, like a cartoon as you put it. I suppose that's one of my problems with them, although I generally like most.

[capungo]

Yeah, I didn't use to see Moore as one of the most lethal bonds but geez, the way he mows down Stromberg was just brutal. It wasn't even one right after the other, it was slow, with pauses between each shot, really making it all the more painful to watch. Also, the way he threatens Rosie Carver in LALD and Andrea in TMWTGG was pretty telling of how his good nature can instantly become a sort of threatening indifference to what happened to them. I agree with everyone else saying that the detachment that let him do nasty things while still being outright gentlemenly in his actions made him a deceptively dangerous Bond.

[00Twelve]

Still, the fact that Danny's Bond could get 3+ hits in on Rog's Bond while he was raring back for one big John Wayne punch kind of deflates the "danger." (Just kidding, of course...kinda.)

[Willowhugger]

Still, the fact that Danny's Bond could get 3+ hits in on Rog's Bond while he was raring back for one big John Wayne punch kind of deflates the "danger." (Just kidding, of course...kinda.)

Unfortunately, you fail to realize that Roger Moore's Bond would smile at Danny before raising an eyebrow. Daniel Craig would rush at him before Moore would step to the side and somehow Craig would fall out the window that he failed to notice was behind Moore. Craig would manage to grab hold of a wooden flagpole on the side of the building before Moore would pull out a saw from seeming nowhere. Daniel would curse up a storm only to end up eaten by alligators that were conveinantly underneath the flag pole that moore cuts through just enough so that it breaks.

Then he'd say something like "See you later Gator."

No, actually, what surprises me about reviewing Moore's films is they're not nearly as cartoonish as people make them out for be. There's always one or two cringe worthy additions to the stories but the plots themselves tend to be fairly serious. Roger also throws in one or two serious moments anyway (I'd argue that Loche's perch on the side of the cliff was also one he could have gotten out of without Moore's kick)

If you can remove the memories of "Spoing" noises when Moore does a flip in his car in TMWTGG, he's actually a very good actor for playing a nice guy seemingly whom is quite capable of manhandling people horribly. Against Moore's wishes or not, he went along with the director's more violent choices.

Edited by Willowhugger, 11 December 2006 - 07:54 AM.

[00Twelve]

I watched Moonraker last night for the first time in months, and watching it again after the impact of Casino Royale, I think my mouth was hanging open practically the entire time. Liking Moonraker is one thing (and perfectly fine!). But to say it's not cartoonish is going too far in defending a film that was made with the intent of being silly. The film even opened with circus music! Quite appropriate. And loving Rog as Bond is one thing. We all love him to one extent or another. But he made Bond into a charicature on purpose. He didn't buy the character as any more than that. He wasn't trying to play the character as a serious lethal instrument, and he didn't play the character as a man who dealt with the real psychological effects of killing over and over. And that's fine. I love Rog for what he did. And he's a fantastic guy. I wish I knew him myself. But I think (dare I assume?) that he'd be the first to tell you not to take him so seriously.

[Willowhugger]

I'd also like to point out to the scene in LALD where Teehee is helpless and Roger Moore causally executes him by tossing him out the train window.

[00Twelve]

I'd also like to point out to the scene in LALD where Teehee is helpless and Roger Moore causally executes him by tossing him out the train window.

You're right, not campy at all!

For a measure of lethality/ruthlessness, contrast this with Tee-Hee's disposal in the novel...

[Willowhugger]

I'm sorry, throwing a guy off a moving train doesn't really bring to mind the word "campy."

[Publius]

I'd also like to point out to the scene in LALD where Teehee is helpless and Roger Moore causally executes him by tossing him out the train window.

There's no evidence to indicate he was "executed".

I'm sorry, throwing a guy off a moving train doesn't really bring to mind the word "campy."

"Campiness" has nothing to do with whether you killed someone or not. It has everything to do with your approach to something, including death, and in this case everything about the fight and scene was lighthearted.

When you're gleefully cracking quips as if violence is nothing, are not dealing with its real brutality or consequences, and are maybe even glossing it over with sound effects, that's campy. It becomes little different than a cartoon character having his face "blown up" by a fuse bomb.

[Willowhugger]

There's no evidence to indicate he was "executed".

You mean aside from a helpless opponent being thrown to his death from a moving vehicle?

When you're gleefully cracking quips as if violence is nothing, are not dealing with its real brutality or consequences, and are maybe even glossing it over with sound effects, that's campy. It becomes little different than a cartoon character having his face "blown up" by a fuse bomb.

Bond is a cold blooded killer and a man whom uses humor to seperate himself from the violence of the actions he brings. A part of him enjoys killing people. Brosnan's Bond never understood that and neither did Dalton or Craig. Scaramanga was right despite Moore's denial about it.

The quips reflect Bond's relishing of destroying those he percieves as evil.

Craig may yet get over the stick up his bum since the last scene was meant to be humorous. The scene where he gleefully has White at his mercy for execution or perhaps torture for information...or both.

Edited by Willowhugger, 14 December 2006 - 09:10 PM.

[00Twelve]

There's no evidence to indicate he was "executed".

You mean aside from a helpless opponent being thrown to his death from a moving vehicle?

When you're gleefully cracking quips as if violence is nothing, are not dealing with its real brutality or consequences, and are maybe even glossing it over with sound effects, that's campy. It becomes little different than a cartoon character having his face "blown up" by a fuse bomb.

Bond is a cold blooded killer and a man whom uses humor to seperate himself from the violence of the actions he brings. A part of him enjoys killing people. Brosnan's Bond never understood that and neither did Dalton or Craig. Scaramanga was right despite Moore's denial about it.

The quips reflect Bond's relishing of destroying those he percieves as evil.

Craig may yet get over the stick up his bum since the last scene was meant to be humorous. The scene where he gleefully has White at his mercy for execution or perhaps torture for information...or both.

See, the thing that was GREAT to me about Casino Royale was the absence of throwaway quips. I'm not a big fan of them, but that's just me.

And between the comic sound (yes, foley artists can render a less "springy" sound) of Tee-Hee's wires snapping, his futile struggle to get the arm unstuck, his big yell (for some reason I hesitate to use the word "scream"), and the fact that he even has that little idiosynchracy, I personally laughed at the whole scene (as I was meant to), and then Rog utters the "disarming" line. A rimshot went off in my head.

I don't know if you've ever read the novel, but in it Bond kills Tee-Hee by kicking him as hard as he can in the balls, twice, and with steel-capped shoes, and then hurls him over the railing of a two-story stairwell (like in the CR movie, come to think of it...and I'm not being sarcastic, I really just correlated that). When Bond sees him a few minutes later, he described Tee-Hee as "either dead or dying." That is being a violent killer, IMHO. Also, check out the first few pages of Goldfinger if you want to know how Bond feels about killing people. I promise, it's no joy for him.

[Publius]

You mean aside from a helpless opponent being thrown to his death from a moving vehicle?

Kinda like Jaws, right?

Honestly, the tone of LaLD is at times more slapstick than TSWLM. I see no reason to think Tee-Hee is definitely dead, or that throwing him out of a train is a remotely satisfactory way to kill an enemy once and for all, and in any case it's still a cartoon "death".

Bond is a cold blooded killer and a man whom uses humor to seperate himself from the violence of the actions he brings.

Whereas Moore's Bond uses it for laughs. Feel free to psychoanalyze his reason for making jokes, but I see in it nothing more than simple audience-pleasing on his part. He's even admitted as much anyway.

A part of him enjoys killing people. Brosnan's Bond never understood that and neither did Dalton or Craig. Scaramanga was right despite Moore's denial about it.

The quips reflect Bond's relishing of destroying those he percieves as evil.

I've never seen enjoyment in it (and thank God), just satisfaction and relief that justice was done. That's a remarkable difference I think you're missing.

Craig may yet get over the stick up his bum since the last scene was meant to be humorous.

Not enjoying the murder of people, especially helpless ones, is now "having a stick up your bum"? Sorry, I don't care for such sadism.

The scene where he gleefully has White at his mercy for execution or perhaps torture for information...or both.

That scene is just an audience-pleaser (the long-awaited Bond theme and classic line finishing off the tale of Bond's beginnings), and please the audience it did. Even if you pick it apart, all I see is Craig relishing in at least one small victory, however tragic it may seem to us (having his coldness reaffirmed by his experiences, that is), after getting screwed over countless times in the film.

[Willowhugger]

I don't know if you've ever read the novel, but in it Bond kills Tee-Hee by kicking him as hard as he can in the balls, twice, and with steel-capped shoes, and then hurls him over the railing of a two-story stairwell (like in the CR movie, come to think of it...and I'm not being sarcastic, I really just correlated that). When Bond sees him a few minutes later, he described Tee-Hee as "either dead or dying." That is being a violent killer, IMHO. Also, check out the first few pages of Goldfinger if you want to know how Bond feels about killing people. I promise, it's no joy for him.

Bond in Fleming books is also a character that changes tremendously as Fleming changes his character over the books. I like the sadistic element actually. As for how he kills Tee-hee, while certainly more violent, I'm not honestly sure that doing it was going to be that interesting.

[00Twelve]

Bond in Fleming books is also a character that changes tremendously as Fleming changes his character over the books. I like the sadistic element actually. As for how he kills Tee-hee, while certainly more violent, I'm not honestly sure that doing it was going to be that interesting.

I'll grant that Bond changed somewhat over the course of the Fleming novels, and we just chalk it up to maturity, but the one point I can't grant is that Bond, as he was written, at least, never looked on killing with any pleasure or joy. Some of the kills he made brought a temporary satsfaction and relief, but I don't remember any post-mortem quips. And hey, nobody has to be a Fleming groupie , and if you like the quips, that's wonderful, but Moore played the character as a charicature, and he'd be the first to tell us that. Besides, this thread was formed not because of Moore's portrayal of Bond's real lethality, but because his films racked up the biggest body counts.

[tambourineman]

Daniel Craig was the most lethal and sadistic Bond by far. Love that scene where he slowly grins when he tricks the bomber into blowing himself up. And the "Allow me" when he points the gun at Vesper.