Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

The Series Would be Less without Moore


29 replies to this topic

#1 Sir James

Sir James

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 748 posts
  • Location:Out there, somewhere out there....

Posted 07 September 2002 - 01:19 PM

While I am not a big fan of Moore or his Bond films, I do think that he is an integral part of the longetivity of the series. His comedic, OTT turn in the 70's and early 80's was what the series needed. With Vietnam, Watergate, the energy crisis, and the general disillusionment that is a part of the 70's, Moore pushed the series forward. If the series stayed the way it was I do not believe this site would exisit today. Perhaps then it was a blessing in disguise that OHMSS failed, and Lazenby turned down his multi picture deal. Maybe Moore is not Less in success?

#2 Xenobia

Xenobia

    Commander RNR

  • Veterans Reserve
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9744 posts
  • Location:New York City

Posted 08 September 2002 - 03:18 AM

I totally agree with you Sir James, especially your points about political disillusionment in the States. The Bond of the past was a staunch conservative...straight laced...total establishment...totally not what the seventies were about.

Moore fit in perfectly into the seventies (and the part of the eighties that he was in), and that can be his weakness at times. In his finest moments, such as the entire TSWLM and FYEO, his Bond rose out of the decade it was in, to stand for all time as a foundation (and in the case of FYEO a cornerstone) of the series. However, some of his others (Moonraker and AVTAK) are too often dogeared by their decade and that can count against him if people forget that the movies work in perspective (whereas, no matter what spin you put on it LTK does not work and Lazenby's performance in OHMSS does not work in certain sections).

Yes, the series would be a far less collection if Moore wasn't there.

-- Xenobia

#3 JimmyBond

JimmyBond

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 10559 posts
  • Location:Washington

Posted 08 September 2002 - 04:50 AM

I could probably go on and on about how Moore helped the series. I could also go on and on about how the series would have been with Lazenby, but for the purpose of this post, I will not.

The truth is, exaclty what Sir James said, people wanted a place to escape the real world. Moore's films were just that, an escape from the horrors of the world. In the real world people were dying in Vietnam. In the Bond films Bond was battling assassains with Golden guns, indestructable giants with metal teeth, and driving cars that turned into subs.

Roger Moore's films were exactly what people wanted, and his contribution to the series is huge. Lets not forget that he has made the most Bond films (yes, I am not counting Connery's NSNA).

#4 brendan007

brendan007

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1512 posts
  • Location:Gold Coast, Australia

Posted 08 September 2002 - 08:10 AM

moores bond film even beat connery's when the went head to head (OP and NSNA)

#5 1q2w3e4r

1q2w3e4r

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1336 posts

Posted 08 September 2002 - 08:18 AM

Yeah i think that was more because NSNA wasn't "official" canon. Connery's films made more than Roger's. But even though i don't like many of his films he was detrimental to the longevity of the series. I don't like "what if" games either but Lazenby wouldn't have hurt the series i dont think.

#6 rafterman

rafterman

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1963 posts
  • Location:Republic of Korea, south of the Axis of Evil

Posted 08 September 2002 - 08:20 AM

Moore's films were pure escapism. That's what people want.

#7 Sir James

Sir James

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 748 posts
  • Location:Out there, somewhere out there....

Posted 08 September 2002 - 01:37 PM

Well here is a portion of an excellent article written by David Morefield on www.ianfleming.org

Here is the link to the article but I typed out the impotant part. Dealing with Fantasy and Escapism.

http://www.ianflemin...ine/roger.shtml


Now here is the part pertaing to fantasy and escapism:

Ask the man on the street to describe his favorite Bond scene and he probably won't tell you about Roger Moore kicking Locque's car off a cliff, or Sean Connery choking Bob Simmons to death with a fireplace poker. More likely he'll mention the Aston Martin employing its gadgets, or Oddjob throwing that crazy hat, or maybe Bond's plunge off a mountain-top, saved at the last moment by a Union Jack parachute. In all these scenes is a tongue-in-cheek, over-the-top sense of fun that people enjoy. It is precisely this sense of humor that defines Bond for most people, and sets him apart from the grim-and-gritty, sweaty t-shirt variety of action hero. Roger Moore not only excels at this approach, for many of us he defined it.



#8 Kingdom Come

Kingdom Come

    Discharged

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3572 posts

Posted 23 September 2002 - 08:58 PM

Response to earlier message as far as I'm aware it was Moores films not Connerys that made the most 'dosh' at the box office by far. It's also interesting to note that as regards message posting, Moore has more people chating about him than Connery. Roger Moore was my fav Bond as the approach then was fantasy based - which I believe made his films popular not only on relaese but also on television.

#9 BondChick007

BondChick007

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 131 posts

Posted 23 September 2002 - 09:26 PM

I pretty much agree with everything that has been said so far. Especially Sir james' point about the time when moore's films were out. I am not a huge fan of moore, but he definantly added a lot to bond. Not only did he give people what they wanted at the time with his comedy, but it added that part of bonds humor today. Bond may have been a stuck up, 'stiff assed Brit'.

#10 Mourning Becomes Electra

Mourning Becomes Electra

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1218 posts

Posted 23 September 2002 - 10:02 PM

Actually no, Connery's films adjusted for inflation made more at the Box office than Moore's or any other Bond's films. Thunderball is the highest ever B.O. grossing Bond film and adjusted for inflation would today would be about $800m (think Spiderman, Harry Potter or Star Wars), and Goldfinger wasn't far behind.

#11 Spectre001

Spectre001

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 229 posts

Posted 23 September 2002 - 10:16 PM

The reason people are discussing Moore more than Connery could be related to the age of the members? And...using inflation to suggest that Connery's films were more successful than any others may also not be the best way to judge the success of the film with an audience.

...ever helpful

#12 Mourning Becomes Electra

Mourning Becomes Electra

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1218 posts

Posted 24 September 2002 - 12:09 AM

Ah but I was responding to the post that Moore's films brought in more "dosh" at the box office than any other Bond's, and that's just not true. Bond was also such a cultural phenomenon during the 60's that has never been reached again by the series. Even I as a Brosnan is #1 Bond fan can acknowledge this. :)

As for #'s of posts determining popularity, Dalton has more than Moore, PB more than any, Connery only more than Lazenby, but I pretty much doubt that has anything to do with how popular in general any of them are as Bond. As you say it has to do with the age of the posters, what Bonds they first saw, or who they're more interested in. But often the posts aren't even flattering, they're more arguing about how good a certain Bond is or isn't, or one of the films is or isn't. Maybe in Connery's case there's less traffic b/c there's less debate. And many times the subjects covered under one actor often discuss the merits and films of another actor, everything isn't exactly contained.

#13 Kingdom Come

Kingdom Come

    Discharged

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3572 posts

Posted 25 September 2002 - 05:53 PM

Moonraker raked in the most dosh than any Bond film up until the 80s - out flanking by a long way, any of Connery's Bond films. Also re. postings, I was talking only in regards to Connery vrs Moore. It wasn't until the 70s that Bond became the phenomenon.

footnote; your posts arn't flattering either!

#14 Mourning Becomes Electra

Mourning Becomes Electra

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1218 posts

Posted 25 September 2002 - 06:22 PM

I was just talking about #s of posts not exactly being indicative of popularity, and you agreed by saying my posts here aren't flattering. :)

And no Moonraker did not make more money than any Connery film, not unless you don't adjust for inflation. Adjusted for inflation TSWLM made more than MR as well (as did LALD) and was Moore's highest grossing film.

http://www.boxoffice...ises/jamesbond/
http://www.klast.net/bond/boxoff.html

#15 Kingdom Come

Kingdom Come

    Discharged

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3572 posts

Posted 26 September 2002 - 06:39 PM

That site is way off track. It doesn't look official to me. I know for example that GoldenEye has made more than 350 million.
It seems the most popular films [not going by that site] have been the one titles of the series. Goldfinger / Moonraker / Octopussy /GoldenEye.
The longer the title the less popular and no Mr pedantic, it has little to do with the films success, I agree - just a thought.

#16 Mourning Becomes Electra

Mourning Becomes Electra

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1218 posts

Posted 26 September 2002 - 06:57 PM

That's Ms. Pendantic to you. Those are two different sites and the stats are from the very official Hollywood Reporter and Variety B.O tracking. Believe it or not.

#17 Kingdom Come

Kingdom Come

    Discharged

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3572 posts

Posted 27 September 2002 - 11:09 AM

Bond:
A woman?

Well call me mad or call me bad but these 2 sites contradict each other.
The second site has a better grasp of the situation. I'm nice really.

#18 Mourning Becomes Electra

Mourning Becomes Electra

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1218 posts

Posted 27 September 2002 - 05:34 PM

I'll refrain from calling you either, but just to be more pendantic, :) they don't really contradict each other, one has the films adjusted for inflation up until '99 the other to '02. Also the Mojo Box Office site doesn't adjust for the WorldWide grosses just the U.S. ones, and doesn't give information on U.S. admissions like K. Last's site. So they have some of the same basic numbers and each give some additional information based on those main numbers.

And yes a woman, haven't you heard, we make up more than half the world's population, we're everywhere. :)

#19 Kingdom Come

Kingdom Come

    Discharged

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3572 posts

Posted 27 September 2002 - 08:56 PM

'they dont really contradict each other'??! 'don't really' means they do.
That last line of yours is dreadful#

#20 killkenny kid

killkenny kid

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6607 posts
  • Location:Albany, New York

Posted 28 September 2002 - 04:28 AM

Sorry, Kingdom Come. But MBE is right. As someone who lived it. I can tell you Bond became a phenomenon in the 60's. Not the 70's.

#21 Mourning Becomes Electra

Mourning Becomes Electra

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1218 posts

Posted 28 September 2002 - 04:34 AM

So much for trying to lighten things up, you win. Moore was more popular, is more popular, always will be more popular. Please ignore the facts behind the curtain. Over and out.

#22 Kingdom Come

Kingdom Come

    Discharged

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3572 posts

Posted 28 September 2002 - 08:38 AM

Killkenny I lived it 2!

#23 Kingdom Come

Kingdom Come

    Discharged

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3572 posts

Posted 28 September 2002 - 08:55 AM

With the advent of greater and more powerful forms of 'selling' films in the 1970s and with the Bond films starting to be aired on television around the world helped make the Bond films this phenomenon. The 1960s did not have the know how to really make the same differance. You do realise that a series like Bond - though not exclusive to the Bond canon - go back over history and ever so gently 'tweek' a little here and there to help make the series more facinating. e.g.. the 007 logo with the front part of the 7 turning into a gun has its copyright as 1962. In reality this design was NOT created then, it was created for TMWTGU and was a good design and was kept.

#24 Kingdom Come

Kingdom Come

    Discharged

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3572 posts

Posted 28 September 2002 - 09:03 AM

Actally it wasn't!

#25 Kingdom Come

Kingdom Come

    Discharged

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3572 posts

Posted 28 September 2002 - 09:06 AM

... come down sparrow... sing me good morning...

#26 Kingdom Come

Kingdom Come

    Discharged

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3572 posts

Posted 28 September 2002 - 09:07 AM

I want to run away and away is the only place I can run to.

#27 Kingdom Come

Kingdom Come

    Discharged

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3572 posts

Posted 28 September 2002 - 12:36 PM

Age now knows where I am.

#28 Sir James

Sir James

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 748 posts
  • Location:Out there, somewhere out there....

Posted 28 September 2002 - 12:55 PM

ok well lets try and get back on track. Moore no doubt was an assett to the series, but what makes you wonder is if we all can acknowledge his importance, why does (with Lazenby) semmed to be poked at by a good amount of "hardcore" 007 fans???

#29 Kingdom Come

Kingdom Come

    Discharged

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3572 posts

Posted 28 September 2002 - 04:25 PM

I think its because a lot of people like or more importantly need to 'run with the pack'. They do say that Rogers 'take' on Bond as a character was closer to what Bonds creator had in mind. Also these folks who believe Connery the best are the ones who lean towards a 'real life' interpratation. Moores films were fantasy orientated and thats were, in my opinion, the films belong. The last few Bond films have tried the realistic approach etc and they end up looking like a lot of other action films around. The Bond films used to pave the way forward and others followed. Its the reverse today and has been for many a year!

#30 General Gogol

General Gogol

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 167 posts

Posted 30 September 2002 - 12:15 PM

I grew up with Roger Moore as Bond and although I like Brosnan more. I have to say that he did make some great bond movies. My favorite is Octopussy. I also liked how Morre injected humor into an otherwise serious role. Have a great day!!!!