100 replies to this topic

[Golden Claw]

OK, I'm not the biggest fan of Rodge Bond, and the main reason is his age. I feel he was made Bond at the age he should've quit the role. But he was born young, so looks at lease 10 years younger than his actual age in his first inning as Bond (LALD & TMWTGG). He looks amazing in these two films.

But age starts to catch up with him in his second inning (TSWLM & Moonraker). I count the wrinkles on his face; & check out his hands in TSWLM. 49 is too old for Bond, IMO. This is where the stuntmen really start to step in. Rodge must've needed a stuntman for everything (except delivering one-liners & screwing nymphets half his age). He can hardly even run. But somehow he manages to pull it off.

But Rodge as Bond in the 80s is ridiculous! He looks like Bond's father, for heaven's sake! I really want to like FYEO & Octopussy, but Granpa Rodge doesn't let me. I don't have a problem with old people, but I do have a problem with an old man playing James Bond. It's too unbelievable to stomach a 50-yr old doing all those stunts. Besides, the stuntmen look too obvious. Wish he's retired after Moonraker (I wouldn't have minded if he'd quit after TMWTGG).

When do you think he should've retired as Bond?

[Double-Oh Agent]

After Octopussy.

He looks great through Moonraker, begins to show some age in For Your Eyes Only and Octopussy--but is still very acceptable and credible, and definitely shows his age in A View To A Kill. While Roger Moore is great and a terrific 007, he looks a little too old for the iconic role in his last film and probably should have quit after Octopussy. Still, I can take him in AVTAK.

[MarkA]

As many of you know I am not one of Roger Moore's greatest fan. Though I agree, to a certain extent with the first post. He looked ok in LALD and MWTGG. But the main problem I have is I thought he was wrong from the start. Bond in my opinion as well as having a level of sophistication (which to a degree Roger Moore has), has also to have a physicality to him. Even as written by Fleming. Roger Moore has none of this. He has no grace to his movement, which all the best Bond's have. Connery, Lazenby and Craig have it in spades. And the older he got the more noticeable it became. Even his shape. He has no waist to speak of. His fighting style is flabby and ungraceful, and I find his humour and line delivery especially towards woman smarmy and condescending. I just don't find him cool. In any way. And for me Bond has to be cool.

[Jim]

I suppose this may open up another discussion, which is - "Would A View to a Kill have been made if it wasn't a Bond film?"

[DamnCoffee]

After Moonraker, he could've had 4 good Bond movies under his belt. For Your Eyes Only was utter drivle, Octopussy was brilliant, even though it would've been a lot better with Dalton in the role, A View To A Kill was horrible. Yes I think Dalton should've took over in 1981.

[Loomis]

When do you think he should've retired as Bond?

1987, after starring in his eighth Bond outing, THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS, making way for his successor, Pierce Brosnan, to star in 1989's LICENCE REVOKED.

[Aris007]

After Octopussy.

My thought exactly! In Moonraker he was good! He played really well in the entire movie. So he did in Octopussy! In A View To A Kill it was clear that he couldn't cope with the role any longer! He should have the part just before it!

[volante]

After The Spy Who Loved Me.

with ideally For your Eyes Only as a second outting in stead of TMWTGG

[jimbo bond 007]

I would say after Octopussy as well. Mr Moore wasn't looking his best in a AVTAK, up until then I was quite happy with how he looked.

[David_M]

But he was born young,

LOL. At last one thing I have in common with Roger Moore. :-)

He has no waist to speak of.

Wow, after all those years of people saying he had too much, it's kind of a shock to see someone say he had none at all!

Artistically, I think the ideal stopping point would have been FYEO. Bond's age is acknowledged in this film in all sorts of subtle and satisfying ways (like Bond's visit to Tracy's grave, his rebuff of the too-young Bibi, his weary, knowing admonitions to Melina about the futility of vengeance, etc), so Roger's visible aging actually works in his favor here, adding gravitas.

OP jettisons all that for a return to "business as usual," but it's also a hugely fun romp and feels like a parting love letter to the Roger era. As such, I can't really wish it away.

So I guess my answer would be "after OP." Over and above the issue of Roger's age, the whole formula is tired and wheezing in AVTAK. There's a feeling that the old jokes, the old schtick, the old tricks have out-stayed their welcome. It was one trip too many to the well. Better that Roger had left the stage with the audience wanting more, rather than giving it to them only to have them say, "No, wait, actually we'd had enough already. NEXT!"

[tim partridge]

After Moonraker. Lewis Collins as his replacement.

[Simon]

I think the old boy should still be filling the shoes to this day.

It's all about the presence and charm.

[dee-bee-five]

This ageist nonsense really is tiresome. He might have been 57 when he finally quit, but I only hope I look as good when I'm that age. Hell, I don't look it now. And if we can have a 64 year old Indiana Jones, I sure as hell don't have a problem with a 57 year old James Bond. And given that there are certain scenes in NSNA when Connery looks like he has just been dug up, I really don't understand why Moore is singled out in this fashion.

That said, I have always felt that AVTAK was a film too far for Moore. This has nothing to do with numbers, but a sense that we'd seen his box of tricks just once too often. Still charming, still playing with part with great aplomb, and yet I felt, for the first time, an occasional sense of his wearily going through the motions.

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

I agree that post-Moonraker, Rog really began to show his age. Ideally, For your eyes only should have been his last Bond movie, but then again, being a huge A View To A Kill fan, I don't know how that could've panned out with someone else in the role. Dalton was the best Bond of all (in my opinion) but A View To A Kill is markedly different from his two movies, and I can't really place his Bond in that movie. For me, even though Rog looks ancient in it, he's still the best man for the job in A View To A Kill.

[Mercator]

I hav the thoughts he could have Dayligths and Lizenz done. He would hav been the charming as Bronston, no? And the action could hav been don with stuntmen. Dayligthts was written for Sir Moore, I hav this read.

[Safari Suit]

Regardless of whether he was too old or not, I certainly wouldn't have wanted anyone else starring in Octopussy. (And not because no one else deserves to bear the shame, cheeky)

[DAN LIGHTER]

When we have got it cleared up and agreed on how old he should have been, how are we going to put the plan into action?

Firstly a poll needs to be conducted to decide the right age. Can a mod add one?

Then I strongly believe we need a time machine Then someone high up in EON Productions who agrees to action our plan to get Roger out at the right age. I think the best man to talk to is Cubby. And let’s just say for arguments sake, it all works out nice, what impact will are meddling do to the future films? Think on friends, think on……….

I will go and see if any time machines are for sale on eBay and get back to you. If I come back as my future self then part of the plan will have already come to fruition.

[QOS007]

After Octopussy.

He looks great through Moonraker, begins to show some age in For Your Eyes Only and Octopussy--but is still very acceptable and credible, and definitely shows his age in A View To A Kill. While Roger Moore is great and a terrific 007, he looks a little too old for the iconic role in his last film and probably should have quit after Octopussy. Still, I can take him in AVTAK.

Agreed 100%. despite his age he looks pretty good through For Your Eyes Only, but it is noticeable that he is getting older. Octpussy comes along and he really ages out, so he should have stopped there. I think he made AVTAK less than what it could have been

And if we can have a 64 year old Indiana Jones, I sure as hell don't have a problem with a 57 year old James Bond.

The only problem with this is that the 64 Indiana Jones was bad, and James Bond does not need to be 57 years old ever again, not even 50. bond must stay between 37 and 47 that seems bout right

[Rufus Ffolkes]

I don't think Moore's age was an issue per se. I think the problem was the filmmakers unwillingness to acknowledge his advancing years.

I agree about the hints at his age in "For Your Eyes Only" - the visit to the grave, and more specifically the dates on Tracy's tombstone, and his rebuffing of Bibi. It's a bit undermined by the casting of Melina, though, who looks more like his daughter than love interest.

It kind of works in "Octopussy", too, as there's a "timeless" quality to that film - with its storybook India, circuses, train fight, Bond coming to the rescue in a hot-air balloon. The film seems to be saying that Bond belongs to a bygone era. The casting is more effective here, as well, with an older villain and (slightly) older leading lady.

Where it really falls apart is in "A View to a Kill". Had the film been about an older Bond who uses his wits and experience to outwit the villains, it might have worked. Instead, the film is desperate to pander to the 80s youth market. It's about computers and microchips! And Duran Duran does the title tune! It's got Grace Jones! And Chrisopher Walken! All this accomplishes is to make Roger seem even older than he is. It's downright creepy seeing him in the shower with a thirtyish Tanya Roberts, and swapping sexual innuendos with nineteen year old Alison Doody.

If they'd been smart, they'd have cast a beautiful woman in her forties opposite Moore and made the whole point of the film about about an aging Bond's place in the world.

[jrcjohnny99]

Moonraker should have been his last;
He looks old and tired in everything after (tho not as old and tired as Sean in DAF; now there's a thought, if only Rig had started a pic or two earlier...)

[BoogieBond]

Although I agree in particular Octopussy would have been strange without the presence of Moore, I still think FYEO should have been his last film. I did feel FYEO really suited Moore and he played the role particularly well, and I still feel he is convincing in FYEO(Although it could have benefitted with a leading lady in her mid thirties). With OP Dalton or another could have stepped in his shoes(Though I am not sure at all about James Brolin).
In regards to his age, I still think for most of Moore's entries his actual age is not a factor, because on screen how old does he look ? For me for the first five films he could easily pass for 10 years younger than he is. And most 43 year olds would probably be pleased to look like Roger at 53. He is still slim and tall and all that, so no issue. The films still look convincing, and in FYEO he did some of the scenes himself(climbing the mountain etc) and they still look fine.

[00Jaws]

Well i think from FYEO onwards you can really see his age (Face, fights and for instance his running in the scene with Loque). So if the looks would be a criteria then after Moonraker.

But actually i'm glad he made 7 Bonds, because he has never been very physical or athlethic (LALD or TMWTGG for instance) so i don't miss that in his 80's Bond. I quite enjoy FYEO, OP and AVTAK.

[dee-bee-five]

After Octopussy.

He looks great through Moonraker, begins to show some age in For Your Eyes Only and Octopussy--but is still very acceptable and credible, and definitely shows his age in A View To A Kill. While Roger Moore is great and a terrific 007, he looks a little too old for the iconic role in his last film and probably should have quit after Octopussy. Still, I can take him in AVTAK.

Agreed 100%. despite his age he looks pretty good through For Your Eyes Only, but it is noticeable that he is getting older. Octpussy comes along and he really ages out, so he should have stopped there. I think he made AVTAK less than what it could have been

And if we can have a 64 year old Indiana Jones, I sure as hell don't have a problem with a 57 year old James Bond.

The only problem with this is that the 64 Indiana Jones was bad, and James Bond does not need to be 57 years old ever again, not even 50. bond must stay between 37 and 47 that seems bout right

I'm sorry, but I really must protest. This is sheer ageism. What are we saying here? That an action hero cannot be older than 50? So, no Cary Grant (55) in North By Northwest, then. Or in Charade (when he was nearly 60 and romancing Audrey Hepburn on screen who was a quarter of a century younger than him).

Surely if an audience buys the premise, numbers don't matter? I had lots of issues with the recent Indy pic; Ford's age wasn't one of them.

[DamnCoffee]

I hav the thoughts he could have Dayligths and Lizenz done. He would hav been the charming as Bronston, no? And the action could hav been don with stuntmen. Dayligthts was written for Sir Moore, I hav this read.

I'm sorry, but I disagree with everything that you've written. A 65 year old man on the top of a tanker would be laughable tbh. He wouldn't be charming at all. Plus I really do find your stuntman remark absurd.

[Royal Dalton]

After Moonraker. But only because the next film was obviously intended for a new, younger, actor as Bond.



Having said that, I wouldn't mind if Sir Rog was still playing Bond now.

[Judo chop]

Let’s be fair here and not just point the finger at Roger. The series was aging just as fast as, if not faster than, Roger, and not because of Roger.

[danslittlefinger]

Moonraker should have been his last;
He looks old and tired in everything after (tho not as old and tired as Sean in DAF; now there's a thought, if only Rig had started a pic or two earlier...)

Agree totally.

[The Ghost Who Walks]

After Moonraker. But only because the next film was obviously intended for a new, younger, actor as Bond.

Yes, if it could have given us more Dalton, I too would have wanted him to quit after Moonraker, but only for that reason. FYEO was a film that would have been tailored to Dalton's strengths.

And Moore SHOULD have quit after Octopussy, which would have been the ultimate swansong for him. A hugely entertaining, well-crafted movie that feels like a typical Moore-veichle in every way (which I'm not sure if AVTAK really does).

[plankattack]

Let’s be fair here and not just point the finger at Roger. The series was aging just as fast as, if not faster than, Roger, and not because of Roger.

Ah, but which came first, the chicken or the egg? Was the series aging (I think so), but the presence of an aging lead didn't help either. And I don't mean that in terms of Sir Rog's age, but the age of the character. What works in FYEO (the older, experienced man) subliminaly works against things in OP and AVTAK. For example, with MacNee by his side, it's two old boys having a lark and swinging punches unconvincingly in Zorin's warehouse, and by extension, 007 is now an old fella not really up to it. Imagine the possibilities if a younger 007 had been accompanied by the wise, older, Tibbett in the same film.

The series was aging - Moneypenny repartee, Q branch gags, all repeating themselves with the originality of a Christmas TV special. And the solution would have been to inject some new life and interest (and a shift in tone) with a younger lead actor. Let's face it, the much-loved (around here) TLD is made with and by all the usual suspects, with one major exception - its leading man. I'm not a big fan of OP, but imagine that film with a young lead actor (and less of some of the silliness which does seem to accompany the Sir Rog-era). It easily would have been on a par with TLD.

So for me, after FYEO; that's a film that really couldn't be bettered with anyone other than Sir Rog IMHO. Bibi, Contessa, "first dig two graves" are all moments made for a veteran agent who has seen it all, and Sir Rog did it total justice.

[O.H.M.S.S.]

After For Your Eyes Only, then Timothy Dalton could have stepped in for Octopussy and A View to a Kill. George Lazenby should have been asked to do Never Say Never Again and he should have done Diamonds Are Forever. These three Bonds would have had their perfect Bond career if things would have gone this way. In my opinion, that is.