25 replies to this topic

[Capsule in Space]

Something I have been thinking about over the summer. Let me preface this by stating that I love Roger Moore. He is my favorite James Bond, although I think Sean Connery was the best playing the role. If that makes sense.

Anyway, I am a big fan of Roger Moore. Yet, I do admit that he was the worst at performing the physical aspects of the role (he would probably admit that as well).

Most fans know that what helped Lazenby win the role was how well he did sparring with stuntmen. So, what if Roger had been held to the same expectations?

Could he have passed the "fighting" aspect of the audition?

Could he have passed the scene in From Russia with Love test like James Brolin, Sam Neill and others had to do?

Could he have passed the "bravado" test (for lack of a better term) that Lazenby and Connery supposedly passed?

If Roger Moore had to audition for the role of James Bond, would he have won the part?

Edited by Capsule in Space, 27 August 2011 - 09:13 PM.

[David_M]

He did pass an audition, it was called "The Saint."

Seriously, if the point of an audition is to see how well an actor could handle a role, Saltzman and Broccoli had all the information they needed about Roger right there on the tele for seven years. Witty one-liners? Been there. Smooth maneuvers with the ladies? Done that. Fight scenes, gunplay, tuxedos, fast driving..."The Saint" could be seen as a prolonged screen test performed in front of the whole world.

As for the fight scenes, Roger did better on the show, and in various movies, than he did as Bond, so I'm going to lay some of the blame for his sometimes underwhelming Bond battles on the stunt coordinators and directors. There are ways to film fight scenes that make them work better, and Roger didn't always get that. For instance, Connery's fights were often filmed at close quarters, adding to their visceral quality, while Roger was often shot at medium range, which accentuated his awkwardness. Also for whatever reason his fights involved a lot of unconvincing kicks, which didn't help.

For the record, I think picking Lazenby based on a fight scene (if that old story is true) was a dumb move, especially when casting for one of the most dramatically demanding films in the series, and one where proper casting might have made the difference between a new lease on life for the series and its premature end. We're lucky he worked out as well as he did, but really, saying, "He can throw a punch, let's make him the star" was a stupid move and sends a bad message about how seriously the producers took their own product. It does, however, demonstrate how completely Connery had redefined the role even by 1969, making Fleming's Bond into a rough-and-tumble superman.

And while I'm venting, I also never understood why Lazenby's fight test was interpreted as having gone well, given that he supposedly broke the stunt man's nose. Technically, I should have thought that would be considered a FAILED test.

[Loomis]

If Roger Moore had to audition for the role of James Bond, would he have won the part?

Strange question. The only possible answer to it is "yes", given that he was actually, erm, chosen to play Bond.

It's not as though he sneaked onto the set of LIVE AND LET DIE and started acting without the permission of Broccoli and Saltzman and their backers and by the time he was rumbled they'd already shot so much footage that they decided they might as well finish the movie with him and sign him up for a few more while they were about it.

[Capsule in Space]

If Roger Moore had to audition for the role of James Bond, would he have won the part?

Strange question. The only possible answer to it is "yes", given that he was actually, erm, chosen to play Bond.

No doubt a strange question that came about after being out in the sun for several hours. I still posted it though because I thought it might produce posts like David_M's, which I found very interesting.

[Loomis]

Fair enough.

[Capsule in Space]

I don't think that Moore could have passed the physicality test that Lazenby had to pass. I am not an expert on Connery's auditioning process, but he was referred to as "that overgrown stuntman", and I think that aspect helped him win the role like it did Lazenby.

I do wonder if Roger would have passed an audition, if he had been required to do one, and if he hadn't of done The Saint.

Edited by Capsule in Space, 25 August 2011 - 10:58 PM.

[jaguar007]

I think after the "lukewarm" reception Lazenby got from the public, I think the main reason Moore was chosen as Bond was because the producers felt they needed a Bond the public already knew and was comfortable with. Moore's "The Saint" was probably the closest they had. I remember reading that one of the producers (I think it was Cubby, but I'm not sure) allegedly said he felt they were scrapping the bottom of the barrel with by casting Roger Moore.

[David Schofield]

Odd one isn't it?

Had Cubby and Harry not tried move away from the rugged, serious, realistic(ish) action man Bond (early Connery/Lazenby) and on to the comedic, the SAINT would have demonstrated exactly why Rog WOULDN'T have been cast.

However, the Lazenby/OHMSS disappointment (inexperienced, unknown lead + serious tone of the movie + lower box office) lead EON to shift even further down the lighthearted route they had dabled with in YOLT, combined with a reliable, established lead. Connery was almost bribed to come back and make it work with DAF, Rog was the ideal man to take that on with LALD.

Had EON tried a more Flemingesque LALD - Connery III if you like, Lazenby having been Connery Mk II - with a fit and dangerous-looking 30 something, Rog would not have been cast. And the SAINT together with the PERSUADERS would have been evidence as to why not.

[doublenoughtspy]

For the record, I think picking Lazenby based on a fight scene (if that old story is true) was a dumb move, especially when casting for one of the most dramatically demanding films in the series, and one where proper casting might have made the difference between a new lease on life for the series and its premature end. We're lucky he worked out as well as he did, but really, saying, "He can throw a punch, let's make him the star" was a stupid move and sends a bad message about how seriously the producers took their own product. It does, however, demonstrate how completely Connery had redefined the role even by 1969, making Fleming's Bond into a rough-and-tumble superman.

And while I'm venting, I also never understood why Lazenby's fight test was interpreted as having gone well, given that he supposedly broke the stunt man's nose. Technically, I should have thought that would be considered a FAILED test.

First of all they had been testing him for months up to that point. Straight dialog, romantic scenes (with Australian and European actresses plus Diana Rigg), running, jumping, horse back riding, swimming (all filmed at Saltzman's estate). (See my book for pics of these rare tests.)

When they got to the fight tests, George Leech paired Lazenby with a wrestler with as little screen fighting experience as Lazenby had - Yuri Borienko.

And for the record, Borienko was the first to land a real punch (not a precious swing and miss) - and he hit so hard that Lazenby said his teeth rattled. So Lazenby floored him.

Director Peter Hunt said the fight was so spectacular that if he could, he would have used it in the film. It obviously convinced the United Artists execs as well.

So yes, if Eon simply felt "He did one great fight test - so we hired him" that would be ridiculous. But my understanding, based on a lot of research and conversations with Hunt, Lazenby, Leech, etc. is that the fight was the icing on the cake, and while it did swing many people in favor of Lazenby, it was hardly the sole reason they hired him.

And while I see your point that a stunt injury is technically a failure, for a multi-million dollar film involving a lot of fight scenes - going with the more physically capable actor makes a lot more sense than choosing an "artiste" who pulls his punches. Isn't a bruise here or there, or broken nose even, worth the cost for more screen realism?

[007 Magazine]

For the record, I think picking Lazenby based on a fight scene (if that old story is true) was a dumb move, especially when casting for one of the most dramatically demanding films in the series, and one where proper casting might have made the difference between a new lease on life for the series and its premature end. We're lucky he worked out as well as he did, but really, saying, "He can throw a punch, let's make him the star" was a stupid move and sends a bad message about how seriously the producers took their own product. It does, however, demonstrate how completely Connery had redefined the role even by 1969, making Fleming's Bond into a rough-and-tumble superman.

And while I'm venting, I also never understood why Lazenby's fight test was interpreted as having gone well, given that he supposedly broke the stunt man's nose. Technically, I should have thought that would be considered a FAILED test.

First of all they had been testing him for months up to that point. Straight dialog, romantic scenes (with Australian and European actresses plus Diana Rigg), running, jumping, horse back riding, swimming (all filmed at Saltzman's estate). (See my book for pics of these rare tests.)

When they got to the fight tests, George Leech paired Lazenby with a wrestler with as little screen fighting experience as Lazenby had - Yuri Borienko.

And for the record, Borienko was the first to land a real punch (not a precious swing and miss) - and he hit so hard that Lazenby said his teeth rattled. So Lazenby floored him.

Director Peter Hunt said the fight was so spectacular that if he could, he would have used it in the film. It obviously convinced the United Artists execs as well.

So yes, if Eon simply felt "He did one great fight test - so we hired him" that would be ridiculous. But my understanding, based on a lot of research and conversations with Hunt, Lazenby, Leech, etc. is that the fight was the icing on the cake, and while it did swing many people in favor of Lazenby, it was hardly the sole reason they hired him.

And while I see your point that a stunt injury is technically a failure, for a multi-million dollar film involving a lot of fight scenes - going with the more physically capable actor makes a lot more sense than choosing an "artiste" who pulls his punches. Isn't a bruise here or there, or broken nose even, worth the cost for more screen realism?

Isn't a broken nose worth the cost for more screen realism?

When was the last time you had your nose broken Charles?

Movies are make believe, pretend. Nobody should ever need to get that badly hurt on the floor of a proper professionally organised film set.

Unless of course they choose to ignore emails from the producer.

Graham Rye
Editor/Designer/Publisher
007 MAGAZINE
007 MAGAZINE ARCHIVE FILES
www.007magazine.com

[robdread]

Interesting question. With "The Saint" and "The Persuaders," Saltzman and Broccoli had to know what they were getting with Moore in terms of approach and style. Of course, his heavy identification with "The Saint" was a concern.

Of course, the same could be said of Brosnan, given his work on "Remington Steele," and he tested around the same time as Dalton (post "View to a Kill"). (Side note: I can't remember if Sam Neill tested around that time as well, or if he tested earlier).

My gut feeling -- nothing more, or is that Moore -- is that Moore seemed a safe (and popular) pick (he apparently had a public Connery endorsement) given that "The Saint" identified him as a suave Bond-type to the public, much the way Brosnan was a safe (and popular) pick having been identified to the public as a suave Bond-type with "Remington Steele."

[David_M]

Charles, thanks for the clarification on the "broken nose" thing. It certainly sounds better in the longer version than the abbreviated one I heard for so many years, which was pretty much "he beat up our stuntman so we knew he was the guy for us." The more detailed explanation paints Laz in a much better light, given Borienko crossed the line first. Otherwise I wouldn't have blamed the whole stunt team for walking out on the producers at Laz's hiring, since the star can punch whoever he wants but the stuntmen aren't allowed to punch back and risk a stop to filming.

On the other hand, while it must have been impressive to see a "mere actor" take out a burly wrestler, it still seems like a funny thing to have tipped the scales. If I witnessed it, I would've been tempted to hire Laz as my bodyguard, but probably not my leading man. And as a producer, I wouldn't have been happy with George Leech for setting two novices at each other like that. In that sense, the whole enterprise still sounds like an unprofessional free-for-all. But I'm not in the biz, so what do I know? Maybe it's normal.

Anyway, good to hear it wasn't all down to the fight, despite the emphasis it's been given in Bond lore. And really from what I've seen of the competition, I still think Laz was the best choice.

Heard a lot of great things about your book. I promise to get around to it when funds allow.

[DR76]

I just recently watched "OCTOPUSSY". Moore was at least 54-55 years old when the movie was being filmed during the summer and fall of 1982. As far as I'm concerned, he did pretty damn good. Especially since this was his 6th Bond film. And of all of the Bond actors, he handled a gun with more realism than any of the others, which I find ironic considering his distaste for firearms.

[Simon]

If Roger Moore had to audition for the role of James Bond, would he have won the part?

Strange question.

On the contrary, I find it is a question that has a home and a place. Afterall, aren't half the threads here based purely on 'what-if' scenarios?

One can also ask, on perhaps a separate thread, whether Connery would ever have been chosen for the part in this day and age. Can you imagine an actor strolling up for the part with toupee in hand? The media would have a bloody field day.

'Not only can he not run, not drive a manual gear change, he also doesn't have Hair! The irrefutable shock of it all!'

Anyway, I will donate this particular topic to someone else, if they want it...

[Capsule in Space]

Odd one isn't it?

Had Cubby and Harry not tried move away from the rugged, serious, realistic(ish) action man Bond (early Connery/Lazenby) and on to the comedic, the SAINT would have demonstrated exactly why Rog WOULDN'T have been cast.

However, the Lazenby/OHMSS disappointment (inexperienced, unknown lead + serious tone of the movie + lower box office) lead EON to shift even further down the lighthearted route they had dabled with in YOLT, combined with a reliable, established lead. Connery was almost bribed to come back and make it work with DAF, Rog was the ideal man to take that on with LALD.

Had EON tried a more Flemingesque LALD - Connery III if you like, Lazenby having been Connery Mk II - with a fit and dangerous-looking 30 something, Rog would not have been cast. And the SAINT together with the PERSUADERS would have been evidence as to why not.

I agree, and the timing (coming off of the campy DAF) certainly worked in Moore's favor.

Interesting question. With "The Saint" and "The Persuaders," Saltzman and Broccoli had to know what they were getting with Moore in terms of approach and style. Of course, his heavy identification with "The Saint" was a concern.

Of course, the same could be said of Brosnan, given his work on "Remington Steele," and he tested around the same time as Dalton (post "View to a Kill"). (Side note: I can't remember if Sam Neill tested around that time as well, or if he tested earlier).

My gut feeling -- nothing more, or is that Moore -- is that Moore seemed a safe (and popular) pick (he apparently had a public Connery endorsement) given that "The Saint" identified him as a suave Bond-type to the public, much the way Brosnan was a safe (and popular) pick having been identified to the public as a suave Bond-type with "Remington Steele."

I agree with you rob. Roger was the "safe" pick. That's probably why he didn't even have to audition. Not only did have the hit TV shows where he played "Bondian" characters, but he also was finishing at the top of those "Who should be Bond?" polls the British newspapers were running. He was a known and acceptable commodity, and that's what won him the role.

I think after the "lukewarm" reception Lazenby got from the public, I think the main reason Moore was chosen as Bond was because the producers felt they needed a Bond the public already knew and was comfortable with. Moore's "The Saint" was probably the closest they had. I remember reading that one of the producers (I think it was Cubby, but I'm not sure) allegedly said he felt they were scrapping the bottom of the barrel with by casting Roger Moore.

Do you remember where you read that? I'd be interested in reading that myself, not because I doubt you, but because it's a topic I am interested in.

I just recently watched "OCTOPUSSY". Moore was at least 54-55 years old when the movie was being filmed during the summer and fall of 1982. As far as I'm concerned, he did pretty damn good. Especially since this was his 6th Bond film. And of all of the Bond actors, he handled a gun with more realism than any of the others, which I find ironic considering his distaste for firearms.

No doubt one of his best performances. He is great in the scenes with Louis Jourdan. He also has good chemistry with the leading ladies, and his scenes with Vijay were a hoot.

Roger was great at his job. Good point about the gun handling. He must of remembered what he had learned in the Army.

If Roger Moore had to audition for the role of James Bond, would he have won the part?

Strange question.

On the contrary, I find it is a question that has a home and a place. Afterall, aren't half the threads here based purely on 'what-if' scenarios?

One can also ask, on perhaps a separate thread, whether Connery would ever have been chosen for the part in this day and age. Can you imagine an actor strolling up for the part with toupee in hand? The media would have a bloody field day.

'Not only can he not run, not drive a manual gear change, he also doesn't have Hair! The irrefutable shock of it all!'

Anyway, I will donate this particular topic to someone else, if they want it...

I am not sure if Connery is the type of actor Barbara Broccoli would want in the role, so I do wonder if he would be cast today. Interesting notion.

[Guy Haines]

Roger Moore may, or may not, have auditioned for the role of James Bond, but others did at the time when he was being lined up for the part. I can remember reading an article in "Starlog" about the British actor Julian Glover, in which he said that he had tested for the role of Bond along with several other actors, but that he felt he was just going through the motions "as we all knew that Roger was going to get the part". Julian Glover didn't specify which year this happened, but his remarks hinted that the screen tests took place before filming on LALD started.

At the time - 1972/73 - Roger Moore seemed to be the obvious replacement for Sean Connery on the back of his long stint in "The Saint" and his continuing high profile in "The Persuaders". Saltzman and Broccoli wanted him, it seems, and he was available.

And Julian Glover, of course, took on Bond as Kristatos in FYEO (and, with his bearded appearance, allowed Roger another dry quip, not in the film but during a TV interview on the set of FYEO. When asked about the cast, Moore mentioned Glover and his beard which, he said, "hid a multitude of chins". Made me chuckle more than some of Roger's on screen witticisms!)

One final point. We know that Pierce Brosnan tested for Bond before TLD. But did he have to audition again for GE, I wonder? Or was he at the top of a shortlist of one?

[SecretAgentFan]

If Moore (the younger one) were to audition for Bond today I believe he would not pass, due to his lightweight ironic style.

However, the question is whether a contemporary Moore (if he were the star of a comedy-crime-show like "The Saint", let´s say, someone on "Leverage" or "White Collar") would try to do Bond as he did in the 70´s?

In my opinion, Brosnan was just like Moore when he became Bond: the star of a fun but lightweight tv show. He tried to make Bond tougher because that´s what the times called for. I guess Moore would have done that, too. Of course, EON is the driving force behind the portrayal of Bond. I´m pretty sure that they would have cast Moore in the 90´s if he had been younger.

The question is: will they cast "lighter" again when Craig ends his tenure?

[Capsule in Space]

The question is: will they cast "lighter" again when Craig ends his tenure?

I myself can't think of an answer to that question, but I think the response to Bond 23 will give us more insight. However, EON casting Craig in the first place was something that came out of left field, so maybe we will be surprised yet again.

Guy H., I don't think Pierce had to audition for the role in the 1990's. I think the studios were pushing for him to be cast by EON. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

Guy H., I don't think Pierce had to audition for the role in the 1990's. I think the studios were pushing for him to be cast by EON. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

Interesting question. I can't (yet) find anything confirming Brosnan tested again back in '94-95. The closest I got is Debbie McWilliams stating she 'considered' ten actors overall for the part (although want is meant by considered in this context is not clear - it could just mean a shortlist of possible names rather than real candidates). Anyway given their was so much riding on GoldenEye, I would find it hard to believe Brosnan didn't do some form of audition/test - if only to put the minds of the studio execs at rest.

[SecretAgentFan]

The question is: will they cast "lighter" again when Craig ends his tenure?

I myself can't think of an answer to that question, but I think the response to Bond 23 will give us more insight. However, EON casting Craig in the first place was something that came out of left field, so maybe we will be surprised yet again.

Guy H., I don't think Pierce had to audition for the role in the 1990's. I think the studios were pushing for him to be cast by EON. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

But I somehow remember that there were shots from Brosnan testing with the FRWL scene...

[Capsule in Space]

The question is: will they cast "lighter" again when Craig ends his tenure?

I myself can't think of an answer to that question, but I think the response to Bond 23 will give us more insight. However, EON casting Craig in the first place was something that came out of left field, so maybe we will be surprised yet again.

Guy H., I don't think Pierce had to audition for the role in the 1990's. I think the studios were pushing for him to be cast by EON. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

But I somehow remember that there were shots from Brosnan testing with the FRWL scene...

Hmmm. Were they from the 90's or were they from when he was auditioning in the 80's? If they were from the 90's then was he auditioning again, or was he participating in a screen test for a potential leading lady?

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

The FRWL/ Brosnan test scene was from the 80's.

[Capsule in Space]

The FRWL/ Brosnan test scene was from the 80's.

Yeah. I think Brosnan didn't have to audition. I think the studios wanted him bad, especially after LTK's weak performance in North America.

[SecretAgentFan]

The FRWL/ Brosnan test scene was from the 80's.

Yeah. I think Brosnan didn't have to audition. I think the studios wanted him bad, especially after LTK's weak performance in North America.

I guess the 80´s audition sealed the deal.

I wonder if Cavill (should he be considered again) would have to test again...

[Capsule in Space]

The FRWL/ Brosnan test scene was from the 80's.

Yeah. I think Brosnan didn't have to audition. I think the studios wanted him bad, especially after LTK's weak performance in North America.

I guess the 80´s audition sealed the deal.

I wonder if Cavill (should he be considered again) would have to test again...

I don't think they would make him go through that again. I kind of doubt he would even agree to participating in another audition.

[Ozzman313]

I'd gamble a yes, we almost got Sam Neil as JB for The Living Daylights. Only Chubby Broccoli held up the decision to let him have the part.

Edited by Ozzman313, 14 September 2011 - 09:24 PM.