14 replies to this topic

[DamnCoffee]

I watched a few Moore Bonds over the past few days, Live and Let Die and For Your Eyes Only, to be exact. The latter, I've always had a strong dislike for, but for some reason, the other night, something changed. I actually enjoyed it thoroughly. I've always loved Live and Let Die, Octopussy and The Spy Who Loved Me. I think The Man With The Golden Gun, Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only and even A View To A Kill are great films in their own right.

Max Zorin is a very decent villian, and so's Grace Jones really, they're both very memorable, and there's just something really sinister about them. Barrys soundtrack is fantastic, and Moore puts on the charm for the final time. I actually think that the positive aspects outweigh the bad, really. Tanya Roberts is awful, and don't get me started on that bloody Beach Boys track. But enough, anyway.

I've always had a strong like for Moore, and have respect for the guy. In fact, this is the man that introduced me to Bond in the first place. The Spy Who Loved Me was the very first Bond film I saw. Over the past five years on CBn, I've come to appreciate my Bond fandom in such a special way. The discussions I've taken part in, the brilliant laughs we've all had. The run up to a Bond film being released. I have one man to thank for making me join in the first place, and that's Sir Roger Moore. He's the man what made me fall in love with the series. So after a lot of thought, I've actually came to the conclusion, that Roger Moore is my favourite James Bond.

Although, saying that, Sean Connery is the best, no doubt about it. Dr No - Thunderball are just thrilling, and Connery's Bond was definitely the best incarnation. He stars in probably my favourite era of the Bond series, where it was truly at it's peak. Sean Connery is brilliant and amazing and fantastic but.... He's not my favourite.

I can now safely say, that Sir Roger Moore is without a doubt, my favourite James Bond. I love him completely. He's funny, charming, and those rare glimpses of darkness really do surprise the audience. You don't expect it at all, Moore being serious is a lovely treat.

I think the beat thing about Moore's Bond, is that he can turn on the charm almost instantly, and his performance is one of real warmth. He really does understand the character, and I really love him for it. Everyone can go on about how stupid his movies were, and outlandish. But at the end of the day, it's what made Bond, Bond. Tee Hee, Nick Nack, Jaws, some of the most memorable villains came with Moore's Bond films, and if he didn't take the part, then just imagine how different the series would've been. I can't see Connery's Bond square up against Jaws?

Moore shines on screen, and is an absolute joy to watch. I have this man to thank for my Bond fandom. So here's to you, sir. My favourite James Bond.

Edited by Mharkin, 16 November 2011 - 03:24 AM.

[AMC Hornet]

Lovely tribute, Mh. You express my own attitiude exactly, and more eloquently than I ever could.

The only difference lies in that I saw DAF first, then its predecessors, and LALD was the first Bond film I got to look forward to, and I embrace Sir Roger immediately - it didn't take any time for him to grow on me. I count his first three, as well as Octopussy, among my essentials.

A long loif t'you, Sir Rog.

[Napoleon Solo]

Lovely tribute, Mh. You express my own attitiude exactly, and more eloquently than I ever could.

The only difference lies in that I saw DAF first, then its predecessors, and LALD was the first Bond film I got to look forward to, and I embrace Sir Roger immediately - it didn't take any time for him to grow on me. I count his first three, as well as Octopussy, among my essentials.

A long loif t'you, Sir Rog.

I first experienced James Bond via "The Incredible World of James Bond," the November 1965 television special and I saw Thunderball a few months later at a drive-in. By the early '70s, while still very young, I wondered if Bond would continue. I was vaguely aware of The Saint. I was aware of a Paul McCartney television special that included the song for Live And Let Die. I remember asking a high school teacher, "Who is Roger Moore, really?"

When Live And Let Die came out, I was anxious. Today, I have misgivings about the movie. But at that time, after seeing the movie, I knew 007 would continue. When Sir Roger made his 007 debut, many people -- and not just movie critics -- wondered whether Bond could continue without Sean Connery. It did. He was part of the reason.

[dlb007]

Moore was always my favorite Bond as well. Certainly, he played the role differently than any actor before or since. I've seen interviews where Moore would say something along the lines of: "We're expecting Bond to be this super spy and yet every bartender in every club around the world knows not only his name, but his drink order. I always found that to be silly and I played the role around that." That's obviously not a direct quote, but Moore was correct in his assertion and I think he made a very entertaining Bond. The one thing I truly love about the film series is that it's carried on for so long, allowing a number of different actors to take on the role and give us their interpretation. Sure, said interpretations can be very hit or miss . . . but that's what makes them so fun to watch.

[David_M]

I'm with you. Somewhere in the purely rational part of my brain, I know Sean Connery is the best movie Bond, but that will never stop Roger from being my favorite. I used to have trouble with that seeming disconnect, but I got over it a long time ago.

When I was growing up, Roger WAS Bond, in every way that mattered. He was what I hoped to be: handsome, charming, funny, sophisticated, confident and above all unflappable. No matter the situation, he could turn it to his advantage and come out on top, and though some have complained that he made it look too easy, never getting his hair mussed or whatever, I never had any trouble understanding when Roger-Bond was in real trouble, and knew it. He just opted not to fall to pieces. There was the feeling that when great danger entered the picture, he would immediately kick into fast-thinking mode and find a way out, emerging seemingly unruffled to raise a cocky eyebrow at the opposition as if to say, "Really? Is that all you've got?"

That was a useful skill for a kid like me, who moved a lot and was often thrown into intimidating, alien situations without a clue what to expect. I often channeled Roger when trying to look unperturbed and unthreatened, conveying an aura of confident bemusement and, where possible, a casual charm. It worked surprisingly often, and at the very least even when things didn't go well at least no one caught on how disappointed I was.

Maybe it's that personal take on things that makes me see something going on under the surface in all Roger's performances, something others may not see (assuming it's even really there). To me, Roger-Bond is not a "superman," aloof and unaffected by everything that goes on around him, a feckless playboy cruising through his adventures on auto-pilot. To me he's a guy who operates under insanely high pressure but copes by projecting an "I'm in charge" attitude that manages to convince not only himself but also his opponents. He never lets them see him sweat, as the saying goes, and ultimately it unnerves them. But scattered here and there throughout the films are those brief moments when we see beyond the facade to realize yes, he can be scared, or furious, or disgusted, or sad, and those moments work better for me than all the "watch me emote, now where's my Oscar" theatrics of the Brosnan years put together.

Roger is arguably the least "Fleming", least "tough" and certainly the oldest of all the Bonds. But he's also my favorite, and at this late stage that's unlikely to change. What the heck; as the old ad used to say, "Why ask why?"

[SecretAgentFan]

My Bondmania started with Sir Roger as well, and therefore he will always be MY first Bond. I remember even disliking Connery at first (I was a kid back then) because he was not as funny as Moore. But soon I found out that every Bond actor stands for a particular kind of Bond era - and Connery, of course, introduced the world to this character AND he was so wonderful doing it, so he and his era will always be untouchable IMO.

But I also think that the Moore era, while completely different, is just as great - simply because Sir Roger brought something new to the role and something unique. Probably something nobody can recreate these days.

[Pussfeller]

As a lad, I also preferred Moore to Connery. I thought Connery was funny-sounding, a cruel brute, and even a bit ugly, since at that age I had that Tiger Beat conception of male attractiveness. I found Moore easier on the eyes, more identifiable, more sympathetic, more intelligent, and so on. I imagined that Connery would have broken my arm while Moore would have deputized me. Only as a teenager did I begin to regard Connery as a better Bond, and even today I would distinguish "best Bond" from "most fun Bond". Of all the Bonds, Moore is the only one I would feel like talking to in real life.

Moore's only real problem is that he was put in shoddy films. But children rarely distinguish good from bad films as long as there's cool stuff in them, and Moore's always did. I never had the faintest suspicion that AVTAK was a bad film. It had Moore, Christopher Walken, John Steed, and a blimp. I can still enjoy it as long as I adopt the "cool things" approach rather than the "good film" approach. Likewise Moonraker. But guys like Connery, Dalton, and Brosnan can't survive on the merits of their own personal enjoyability. Whenever they're put in a sub-par film (DAF, LTK, DAD), their performance sags as well.

[DaveBond21]

I grew up with Roger Moore as Bond so he will always be special to me.

When I was 10 years old, Moore was still 007 and was starring in AVTAK, plus it seemed that every weekend, we'd see one of his Bond movies on TV - especially LALD and TSWLM.

----

[hilly]

I grew up with 2 Bonds. The Connery films were shown on ITV from the mid '70s and the TSWLM was the first Bond film that I saw at the cinema ( I was 9 in 1977). For me, Rog WAS Bond and Connery was merely the fella who had done it before him. ( In the same way that Tom Baker WAS Dr Who, even though I knew that others had done it beforehand) In both cases I have since decided that I ultimately prefer other portrayals ( Connery and Pertwee respectively), but in the case of Bond, I still have a great respect and love for Roger's portrayal. His unique charm and humour carried the series through some great ( TSWLM) and not so great ( AVTAK) moments. The series owes a lot to him and he deserves all the plaudits that come his way

[BoogieBond]

I was also introduced to Bond via Roger's films. Therefore I have always liked Roger, even though I know Sean is the Best Bond.
I think growing up with Roger's films, its the image, when I thought Bond, I thought Roger growing up. I am sure it is the same for Pierce babies, and those growing up with Craig now. I still believe TSWLM was his best performance, and he had some great films in his era which are some of my favs. His era was great, it was successful, it proved Bond can continue without Connery, and even added to it, Bond would be a lot poorer without Rog in the part(I know his detracters won't agree, but we all have our favourite Bonds, and even looking back they should tip their hat to Rog for keeping Bond going the same way I tip my hat to Pierce, even though I really don't like TND and DAD as films, can't argue with the Box office)

[Secret Treaties]

Moore was, like many of my generation, my introduction to Bond. There are a lot of fine moments in his movies, but I quickly favored Connery's grittier portrayal. Too much light comedy in Moore's films drove me away after a while and I hate the outright slapstick that plagues movies like Moonraker.

Edited by Secret Treaties, 17 November 2011 - 04:51 PM.

[Pussfeller]

On one level, I admire the bold weirdness of the Moore era. LALD is the ultimate example. If only they'd stuck to weirdly sinister, off-kilter stuff and avoided the Hanna-Barbara "comedy" of Jaws flapping his arms and pigeons doing double takes.

[sharpshooter]

Sean Connery is my favourite and best Bond, but Roger Moore is firmly in second place. I respect him. He's a true Bond legend and made the role distinctly his own. I find worth in all of his movies. I've been focusing on A View To A Kill recently, and it seems like I've dismissed it too easily in the past.

and don't get me started on that bloody Beach Boys track.

On this point, I like the music selection here. I see it raised as a critique, but Barry got it right IMO. It suits the scene and the era. We can have Tarzan yells and the Magnificent Seven theme, but no Beach Boys? I see it as a moment where Bond is in the zone, escaping with such ease it's like a holiday briefly. Sure, this would have no place in a gritty Craig film. But here I don't see the big issue, or the self conscious embarrassment. I mean, the scene straight after has Bond boarding a boat disguised as an iceberg. I just roll with the fun.

[The Shark]

and don't get me started on that bloody Beach Boys track.

On this point, I like the music selection here. I see it raised as a critique, but Barry got it right IMO.

That wasn't John Barry's choice, that was John Glen's. Barry added the slide whistle in TMWTGG, but nothing else.

[stromberg]

As a lad, I also preferred Moore to Connery. I thought Connery was funny-sounding, a cruel brute, and even a bit ugly, since at that age I had that Tiger Beat conception of male attractiveness. I found Moore easier on the eyes, more identifiable, more sympathetic, more intelligent, and so on. I imagined that Connery would have broken my arm while Moore would have deputized me. Only as a teenager did I begin to regard Connery as a better Bond, and even today I would distinguish "best Bond" from "most fun Bond". Of all the Bonds, Moore is the only one I would feel like talking to in real life.

Moore's only real problem is that he was put in shoddy films. But children rarely distinguish good from bad films as long as there's cool stuff in them, and Moore's always did. I never had the faintest suspicion that AVTAK was a bad film. It had Moore, Christopher Walken, John Steed, and a blimp. I can still enjoy it as long as I adopt the "cool things" approach rather than the "good film" approach. Likewise Moonraker. But guys like Connery, Dalton, and Brosnan can't survive on the merits of their own personal enjoyability. Whenever they're put in a sub-par film (DAF, LTK, DAD), their performance sags as well.

Same for me. I like Connery for being James Bond, but I like Roger Moore for being Roger Moore.