It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Sean Connery
Roger Moore
Daniel Craig
Pierce Brosnan
George Lazenby
Timothy Dalton
Live and Let Die, Golden Gun, Moonraker and For Your Eyes Only are great Bond adventures, and Octopussy and Spy are also worthwhile viewing, so Moore gets the vote for me. I can't abide Die Another Day and don't have much time for Tomorrow Never Dies with regards to Brosnan it should be mentioned
That said Brosnan probably does (as I said on my earlier post) have the edge physically. From TSWLM onwards Moore looked clunky as hell in fights.
True. Brosnan is not as bad an actor as his 4 Bond films suggest. In his defence he has done other stuff that shows he can act. His scripts, directirs and co stars were often pretty weak. That said, he has to carry the can at the end of the day. 4 shots at getting it right and he never nailed the character. A wasted decade. For me, as a big Dalton fan I always felt like Brosnan was a backwards step. Roger is infinitely better on every front.
True. Brosnan is not as bad an actor as his 4 Bond films suggest. In his defence he has done other stuff that shows he can act. His scripts, directirs and co stars were often pretty weak. That said, he has to carry the can at the end of the day. 4 shots at getting it right and he never nailed the character. A wasted decade. For me, as a big Dalton fan I always felt like Brosnan was a backwards step. Roger is infinitely better on every front.
:))
Without Roger Moore, the Bond series wouldn't have survived the '70s. Furthermore, I firmly believe that Moore supplanted Connery as the definitive James Bond in the public consciousness. In fact, I doubt that Pierce Brosnan would have been cast as Bond had it not been for Moore's success in redefining the role. When that magazine reporter back in '84 said, "Pierce Brosnan could make it as a young James Bond," she was really saying, "That Brosnan guy kinda reminds me of Roger Moore."
I have, in the past, described Brosnan as a Moore clone who really wanted to be Connery or Dalton instead. And while that may be an oversimplification, I think it gets to the heart of Pierce's appeal and his approach to the role.
Thus, in the end, I have to go with the original. More charm, more wit, more charisma, more Moore!
Brozzer didn't, even by his own admission. Not his fault, it's the scripts.
I'd also say that the best Bonds imo create a character. The adequate ones just play Bond. So Connery really did create Bond, the adjusting the cufflinks, the laconic delivery, the whole star persona was his. Lazenby? He sort of played Bond, they directed him to be like Connery. Is there anything he does in OHMSS that his quintessentially his? I don't think so. Ditto Brosnan really and to some extent Dalton too. Moore did create a character, even if a lot of it is the Moore persona we got in The Saint. And while I don't care for Craig, I admit that he also has created a Bond - he isn't just playing him, simply donning the tux and saying his lines - he has brought something to the table. We see him do things no other actor has attempted.
WHAT??? His was as much a creation as Connery, Craig or Moore's!!
Wait 'till I tell the guys at AJB what you said!!! [-(
:))
How did Sir Roger become a liability ?
Well I personally didnt really "believe" Moore was still Bond when he was in AVTAK. Can anyone really look at Moore in that film and consider him a "blunt instrument" or in any way dangerous or ruthless? At least in OP he still had that man of the world quality about him. In AVTAK Moore is more leery and awkward than charming much of the time.
I love what Moore brought to the series, and he has some of the best action scenes and finales in the entire list of films, but you know me: Brosnan always takes the cake.
In terms of his movies though I rank most of them above Brosnan's despite the fact I grew up in Pierce's era.
You clearly have not seen Roger Moore lately.
I'm split on this one. I think for the pure magnetic charm I will vote for Moore. I grew up with Brosnan though, and even amongst all the hate I still think he was an excellent Bond.