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
thought Brosnan should never have been Bond
Are you another one who wanted Dalton to stay on @chuck007?
It seemed fitting that the husband of a former Bond girl gets to play the part :-D
I'm affaid that's not a view I can agree with. Moore's contribution to the series isn't irreplaceable, imo.
Actually, I think it is.
I think Roger Moore, for better or worse, was absolutely the perfect Bond for his time. I really can't think of any known commodity at the time that would have done the job he did.
Like Luds said a few days ago, the name of the game was making audiences forget about Connery and updating Bond for the new generation of people. The 60s was about paranoia, and the Cold War, etc. The 70s was a different animal.
And Moore was a very different animal from Connery.
So while we'll never know if someone would have succeeded as Bond, I'd be willing to bet that not many would have taken Bond to the heights that Moore did at his peak. He made Bond cool again.
will always prove that Sir Rog himself is awesome :-D
Moore's actually gone on record as saying he enjoyed making that film far more than any of his Bond films.
Moore is really a great actor!
Moore was the opposite. A physically stiff, debonair, born and bred aristocrat.
There is no argument in my book, Moore was the right Bond for the right time. End of.
Anyway.....North Sea Hijack..............
\m/
There's alot said about who is and who isn't a great actor. Yet there is acting and then there is acting.
Acting 100 years ago was all theatrical complete with spinning eyeballs and grand gestures. Dalton comes from that tradition, and his style simply doesn't suit the minimalistic style required for great film acting. I doubt there would be another Bond actor I would prefer to see on the West End stage, but it's no coinsidence that Dalton hasn't had the film career many on here think he should have had. He's a leading man for the TV movie industry.
Connery however is a great film actor. Charisma is part of it. The rest can be seen simply by watching him very closely. Watch him when someone else is speaking. His movement, his expressions. It's a master class in screen acting.
Roger Moore isn't really one or the other. He had enough about him in the 70s to be a reasonably successful leading man. And also a huge, huge star on TV. He hasn't got enough in his locker though to be a great film actor, merely competant and likeable. It's near enough the same with Brozzer.
Craig is the first great film actor to play the role since Connery.
And Lazenby? Had he got the chance to forge a career after Bond, he would have made it I'm sure. But his reputation and prickly personality more or less ruined him. Glances of what he was capable of were there in OHMSS and later in Saint Jack. Maybe a missed opportunity. Only 'maybe' mind you.
It would be a toss between FRWL, OHMSS and TLD.
But it doesn't bear thinking about. A world without Sir Rog starring in Octopussy is a world not worth living in.
Lazenby in another Bond is the ultimate missed opportunity in the history of the cinema.