Why did they not replace Roger Moore in 1980?

17891113

Comments

  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    1. Sean
    2. Dan
    3. Roger
    4. Tim
    5. Pierce
    6. George

    For me


  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    aspie wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Did Dalts ever do a screen test before being cast?

    Yes they did a test per John Glen's book for TLD to show studio. Tim was considered for FYEO.

    http://crawleyscastingcalls.com/index.php/component/movies/index.php?option=com_movies&Itemid=67&id=14&lettre=BOND

    According to the press back then, their first choice was Sean Connery in FYEO. But he declined. According to the press back then, like I already mentioned.

    Just like when Brosnan was about to be names Bond on The Living Daylights and then Remington Steele was picked up at the 11th hour and Pierce contractually had to stick with Remington Steele and then wait his turn. Just think if Remington Steele Bond would have gone off in whole other direction.
  • Posts: 12,526
    With the benefit of hindsight it is a good job they didn't, seeing as FYEO was probably his best performance as Bond?
  • ml94ml94 Finland
    Posts: 88
    For me:

    1. Pierce
    2. Sean
    3. Roger
    4. Timothy (VERY UNDERRATED).




    5. Lazenby
    6. Craig
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    RogueAgent wrote: »
    With the benefit of hindsight it is a good job they didn't, seeing as FYEO was probably his best performance as Bond?

    So true, and having MR as his vanishing number would have been a bit cringeworthy.


    (Hmmm...AVTAK... ) :|
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    But moonraker made money, same as die another day made money with the same tone and far out shit. Many of us just expected pierce to come back in 2004 the same way Moore did in 81 to bring it back to earth
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,208
    [quote
    According to the press back then, their first choice was Sean Connery in FYEO. But he declined. According to the press back then, like I already mentioned. [/quote]

    Was the intent to bring Connery back in 1980 or film FYEO back when he was still in the fold?

  • Posts: 11,189
    RogueAgent wrote: »
    With the benefit of hindsight it is a good job they didn't, seeing as FYEO was probably his best performance as Bond?

    So true, and having MR as his vanishing number would have been a bit cringeworthy.


    (Hmmm...AVTAK... ) :|

    Agreed. I think MR would have been a tad more dignified a send off than AVTAK. At least that film didn't end on crude jokes about dropping soap in the shower.
  • Posts: 15,117
    FYEO would have been the perfect first Bond movie for a new actor. But I don't think anybody else than Rog could have pulled off OP, especially the bomb scene.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    We could have had James Brolin . ;)
  • Posts: 15,117
    I could have pictured Ray Lonnen as Bond in FYEO.
  • edited February 2015 Posts: 2,341
    They tested many actors and were impressed with Dalton but he was unavaliable, (James Brolin , and Sam Neill all sucked) so with time running out they persuaded Moore to strap on the Walther for another outing.
    Sa
  • Posts: 15,117
    OHMSS69 wrote: »
    They tested many actors and were impressed with Dalton but he was unavaliable, (James Brolin , and Sam Neill all sucked) so with time running out they persuaded Moore to strap on the Walther for another outing.
    Sa

    I thought Sam Neil had impressed everyone but Cubby.
  • edited February 2015 Posts: 1,552


    "All of us were impressed with Sam Neill"
  • edited February 2015 Posts: 11,189
    yeah it's a shame they didn't Grant him the role ;)

    Imagine if he'd done Goldeneye and M had called him a dinosaur :))
  • Posts: 15,117
    JCRendle wrote: »


    "All of us were impressed with Sam Neill"

    I think he sounds like Brosnan. I have to say, I am not impressed. Great actor. But not Bond. Not in this scene anyway.
  • edited February 2015 Posts: 11,189
    It's the way he breathes in before he says "Bond (pause) James Bond". Brosnan did that. EMPHASIS.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    yes, they have the same delivery. ;)
  • Posts: 11,189
    They're both quite showy. Heyy I'm Bond and I want you to know it.
  • Posts: 15,117
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    They're both quite showy. Heyy I'm Bond and I want you to know it.

    Big mistake. Big, big mistake. The icon before the character. James Bond does not know who/what he is to us. He lives in a world where there are no Bond movies, no Bond novels. He would not be conscious of what he represents.
  • Posts: 2,341
    Sam Neil is good looking and has a flair of sophistication but he's just not Bond. He might have made a good villain (perhaps Khan in OP or maybe even Trevellyn in GE) but I have to agree with the earlier comments: He's just not Bond.
  • Posts: 11,189
    I saw him recently in A Long Way Down incidentally, also starring Pierce.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,716
    Ludovico wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    They're both quite showy. Heyy I'm Bond and I want you to know it.

    Big mistake. Big, big mistake. The icon before the character. James Bond does not know who/what he is to us. He lives in a world where there are no Bond movies, no Bond novels. He would not be conscious of what he represents.

    He still managed to recognize his own theme song in OP. :))
  • Posts: 1,310
    Ludovico wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    They're both quite showy. Heyy I'm Bond and I want you to know it.

    Big mistake. Big, big mistake. The icon before the character. James Bond does not know who/what he is to us. He lives in a world where there are no Bond movies, no Bond novels. He would not be conscious of what he represents.

    He still managed to recognize his own theme song in OP. :))
    Not a fan of the goofiness in Moore's films, but for some unexplained reason, I've always really liked that.

    Concerning the topic, we're all aware that many other actors were being looked at and even Moore himself was considering leaving after Moonraker. But the money was there for Moore, and he had a very large fan base that were paying to see his films. I think a lot of us can agree that Sir Rog hung around for too long, but when the money was rolling in, why not keep him? It wasn't even until AVTAK that the box office started to drag, but even still the film was a worldwide financial success. Whatever your opinion on Moore's Bond, one can't deny his films were constant moneymakers.
  • Posts: 15,117
    SJK91 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    They're both quite showy. Heyy I'm Bond and I want you to know it.

    Big mistake. Big, big mistake. The icon before the character. James Bond does not know who/what he is to us. He lives in a world where there are no Bond movies, no Bond novels. He would not be conscious of what he represents.

    He still managed to recognize his own theme song in OP. :))
    Not a fan of the goofiness in Moore's films, but for some unexplained reason, I've always really liked that.

    Concerning the topic, we're all aware that many other actors were being looked at and even Moore himself was considering leaving after Moonraker. But the money was there for Moore, and he had a very large fan base that were paying to see his films. I think a lot of us can agree that Sir Rog hung around for too long, but when the money was rolling in, why not keep him? It wasn't even until AVTAK that the box office started to drag, but even still the film was a worldwide financial success. Whatever your opinion on Moore's Bond, one can't deny his films were constant moneymakers.

    As I said I am of two minds about when Roger Moore should have retired. FYEO would have been the perfect first Bond movie for a new actor, maybe more than LALD and TLD. Then on the other hand, I cannot see anyone but Moore pulling OP convincingly. In AVTAK Moore was too old, but AVTAK as a first movie for a new Bond would have been terrible unless drastically changed and Moore does bring some qualities to it.
  • edited February 2015 Posts: 2,015
    DrGorner wrote: »
    We could have had James Brolin . ;)

    When the sparring partner acts more convincingly, there's a problem IMO :)

  • edited February 2015 Posts: 2,015
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Big mistake. Big, big mistake. The icon before the character. James Bond does not know who/what he is to us. He lives in a world where there are no Bond movies, no Bond novels. He would not be conscious of what he represents.

    But you can go also full meta-throttle with that, like in DAF or AVTAK ("That's him ?" "Thats" you?"): note this was the last official outing of Connery and Moore : the actor before the icon, somehow.

    But the most subtle hin there is a "Bond world" outside the norma world, IMO, was in LTK, when we have a made-for-TV-villain thrown into the Bond world. He just can't believe Bond can do water-skiing behind a plane to escape, Milton Krest must be lying.

    Mendes went a bit that way with the totally "illogical" DB5 but didn't acknowledge it fully. In Moore times, they acknowledged it "a lot". It's a pity Glen is labeled a yes-man while he takes full responsibility, and Mendes an author while he doesn't :)
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Sam Neill as James Bond is just silly.
  • edited February 2015 Posts: 15,117
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Big mistake. Big, big mistake. The icon before the character. James Bond does not know who/what he is to us. He lives in a world where there are no Bond movies, no Bond novels. He would not be conscious of what he represents.

    But you can go also full meta-throttle with that, like in DAF or AVTAK ("That's him ?" "Thats" you?"): note this was the last official outing of Connery and Moore : the actor before the icon, somehow.

    But the most subtle hin there is a "Bond world" outside the norma world, IMO, was in LTK, when we have a made-for-TV-villain thrown into the Bond world. He just can't believe Bond can do water-skiing behind a plane to escape, Milton Krest must be lying.

    Mendes went a bit that way with the totally "illogical" DB5 but didn't acknowledge it fully. In Moore times, they acknowledged it "a lot". It's a pity Glen is labeled a yes-man while he takes full responsibility, and Mendes an author while he doesn't :)

    One of the flaws of both DAF and AVTAK. But anyway, Sam Neill sounded like an icon, not a character. Which is strange, as I thought he would have been able to pull it off easily. Not sure his face or body could have worked as Bond, but I always thought his acting and his delivery of lines would.
  • Posts: 15,117
    I cannot get over how disappointed I was about Sam Neill's delivery. really I thought he would be far better than that.
Sign In or Register to comment.