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
I love Moore but some might say he is easily the worst as he set in motion the idea that Bond should be an unflappable posh playboy. Without him there would be no Brosnan.
That's not what bothered me about Moore's take on the character; what got in my way of really enjoying what he was doing is what I saw as his tremendous softening of the character. He could deliver a great line, but I didn't believe he could stand up to a stiff wind much of the time.
One thing that I've sometimes I've had issues with regarding Moore is that I occasionally felt I was watching Moore first and Bond second.
Maybe its because of the way Brosnan looks...in which case call me shallow...but there were moments which made me say "Bond" in my head.
Same goes for DC.
I'd add Brosnan was the one and only that truly rushed to save his own skin (a bit Dalton in LTK) And thing absent before, much with Moore, (quite with Dalton) due to "Bond always wins" behaviour "and never struggled".
Exactly.
My view of Brosnan is less that he was paying homage to Sean and Roger and rather that he just didn't know what he wanted to achieve. His only goal was to avoid being another Dalton, and it showed...
Good thing for him he could act. But even that took a back seat when he played in badly written Bond movies (his last 3 outings).
So, I'd take Sir Roger any day of the week, any week of the year.
The Man With the Golden Gun>Tomorrow Never Dies
The World is Not Enough>The Spy Who Loved Me
Moonraker>Die Another Day
It's a tie for me as well.
Brosnan was young & even better looking (& great hair), with leftover credit from Remington Steele.
Roger did a more personalised Bond, realising the finer qualities of the character in favour of the less redeeming.
IMO Pierce did a better Bond, more human, more apt to be volatile or emotional. More ready to kill in a moment.
Whoah, that's IT! You nailed his weakness. But with average non-hardcore fans it was also his strength IMO.
Moore's strength was being more family-friendly. No real 'edge' to speak of compared to other Bonds.
Exactly. Quite honestly if Brosnan had been more original he may have had a shot of being ranked higher in my favorite Bonds, but he just didn't do enough to make himself feel more different than the other 5. Regardless, he's a better James Bond than Moore just for the character's sake. I don't dislike either at all; I enjoy all 6 Bond actors to some extent. If Brosnan had gotten a couple more great Bond films after GE, he probably would be more well-liked.
while Brosnan's first two outings were certainly better than his last two, I never got the impression that he took the role by the horns and made it his own - he gave solid performances in each one of his films - and each of those films shortcomings or problems were never solely Pierce's fault... but I never felt like he brought that intangible quality that made his Bond stand out from others... i think if they found a steady direction for him to go towards, it could've worked out better - it felt like he was stuck in this limbo (much like his films at the time) where it was like they were going "do we make this serious? do we go with more action? do we make this more emotional? do we lighten things up?"... during his run, it felt like they used Broz as a guinea pig and they threw a bunch of crap at the wall to see what would stick..... by the end, obviously Brosnan was starting to find his rhythm, but by then it was too little too late..... but he did a fine job, and i enjoyed his tenure (sans one film).. but i couldn't put him above Moore - Moore just has too many classic moments..
LALD < GE
TMWTGG < TND
TSWLM > TWINE
MR < DAD
Brosnan still wins, but three of Moore's best, FYEO-AVTAK, aren't accounted for, obviously, so it's not exactly fair.
i truly don't dislike any of the Bonds... i try not to get caught up in the whole 'i have to like this guy more than this one'.. it seems like sometimes as fans, in order to prove how much we are fans of something we have to start hating things about it..... (ie: Star Wars, Indiana Jones or any other big film franchise, or general fandom).. and as I get older (going to be 30 this year - boy oh boy i am such an old man).. but i tend to dial back hatred on such things - and save it for stuff that really matters lol.... like war, politics, justin bieber - things like that...... when it comes to Bond I went through that stage where i was like "F Pierce, his movies suck!" or "Connery all the way, everything else is garbage." and i felt like i was trying to conform to popular consensus............ i finally just had enough of playing to one side or the other - i got tired of trying to view everything with blinders on, that it was preventing me from being able to sit back and enjoy a movie for what it is - entertainment....... bottom line, no one knows what you like better than you, so stick to your guns - but never be afraid to change your mind..
I guess we wear the same "blinders". I would even rather watch MR than GE. There you have me, totally biased against bad Bond performance and poor films without neither artistic credits nor entertainment value.
Did I mention that Moore wins this one for me?
The two things I think MR does legitimately have over GE are the soundtrack and the cinematography (the strongest aspects of the film).
I still think that Moore's weakest Bond performances are MR and GG.
I have to confess too I don't like Rog as much in The Saint (from what I've seen of it). Its that smirk he does that gets to me a little.
He certainly seems to be the actor that embraces playing Bond the most. All the others (including Dan) seem to want to distance themselves from it and will only comfortably discuss the role on special occasions. I get the feeling Moore would happily talk about it over lunch and I like him for that.
not sure if this was meant as a dig or not... hard to tell...
i didn't mean offense to anyone on here by saying that, nor did i suggest that anyone who sees things from a different p.o.v as wearing "blinders" - i was only speaking in regards to myself.... sometimes i'd get a bit too focused on one thing, or trying to think one way, that i didn't look at the whole picture - hence "blinders"..
sorry if you felt that it was a way of speaking down.