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
Yeah can totally understand the way you feel I thought the driving off in the sunset in Spectre was a good way to end his bond. I don't know what they will do but they should take a page out of top gun maverick make Bond thrilling and make the audience think how does he get out of this one and surprise the audience like they used to do.
By the way, it was sunrise and not sunset. It was in the morning. ;)
Ah ok
Bond had always been reinvented with a new actor. We saw that from Connery to Moore. Moore to Dalton. Dalton to Brosnan. And Brosnan to Craig. I think some folks are just being reactionary by jumping to conclusions on how they interpret the word.
EON has been reinventing the character since Lazenby stepped on the role.
I think the reinvention would likely to depends on what's the current public demand:
Example: EON hired Brosnan because the public wanted a 90's action hero, then EON ditched Brosnan for Craig because the public wanted a gritty, serious action hero.
So it depends on the current trend.
I've edited my message, it's just my first draft. 😅 But yes, I though understand.
Funnily enough I was thinking about that recently, and the weird thing is, I actually don't find it too hard to imagine! 😄 Certainly he'd slot into the PTS no trouble at all ("Felix, relax", "Friends of yours perhaps?", "Well, if I, er, don't get you back for the wedding, I'm a dead man, certainly!"; "I always said we should go fishing, Felix!") ; I think at the wedding party he might have been less of a terrible grump and brought out the charm, so you might even have got a feel for why Bond and Felix are supposed to be friends, unlike in the finished film! "Well, er.. I'll do anything for a woman with a knife, that's for sure"
He’d also have plenty of chemistry with Hedison’s Felix (his Felix): you’d actually believe they were friends, which would actually be an improvement on the Dalton version.
I know it's a bit of a joke, and the thought is that he'd have had to make quips at every point, but the more I think of it the more I think he'd have actually managed it fine, and I can't think of a scene he'd really struggle with in it. Even if you watch AVTAK, one of the things which I was quite surprised is that Roger is mostly playing it quite straight, and by the time the film has moved to San Francisco there is a bit more grit there, and he's playing Bond as absolutely despising Zorin, which I don't think he'd really done with any of his villains before. When he's blown he's actually sarcastic with Zorin and spits his lines at him. Tone-wise the end of that film is not a million miles from LTK at times, and certainly feels like the same director.
Agreed, also the version of Moore's Bond in FYEO was also not that hard to imagine being in LTK.
I don't get this negativity. Why so dramatic? Two years ago people were SURE that NTTD would NEVER be released. I find such hysterical outbursts somewhat worrying.
Wasn't FYEO marked for a new actor too, hence the change in direction? Moore was still able to fit in perfectly, even though there was a change in direction with this film.
The same with TLD, which was originally written for Moore. Dalton managed to slot into this one too (although his performance is much better in LTK, as this was written around Dalton's strengths).
As far as we know, TLD was never written for Moore but for a generic actor (Brosnan, Neill, whatsoever). Moore was already out for a longtime since, in the between, the prequel/reboot option with a younger Bond was pitched.
Yeah I tend to think that, slightly counter intuitively, Roger is possibly the most versatile of the Bond actors! There's none of them he couldn't have done, even though a few wouldn't have suited him as much. Is "Compliments of Sharkey" such a big leap from "Killing Tibbett was a mistake"? Maybe Casino Royale is a leap too far for him, I find that a trickier thought experiment than LTK (although it would have been pretty straightforward to adapt the book of CR into a different script for Roger's strengths).
Roger could've made most scripts work in my opinion. I sometimes try to picture him in OHMSS in '69. Given his already more or less established popularity, the film might have drawn in an audience big enough to please even UA. Who knows, they could've built the Roger Moore era on that, rather than on semi-spoofs and fantasy trips. Roger could have handled the material with ease.
They’re gonna reboot. My guess is they’ll just introduce the new Bond mid-career much like how Connery was in DN.
But then I guess we wouldn't have got Connery back for DAF, and I'm sure everyone likes having him in that. And maybe the combo of a non-Connery-style Bond in a non-Connery-style film may have been too much of a shock for audiences, or maybe Roger's warm screen presence may have guided them through it, it's hard to say.
Moore was actually a very strong actor, you can see it throughout his films as Bond. It's a shame he was prone to as much self-deprecation as he was and was arguably typecast in a way Connery managed to consciously break out of.
The next Bond will be young and be Timothée Chalamet.
The script will be about opening parallel worlds and Lazenby, Dalton, Brosnan, and Craig will cameo.
Typical Roger 😊
Exactly. which is why a strong director, who can rein an actor’s personal tendencies and “ticks” , is needed
When an actor is in a role for too long they often stop being the character and start playing themselves; I see this in spades with Daniel’s performance in NTTD.
With that said, a young Roger would have been awesome for OHMSS.
Actually, good point all around.
True, though I'm fine with Laz, but if I'm going to pick someone who could play in that film, then I'd rather see Roger than Connery.
Apart from the reason that I could easily imagine him in that story, the second reason was the possibility of Rigg's casting, she made the film work, I think Rigg would still get casted even Moore is the Bond for that film.
Had Moore been in OHMSS, maybe the direction for the 70's would have changed too. Assuming the film was a success with Rog in, then maybe DAF would have been a very different kind of movie.
Instead, the campy DAF we got instead was a direct response to the outcome of OHMSS, which was seen as a failure at the time.