Home › Bond Movies › Actors
Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
Who is more Fleming-esque? Moore v. Brosnan
I am a huge Brosnan supporter, and I like Roger Moore as Bond enough to appreciate what he has done for the series.
Brosnan and Moore, as I have observed over my 4 years on MI6, are often looked on upon as the 2 campiest Bond actors. I'd agree with Moore, not so much Brosnan.
I think Moore was very Fleming-esque in LALD. After that he made the campiest Bond films the series has ever seen (I'm not saying they're bad) until FYEO when he gave his most serious performance since LALD.
Brosnan's performance in Goldeneye was very "Flemingy." I wouldn't say his next few films were necessarily campy at all. Yes, puns were very abundant, but me thinks that doesn't make a film campy. Brosnan's performance in DAD was very good. The film, well, you know how that was.
I know this isn't a very well thought out and explained post, but I guess I don't really know how to explain myself in why I think Brosnan was, overall, closer to Fleming than Moore.
I guess I really just want to hear your guys' thoughts. Who was closer to Fleming's Bond, Moore or Brosnan?
TGJB
P.S. Mods- Poll?
Brosnan and Moore, as I have observed over my 4 years on MI6, are often looked on upon as the 2 campiest Bond actors. I'd agree with Moore, not so much Brosnan.
I think Moore was very Fleming-esque in LALD. After that he made the campiest Bond films the series has ever seen (I'm not saying they're bad) until FYEO when he gave his most serious performance since LALD.
Brosnan's performance in Goldeneye was very "Flemingy." I wouldn't say his next few films were necessarily campy at all. Yes, puns were very abundant, but me thinks that doesn't make a film campy. Brosnan's performance in DAD was very good. The film, well, you know how that was.
I know this isn't a very well thought out and explained post, but I guess I don't really know how to explain myself in why I think Brosnan was, overall, closer to Fleming than Moore.
I guess I really just want to hear your guys' thoughts. Who was closer to Fleming's Bond, Moore or Brosnan?
TGJB
P.S. Mods- Poll?
^ 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
To be honest...
Neither
Both take the Bond character as far away from Fleming novels as you could possibly take them. They are campy portrayals with flippant oneliners and an absence of the feeling as Bond as a human being. They both waltz through their adventures like a bon viveur flicking switches and smirking their way across adventures.
Nothing wrong with that, lots of people like that. But it is not Fleming.
If a CO2 speargun was pointed at me and I had to chose then I would pick Rog as he simply had more Fleming elements to his stories ie Colombo in FYEO, the Fillet of Soul in LALD and Sotheby's in OP.
But compared with Craig, Connery and especially Dalton there isnt much of Flemings portrayal in there.
Here's a detailed list of when Brosnan was Flemingesque:
Brosnan has 0 moments that could be in a decent Bond novel, while Moore has many to count for.
You look at LALD, TMWTGG, FRWL, and certain aspects of OP and you'll see veins of Fleming's character.
Brosnan.. well not so much for him, unfortunately. Not even Goldeneye, revered by many as his crown jewel.
I'm new here (relatively; less than a year). If you remember older threads that you liked, or other topics, why not re-introduce them for the rest of us? Or come up with something suitable yourself?
Also, when reading Fleming Moore was the one I pictured in my head the least. Although I will admit Moore had SOME Fleming in his stories whereas Brosnan had virtually none.
However Brosnan just seems a bit more...arrogant and cocky to me. Traits associated with the original Bond.
That and he looks a bit more like how Bond is described.
Brosnan (but only by a hair).
I agree with @jaguar007. Brosnan did give us a couple of interesting moments that seemed to go back to Fleming. Moore was mostly Roger Moore, which, btw, isn't necessarily a bad thing!
Poll added!
I must admit thats the conclusion I've formed. With Rog, as cool as he was, I sometimes felt he was "Roger Moore" first and "James Bond" second. With Brosnan I didn't feel that as much.
Both are much closer to Fleming than Craig, IMO. For me Craig is the least Flemingesque.
** Before I get blasted : this is only my honest opinion, so no need to go bananas because you don't agree with me. **
I think Brosnan has some Flemingesque moments, and Moore maybe ... well, it's hard to say. I do love Roger's Bond, I don't necessarily immediately think of the Bond I read in the Fleming novels when I see him, though.
As for GE, here things are quite the opposite IMO. The film itself is great, so Brosnan's somewhat juvenile first outing gets an easy pass.
I would rank his performances as follows:
1) TND
2) DAD
3) GE
4) TWINE
By comparison, here's how I rank the Brosnan films:
1) GE
2) TND
3) DAD
4) TWINE
As for TMWTGG, that's up next on my Bondathon. Whether it will follow in the footsteps of OHMSS and receive a boost up my list remains to be seen.
WRT Brosnan,he was just bloody awful,however he had to deliver those one liners and puns that the writers had penned.I have no faith in Purviss and Wade.I am not sure why they have decided to persist with these two palukas for over a decade.
Brozza does have charisma. He wouldn't have been as well received if he didn't.
Agreed - in fact, he had so much charisma (or at least a certain type) that he could get away with a lot of things that would make an audience groan if it were a different actor. I think the same thing about Moore. Regardless of how much I rate their Bonds (I don't) they were both very charismatic and charming and related well to the audience at large.
As for which actor's performance is more Flemingesque, well...depends on how you define Flemingesque. I just finished reading all of the Fleming books (and Colonel Sun) and it was surprising to me how different they were from how I remembered them. The Bond of the books is someone who hates killing and violence, questions who are the good guys and who are the bad guys, is a romantic and even a bit poetic and philosophical at times, and is (depending on the book!) racist, sexist, and homophobic.
Setting all of the above aside, there are two traits which read huge in Fleming's Bond that very few of the actors have ever captured. The first is that Bond is not a supremely confident superhero who swaggers around like many of the actors. This really eliminates Brosnan, Moore, (although he had his moments of vulnerability), Craig, and Connery (although again, he had a few moments early on). Dalton and especially Lazenby captured this - I always find Lazenby the most "human" Bond. He's well trained and pushes himself hard but he makes mistakes. In fact, one of my favourite moments in the series is right after he's captured at Piz Gloria and Blofeld is lecturing him. Lazenby looks furious with himself at being captured. I can't imagine any of the other actors doing this - although Craig looks genuinely scared and out of his depth when he hears Vesper screaming just before Le Chiffre tortures him.
The second thing is that the Bond of the books is very, for lack of a better word, casual. I remember reading one of those books about the Bond films when I was a kid and one thing that struck me was how the author said that Moore was a way better Bond than Connery. His rationale was that Moore's Bond was more of the "Etonian gentleman" that Fleming wrote (I recognize now that anyone can write a book and present their opinion as fact; when I was a kid I assumed that what the guy said must be true as I had never read Fleming). However, reading the books Moore's excessively smooth Bond is hugely removed from Fleming's creation - the man who drops the jacket of his suit on the floor because he can't be bothered to hang it up, the man who wears worn or threadbare clothes and carries a battered suitcase, the man who favours simple but well made meals (I can't imagine him ever having an espresso machine in his flat). But his manner of speaking is also very casual at times, as is his manner of joking with people. Reading some of Bond's dialogue in the books is really interesting; Moore is the last person I could picture saying it.
This is all what is in the books, it doesn't even capture what *isn't* in the books (i.e. bad puns and one-liners after killing someone).
I'll have to watch TMWTGG now that people of recommended it (I've only seen half of Moore's films; even when I was a kid I found them too juvenile for me). I think that both Moore and Brosnan captured little bits of Fleming at varying times but their both about as far removed from Fleming as you can get.
=)) , sorry Brosnan fans. That was hilarious.
Both actors had Flemingesque moments, but if an industrial laser was threatening my manhood, I might have to lean towards Brosnan only because I think if either read the books, he got more out of them.
(launches tomato at DC's head not for his opinion but for making an off-topic comment that doesn't belong in this thread and is provocative in this context).
this topic is about Brosnan and Moore, and I talked about them... how is that off-topic ?
Fleming's Bond would rather have died than grab the sumo wrestler's butt cheeks in TMWTGG.
So elegantly put, Kerim, and I totally agree with your Brosnan list, but you missed this one out:
Or kiss two dead women
Or get slapped by those same two women without retaliating
Or force a pain face
Or drive an invisible car
Or go back for Jinx
Silly me, how did I miss that one.
I'm not a big Brosnan (as Bond) fan either. My point is that neither Moore nor Brosnan is Flemingesque.
PEOPLE DON'T WANT FLEMING.
The likes of Connery, Moore, Brosnan and, to a lesser extent Craig, are popular BECAUSE they are cool and often, immacuately groomed. They are bigger than life, they have charisma and charm and are capable of remarkable things. They are the people we want to be - NOT who we are.
Frankly if I want to see someone who worries about life and who gets depressed I can look in the mirror. I don't need that shit. I get enough of that in the real world. I say that as someone who has read the books. If I want to see Fleming's character I'll pick up a book.
The likes of Moore and Brosnan are popular because they are fun to watch - nothing to do with Fleming.
The films DN, FRWL, GF, TB, FYEO, OP, TLD, and CR cut against your thesis.