Was it right in retrospect to change Moore's personality after TMWTGG?

edited May 2011 in Bond Movies Posts: 11,189
It would be interesting to hear from Fleming enthusiasts particularly. Was it a betrayal of Fleming's dictum to make Bond a more charming "Cary Grant-like character" as opposed to this:



My personal opinion is that it was the right thing to do. The move away from Fleming is something I'd gladly accept. Moore COULD still be serious however but in much smaller, more appropriate doses.
«134

Comments

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,686
    Moore in LALD - TMWTGG = Excellent.
    Moore in TSWLM - AVTAK = Great.

    Not as good as what he was in TMWTGG, but still the best Bond in the franchise !!
  • Jazz007Jazz007 Minnesota
    edited May 2011 Posts: 257
    In general, I do not think that "moving away from Fleming" is a good idea for the series - in fact, it is the moves BACK to Fleming in OHMSS, TLD, and CR and I consider to be some of the strongest entries in the series and the moves away from Fleming in DAF and Brosnan to be some of the weakest entries in the series.

    However, I think it was the right thing to do - for Roger Moore - because his obvious strengths were being, as you say, "Cary Grant-like" as opposed to what he was asked to do in LALD and TMWTGG, which I always found to be definitely good but not as commanding or confident as he was from TSWLM-AVTAK.

    However, I think "moving away from Fleming" may be stretching things a bit - he arguably became closer to Fleming, not further away, after TMWTGG in FYEO and OP, specifically. Few things Moore does in LALD, for instance, speaks of Fleming to me - he does more-so in TMWTGG, but not as much as he does in FYEO and much of OP.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,686
    Iand the moves away from Fleming in DAF and Brosnan to be some of the weakest entries in the series.
    DAF is much, much better than the Brosnan nonsense, Fleming or not Fleming. DAF, along YOLT, MR, TSWLM and TMWTGG are all my top 7 !!
  • LudsLuds MIA
    Posts: 1,986
    It was the right call, Moore's charm and character worked better as a buffon looking for love!
  • Posts: 251
    With respect, I don`t think Moore changed that much at all. Fleming wrote Bond over a long period, and there were many facets to his character. Moore is often thought as not very Fleming like, along with Brosnan, but I can see there interpretation as a valid facet that Fleming wrote.
    I sometimes wonder if there is a preconception that to "be Fleming" you have to be "dark and serious"....Yes you do, but it is not all about that, well, for me anyway.
  • St_GeorgeSt_George Shuttling Drax's lovelies to the space doughnut - happy 40th, MR!
    Posts: 1,699
    I think you're right, @Shoreline, for a Bond actor of film to 'be Fleming' surely doesn't just mean he/ it should be 'dark and serious'; there is more to it than that (exotic, an element of the bizarre and a strong sense of espionage, for instance, should also be on the list of Fleming-esque Bond film traits).

    The idea that there isn't any Fleming in Sir Rog's perceived lighter performances as 007 doesn't wash with me either. Take TSWLM, the scene in which his Bond is forced by XXX to admit he killed her lover (and the slightly guilty but blunt and assured manner in which he does so) aches of Fleming for me. One may argue there's more Fleming in his performances from FYEO and OP and, sure, with their stronger mix of the heavy and the light, the seriousness and the humour than in, say, his turn in MR, that's probably fair to say. Yet, I've always rated his performance in TMWTGG as his least accomplished, his least believable (in the far from believable world of Bond), because it feels uneven. Yes, there's humour there for sure (a lot of it black, in fact) and there's seriousness definitely, but the mix is clumsier than in his later efforts - by which time he was more comfortable in the role and, no doubt, more confident at mixing things up.

    But, hey, that's just my view... ;)
  • Posts: 251
    You just highlighted something very Fleming, very valid, and very Moore. Elemaents of the bizarre....love this!
    Fleming, being the worldly inquisitive man he was, wrote this angle into Bond so superbly. Let`s not forget,back in the day when he was writing, things like scuba diving were actually bizare! Let alone going to a foreign country!!
    I think Moore had a "knowingly dark" take on Bond.
    On another note, another Bond actor written off to quick is Brosnan, who did espionage rather well. Not to say the romantic side to Bond.
    It`s not all black clouds and bullets you know!
  • edited May 2011 Posts: 11,189
    I think there is a bit of Fleming in all the actors tbh. However I'd say that Moore is (mainly) the least Fleming like despite some admittingly more serious moments.

    In my view Moore was simply too likeable to truly represent Fleming and, if I'm honest, he very rarely came into my head when reading the books. Even Brosnan came into my head more

    Not that I don't like Moore - on the contrary. I like him VERY much.
  • St_GeorgeSt_George Shuttling Drax's lovelies to the space doughnut - happy 40th, MR!
    Posts: 1,699
    Fair opinion there, @BAIN123. I can totally accept and respect the fact you don't feel Sir Rog was that Flemingian, especially given you liked him in the role, regardless... :)
  • KerimKerim Istanbul Not Constantinople
    Posts: 2,629
    I think Moore proved he could do both. He did kind of stumble out of the gates in LALD, but recovered and did a rather good Flemingesque job in TMWTGG. I don't believe Moore was comfortable with this and branched off and created the charming, suave and witty Bond from TSWLM-AVTAK. He broke the mold and created an entirely different Bond was very successful at it.

    You have to remember that the sillier humor was a carryover from DAF. Moore was naturally able to transcend this and use it well during his run as Bond.
  • Posts: 4,622
    I think the more appropriate comparison of post Connery Bond actors, is how close they came to finding Sean's perfect screen Bond, not Fleming's Bond. Sean's Bond translates best on screen. Both charming and deadly.
    Moore was a decent Sean Bond in many respects but he lacked the most important Bond characteristic, screen or literary. He moved like an ox. His action scenes and his fights were not convincing. He was not believable as a deadly double 0 killer. Otherwise he was quite passable as screen Bond.
  • edited May 2011 Posts: 11,189
    Fair opinion there, @BAIN123. I can totally accept and respect the fact you don't feel Sir Rog was that Flemingian, especially given you liked him in the role, regardless... :)
    I'm not saying that Moore didn't get some good "Fleming-like" moments like TMWTGG and FYEO (probably his best performance), I just can't help but think that (overall) these were more due to the script writers rather than a conscious effort by Moore himself. I think moments like these were the exception rather than the rule tbh - although Moore did carry them off rather well. Even the man himself said re the car-kicking scene in FYEO that "although it was Bond, it wasn't very Roger Moore Bond".
  • Posts: 4,762
    I really enjoyed the more dark and serious-toned Roger Moore of TMWTGG, and I've always thought they should have continued on that note, because TMWTGG featured one of his best performances out of his seven. Thankfully, FYEO kind of turned it back around, then OP let it go again, and AVTAK tried to pick it up again, especially in the scenes with Zorin, but didn't capture the feel of dark Roger like TMWTGG and FYEO did.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,921
    I don't think Moore is as Flemingesque in TMWTGG as posters on this board believe.

    Sure, he hits Andrea, but he also has his lighter, hardly Fleming, more Moore moments that we'd see throughout his run as Bond. Examples are his grabbing the sumo wrestler's butt cheeks and seducing the belly dancer's abdomen.
  • Posts: 4,762
    echo wrote:
    I don't think Moore is as Flemingesque in TMWTGG as posters on this board believe.

    Sure, he hits Andrea, but he also has his lighter, hardly Fleming, more Moore moments that we'd see throughout his run as Bond. Examples are his grabbing the sumo wrestler's butt cheeks and seducing the belly dancer's abdomen.

    Those two moments are pure class from ol' Roger! Both crack me up every time. They mat be corny, but they never fail to spring a laugh!
  • DRESSED_TO_KILLDRESSED_TO_KILL Suspended
    Posts: 260
    Moore in LALD - TMWTGG = Excellent.
    Moore in TSWLM - AVTAK = Great.

    Not as good as what he was in TMWTGG, but still the best Bond in the franchise !!

    In my opinion the worst Bond in the franchise.
    All 7 films were laughable and a disgrace to Ian Fleming.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited May 2012 Posts: 15,686
    Moore in LALD - TMWTGG = Excellent.
    Moore in TSWLM - AVTAK = Great.

    Not as good as what he was in TMWTGG, but still the best Bond in the franchise !!

    In my opinion the worst Bond in the franchise.
    All 7 films were laughable and a disgrace to Ian Fleming.

    :)) the real disgrace, IMO, to Ian Fleming are Craig's Bond and his 2 films. Sir Rog was much closer to Fleming than DC, especially in movies like TMWTGG and FYEO. Sir Rog's films were a blessing.... and au contraire they have many Fleming elements in them.
  • Posts: 4,762
    Moore in LALD - TMWTGG = Excellent.
    Moore in TSWLM - AVTAK = Great.

    Not as good as what he was in TMWTGG, but still the best Bond in the franchise !!

    In my opinion the worst Bond in the franchise.
    All 7 films were laughable and a disgrace to Ian Fleming.

    :)) the real disgrace, IMO, to Ian Fleming are Craig's Bond and his 2 films. Sir Rog was much closer to Fleming than DC, especially in movies like TMWTGG and FYEO. Sir Rog's films were a blessing.... and au contraire they have many Fleming elements in them.

    I agree about Roger's Bond movies being very Fleming worthy. With TMWTGG and FYEO, we get such legends like when Bond interrogates Lazar, Andrea Anders, admits to wanting to kill Scaramanga at the lunch table, kills Scaramanga, kicks Locque's car off the cliff, and rock climbing up to St. Cyril's. I definitely think that Roger has more Fleming than Craig, though the latter is still good too. Also, I never really care if Bond in the movies is Fleming-worthy or not, I just want the movie to be entertaining and have that special Bond sensation. Fleming or not, it doesn't matter to me.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,449
    I don't just think it was right, I think it was needed. Sir Rog is a great actor and his performances in both LALD and TMWTGG are still highly enjoyable but when James Bond became Roger Moore again, beginning in '77, he oozed an unprecedented level of confidence IMO. My favourite Moore performances as Bond include MR and OP. He may not have personified the same Bond as had Sean Connery before him, but I prefer an actor who is a part rather than one who tries to be a part. And let's face it, it's not like Moore was the anti-Bond or something. ;-)

    I love this man and his work in the Bond films but I like him best from TSWLM onwards.
  • Posts: 4,762
    DarthDimi wrote:
    I don't just think it was right, I think it was needed. Sir Rog is a great actor and his performances in both LALD and TMWTGG are still highly enjoyable but when James Bond became Roger Moore again, beginning in '77, he oozed an unprecedented level of confidence IMO. My favourite Moore performances as Bond include MR and OP. He may not have personified the same Bond as had Sean Connery before him, but I prefer an actor who is a part rather than one who tries to be a part. And let's face it, it's not like Moore was the anti-Bond or something. ;-)

    I love this man and his work in the Bond films but I like him best from TSWLM onwards.

    I can see why, sometimes when I watch his first two it seems like he's a bit unsure of how to carry himself in certain scenes, but on the whole, I love his performances in LALD and TMWTGG. Still though, I understand what you mean about TSWLM hitting his stride.
  • Posts: 1,082
    Moore in LALD - TMWTGG = Excellent.
    Moore in TSWLM - AVTAK = Great.

    Not as good as what he was in TMWTGG, but still the best Bond in the franchise !!

    In my opinion the worst Bond in the franchise.
    All 7 films were laughable and a disgrace to Ian Fleming.

    The worst Bond? Hardly! I'd say that he outclasses the rest of the Bonds. Brosnan in TND & DAD and Connery in DAF & NSNA are the only ones somewhat near his level.

    I like him best in MR, possibly followed by OP. In the latter he is on top of his game when it comes to one-liners. MR is just amazing all the way through.

    I like Moore very much in TMWTGG (and LALD, where he showed his super amazing skills from the first second also), but I prefer the later portrayal (TSWLM-AVTAK). Although AVTAK and FYEO were IMO more serious performances and reminded me more of his performance in TMWTGG than the likes of TSWLM and MR. I think it was right to change his personality, but he was amazing before that anyway.

  • DRESSED_TO_KILLDRESSED_TO_KILL Suspended
    Posts: 260
    CR 2006 is the only bond movie most similar to any Fleming Book, which in this case would be CR.

    Yes the movie updated many things from the book to keep modern , but all in all its definitely the only film that borrowed and used the actual basis of a Fleming book and fully interpreted it into the film.

    So to say CR 06 is not Fleming oriented is completely absurd.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,449
    CR 2006 is the only bond movie most similar to any Fleming Book, which in this case would be CR.

    Yes the movie updated many things from the book to keep modern , but all in all its definitely the only film that borrowed and used the actual basis of a Fleming book and fully interpreted it into the film.

    So to say CR 06 is not Fleming oriented is completely absurd.

    IMO, OHMSS is the most faithful adaptation of a Bond novel.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited May 2012 Posts: 15,686
    CR 2006 is the only bond movie most similar to any Fleming Book, which in this case would be CR.

    Yes the movie updated many things from the book to keep modern , but all in all its definitely the only film that borrowed and used the actual basis of a Fleming book and fully interpreted it into the film.

    So to say CR 06 is not Fleming oriented is completely absurd.

    CR'06 completly butchered the novel. And the film itself doesn't have the 'Fleming touch', which makes films like DAF and TMWTGG much closer to Fleming than CR'06... Craig's first film is the least Fleming-esque film in the franchise along with QOS and TWINE.

    Fleming's novels were very much different to the Craig films... imo the novels were closer to a Moore/Connery film than anything else.

    even the darkest, most gritty novel, which imo is MR, was nothing like the overly-seriousness and overly-moody Craig films.... remember the army of Drax' men, all with shaved heads and moustaches ? much closer to the Moore-esque bizarre than Craig's overly-realistic films.....

    I sometimes wonder what novels some people have read here, because I found Fleming's work much more comical, bizarre and larger-than-life than what people say here. I don't recognize Craig's Bond or his films at all when I read Fleming. I've read all the novels many times, and I always feel like I'm watching a Moore film when I read one.
  • Posts: 12,837
    CR 2006 is the only bond movie most similar to any Fleming Book, which in this case would be CR.

    Yes the movie updated many things from the book to keep modern , but all in all its definitely the only film that borrowed and used the actual basis of a Fleming book and fully interpreted it into the film.

    So to say CR 06 is not Fleming oriented is completely absurd.

    Alot of the stuff they "updated" I don't think they needed to. Why change Bonds 2 kills to get double 0 status? And why change Vespers death to that stupid CGI stuff with the sinking house?
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,921
    DarthDimi wrote:
    CR 2006 is the only bond movie most similar to any Fleming Book, which in this case would be CR.

    Yes the movie updated many things from the book to keep modern , but all in all its definitely the only film that borrowed and used the actual basis of a Fleming book and fully interpreted it into the film.

    So to say CR 06 is not Fleming oriented is completely absurd.

    IMO, OHMSS is the most faithful adaptation of a Bond novel.

    I agree. DN, FRWL, GF, and TB also come pretty close. And, I suppose, TLD.
  • Posts: 1,492
    [q
    I sometimes wonder what novels some people have read here, because I found Fleming's work much more comical, bizarre and larger-than-life than what people say here. I don't recognize Craig's Bond or his films at all when I read Fleming. I've read all the novels many times, and I always feel like I'm watching a Moore film when I read one.

    The giant squid and the Garden of Death were the only really fantastical element of Flemings books. And since the books were now following the films at that point. YOLT was 1963/4. I always thought he had one eye on a cinematic treatment with that book.

    There little tips of the bizarre ie Oddjobs hat, the golden girl, the voodoo, Klebbs poison shoes but mostly the books were hard nose thrillers which made the little tips of the bizzare but not enough to overshadow the geopolitics and espionage.

    They certainly never had any invisible cars, Bondolas, submarine swallowing supertankers or obiting space stations or Jaws in love.

    There is a thin line between the exotically bizarre and the overcamp and cruddy.

  • Posts: 1,492
    [
    Alot of the stuff they "updated" I don't think they needed to. Why change Bonds 2 kills to get double 0 status? And why change Vespers death to that stupid CGI stuff with the sinking house?

    Why change it? Well, a sinking palazzo is more dramatic then just a corpse with a note on it. I love the palazzzo sinking. Its one of my favourite bits. I love the fight with Craig pulling the bolt out of his back and the bystanders gasping as the thing sinks into the canal.

  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,921
    actonsteve wrote:
    [
    Alot of the stuff they "updated" I don't think they needed to. Why change Bonds 2 kills to get double 0 status? And why change Vespers death to that stupid CGI stuff with the sinking house?

    Why change it? Well, a sinking palazzo is more dramatic then just a corpse with a note on it. I love the palazzzo sinking. Its one of my favourite bits. I love the fight with Craig pulling the bolt out of his back and the bystanders gasping as the thing sinks into the canal.

    It's very much in the tradition of the cinematic Bond: "Did they really sink a palazzo in Venice?"
  • edited May 2012 Posts: 12,837
    actonsteve wrote:
    [
    Alot of the stuff they "updated" I don't think they needed to. Why change Bonds 2 kills to get double 0 status? And why change Vespers death to that stupid CGI stuff with the sinking house?

    Why change it? Well, a sinking palazzo is more dramatic then just a corpse with a note on it. I love the palazzzo sinking. Its one of my favourite bits. I love the fight with Craig pulling the bolt out of his back and the bystanders gasping as the thing sinks into the canal.

    Maybe Bond leaves, to meet somebody or fetch something, and is attacked by Quantum, has a dramatic shootout/fight somewhere (with no/less CGI), and rushes back to find Vesper's corpse with a note on. I think they shouldn't have done the sinking palazzo, too much CGI. I find it intresting that people slag off DAD for using alot of CGI but in CR it's fine.
Sign In or Register to comment.