As usual, James Bond movies have been playing here in my country the last few weeks. They keep showing all the films every few years on one of our television channels. I never seem to get bored watching the old Bond movies that actually managed to be pretty good.
Nevertheless, everyone seems to have an opinion on who is the best Bond. In my case I have to say that Roger Moore happens to be my favorite Bond, even though I have nothing particular against any of the actors that have played 007.
There are a number of reasons why I prefer Moore's Bond over the others. Most importantly, I think that Sir Roger is the best 007, because at least in my opinion his Bond is the most well rounded person. He's the whole package, as they say.
The problem with the other Bonds is that I think they are too serious, at least for my tastes. By that I mean that Roger's James Bond was able to be serious when it was required, but unlike those other Bonds, he was capable of being genuinely funny and humorous too.
In fact, Roger had the ability to be downright silly when it was needed - which is why many Bond 'purists' can't stand him at all. They say that James Bond is supposed to be a cold blooded killer who drinks Vodka Martinis and beds women.
They say the Moore made the character a joke for being too 'campy'. Supposedly no one could take the character and the series seriously after Moore was so absurd and comical. For them the only real James Bond is always going to be the 'Ian Fleming'-type.
I myself can't see being humorous as a negative thing. What's really the point in being serious when it's not that necessary? If you can be both serious and funny at the same time, where's the problem in that? It's not like there's too much laughter in the world anyway.
Besides, it's not like it's that easy to be charming and funny. If you want to be a humorous action star, you need to have a talent for that. After all, it's much, much easier to be dramatic and dead-serious than it's to be light-hearted and tongue-in-cheek.
I mean, for example, could anyone really imagine any other Bond pulling off what Moore did in the movie Octopussy? In one of the most absurd, yet dramatic scenes of the whole series, Bond goes to a circus dressed as a clown to defuse a small atomic bomb.
Despite what some others might claim, that whole sequence leading up to the climax was really well made. I think it's one of those moments in cinema's history that won't get the credit that it likely deserves. It was full of entertainment and real suspense.
In any case, Roger Moore's era as James Bond is the one when the producers of the series probably tried their hardest. That is when the series took its biggest risks artistically and in most cases those risks paid off rather well in my opinion.
This is not to say that every Roger Bond movie was that good. But I think it's rather safe to say that 'The Spy Who Loved Me' and 'For Your Eyes Only' are likely the best movies in the series. They had the best combination of drama and comedy.
All in all, Roger Moore's 007 movies remind me of the times when just about anything was possible and not everything had to be taken that seriously. That was the Golden Age of movies and in my opinion the golden age of James Bond films too.
There are a number of reasons why I prefer Moore's Bond over the others. Most importantly, I think that Sir Roger is the best 007, because at least in my opinion his Bond is the most well rounded person. He's the whole package, as they say.
The problem with the other Bonds is that I think they are too serious, at least for my tastes. By that I mean that Roger's James Bond was able to be serious when it was required, but unlike those other Bonds, he was capable of being genuinely funny and humorous too.
In fact, Roger had the ability to be downright silly when it was needed - which is why many Bond 'purists' can't stand him at all. They say that James Bond is supposed to be a cold blooded killer who drinks Vodka Martinis and beds women.
They say the Moore made the character a joke for being too 'campy'. Supposedly no one could take the character and the series seriously after Moore was so absurd and comical. For them the only real James Bond is always going to be the 'Ian Fleming'-type.
I myself can't see being humorous as a negative thing. What's really the point in being serious when it's not that necessary? If you can be both serious and funny at the same time, where's the problem in that? It's not like there's too much laughter in the world anyway.
Besides, it's not like it's that easy to be charming and funny. If you want to be a humorous action star, you need to have a talent for that. After all, it's much, much easier to be dramatic and dead-serious than it's to be light-hearted and tongue-in-cheek.
I mean, for example, could anyone really imagine any other Bond pulling off what Moore did in the movie Octopussy? In one of the most absurd, yet dramatic scenes of the whole series, Bond goes to a circus dressed as a clown to defuse a small atomic bomb.
Despite what some others might claim, that whole sequence leading up to the climax was really well made. I think it's one of those moments in cinema's history that won't get the credit that it likely deserves. It was full of entertainment and real suspense.
In any case, Roger Moore's era as James Bond is the one when the producers of the series probably tried their hardest. That is when the series took its biggest risks artistically and in most cases those risks paid off rather well in my opinion.
This is not to say that every Roger Bond movie was that good. But I think it's rather safe to say that 'The Spy Who Loved Me' and 'For Your Eyes Only' are likely the best movies in the series. They had the best combination of drama and comedy.
All in all, Roger Moore's 007 movies remind me of the times when just about anything was possible and not everything had to be taken that seriously. That was the Golden Age of movies and in my opinion the golden age of James Bond films too.
No comments:
Post a Comment