A big Monday shout-out to my main man with a license to kill, Sir Roger Moore, who turned 80 — 80!! — yesterday and finally got a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame last week. Good on ya, James… I mean, Rog! (And, yes, PopWatchers, that’s right: Dude got frickin’ knighted by the Queen of England before he was bestowed the high honor of seeing a slab of concrete on one of the crappiest streets in L.A. embossed with his name. Oh, and, also, yes: He is older than Sir Sean Connery, go figure.)
Anyway, time’s right to re-raise that age-old question to which, in my opinion, "Roger Moore" is the only correct answer: Who’s the best James Bond? I think we children of the ’70s and ’80s have allowed those older folks/Connery groupies to own this debate for too long. First of all, just because SeanCon was the first, doesn’t mean he was the best. Honestly, I’ve had this conversation many times over the years, and all I’ve ever really heard from Connery fans is a lot of whining that the guy left the 007 franchise. Well, boo hoo. That still doesn’t change the fact that The Spy Who Love Me (pictured) is a trillion times better than Diamonds Are Forever, suckas. Second, the Scotsman may have an Oscar, but he doesn’t have a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, the loser.
And third, there’s the argument that Moore’s smiling spy is toodifferent from the James Bond of Ian Fleming’s novels, which would be alegitimate point if (a) Connery were remotely close to the dour brute of the books, and (b) any of the Bond movieseven slightly resembled the original stories. (Seriously, go back andread them, they’re incredibly different.) As for the other guys, well,Lazenby, Dalton, and all the fellas who’ve pretended to be 007 inspoofs and TV movies simply don’t count. Daniel Craig is a lovely chapwho did an awesome job in Casino Royale, but it’s still tooearly to make a ruling on him. And while I’m a big fan of PierceBrosnan (and not just because he and I are homeys from our day kicking back with some brewskis on the beach), the four sub-par flicks he starred in ruin his cause.
No, Moore is the guy. He clearly had the most fun with the role, hismovies are the most amusing to watch, he carried the Walther PPK longerthan anybody, and he’s exhibited the best sense of humor about his workas James Bond in the years since he left the gig.
Okay, folks, have at it — live and let the debate begin!
Yes! I agree with you whole heartedly. I too was a child of the 80′s, and I never understood how everyone thought Connery was da man. To me, British spies are supposed to be suave and debonair, and Rodger Moore was just…it. He was British to a T, he had the accent, the outfit, and that expression that bordered on amusement. And all the gadgets! Every so often the Connery version would get too macho, or sexist (even for Bond) and push women around, or just plain rough around the edges. Nothing against the Scotts, but he was just too…Scottish. A bit of a dick, really, while Moore just bordered on priss. Whether or not that’s how the Bond of the books was supposed to be, I just thought Moore was the perfect movie version. And how could you not love the underwater car?!?
I always loved Moore best, too. He had the best sense of humor of all the bonds, also. Dalton was okay, Lazenby was alright, Connery was passable, Brosnan was atrocious. I am obsessed with Daniel Craig in general so I’m too biased to talk about him as Bond.
The problem of picking the best Bond is that so many of the movies are terrible, and therefore impact the character/actor. Dalton never had a chance with those awful movies. But using the same logic — The Spy Who Loved Me = best Bond movie, ergo Roger Moore = best Bond.
Sorry Roger, you’re #3 now. I was born in 1977. Roger Moore WAS James Bond for me. And then I saw Goldfinger and I realized what James Bond SHOULD be. For me, Moore was just too silly. When the movies played it seriously, Roger shined. But far too often, the scripts just destroyed him. So, it really comes down to the good movie-to-bad movie ratio. Connery’s ratio: 2:1. Moore’s ratio: 3:4. So, Connery wins. And if Daniel Craig continues on the trend of Casino Royale, he will be the true Bond heir.
Wait a minute… You mean Britney Spears has a star on the walk of fame and Sean Connery doesn’t? Something is wrong with this world.
I know I’m betraying my generation and all, but I have to disagree. “View to a Kill” was the first Bond movie I ever saw in the theater, so I have a soft spot for Moore. But he’s just too *smooth* for my taste…the Moore-era Bond movies are great popcorn entertainment, but there’s no sense of drama or humanity there. Connery let you see the brute under the suavity, and Craig showed the burden of the license to kill. That said, however, I do like Moore and wish him a very happy 80th birthday. Cheers!
Read my lips: Sean Connery was the first and best movie Bond ever!
Roger moore was and still is the only Bond for me. Never got the Connery thing, even though I love the Scotsman in pretty much everything else he has done.
Daniel Craig, for sure. He’s the first Bond that’s actually been presented as a somewhat complex character. That wins it in my book.
Moore looks kinda like William Shatner in that picture.
Luke, I wouldn’t be too concerned that Britney has a star and Connery doesn’t. In order for someone to get a star someone has to pay to make it happen. It could be that Britney paid for her own star, which is why she got one so soon. There are plenty of people who “deserve” stars who haven’t gotten one yet.
Even though I looooooove Pierce Brosnan and grew up watching the Roger Moore Bond movies…. I’m going to have to go with Daniel Craig, because I think that in the long run, he’s going to be everyone’s #1 Bond.
Pierce Brosnan is the only one for the job. He’s the best looking, the sexiest, he can be cruel and he can be caring. No one does it better!
Randomly, the first Bond film I saw all the way through was On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. So, I’ll always have a soft spot for George Lazenby. The dude got shafted.
Moore did for Bond what Adam West did for Batman…nearly destroyed him. And From Russia with Love and On Her Majesty’s Secret Service very closely resemble the books, which is why they are the two best Bond movies. Casino Royale is incredible and so is Daniel Craig, but we will only be able to wait and see if it stands the test of time like FRWL or OHMSS.
My vote goes for Timothy Dalton, based on “the Living Daylights”. IMHO, License to Kill was not a James Bond movie.
Dalton, a Shakespearian actor played Bond to match the literary character. In the books Bond was cold and uncaring. Dalton fit this perfectly. His campy scenes with the cello were top notch, as was his escape from the east.
His movie took place largely in Afghanistan and dealt with the Mujahadin (which would evolve into the Taliban post Soviet invasion). Meant to be a reflection of the end of the reheated cold war, it ironically dealt with a modern topic that’s still relevant today. Few Bond movies have that element of realism and relevance.
As for those who say “roger moore”, I feel sorry for you. His only good movie was “For your Eyes Only”. Two of his films were remakes of “You Only Live Twice”, two were regarded as the worst Bonds ever (Octopussy N View to a Kill), and the less said of “Bond in Harlem” or “flying car and Sgt. Pepper” the better.