[Closed] Moonraker

Oi!
RM.

Is there a worse Bond?

There is no better answer than this:

He can’t act, the films are nonsense, and he’s [i]way[/i] past his prime - but he’s clearly the best Bond. If you want reality, there’s plenty of other films for that kind of thing!

EDIT: quite liked Brosnan, Goldeneye is a great film, that scene though - probably the worst action sequence ever made for a big-budget film. Absolutely atrocious - at least when they cut corners on a RM film the result was normally pretty funny! 😀

At least Octopussy had a great title and theme tune.

Oi!

You're still my fave Rog!

At least Octopussy had a great title and theme tune.

I actually think on her majesty's secret service holds up better than alot of the "classic" bonds.

The Moore films were the silliest, bit Moonraker was the worst of a bad bunch.

OHMSS actually wasn't that bad, IMO

So do you think it was supposed to be silly? I did wonder that. No other explanation other than: film production company gets handed a billion £ to produce bond film, which they promptly spend on coke and hookers before turning something in at the last minute.

/double takes in pigeon.

Moore's sort of comedy bond essentially cursed Timothy Dalton, who had to follow and tried to play the character straight, but also without the budget.

The Spy Who Loved Me was my favourite RM Bond, because of the silly sub-swallowing tanker and a villan that wants to purge the earth and live under the sea (same plot as Moonraker in essence, just a different hiding spot for the apocalypse)...

He can’t act, the films are nonsense, and he’s way past his prime – but he’s clearly the best Bond

Still better than Quantum of Solace.

Yup, utterly ridiculous. And still a million times better than Bond 23 aka Home Alone 4, death in Glen Etive.

I like the silliness of the Bond films like Moonraker. It's tongue-in-cheek.

Roger Moore saves the world in a way that is not too serious, charming and impeccably polite. That's (to me) what Bond should be. I think Brosnan did this well too, even if his later films weren't the best stories, he was a great Bond.

iirc moonraker was a rushed production to cash in on the star wars generated sci fi explosion, it has no resemblance to the Fleming written book it shares it's title with.

James Bond used to be fun entertaining comedy. The whole premise is clearly absurd.

It has sadly been turned into something which is dreary and unfunny as they attempt to turn a ridiculous idea into serious drama.

It has sadly been turned into something which is dreary and unfunny as they attempt to turn a ridiculous idea into serious drama.

See also Batman and his transformation from man in tights to damaged, violent psychopath.

James Bond used to be fun entertaining comedy. The whole premise is clearly absurd.

No, Connery era was serious enough, Moore made a mockery of it, Dalton went to the action end, Brosnan picked up where Moore left off and Craig likewise with Dalton. Different tastes for different eras.

But Moore and Brosnan were utterly, unforgivably shit, down there with Never Say Never Again. Chopped Renault in Paris anyone? Bosphorus with added sub swallowing Marianas Trench?

See also Batman and his transformation from man in tights to damaged, violent psychopath.

Adam West era vs everything (except those two) after in other words.

If you want reality, there’s plenty of other films for that kind of thing!

Who watches bond for reality? Missing the point totally.

I think all the actors have brought a different take on bond. RM took it towards a more cheesy level but that was probably ‘of the time’ don’t mind the Moore films at all. Revisiting them is A nice rest it’s from the more dower and moody Craig movies. I think Dalton was the worst bond. Never really gelled with him, in fact not even sure I’ve seen all his films.

Connery era was serious enough

You think it was an a serious attempt to portray a MI6 operative?

Declaring "He had a lot of guts", as the snowplough spewed out the mangled remains of an unfortunate adversary wasn't intended as comedy?

The biggest issue with the Sean Connery.

He was a weapons grade bellend who was adamant that knocking your wife around was perfectly acceptable.

Best q line in it though....

Best q line in it though….

The one redeeming moment

He was a weapons grade bellend who was adamant that knocking your wife around was perfectly acceptable.

So undoubtedly Ian Fleming would have approved. Respect for women wasn't his strongest quality.

That line was from OHMSS and was said by George Lazenby.

The Spy Who Loved Me

It was the Esprit that did it for me…

Roger Moore’s films were the Pantomime bonds, entertaining thou.

I stand corrected doomanic.

Roger Moore saves the world in a way that is not too serious, charming and impeccably polite. That’s (to me) what Bond should be.

You should read the books particularly the early ones

Bond is not a nice guy at all. Not polite, not charming. He is a bit of a drunk, cruel and a bit rapey to say the least.

Moore created that charming polite Bond but it is not true to the books at all.

Even the Connery Bonds were comic, (just drier and more misogynistic).

Bond movies have always been absurdist, I'm not fond of the Daniel Craig films because they try to be too plausible.

Live and let die was that last good one, killer theme tune (you're humming it in your head right now aren't you) and best line-

"Secret agent?... On whose side???

Die Hard killed off the Bond franchise when it came out and no Bond film since then has come close to that film.

Never managed to sit through a Brosnan Bond.

Brosnan is terrible. I cannot watch him. Moonraker I could watch repeatedly.

You should read the books particularly the early ones

Who watches bond for reality? Missing the point totally.

I think Dalton was the worst bond. Never really gelled with him, in fact not even sure I’ve seen all his films.

Isn't that ^^ exactly TJs point?

Moore created that charming polite Bond but it is not true to the books at all.

Was it? He was saying, read the books. I wouldn’t bother personally. They’re best forgotten.

No - As well as that I said:

You should read the books particularly the early ones

Bond is not a nice guy at all. Not polite, not charming. He is a bit of a drunk, cruel and a bit rapey to say the least.

Moore created that charming polite Bond but it is not true to the books at all.

So do you think it was supposed to be silly?

Dude. It has a hovercraft gondola and a double-taking pigeon in it.

iirc moonraker was a rushed production to cash in on the star wars generated sci fi explosion, it has no resemblance to the Fleming written book it shares it’s title with.

Indeed. The Spy Who Loved Mw even said "Bond will return in For Your Eyes Only" in the end titles, but they then decided to throw in a "space one" instead due to Star Wars. Moonraker the book is set in glamorous Kent.

Anyone one who knows anything about Bond generally agree that OHMSS and the Dalton films are among the best, but somehow people still seem to try and project these as somehow 'edgy' opinions.

I personally think the Bronson's are the worst (Moore gets a pass as the were my childhood films).

I don’t think you’ve really got a leg to stand on though if you’ve never even managed to watch a whole TWO films 🤣

I think you might be taking this thread a tad too seriously.

I got the impression wobbliscot was giving a personal opinion rather than taking a principal stance or making the case for the prosecution!

Folks remember it’s only fiction 😉

38 posts and no Partridge?

Saying the best Bond film is the one closest to the book is like saying the best Christmas film is the one closest to the Bible.

(Die Hard is the best Christmas film, in case you were wondering).

I like Live and let die

Not really dated that well to say the least

But speedboats

"I think he's attempting reentry, Sir"

Come on, with classy lines like that, how can you not smile.

I like the silliness of the Bond films like Moonraker. It’s tongue-in-cheek.

Used to be completely far fetched fanciful stuff and then we have Elon Musk with his rocket ship armada, penchant for satellites and urge to be Imperator of Mars. Living the dream!

Die Hard killed off the Bond franchise when it came out and no Bond film since then has come close to that film.

Lolwut?

WTF does Die Hard have to do with anything? It's not even a spy film FFS. Although 4.0 and it's successors have come close to Brosnan levels of utter toss.

Live and let die was that last good one, killer theme tune (you’re humming it in your head right now aren’t you)

Humming the GnR version. Never seen it, not even sorry.

Anyone one who knows anything about Bond generally agree that OHMSS and the Dalton films are among the best, but somehow people still seem to try and project these as somehow ‘edgy’ opinions.

Never gelled with OHMSS but Dalton? Yes.

I'm throwing in Gladys Knight as the best theme.

I should go back through the RM one's, I've not seen them since I was about 12, I've never really been interested in Bond films after that

See also Batman and his transformation from man in tights to damaged, violent psychopath.

there was no transformation, that’s pretty much what Batman is. Adam West series and Batman & Robin movie are the exceptions not the norm. Nearly every film has failed at the highly intelligent and great detective bits though.

I always thought Bond was supposed to be a bit cheesy and shit. If it was then it’s a roaring cinematic success. If not they failed miserably in their intentions but were still successful. Not seen any of the older ones since I was a kid so can only remember Jaws, bits of the New Orleans one and the fella with the dangerous bowler hat. Goldeneye on the N64 is the best Bond by a HUGE margin

Die Hard killed off the Bond franchise when it came out and no Bond film since then has come close to that film.

Not even close. It was the Bourne film that made the Bond films change from cheesy hokum to a much harder, grittier form. In case it slipped your notice, the good guy in Die Hard is an off-duty cop, not a government sanctioned assassin.
Having watched every Bond film from the beginning, my dad took me to the cinema to see the first couple, the Connery ones and the Craig ones are absolutely the best, the Moore ones cheesy nonsense, the Dalton and Brosnan ones somewhere in between.

Admittedly they were all pretty poor and the choice of actor playing the lead was comical to say the least. Daniel Craig was the only one who fitted the fictionalized personality of a secret agent, that being akin to a psychopath.

For me it comes down to who you can imagine looks like they would actually kill someone and that has to be Connery/Dalton/Craig.
Moore was great as a tongue in cheek Bond but not a killer (his true role was always The Saint).

The Craig films are the best Bond films (even QoS has its merits), but Dalton is the best (closest to the books IMO) screen Bond.

Connery was good but the films haven't aged well, Moore fully cheese, although Live And Let Die was a decent effort. Lazenby a good early effort at reinvention, but didn't quite hit the mark for me. Brosnan started weak and then increasingly dross.

Not going to happen (it will surely be Cavill or Madden), but I'd like to see Tom Hardy's take on the character.

but I’d like to see Tom Hardy’s take on the character.

He'd be my choice too. Very versatile actor.

I think much of what people project onto the actor playing bond is actually just down to the style/quality of the film. These are actors after all - they play the role as it appeared in the film.

Whilst RM and Brosnan were my two least favorite Bond's, I think both would have been capable of playing "Connery's" or "Craig's" bond - if that's how their parts had been written.

It was the Bourne film that made the Bond films change from cheesy hokum to a much harder, grittier form.

Exactly this. Bond was at a low point with kite-surfing (posted earlier) and and invisible bloody car, and then Bourne came along and showed everybody what a Bond film should be. Credit to them - they came back with Casino Royale, which is possibly my favourite bond films ever. But I think any of the Bond actors were good enough to have starred in that film. Obviously RM and Brosnan would have been less convincing in the action scenes - but it would have been a great film regardless of who wore the suit.

I'd love it to be Cavill (he was basically Bond in the man from uncle), but my guess would be either James Norton or Richard Madden, which is a shame as they are both really forgettable.

Edit: Robert Pattinson would be good too, but I don't think he'd go for it

Yep,

The bond films were what they needed to be at the time for entertainment and changed accordingly to perceived audience expectations. Bourne sorta pushed them into gritty realism.

Don’t forget the bond franchise is a an odd/old animal in film terms as they have a market but they have to come up with a film every few years, there’s always a market for Bond.

See also Batman and his transformation from man in tights to damaged, violent psychopath.

That happened a long time ago. Miller's Dark Knight trilogy started in 1986, Alan Moore wrote Killing Joke in 1988. Batman's been a violent Psychopath for a while now.

The Bond books are odd. Some of them are clearly "of their time" Live and Let Die has some very uncomfortable passages of descriptions of black people, and there are too many swarthy dark types up to no good.  in the same way that Dr. No has English actors playing Chinese men and women complete with eye make up and yellow cake face paint.  But some of the books, "from Russia with Love" is really pretty good.

I think the issue with the original source material is that they're largely set immediately post war (see Moonraker written in the 50's about converted V2 rockets and German ex-Nazi scientists) and the plot doesn't really translate that well anymore

See that some harm comes to him.

/thread

It was the Bourne film that made the Bond films change from cheesy hokum to a much harder, grittier form.

That. When the Bond films started using more CGI than anything else for the action sequences and lost that realism, Bourne just came in and took the spot Bond had always had. They had to go back to basics to compete and that's why Casino Royale is such a step change. Craig tried to be Bourne, but with the smoothness of Bond. It kind of works, but doesn't.

Best Bond? David Niven. Possibly Peter Sellers.

Best Bond? David Niven. Possibly Peter Sellers.

Bob Holness is the fan’s pick

Who watches bond for reality? Missing the point totally.

It's easier to suspend your disbelief if you're not constantly thinking the dialogue is stupid and the scenes implausible. IMHO all films need a degree of realism for me to immerse myself in. Some people can dive into imaginary worlds more easily than I can - I suppose that line depends how good your imagination is and how prone to tutting you are.

So, whilst I can enjoy the RM films for what they are, I prefer the Craig era bonds. In fact it seems like we approach a consensus that Casino Royal was great, so maybe we should lock this thread now?

P.S. Die Hard is not a Christmas film.

P.S. Die Hard is not a Christmas film.

In the bin with you!

P.S. Die Hard is not a Christmas film.

Now... Gremlins, that's a Christmas film!

but I’d like to see Tom Hardy’s take on the character.

Trouble is he is too old (as are most of the usual suspects). They need to go younger so someone can have decent run of films.

Of course Die Hard killed off the Bond franchise, after Die Hard the Bond films became a joke.

Those saying the Bourne series killed it off are a confusing killing something off with breathing life into it. The Bourne series reinvigorated Bond, so the opposite of killing it off.

Can't you see that Die Hard was made as a direct challenge to Bond? the thinking being that it was time for a blue collar hero as the posh secret agent routine had become an anachronism. Saying you can't compare because one is a cop and not an agent is missing the point entirely.

I have to say the current one will not go down as a classic. Even by bond standards the story was weak. The chase in Norway was appalling and so far fetched

NO SPOILERS!

P.S. Die Hard is not a Christmas film.

You're very lucky I can't ban people any more. (-:

P.S. Die Hard is not a Christmas film.

I agree, it’s not a Christmas film it’s the Christmas film!

Can’t you see that Die Hard was made as a direct challenge to Bond?

I always assumed that it was made to cash in on the success of Lethal Weapon. (Although the timing doesn't really work for that, only one year between the release of LW and DH.)

Oh a Bond discussion!

I love a Bond film, but it must be said, there are more bad Bond films than good.

For me the worst Bonds were Bronson, for having no identity of his own and this...

Mostly though, Golden Eye was okay, even with the sliding door, but went rapidly downhill from there.

And Dolton. Lazenby always seems to come with an astrix because he only made 1 bond film, but it's actually very good and strayed away from the usual rigid rules of Bond. Dolton only made 2 Bond films, Living Daylights is so-so, but at least it feels like a Bond Film, License to Kill though is awful, it's like a cross between the A-Team with a bit of 80s video violence mixed in. US made for US audiences I think.

I always like Roger Moore as Bond, his Bond was very silly, but at least he had an identity of his own. He couldn't have played him like Daniel Craig did, he was 3 years older than the Guy he replaced and in his late 40s when he first got the role, and 58 when he hung up his PPK, so we got the 70s Safari suits, 2 inches of makeup and some very suspect hair as he sucked in his gut and Judo chopped his way around the globe.

P.S. Die Hard is not a Christmas film.

I agree, it’s not a Christmas film it’s the Christmas film!

It's a Christmas film for everyone like me who hates all the usual twee, sugary sweet bullshit Christmas films, it's a near perfect palette cleanser for all of us who have to suffer Love Actually and The Snowman every December.

That said, the could have stuck a plastic tree with some tinsel back of shot in Alien, and I'd be claiming it's a Christmas film.

I don't mind, Elf though, but I've seen it too many times, same for Home Alone, I like the Muppets one, I could watch that every year. I love Muppets.

Dammit. Can somebody sort that out for me please. How do you embed a ruddy YouTube video?!

- Ta!

Dammit. Can somebody sort that out for me please. How do you embed a ruddy YouTube video?!

Your link is "m.youtube", change it to "www.youtube"

It’s a Christmas film for everyone like me who hates all the usual twee, sugary sweet bullshit Christmas films, it’s a near perfect palette cleanser for all of us who have to suffer Love Actually and The Snowman every December.

Now I want to watch Gruber falling from the plaza, overdubbed with We're Walking In The Air.

Can’t you see that Die Hard was made as a direct challenge to Bond? the thinking being that it was time for a blue collar hero as the posh secret agent routine had become an anachronism. Saying you can’t compare because one is a cop and not an agent is missing the point entirely.

Oh okay then, in that case I contend El Mariachi/Desperado/Once Upon a Time in Mexico were the proper competitors. The premise is completely different (like Die Hard), the plot is completely different (like Die Hard) and the settings are completely different but if you think I'm wrong you're missing the point entirely.

Can’t you see that Die Hard was made as a direct challenge to Bond?

National Lampoons Christmas Vacation. Now that’s a Christmas movie. Not as good as the other two of course. But then they’re not Christmas movies.

Now I want to watch Gruber falling from the plaza, overdubbed with We’re Walking In The Air.

Just for you, Cougs. Merry Christmas.