For nearly four decades James Bond has entertained both young and old all around
the world. He has been portrayed by five different men over the years, each with his
own admireable talent and acting methods. Younger generations who seek action and
die-hard adventure in 90's movies probably associate 007 with Brosnan or Dalton for
the mixture of suspense and excitement in their movies. Sean Connery...Roger Moore,
to young movie goers these are just names in the past, but it is from these that James
Bonds' image emerged.
With all due respect, it was Sean Connery who brought the James Bond character out from the confines
of Ian Flemings' pages and onto the silver screen for us to enjoy. It was he who introduced us to
a new world of excitement and espionage through his characters eyes in 1962 with "Dr.No." James Bond,
had until this point not been exposed to the public with the exception of the not very popular TV
series "Casino Royale" in the 50's. Bond was not an instantaneous succuess however among the public,
and it was only when they returned to see him in "From Russia With Love" the folloing year, that they
were captured into his world through Connery's ability to put on a show. Women found him sexy and increadibly
attractive and men envied him for his way with women, guns, and tight situations. It was in 1963, after this film
that James Bond secured himself a position among the public as an image to admire and keep looking for.
Connery's approach at playing Bond was ruthless and sometimes almost scary. Besides his battering of women, he would
also really seemed to like killing people in his films. The killing rarely had to be justified for an audience to enjoy it,
and it seems that it didn't have to be justified for Sean Connery to commit it either. Many people like this aggressive behaviour
and live by the rule that without it, there is no James Bond. Sean Connery's movies had such an effect on people, that they made
audiences forget about the truth and seriousness of death. Killing a person up till this point in cinema was a task that seemed to be
taken very carefully without scaring the public image. Here though, is a man who lives to kill people, and seems to enjoy it. Whether or
not his actions were morally wrong can be argued. I don't think that people really care anymore. Not only did they make people forget
about the rationality behind dying, but Sean Connery's Bond films in my opinion were one of the important transitions in film history. Indirectly,
the Bond of the 60's led to violence and corruption of film today, and I am ever gracious for it!
Connery left in the early seventies and took with him the ruthless
characteristics of 007 that he had implanted into the public's
impressions. A more humorous Connery performance in Diamonds are Forever
acted as a nice transition and a sign of things to come;
For without a doubt, just as he owned the 60's, Roger Moore stepped
in to take over the seventies.
What were people to think? Sean Connery was James
Bond.....Wasn't he? Who was this Roger Moore guy? Skeptical as they
were, audiences still came to see him debut as 007 in Live and Let Die
as he expressed to Bond fans worldwide that there was life after
Connery.
From the begining, it was obvious that this Bond was not like the old one. He was
more care-free and considerate, but above all else,
Roger Moore was more humorus than Connery was, or ever tried to be. Live and Let Die
was a great movie for Roger as it not only got him started with a bang, but to this day still
remains as the best debut film for any of the Bonds. With perhaps the exception of OHMSS
which we can't really consider as Lazenby's debut as he only did one. Roger went on to do
The Man With the Golden Gun, which to many people's opinion is a waste of film. Trying to put
bias perspectives aside, I feel that this movie should be treated for its good points instead of its bads.
Sure, it's cheesy, but isn't Bond cheesy? What would you call that jet-pack ride in Thunderball?...(Ooops,
there's a bias remark!).
Roger Moore has said himself that his favourite Bond movie to do, was The Spy Who Loved Me,
which premiered in 1977. And without a doubt, the majority of Bond fans agree with him. Highlighted with
amazing stunts, a great story and pure Bond action, this movie showed the world that Roger Moore was just
as capable of putting on a show as Sean Connery was. Skepticism about his character had dropped a fair bit by
the eighties and many 007 fanatics by now had long accepted his portrayel of Bond as the best up to date.
In 1985 however, the humor and charisma which dazzled audiences for 12 years came to an end when Roger
called it quits with A View To A Kill.
Both actors have long since now hung up their walthers and have made way for the new James Bond.
An "Electronic Superman in a Suit" I suppose would describe him best. If not for the gagdetry of Q, would Dalton have survived?
Will Brosnan? We are missing the old classic Bond methods introduced by Sean Connery, later copied and innovated by Roger Moore's
ability in the seventies. Bring back the classic cars and the S.P.E.C.T.R.E. agents. With the changing world in which we live, I guess no one
should be dissapointed with this equally fast changing Bond character. It is what the times call for. Advances in technology and science have
found there way into film with James Bond leading the pack. We can hope and make ourselves believe in Bond, but with the turn of the century
fast approaching, will we ever see the Classic James Bond again?, the man who started it all with his intellegence and his brash approaches?
Or is he, like so many other fads in the past, tossed in the closet and forgotten?
Get your own Free Home Page