MovieChat Forums > The Man with the Golden Gun (1974) Discussion > What's up with Roger in this film?

What's up with Roger in this film?


Is it just me or does Roger seem like a different character in this movie than in his other movies?
It really looks like he is putting on an act instead of just being the character.
And he just seems so mean and pissed off in this movie to.

reply

Maybe he was trying to be a bit harder, to make him more like Connery?

reply

If that's the case i don't think he pulled it off.

reply

no. it's not really his style.

reply

Guy Hamilton wanted Bond to be more rough around the edges in this movie. More like he is in the book. this is why Moore's acting a lot more "tough". The problem is that Roger Moore didn't like playing it that way and second off it didn't work in the case of Moore. Dalton and Craig pulled it off better. The Spy who loved me returns to a more "charming" Bond

reply

He's pretty damn cold In 'spy' too..

He talks about killing triple x's lover in an even handed way, but otherwise plenty of dismissive moments. He pushes a guy to his death, blows up the helicopter with relish, guns down a small army, and blasts stromberg with a clutch of bullets.

Moore's Bond was a pretty mean guy with a superficial air of courtesy.

reply

And then there's of course, the infamous car kicking scene from For Your Eyes Only.

reply

And exploding Kannanga in live and let die!

reply

Yeah, he's not so different in this film from Live And Let Die.

reply

I think Roger Moore was better at "acting angry" when he was more allowed to be more calm and controlled. It came off as awkward and forced (like he's trying too hard to be this big, macho tough guy instead of the charming, gentleman spy that we grew more accustomed to seeing him as) in TMWTGG because you can tell (especially in context to Moore's later films) that it didn't seem organic.

reply

Roger Moore from what I gathered, was extremely uncomfortable with being asked to be "rough" with women like Maud Adams. Roger Moore the man, was said by those who knew and worked with him to be the perfect British gentleman (very affable, charming, and down-to-earth). This is pretty much why I think, the Broccolis loved working with him and he was essentially, the de facto "ambassador" of the Bond franchise long after he stopped playing the role in 1985. It just wasn't in his nature so to speak, to play an asshole just for the sake of it to put it in another way.

reply

Yeah he seems to be more aggressive in this one.

reply

He was still coming into the part. I don't think he found his niche with the character until the next film, "The Spy Who Loved Me."

reply

I agree, the way he treated Andrea in the arm twisting scene was shocking. I'm just going to take it as he felt a sense of urgency because he thought Scaramanga was after him.

"I really wish Gia and Claire had became Tanner" - Honeybeefine

reply

I don't know if anybody else saw it. But the Reelz Channel has this show called Autopsy: The Last Hours of... that examines why celebrities may have died the way that they did. Well, in their most recent episode, Roger Moore was profiled. What shocked me upon learning about Roger's life is that two of his ex-wives were physically abusive towards him.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2202445/Why-did-Roger-Moores-wives-beat-As-revealed-Bond-star-victim-domestic-violence.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/007-sir-roger-moore-was-victim-domestic-violence-8130816.html

https://www.ndtv.com/entertainment/sir-roger-moore-was-physically-abused-by-his-former-wives-607481

https://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/james-bond-roger-moore-claims-beaten-wives-article-1.1157521

So it's even more jarring and surreal seeing Roger Moore being aggressive with women as James Bond, when in reality, he was the one who was being victimized.

reply

GREAT post(s) OP & everyone else. Came here to say the same exact thing & im glad you all saved me the trouble.

Thing is I think the producers & Moore were still getting a feel for his interpretation of Bond. Connery was more of a brute/gentleman type of Bond, but for Moore, they decided to give him the pimp hand as they say. Maybe to make up for him being smaller or more refined.

Let us not forget it wasn’t just this film but also in his debut “Live & Let Die” he was like that.
Not to anger anybody but given that it’s the 70’s wer’e talking about & the current state of the black culture at the time, given all the Blaxploitation movies of the era & such, maybe Bond was made a little bit pimpish to relate & connect to this group, especially given that “Live & Let Die” had mostly a black cast.

Honestly think they experimented with doing this to see how it would go but Moore probably tired of it or the producers just decided to drop it, to avoid trouble down the line as they probably foresaw public opinion was going to change soon regarding a Bond who regularly man handled women.

As someone here observed which I noticed too, when the next film after this was released, which was “The Spy Who Loved Me” Bond radically changed into a more genteel character. That film was also the start of Bond’s downfall by introducing a humorous bent to his personality. Which I didn’t mind because it worked well for the “SWLM” but as the series progressed it got just God awful.

reply

Moore can play a serious Bond, as he did in For your Eyes Only, but I agree w/ everyone he looks out of character here. Roger was still finding himself playing 007.

reply