The argument for an older actor playing James Bond tends to be backed by Roger Moore’s time as 007, but Moore’s version of Bond wouldn’t work in the upcoming Bond 26 without some major changes. Every James Bond actor has changed the way that fans view the suave super-spy. Ever since Sean Connery introduced the character to audiences in 1962’s Dr. No, Bond has been tougher, sillier, slicker, or campier depending on who is playing him.
As a result, it is tough to tell what sort of 007 viewers will get next. If Bridgerton’s Rege-Jean Page plays Bond in Bond 26, viewers could be in for a younger, less polished version of the spy akin to Craig’s Casino Royale Bond. Meanwhile, if a more established star like Henry Cavill gets the role, the odds are good that Bond will be a smoother operator with years of experience, more like Pierce Brosnan’s take on the part.
One of the biggest questions that have repeatedly arisen in discussions of the next James Bond star is what age the actor playing the role ought to be. Although actors like Idris Elba (49 years old) and Tom Hardy (44 years old) have had their Bond odds backed up by many citing Roger Moore’s advanced age when he gained the role. However, this comparison ignores the tone of Moore’s 007 outings. As proven by Moore playing Bond on a comedy sketch show years before taking on the role for real, Moore’s 007 was an outright comedic reinvention of the character who was goofier than anything that the franchise has attempted before or since — and Bond 26 suddenly attempting a return to this style of character would be a disastrous tonal 180 for the series, meaning it would be the wrong avenue for the film to go down.
Roger Moore’s Bond Explained
Campier than Sean Connery, Moore’s interpretation of James Bond was a lot sillier and more over-the-top than the first cinematic incarnation of the character. Connery’s James Bond was a more wounded, paranoid figure than many viewers remember, particularly in his dark From Russia With Love turn. In contrast, Moore’s broader take on the part made the actor’s 007 movies more arch and goofy by extension, from Live and Let Die’s misguided Blaxploitation elements to Moonraker’s rare foray into full-blown space travel for Bond. Where Connery’s silliest Bond elements were limited to bases hidden inside volcanoes and a piranha tank, Moore faced off against a metal-toothed assassin and a villain who planned to start World War III so he could start a civilization under the sea.
Why Moore’s Bond Wouldn’t Work In 2022
Moore’s choice to play the first winking, ironic take on James Bond was huge at the time, but it’s now almost seen as the standard approach to movie spies. Pierce Brosnan’s take on Bond already revisited this sort of playful meta-humor throughout the 90s, while many attempts to parody Bond are inspired by Moore’s incarnation more than any others. Without Moore’s sillier, fourth-wall-leaning version of 007, there would likely be no Austin Powers, since mainstream viewers were nowhere near as familiar with the character’s other inspirations such as Our Man Flint and the ’60s Bulldog Drummond revival. While Moore’s goofier 007 meant that Mike Myers could create a now-iconic comedic character, it also iconically meant that Moore’s Bond is now too comedic to function as an action movie leading man after decades of being parodied.
Why Bond 26 Can’t Be Too Fun
The Daniel Craig Bond era took the darkness of Timothy Dalton’s take on the role up to eleven, with almost every new 007 movie being as brutally sad as On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. Suddenly pivoting from this to the absurd villains and goofy one-liners of the Roger Moore era would result in a massive tonal shift for 007 and could leave the franchise feeling completely out of balance. The later Craig movies gradually introduced more campy elements and overt humor after the dour tone of Casino Royale, but even the lighter No Time To Die was still the first Bond movie to kill off 007 himself. As such, bouncing from this to the sight of Bond being paired off with a gormless Southern detective and blowing up a villain via inflation (both of which happen in Live and Let Die) would leave the James Bond franchise without a clear or consistent style.
How Bond 26 Could Bring Back Moore’s Fun Bond
Although Bond 26 can’t suddenly start writing Bond as if he was played by Roger Moore again, the series can start to gradually bring back the sense of fun and levity that the veteran actor brought to the part in the next movie. By keeping James Bond tough, Bond 26 could ameliorate some of the goofiness that comes with bringing back Moore’s sillier take on Bond. Taking the physicality of Craig’s Bond and marrying it with Moore’s older, more self-parodying take on the character would allow the James Bond franchise to keep 007 looking like a legitimate action hero while still giving him a sense of humor. An example of this tonal balance can be seen in Diamonds Are Forever’s shockingly brutal fight scene, wherein Connery’s returning Bond beats an assassin to a pulp over a few slow, hard-to-watch minutes of screen time.
The fight itself is a clear influence on both the Bourne movies and Craig’s Casino Royale-era Bond, with Connery’s antihero battering his enemy into submission in a genuinely dark scene. However, this moment takes place in the same movie that features a love interest named ‘Plenty O’Toole,” a moon buggy chase, and a pair of one-liner-dropping hitmen. The presence of some brutal action courtesy of James Bond doesn’t stop Diamonds Are Forever from nailing the playful, goofy tone of the next movie, Roger Moore’s Bond debut. All that Bond 26 needs to make James Bond fun again is for the franchise to find this balance between silliness and impactful action. Roger Moore’s version of James Bond was noted by both viewers and critics of the actor for largely abandoning the dark edge that 007 had in earlier movies, but there is no reason that Bond 26 can’t marry his Bond’s charisma and easy humor with a more grounded and brutal action movie plot that is not impossible to take seriously.
