Roger Moore’s Son Reopens the Debate over Who Was Really Meant to Play James Bond
Few casting stories in film history are retold as often as the origin of James Bond on screen. Sean Connery was the original 007, and Roger Moore later became his successor in the phenomenally successful film series that ran from 1973 to 1985. Moore’s take on the character was widely regarded as the furthest removed from the original, leaning into wit and humor.
That tone was deliberate. Moore’s Bond was lighter, more playful, and more tongue-in-cheek than any of his predecessors. His first outing, ‘Live and Let Die’, grossed more outside America than Connery’s last official film, ‘Diamonds Are Forever’, which helped audiences accept the change.
Roger Moore’s son reveals: Sean Connery shouldn’t have played James Bond. The story appears to trace back to a Daily Mail interview with Geoffrey Moore, shared by the outlet on Sept. 20.
According to reports on that interview, Geoffrey said producers had his father in mind as their first choice, but Roger couldn’t get out of his contract with the television company ITC. He also said Bond author Ian Fleming was a fan of ‘The Saint’ and was friendly with producers Albert R. Broccoli and Harry Saltzman.
It’s worth noting that the headline goes further than the reported comments. Coverage of the interview frames it as Connery not being the original pick, not as a claim that he shouldn’t have taken the part. That’s a meaningful difference, and it shows how quickly a family recollection can turn into a much sharper headline once it crosses languages.
The historical record is also more tangled. Bond fandom sources note that the idea Fleming favored Moore after seeing him in ‘The Saint’ is often debunked by fans and historians, since the series only began airing in the U.K. on Oct. 4, 1962, one day before the premiere of ‘Dr. No’. The same source says Moore wasn’t publicly linked to the role until 1967, when Saltzman suggested he’d make a good Bond.
Moore’s own version lines up with that later date. Apple TV’s biography notes that the actor later confirmed he was never approached, and never felt he was in contention, until Connery left the role for good. SlashFilm adds that Moore revealed in his autobiography that he was approached about taking over in 1967 but couldn’t accept because of his commitments to ‘The Saint’.
Other names have also been floated as Fleming’s preferences. Wikipedia’s list of actors considered for the role says Richard Todd was Fleming’s first choice but that scheduling conflicts got in the way, and that David Niven was Fleming’s personal pick. In other words, Moore is far from the only actor tied to the author’s wish list.
Geoffrey has been in the Bond conversation lately for other reasons too. A recent Telegraph interview recalled how he grew up on his father’s Bond sets, having been 6 years old when Roger filmed his 007 debut. He is clearly a fond witness, but memory and family lore are not the same thing as a production paper trail.
None of this changes Connery’s place in film history, or Moore’s. It simply shows how the origin story of the world’s most famous spy is still being debated, with each retelling adding a new twist. The more accurate takeaway may be that Bond casting was never as tidy as the legend suggests.
Who do you think was the best choice to play James Bond?
Have something to add? Let us know in the comments!
