My problem with Moore was that he never seemed like he was really at risk. It was sort of always done with a wink. One of the things I really loved about the Craig movies is that you got a feelong of his honest belief that this particular event could be his end, but he pushed through anyway and was successful.
I do know what you mean. Rog was playing Bond like he was still doing Simon Templar (The Saint). I still think FYEO showed more of a serious side to him, and didn’t have any particularly ludicrous storylines.
When I was a poster back on the James Bond newsgroup in the late ‘90s, I was a particularly harsh critic of Brosnan. I cited he was taking the worst aspects of Roger Moore’s Bond and making them a comical farce (in a boat chase in London where he adjusted his tie while under water). The producers actually read what we wrote ! I may have been responsible for the suggestion of casting Denise Richards (hot off of “Wild Things”), as I openly had a thing for her at the time.
I strongly suggested then Brosnan’s successor be a more serious individual (I personally wanted Clive Owen) without the teeth-gritting smarminess and smugness that was like his Remington Steele on steroids. I had no idea they would go the Red Grant as Bond route with Daniel Craig (although I think Robert Shaw had a lot more class and charm).