Roger Moore is all too often accused of wearing leisure suits, but this powder blue number from Live and Let Die is one of the few that truly qualifies. The trucker jacket alone could easily have been from the 1960s, but wearing it with matching flared trousers turns it into a classic leisure suit. The suit is often claimed to be denim, but it’s a solid light blue rather than the typical blue and white of denim, and the material is most likely cotton duck canvas or cotton chino.
The jacket has a front and back yoke, turn-down collar, two button-flap patch pockets and one-button cuffs. The jacket is a little longer than waist-length, and the bottom width can be adjusted with buttoned tabs.
The flared flat-front trousers have jeans-style patch pockets in front and are worn with a surcingle belt. The belt is a cream web with brown leather ends and a brass centre-bar buckle. Similar to denim clothing, this leisure suit has rivet buttons and flat-felled seams.
Moore wears only a white knit vest (A-shirt) under the jacket, tucked into his trousers. His shoes are black suede oxford trainers with tan rubber soles and black edging. Roger Moore sometimes is without socks and other times wears them with beige socks that give the impression he’s not wearing any socks. Since he wears them without socks, they are most likely unlined.
This casual outfit is one of the most dated of the series and unlike Moore’s suits has few redeeming qualities. The jacket alone could be better worn with non-matching trousers, though the colour makes it difficult to wear. The best parts of the outfit are the classic surcingle belt and canvas trainers.
Poor Roger is missing only the proper hat to audition for Superfly. The suit is bad enough, but that scoop-neck shirt really pushes the boundary. A simple white polo would have upgraded the overall look substantially. Also, the trousers are too short for flares. Flares didn’t look right unless the rear portion was close to ground level. Well, even then they didn’t look ‘right,’ but people thought they did at the time!
I wouldn’t argue at all that this was hardly Roger Moore’s finest hour but, as J Kraus above notes, it’s the vest that pulls it down. Were it worn with a polo shirt, a standard high, round necked white t shirt or, for example, the dark blue v neck type T shirt Moore wears in For Your Eyes Only, it would probably look a hell of a lot better. The jacket and trousers in themselves are actually not THAT bad.
Most, if not all, the Bond actors have been let down by some of their casual wear. We all know the offences and, to be fair, generally Moore stays pretty safe/classic. Thanks for the definition of the belt, Matt. I’d never heard the attribution before and I have a couple of these myself as they look good with chinos etc. Moore also wears a surcingle in For Your Eyes Only with pretty decent casual wear.
And remember, hey, at least it’s not an ugly safari suit, right?!!
I’d wear this, especially if it was made from lightweight cotton and with adjustments to the collar and trouser-leg width. It wouldn’t even look out of place on a mariner or a beach or poolside (not that I live anywhere near a beach or a pool!).
People need to calm down about ’70s clothes. They were flamboyant and a lot of people just didn’t have the guts to wear it, so they hated it instead. As leisure-wear it’s a far and away better than a heavy-metal t-shirt, obese balloon shorts and flip-flops.
I agree that it’s much better than some of the clothes that are too commonly seen today. Something better than the A-shirt underneath would bring the outfit up an notch. I could come up with historial arguments as to the validity of the leisure suit, though as a whole I don’t think this outfit works for Bond.
Of course, you’re right, that’s the thing: it’s not the best sort of Bond outfit.
Yet Moore’s Bond wardrobe is so unfairly maligned (not here of course). Hardly anyone makes the same observations about e.g. that horrible towelling all-in-one thing Connery wore at pool scene at the start of Goldfinger.
There are a couple of publicity photos on the imdb page that show Moore in this jacket with the black shirt that he wears with the beige trousers in this movie. He looks a lot better with the black shirt.
I agree with Matt’s assessment, this hasn’t aged well and is probably the most dated look in the series. I prefer the green safari shirt he wears in The Man With the Golden Gun, for example, or the black shirt he wears in New Orleans later in this film. I think Moore is often unfairly criticized for his casual wear which is usually well-chosen, but I’m not a fan of this particular look.
This is bad. And even accounting for the time and the t-shirt and context which are covered by others above, I don’t think the clothes look good on Moore. The fit here seems off, or at least not flattering on Moore’s body. And the solid powder blue is too much. If this was meant as an homage to Connery’s Dr. No beach wear, it fails miserably.
By contrast, Lee Majors was playing Colonel Steve Austin on The Six Million Dollar Man during that time period. He often wore these leisure suits but looked much better in them. I don’t know if it is a body type/shape issue, the clothes, or the relative age of the two actors (Majors is 12 years younger). But this is about as bad as Bond casual wear gets.
Christain, re your last comment (“this is about as bad as Bond casual wear gets”) I would respectfully dissent and assert that this hideous monstrosity plumbed a low no other actor had replicated.
At some point in these back and forths about Daniel Craig’s and Roger Moore’s Bond wardrobes (One was the best, one was the worst, etc), we’re all just going to have to agree to disagree.
I do love that Madagascar shirt, though.
I’m curious to know your opinion on this debate. Which do you personally find the most distasteful; the subject of this post , my all time low, Connery’s toweling number from “Goldfinger” or something else entirely?
Each actor has his own low, with the exception of Lazenby.