› ›

Pierce Brosnan's tenure as James Bond ended 10 years ago

245

Comments

  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Happy days. I remember the day Brosnan was sacked with great fondness. And as soon as they announced DC had been cast I new things were looking up. I've found the DC era a bit of a mixed bag, but at the core of it we have a very good Bond, which is the most important thing.

    In some ways I stil feel like I'm waiting for DC's definitive Bond though. We've had rookie and over the hill Bond close on each other's heels. I want Bond in his prime for B24.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited October 2014 Posts: 11,425
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote: »
    Any thread where Brosnan or Moore are mentioned is a bash thread, unfortunately.

    To be fair to the man Brosnan can act when given the chance. Moore himself on the other hand always highlights his lack of acting skills in interview. Nuff said.

    Just because Moore is massively self deprecating doesn't make what he says true. He's English. He takes the piss out of himself. That's what we do. Rog is RADA trained and went through the Hollywood studio system. He is highly professional and knows what to do In front of a camera. I'm not saying he is a great thespian but he has more than enough technical ability, versatility and charisma to put Brosnan to shame.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,864
    Getafix wrote: »
    Rog is RADA trained and went through the Hollywood studio system. He is highly professional and knows what to do In front of a camera. I'm not saying he is a great thespian but he has more than enough technical ability, versatility and charisma to put Brosnan to shame.
    Moore & Dalton were the two really classically trained Bonds. Brosnan, like Connery, kind of made his way into acting by making it up as he went.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I'm not saying he is a great thespian but he has more than enough technical ability, versatility and charisma to put Brosnan to shame

    I did not know Moore was RADA trained. I agree completely with your comments though, particularly about his on-screen charisma.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Rog is RADA trained and went through the Hollywood studio system. He is highly professional and knows what to do In front of a camera. I'm not saying he is a great thespian but he has more than enough technical ability, versatility and charisma to put Brosnan to shame.
    Moore & Dalton were the two really classically trained Bonds. Brosnan, like Connery, kind of made his way into acting by making it up as he went.

    Connery had a keen interest in acting, especially the physical aspect of acting - he studied movement (within an acting context) and was very aware of how to construct a character.

    Sean was a natural actor. Brosnan just simply isn't.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited October 2014 Posts: 23,883
    AceHole said:
    he studied movement (within an acting context)

    Again, I did not know this, but it makes sense. He moved very well for a big guy....almost cat like...

    As I've said before, Connery was responsible for bringing the most enduring cinematic character of our era to the screen. For that we owe him a great debt. He sure knew how to "construct a character"
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    edited October 2014 Posts: 1,731
    There is a reason Connery was so darn cool on screen - using the principles of physical acting he learned from Yat Malmgren he constructed 007 on the basis of an assertive, controlling alpha male - slow, controlled gestures & movement, no wasted movement, always firm & calm.

    Look at the way he walks, or how he moves when he snoops around. His controlled, smooth kinetic acting is the basis for the character. All the rest (delivery of dialogue, extreme assertiveness) flows from this construct.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,239
    The constant berating of Brosnan's acting abilities is extremely boring at this stage. Like him or not, the guy has put in some fine performances in his career - regardless of him being trained or not.

    He actually did study acting, by the way.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    It's also often mentioned (and always worth repeating) how Terrence Young really helped Connery to create his Bond persona. That huge helping hand that Connery got (and which he was man enough and mature enough to embrace) doubtless played a huge part in Connery's success. Young took the raw talent and charisma and helped Connery turn that into cinematic magic.

    I'd argue that Brosnan (cough, cough) doesn't quite have the innate talent of Connery, but neither do I think Cambell (or really any of his directors) had much idea of what kind of Bond he should be. He was sort of left to just get on with it, and it shows. That's not to say Brosnan is without talent. When paired with top notch directors - Boorman, Polanski - he is capable of decent performances.

    Correct me if I'm wrong but Brosnan did street performances and mime, didn't he, when he was starting out? He's a nice guy and I nothing against him personally. I just think he is one of the least talented actors to play the role, and for me at least, the least charismatic. I much prefer Laz's one performance to any of Brosnan's.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,864
    AceHole wrote: »
    Look at the way he walks, or how he moves when he snoops around. His controlled, smooth kinetic acting is the basis for the character. All the rest (delivery of dialogue, extreme assertiveness) flows from this construct.
    Ha ha, okay, here's how it is, Connery studied movement because he's just a big klutz. The movement classes just made it so he wouldn't keep bumping into the scenery. And that 'controlled smooth' stuff is so affected- makes him look like he's holding back diarrhea or something. Then some girl told him he had bedroom eyes, so that why he walks around with his eyelids half closed looking drowsy constantly. And that teeth-gritting! Wow, this scene needs drama, I'll grit my teeth! Here's another one, when one doesn't know what to do with one's hands, put them in pockets. It's like he's always fishing for car keys. The more I think of it, the more I realise Connery was just a working class dope getting by on his good looks. He couldn't out act Paul Rubens. Sad that so many see him as some sort of 'thespian'. Heh heh, watch Marnie to see a movie Hitchcock just rushed through to get it over with. He realise his miscasting of this popular Bond actor, and could do nothing of substance with the movie. Of course if you want to see Connery at his natural worst, watch NSNA.
    Some loser actors fall into great situations. Arnold got Conan & Terminator...
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited October 2014 Posts: 23,883
    Getafix said:
    He's a nice guy and I nothing against him personally. I just think he is one of the least talented actors to play the role, and for me at least, the least charismatic. I much prefer Laz's one performance to any of Brosnan's.

    I couldn't have said it better myself. I too have nothing against him. I just think he did not know how to make an enduring 'James Bond'. He was excellent in the Ghost Writer, The Tailor of Panama, even After the Sunset, and in other movies I have seen, including 'the Noble House' miniseries, but his 'James Bond' characterization just seemed lacking & inconsistent to me - one minute overly sentimental/schmaltzy and one minute hard edged. He lacked confidence in the character for some reason and it showed on screen. Even the much touted Goldeneye (which I loved by the way) had more charismatic performances from the supporting cast (Bean, Scorupco, Janssen etc.)
  • Matt_HelmMatt_Helm
    Posts: 908
    chrisisall wrote: »
    AceHole wrote: »
    Look at the way he walks, or how he moves when he snoops around. His controlled, smooth kinetic acting is the basis for the character. All the rest (delivery of dialogue, extreme assertiveness) flows from this construct.
    Ha ha, okay, here's how it is, Connery studied movement because he's just a big klutz. The movement classes just made it so he wouldn't keep bumping into the scenery. And that 'controlled smooth' stuff is so affected- makes him look like he's holding back diarrhea or something. Then some girl told him he had bedroom eyes, so that why he walks around with his eyelids half closed looking drowsy constantly. And that teeth-gritting! Wow, this scene needs drama, I'll grit my teeth! Here's another one, when one doesn't know what to do with one's hands, put them in pockets. It's like he's always fishing for car keys. The more I think of it, the more I realise Connery was just a working class dope getting by on his good looks. He couldn't out act Paul Rubens. Sad that so many see him as some sort of 'thespian'. Heh heh, watch Marnie to see a movie Hitchcock just rushed through to get it over with. He realise his miscasting of this popular Bond actor, and could do nothing of substance with the movie. Of course if you want to see Connery at his natural worst, watch NSNA.
    Some loser actors fall into great situations. Arnold got Conan & Terminator...

    Please tell me you are kidding us big way!!!
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,864
    bondjames wrote: »
    his 'James Bond' characterization just seemed lacking & inconsistent to me - one minute overly sentimental/schmaltzy and one minute hard edged. )
    That's better than Connery with his walking. Ever notice he walks a LOT in his Bond movies? That's a trick directors use with untalented actors to use up screen time. And don't forget to do something with your hands. Yep. Pockets.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    chrisisall wrote: »
    AceHole wrote: »
    Look at the way he walks, or how he moves when he snoops around. His controlled, smooth kinetic acting is the basis for the character. All the rest (delivery of dialogue, extreme assertiveness) flows from this construct.
    Ha ha, okay, here's how it is, Connery studied movement because he's just a big klutz. The movement classes just made it so he wouldn't keep bumping into the scenery. And that 'controlled smooth' stuff is so affected- makes him look like he's holding back diarrhea or something. Then some girl told him he had bedroom eyes, so that why he walks around with his eyelids half closed looking drowsy constantly. And that teeth-gritting! Wow, this scene needs drama, I'll grit my teeth! Here's another one, when one doesn't know what to do with one's hands, put them in pockets. It's like he's always fishing for car keys. The more I think of it, the more I realise Connery was just a working class dope getting by on his good looks. He couldn't out act Paul Rubens. Sad that so many see him as some sort of 'thespian'. Heh heh, watch Marnie to see a movie Hitchcock just rushed through to get it over with. He realise his miscasting of this popular Bond actor, and could do nothing of substance with the movie. Of course if you want to see Connery at his natural worst, watch NSNA.
    Some loser actors fall into great situations. Arnold got Conan & Terminator...

    I assume you are joking, Chris. If not, watch "The Name Of The Rose". Then revise your opinion, as you surely will :>
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited October 2014 Posts: 17,864
    AceHole wrote: »
    I assume you are joking, Chris.
    No, I'm not joking. All this talk of how bad Brosnan is has woken me up to how bad Sean is too. I now dislike him. I dislike all his Bonds too. I'll never watch one of-

    YES!! I just got my Blu Ray of Dr. No in the post!! WOOHOO!

    Okay, just making the point that if you hate an actor you can always find negative stuff to say about them.
    :))
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited October 2014 Posts: 23,883
    chrisisall said:
    Okay, just making the point that if you hate an actor you can always find negative stuff to say about them.
    :))

    True, and point taken. Bad choice using Connery to prove this particular point though.

    I don't think anyone has been expressing any 'hate' here. Just personal opinions that have been backed up by facts and/or observations. Hate is a bit strong to say the least. I think Brozza is a decent enough bloke.

    PS: If you want to see a great Connery forgotten (and rare) flick try to get a hold of a copy of Basil Dearden's Woman of Straw. Love that movie and he's great in it. And for a great Moore flick, check out Basil Dearden's The Man Who Haunted Himself. One of his best performances.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,864
    bondjames wrote: »
    Bad choice using Connery to prove this particular point though.
    Well, I could have chosen Lazenby (got wood?). Or Moore (Laff it up, fuzzball). Or Dalton (Years at RADA so he could pop a balloon convincingly). Or Craig (Ill be back).
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,213
    Pierce Brosnan was the only actor out of the 6 who could eat fire.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,423
    But Timmy could freeze the fire with one look....

    @chirsisall - i found that quite chuckle-some, especially your bit about Dalton
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,213
    If Timmy tried setting Brosnan on fire he'd probably just swallow it ;)
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    chrisisall wrote: »
    AceHole wrote: »
    Look at the way he walks, or how he moves when he snoops around. His controlled, smooth kinetic acting is the basis for the character. All the rest (delivery of dialogue, extreme assertiveness) flows from this construct.
    Ha ha, okay, here's how it is, Connery studied movement because he's just a big klutz. The movement classes just made it so he wouldn't keep bumping into the scenery. And that 'controlled smooth' stuff is so affected- makes him look like he's holding back diarrhea or something. Then some girl told him he had bedroom eyes, so that why he walks around with his eyelids half closed looking drowsy constantly. And that teeth-gritting! Wow, this scene needs drama, I'll grit my teeth! Here's another one, when one doesn't know what to do with one's hands, put them in pockets. It's like he's always fishing for car keys. The more I think of it, the more I realise Connery was just a working class dope getting by on his good looks. He couldn't out act Paul Rubens. Sad that so many see him as some sort of 'thespian'. Heh heh, watch Marnie to see a movie Hitchcock just rushed through to get it over with. He realise his miscasting of this popular Bond actor, and could do nothing of substance with the movie. Of course if you want to see Connery at his natural worst, watch NSNA.
    Some loser actors fall into great situations. Arnold got Conan & Terminator...

    I tried watching Marnie a while back and did actually have to turn it off. Connery is truly awful in it. Utterly miscast. The whole premise seems to badly dated as well. Not Hitchcock (or Sean's) finest hour.

    Obviously everything else you've written is amusing nonsense though.

    Who doesn't love Sean's walk and his excellent use of pockets -marvellous.

    But in all seriousness, one of the true signs of a real star is that ability to command your attention when even carrying out the most mundane of actions/activities.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,213
    My grandad once said to me he was never all that impressed with Connery back in the 60s and much preferred him once he got older.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,864
    Getafix wrote: »
    Obviously everything else you've written is amusing nonsense though.
    As long at it was amusing.

    ;) :))
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    AceHole wrote: »
    There is a reason Connery was so darn cool on screen - using the principles of physical acting he learned from Yat Malmgren he constructed 007 on the basis of an assertive, controlling alpha male - slow, controlled gestures & movement, no wasted movement, always firm & calm.

    Look at the way he walks, or how he moves when he snoops around. His controlled, smooth kinetic acting is the basis for the character. All the rest (delivery of dialogue, extreme assertiveness) flows from this construct.

    And he was alwso coached by Terence Young into the role, that style, etc.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Obviously everything else you've written is amusing nonsense though.
    As long at it was amusing.

    ;) :))

    Yes, but when I want real amusement, and the predictable kind, I read Getafix's comments about Brosnan. :O)
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,864
    4EverBonded wrote: »
    when I want real amusement, and the predictable kind, I read Getafix's comments about Brosnan. :O)

    :)) =))
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Always a pleasure, never a chore.
  • The_ReaperThe_Reaper
    Posts: 1,092
    For the record, Connery is a total pimp. I just watched DN and he's amazing from start to finish. He IS Bond. Without his performances in those first four films (the Golden Ear), we wouldn't be talking here b/c this forum wouldn't exist.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,864
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    I just watched DN and he's amazing from start to finish.
    Just watched it last night myself, and I concur. It IS one of the very best Bonds IMHO.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    edited November 2014 Posts: 5,080
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    (the Golden Ear)

    "Golden Ear,I found his weakness
    Golden Ear he'll do what I please
    Golden Ear no time for sweetness
    but a bitter kiss will bring him to his knees    "
Sign In or Register to comment.