It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
This chap has an interesting look. Sort of like a younger Jeremy Northam.
Agreed
It's a good idea to check modern TV shows for the next Bond, as TV production are fantastic these days, but most of these candidates don't even cut if for a leading man status in a TV show. Would anyone consider Aidan Turner as the main star in a big TV production? Guys like Kiefer Sutherland, David Duchovny, Michael Chiklis, irrespective of what you think of them, they have enough clout to have their TV shows green-lighted with ease.
Really not even Tom Hardy
That is quite possibly true, and in my opinion not a negative at all. The problem with the Brosnan era wasn't Brosnan.
It actually makes a lot of sense, considering how Brosnan followed Dalton, and how many compare Craig with Dalton. Maybe it is now time for someone to deliver a greater version of the Brosnan Bond, just like Craig did for Dalton.
I agree. It's almost like it's become a trend to nominate the least Bond-like names for 007 and try to convince fans how right they are for the part. Might as well throw in Jason Alexander, Kenny Rogers, Tom Petty, or Jim Parsons and be as adamant that they NEED to be the next James Bond. It's become ridiculous.
Just speaking for myself, I also didn't think that the approach suited the lead actor. Just like how some say TMWTGG didn't suit Moore (I disagree on this one). Whether this was on account of the script or the performance, I'm not sure, but it's how I felt. I think Craig's portrayal didn't seem 'true' to what he'd brought before, if that makes any sense. He'd pretty much made the role his own since CR, and I think he should have played to that introspective and damaged Bond which is 'uniquely his' rather than going off on a more 'fully formed' light-hearted tangent.
So to me, it was possibly a case of both the script and the performance being problematic.
Just read, that Kings already starts Dec 27 for 8 weeks, which means straight after Othello and then Purity. Who knows, if they are having Bond in mind with this tied schedule.
I watched TWINE the other day, I film I don't really enjoy, but I found that Brosnan was very cold and calculating and yet still had that jovial tone, like he was enjoying himself.
Like when he attacks Renard and putting the silencer on and he is telling him how "I feel nothing" about shooting Renard, who is unarmed. I wasn't so much paying attention to the dialogue, but the performance, because I think this is more how Brosnan wanted to play Bond. He really excels with this stuff, even if the scenes and the dialogue itself isn't the best.
Just like the Dalton era, the Brosnan films are saddled with excessive cheesiness, but I think under it all, there was an attempt to make Bond modern, and light hearted at the same time. Unfortunately they, like Dalton, were ahead of their time and the ideas weren't mature enough yet. Brosnan ended up recessing into the typical groaner one liners instead of a more subtle, darker humour.
I'm afraid this is one of the scenes that I find most discomfiting in the film, along with the infamous Baku breakdown. I think he overplayed it in this film in an obvious way, much to his detriment.
What I mean to say is that I think the idea of the Brosnan era was to start with a very traditional Bond film with lots of campiness (GE) just to get people interested in Bond again, and then gradually shift into a more organic, contemporary style of humour and tone, probably borrowing from Tarantino and others. However, once GE was a huge hit, then Cubby died, and I think Barbara and Micheal just focused on the survival of the franchise. It all ended up going in a more stereotypical "safe" direction than was intended.
(I mention Tarantino because as you say the scene in TWINE is overplayed, and I can't help but think is somewhat intentional, or at least inspired by Tarantino's tendency to portray drama in a very sensationalized manner.)
I've always said that Brosnan was straightjacketed by Bond. He is best when he can be expressive (like in November Man or Tailor of Panama), but I personally feel that to play Bond best, one must be able to do subtle - which I didn't think he was all that great with.
That's a great point. A bit like Sam Jackson as Mace Windu. ;)
This. Well said.
Me neither. He's a bit 'camp' for Bond.