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
@actonsteve You say this a lot but I find it hard taking it seriously coming from you when you're a fan of the likes of DAF. That film is definition of lazy.
Truth be told i suspect each incarnation, regardless of what they do with the character or how "revolutionary" they are in their debut, risks becoming "tired and lazy" after a while. Connery became tired in DAF and Moore was tired in AVTAK. Those two had v different versions of the same character. One could say they "defined" the character for their generation just like Broz did for mine.
Give Craig a few more films and some will be calling for change. Indeed one of the criticisms I've heard re. SF is that they've gone back to the Bond of old with a few new " trendy" editions.
However with Brosnan it's hard to argue that the creative team weren't "lazy and complacent" towards the end
Mr Kil anyone...?
I like Broz but I have to reluctantly admit that he never really seemed to take charge of events himself. I'm beginning to realise that Instead he left the big creative stuff to the writers and just did as he was told. He may have made some suggestions but the bulk of the creativity seemed to come from above him.
He even says in the DAD audio commentary that he was "just along for the ride".
What has that got to do with the argument in hand? Your getting peevish because you know there is something in what i say.
Pierce isnt that kind of actor. He is lightweight and cant do the characterisation that tim and dan can
You were complaining about the Brosnan era being lazy but then you love DAF, one of the laziest films in the franchise. If you don't like Bond getting too lazy then why do you let that film off?
Nobody said Pierce was that kind of actor. My point is he didn't have to be. He didn't play Flemings Bond and he didn't drastically change the character.
But I couldn't give a shit about that personally because I thought he did a very good job playing the cinematic Bond.
The Dalton films are like brilliant medium rare steaks while the Brosnan films are like good burgers, the kind you'd put on a barbecue. Of course the steak is better but I love a good burger every once in a while.
This is of course excluding DAD, which is a cheap burger at a football match that somebody dropped and didn't bother picking up so now it's been sitting half eaten on the floor since half time.
:))
That's entertainment!
;)
(Though I do admit to smiling at the final line)
TLD is on now. Even though I have a few issues its EASILY the better film (bar the Moneypenny sequence).
TWINE for me is now in the same bracket as AVTAK. Not quite among the worst lot in the series but still a relitively forgettable film.
It also has a touching final appearance from Q, a brilliant PTS and some fresh ideas they're reusing now (MI6 getting blown up, Bond getting injured, M being a big part of the story, etc).
I used to like TWINE a lot more but I don't think it holds up that well. That said there are some good scenes here and there.
That's a solid and in my opinion an accurate assessment of TWINE. All of the official 23 films, as I am fond of saying, have some good moments that make them re-watchable. The rest is personal taste as to how much any given film is watchable. Brosnan's first two films I find to be much more watchable than his last two and I still enjoy both tremendously. GE is a great story with great characters, and TND is pure popcorn entertainment if you enjoy the likes of YOLT and TSWLM, which I do. Other than Elektra and Zukovsky, I simply don't enjoy TWINE. Brosnan's worst performance as Bond (yes, for me he was better overall in DAD) and the wasting of Carlyle, both attributable to Apted's direction and a poor script that fails to support the premise of the story, are why I cannot support TWINE as anything more than one who joins DAD, MR, DAF, and TMWTGG in my personal bottom five.
I like TWINE too. It is very, very, very flawed though, but it might be Brosnan's best. That said, I never liked the PTS all that much. And a recent interview with Apted, when he was very arrogant about it, made me appreciate much less.
You see...I'm iffy about Apted too. He's articulate and has quite a good back catalogue but he seems to think TWINE is a better movie than it actually is. I can remember listening to the audio commentary on the TWINE dvd in which he describes Brosnan's performance as "powerful" - during the scene in which he confronts Electra.
Of course my tongue is poisoned when it comes to TWINE as I notoriously have something of a grudge with it. Despite my amusement with the film in the most basic way, I can point out so many elements that get me angry when I give them too much thought. I was still working from the GoldenEye ideal back in the day and when I noticed that they were working on something perhaps closer to that splendid film than to TND, I had my hopes running fairly high. But the overall experience wasn't at all as satisfying as that. I too have reflected over the years, learning to dismiss the GE ideal as a template for future Bonds and learning to trace the good things in each Bond film, a huge endeavour when it comes to TWINE and DAD. But strangely enough, I have accomplished much more of a reconciliation with DAD than I have with TWINE to the point where I actually prefer DAD over TWINE as the better film. Why? Simple. DAD is at times so over the top, so openly spreading its legs for the anything-goes idea, if you're in the right mindset you can go with it. TWINE, by contrast, continuously tries to impress me on an intellectual level with supposedly brilliant script choices and stylish shots. But after the OC, I always find myself gravitating more to utter confusion and silliness. With story arcs about nephews in the military just detouring a nuclear submarine for a few hours, or Bond's incredible deduction based on a single phrase, it never pulled me in as much as it actually pulled me out of the enjoyment. At least DAD would have done those things with an extra smirk, like having Halle Berry say the 'serious' line to unintentionally elicit a good dose of laughter.
Amidst all that is the Brozzer, clearly in pain, and I'm not talking about the chair or the shoulder. I'm referring to the fact that Pierce was always very vocal about willing to do a proper Fleming film. Some say he couldn't have pulled that off. I'm saying he wasn't granted the chance of proving he could. I never blame Brosnan for what occurred between '97 and '02. He's as much a victim in many respects as we are. I like him as an actor and specifically as Bond. He was the right Bond for the 90s and he gave the role everything he had in him. We'll never know how it would have turned out had he stayed on for a few more, including perhaps CR (but without the 'origin story'). So while Apted should have by now reached the point of admitting that TWINE is fundamentally flawed, I see no reason why Brosnan should ever apologise.
Definitely not a shining moment in his career, but I can sense his frustration after the last 2 scripts all but sabotaged any chance he had to get the kind of story he wanted.
To be fair if I was sacked from my dream job because the producers made some idiotic choices and now wanted to completely start from scratch, then I'd be pretty pissed off too.
At least he deserved a memorable swan song, and memorable for the right reasons. ;-) I can see him being very reluctant to go out without a film at least as good as his first. ;-)
He was 50 at the time. I know, Moore was older when he left Bond, but he also had stretched credibility. Brosnan did not have another Bond movie in him, let alone two or three as he claimed he had (or was it Jonathan Ross sucking up to him?)
I'm assuming you are aware that this is merely your opinion; one might mistake this as an attempt at stating a fact or something. ;)
Brosnan in DAD looked better than Connery did in DAF in my opinion - and Brosnan was about 8 years older than Connery when he did his last Bond film.
48/49 during DAD? Check out his shirtless scenes- he looked amazing.