What if Pierce Brosnan played Bond from 1986 until 2012

2456

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    I mean if it was Timothy Dalton we were talking about I'd have no problem with it... ;)

    He's bald now.
    So was 'the other fella'. It never stopped him.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited November 2015 Posts: 5,131
    Wigs in the 60's acceptable. Now, no, get someone with hair. When SC was playing 007 I don't think the wig was widely known about. Everyone knows Dalts is now bald (not to mention over 60).
  • JNOJNO Finland
    Posts: 137
    Thank God he didn´t.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    We'd have been deprived of Dalton's take on 007. I always found it odd that Cubby tried to get Dalton on several occasions since 1968 but then didn't have him down as 1st choice in '86...
  • Posts: 15,218
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    That'd have been far too long for ANY Bond actor, irrespective of how good they were!

    Indeed. And a ridiculously old Bond near the end of his tenure.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 1,661
    Actually he got better looking as the films advanced and also his portrayal was better, he was fantastic in Goldeneye but he was just a perfect 10 in his latter films.

    1990s Brosnan had more maturity to his face but I don't know if I'd say he was better looking than in he was in the 1980s. You could argue he was in his physical prime in that decade. I think so. People may forget this is how he looked in the later episodes of Remington Steele:

    20pas8m.jpg

    Remington Steele circa 1985.

    I thought he didn't look too young to play James Bond in 1986 but it's a fascinating scenario to ponder - would most Bond fans prefer Brosnan over Dalton when Roger Moore left the role? I think Timothy Dalton was a nice contrast to Roger Moore.

    I dunno, I think Pierce Brosnan might have been a bit similar to Roger Moore in The Living Daylights. Hmm, it's hard to say for certain, though. I do think Brosnan is more like Moore in terms of light comedy. Dalton is a bit more serious although he was very amusing in Hot Fuzz.

    Casting Dalton gave the producers/writers a fresh approach. Brosnan from 1986 onwards might have been Moore version 2 albeit with some extra moments when Brosnan's Bond was a bit meaner than Moore's vision.

    I can't imagine Connery in OHMSS. Lazenby was meant to play Bond in that film and I think Dalton was meant to be play Bond in TLD. It was meant to be. Call it fate!





  • edited November 2015 Posts: 11,425
    In answer to the question, that would have been my nightmare scenario. The series would be dead in the water IMO and we'd have lost out on Dalton and some decent Craig films. A poor deal for two decades of Brosnan.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited November 2015 Posts: 18,338
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    I mean if it was Timothy Dalton we were talking about I'd have no problem with it... ;)

    He's bald now.

    Well yes, perhaps not up to 2012 or anything but a few more Bond films from Timothy Dalton would have been nice. :D
  • Posts: 11,189
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    Actually he got better looking as the films advanced and also his portrayal was better, he was fantastic in Goldeneye but he was just a perfect 10 in his latter films.

    1990s Brosnan had more maturity to his face but I don't know if I'd say he was better looking than in he was in the 1980s. You could argue he was in his physical prime in that decade. I think so. People may forget this is how he looked in the later episodes of Remington Steele:

    20pas8m.jpg

    Remington Steele circa 1985.

    I thought he didn't look too young to play James Bond in 1986 but it's a fascinating scenario to ponder - would most Bond fans prefer Brosnan over Dalton when Roger Moore left the role? I think Timothy Dalton was a nice contrast to Roger Moore.

    I dunno, I think Pierce Brosnan might have been a bit similar to Roger Moore in The Living Daylights. Hmm, it's hard to say for certain, though. I do think Brosnan is more like Moore in terms of light comedy. Dalton is a bit more serious although he was very amusing in Hot Fuzz.

    Casting Dalton gave the producers/writers a fresh approach. Brosnan from 1986 onwards might have been Moore version 2 albeit with some extra moments when Brosnan's Bond was a bit meaner than Moore's vision.

    I can't imagine Connery in OHMSS. Lazenby was meant to play Bond in that film and I think Dalton was meant to be play Bond in TLD. It was meant to be. Call it fate!





    ...and people say his hair looks bad in GE :))
  • Posts: 6,396
    To answer the OP's question (What if Pierce Brosnan played Bond from 1986 until 2012?):

    @Thunderfinger would have self immolated by now. ;)
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I have managed to stay away from this thread until now, and then you had to bring me in!
  • Posts: 6,396
    It was the least I could do. :D
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    If Brosnan played Bond from 1986 until 2012 the Bond movies would have become straight to bargain bin dvd releases.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    doubleoego wrote: »
    If Brosnan played Bond from 1986 until 2012 the Bond movies would have become straight to bargain bin dvd releases.

    Seiously? As many as nine of those being made?
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Yep. They'd become much cheaper to produce and yet they'd still make enough to churn them out by the crapload.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I guess the last couple of those would just go straight on youtube instead.

    Along with all the other fan crap.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    It's a useless discussion.

    No matter who would have been casted as Bond in 1986, he would have been out after 1989.
    The 6 year hiatus had nothing to do with the actor.

    If EONs problems after 2008 hadn't been resolved in less than 5 years, Craig would have been a 2 movies Bond actor as well.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited November 2015 Posts: 15,423
    It's a useless discussion.

    No matter who would have been casted as Bond in 1986, he would have been out after 1989.
    The 6 year hiatus had nothing to do with the actor.

    If EONs problems after 2008 hadn't been resolved in less than 5 years, Craig would have been a 2 movies Bond actor as well.
    Indeed, especially when the 99% of the members here have a grudge and hatred against Brosnan and his era. I'm starting to avoid all the Pierce Brosnan threads because I know the poor man gets obliterated by harsh and unnecessary comments from almost everyone here, save for a few that are less than ten by number, including me. Perhaps I am in the wrong fandom for enjoying the over-the-top films that actually did bring a lot of money and their marketing was done well, but that is always denied, you see? Because the Brosnan films are "make believe parodies".

    Anyway, I'm out of this discussion. Enjoy tearing Pierce Brosnan apart. ;)
  • Posts: 11,425
    doubleoego wrote: »
    If Brosnan played Bond from 1986 until 2012 the Bond movies would have become straight to bargain bin dvd releases.

    I remember having a nightmare soon after seeing GE where Bond films had become a 'made for TV' franchise. That was how badly GE effected me.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    It's a useless discussion.

    No matter who would have been casted as Bond in 1986, he would have been out after 1989.
    The 6 year hiatus had nothing to do with the actor.

    If EONs problems after 2008 hadn't been resolved in less than 5 years, Craig would have been a 2 movies Bond actor as well.
    Indeed, especially when the 99% of the members here have a grudge and hatred against Brosnan and his era. I'm starting to avoid all the Pierce Brosnan threads because I know the poor man gets obliterated by harsh and unnecessary comments from almost everyone here, save for a few that are less than ten by number, including me. Perhaps I am in the wrong fandom for enjoy the over-the-top films that actually did bring a lot of money and their marketing was done well, but that is always denied, you see? Because the Brosnan films are "make believe parodies".

    Anyway, I'm out of this discussion. Enjoy tearing Pierce Brosnan apart. ;)

    Well, I'll defend Brosnan, always. Because he is the underdog here and I like fighting for the underdog.

    You are right of course, the hatred and CONSTANT bashing of Brosnan on this site gets tiresome and doesn't reflect reality in any way.
    The worst thing is, some of those who bash him the most, have the audacity to call on me or others for criticising Craig or Skyfall.
    Those are pure hypocrites.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Getafix wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    If Brosnan played Bond from 1986 until 2012 the Bond movies would have become straight to bargain bin dvd releases.

    I remember having a nightmare soon after seeing GE where Bond films had become a 'made for TV' franchise. That was how badly GE effected me.

    Those 7 years must have been hellacious for you.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 11,425
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    If Brosnan played Bond from 1986 until 2012 the Bond movies would have become straight to bargain bin dvd releases.

    I remember having a nightmare soon after seeing GE where Bond films had become a 'made for TV' franchise. That was how badly GE effected me.

    Those 7 years must have been hellacious for you.

    After watching GE I basically thought there'd never be another decent Bond movie. I felt EON had lost the plot for a long long time after that.

    And of course that all followed on from the hellish 6 year hiatus after LTK, when you wondered if there'd ever be another Bond film at all.

    It was a great moment for me when they sacked Brosnan. I realised EON must have shared at least some of my reservations about Brosnan and as soon as they cast Craig I knew the films were heading back into the type of territory that I enjoy more.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Getafix wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    If Brosnan played Bond from 1986 until 2012 the Bond movies would have become straight to bargain bin dvd releases.

    I remember having a nightmare soon after seeing GE where Bond films had become a 'made for TV' franchise. That was how badly GE effected me.

    Those 7 years must have been hellacious for you.

    After watching GE I basically thought there'd never be another decent Bond movie. I felt EON had lost the plot for a long long time after that.

    And of course that all followed on from the hellish 6 year hiatus after LTK, when you wondered if there'd ever be another Bond film at all.

    It was a great moment for me when they sacked Brosnan. I realised EON must have shared at least some of my reservations about Brosnan and as soon as they cast Craig I knew the films were heading back into the type of territory that I enjoy more.

    You and me both. Couldn t have said it better myself. Those four films were worthless.
  • mrchopsticks3mrchopsticks3 California
    Posts: 4
    Blah! Remington Steele was too generic, his films are arguably the weakest in the franchise. I was watching "Die Another Day" and was happy that he didn't make any more after that.
  • Posts: 486
    Getafix wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    If Brosnan played Bond from 1986 until 2012 the Bond movies would have become straight to bargain bin dvd releases.

    I remember having a nightmare soon after seeing GE where Bond films had become a 'made for TV' franchise. That was how badly GE effected me.

    Those 7 years must have been hellacious for you.

    After watching GE I basically thought there'd never be another decent Bond movie. I felt EON had lost the plot for a long long time after that.

    And of course that all followed on from the hellish 6 year hiatus after LTK, when you wondered if there'd ever be another Bond film at all.

    It was a great moment for me when they sacked Brosnan. I realised EON must have shared at least some of my reservations about Brosnan and as soon as they cast Craig I knew the films were heading back into the type of territory that I enjoy more.

    You and me both. Couldn t have said it better myself. Those four films were worthless.

    I heartily agree with the pair of you!

    If it wasn't bad enough dealing with what appeared to the end of the franchise in 1989 the only way we got it back was via 'Hollywood Bond'. Never much cared for Brosnan anyway and the GE PTS hadn't even finished before I realised dark days were ahead of us.

    From being a paid up fan club fan member my membership waned as people who expressed relief he wasn't Bond in TLD were now proclaiming him the saviour. After DAD I slipped away from online forums too. Discussion of a fifth Brosnan film just didn't interest me. I stayed away for so long the next thing I knew Daniel Craig was being announced.

    From the 'this was Brosnan's gig if not for Remington Steel' furore in 1986 through to the CraignotBond stuff of 2006 it seems Brosnan has blighted the Bond series in one form or another for an overall undeserved twenty years so thank goodness we didn't have him for a further six.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Cowley wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    If Brosnan played Bond from 1986 until 2012 the Bond movies would have become straight to bargain bin dvd releases.

    I remember having a nightmare soon after seeing GE where Bond films had become a 'made for TV' franchise. That was how badly GE effected me.

    Those 7 years must have been hellacious for you.

    After watching GE I basically thought there'd never be another decent Bond movie. I felt EON had lost the plot for a long long time after that.

    And of course that all followed on from the hellish 6 year hiatus after LTK, when you wondered if there'd ever be another Bond film at all.

    It was a great moment for me when they sacked Brosnan. I realised EON must have shared at least some of my reservations about Brosnan and as soon as they cast Craig I knew the films were heading back into the type of territory that I enjoy more.

    You and me both. Couldn t have said it better myself. Those four films were worthless.

    I heartily agree with the pair of you!

    If it wasn't bad enough dealing with what appeared to the end of the franchise in 1989 the only way we got it back was via 'Hollywood Bond'. Never much cared for Brosnan anyway and the GE PTS hadn't even finished before I realised dark days were ahead of us.

    From being a paid up fan club fan member my membership waned as people who expressed relief he wasn't Bond in TLD were now proclaiming him the saviour. After DAD I slipped away from online forums too. Discussion of a fifth Brosnan film just didn't interest me. I stayed away for so long the next thing I knew Daniel Craig was being announced.

    From the 'this was Brosnan's gig if not for Remington Steel' furore in 1986 through to the CraignotBond stuff of 2006 it seems Brosnan has blighted the Bond series in one form or another for an overall undeserved twenty years so thank goodness we didn't have him for a further six.

    Amen. Indeed. You said it. Hurra!

    Now we call upon the defence, @JasonBond006. And the other ten.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    How about having an actual actor playing James Bond in ohmss? The mannequin they brought over from Australia may have had a million dollar arm, but they eventually found out about his five cent head
  • Posts: 11,425
    How about having an actual actor playing James Bond in ohmss? The mannequin they brought over from Australia may have had a million dollar arm, but they eventually found out about his five cent head

    Disagree. It is not entirely coincidence that OHMSS is one of the great Bonf films and happens to star George Lazenby. Somehow Hunt got a very solid performance out of Laz. I would have loved to see him do DAF as a proper revenge movie with Hunt directing. It would have been awesome.
  • 1987-2012 is out of the question. Nobody better touch the few Dalton movies I have!!

    But 1995-2012? I might be more curious to see...
    I wouldn't want to lose Craig, but the mere prospect of seeing Brosnan as an older Bond in a SkyFall type venture, reworked to suit him and no longer part of the 'reboot'-- complete with M's death (considering their longer relationship) almost sounds worth it!
    I wonder what sort of movies he'd do in place of CR and QOS however
  • Posts: 11,425
    1987-2012 is out of the question. Nobody better touch the few Dalton movies I have!!

    But 1995-2012? I might be more curious to see...
    I wouldn't want to lose Craig, but the mere prospect of seeing Brosnan as an older Bond in a SkyFall type venture, reworked to suit him and no longer part of the 'reboot'-- complete with M's death (considering their longer relationship) almost sounds worth it!
    I wonder what sort of movies he'd do in place of CR and QOS however

    We'd have got DAD parts 2 and 3.
Sign In or Register to comment.