Pierce Brosnan Not a Fan of Spectre

Getafix

acoppola wrote: »

Getafix wrote: »

acoppola wrote: »

In all honesty, I thought Pierce Brosnan's comments were very gentlemanly, and he raises some good points too. He has as much right as anyone here to give his opinion.

I see nothing offensive in his remarks. And in no way could his comments affect the financial success of the film. I think he was brave in his honesty, and bloody nice about Daniel Craig!

Dalton is my favourite Bond, but, I have a soft spot for Pierce in the role, and thought he was fantastic in his first two films.

And those who say that Dalton nearly sank the series is not quite true. LTK was badly promoted, and at the time, the studio was badly mismanaged. Look at how much was spent on promoting Skyfall as well as Spectre. Craig is fortunate to have a studio backing him 100%! Surely that helps box office numbers???

Also, LTK only under performed in the US. Everywhere else it did pretty well.

Indeed @getafix The film did very well internationally. It made $158 million on a budget of $30 million. And Dalton was offered to stay on by Cubby. It was Dalton who carried Cubby's coffin at his funeral, so that shows how close he was.

How an actor does in the role has a lot to do with good marketing and getting a great team behind them. When a studio is half-arsed, the box office results are terrible.

LTK was released around too much comptetion in the USA, and coupled with weak marketing promotion, the results were less. Take Spectre for instance as it was released just before the heavy hitting franchises get released, like for instance Star Wars 7.

I actually feel Skyfall and Spectre were too intrusively marketed in my face. Every Youtube video I almost watched has a Spectre trailer. It actually started to irk me!

Wasn't Dalton getting his wicked way with Babs as well, or may be that was earlier?

The ultimate sign of Cubby's approval, surely? Can't imagine him having been happy about Babs stepping out with any of the other Bonds.

Thunderfinger

HASEROT wrote: »

@0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

^:)^

Thunderclap from me, too. Well said.

This is a non subject as far as I am concerned.

mepal1

DRush76 wrote: »

So what? I don't care. I may be a fan of his, but I couldn't care less whether he liked "SPECTRE" or not. Nor do I care whether Moore liked or disliked "QUANTUM OF SOLACE". My opinion is the only one that matters to me.

True, at the end of the day, it is how we all individually feel about the film that counts.......but its also good to know, if other people feel the same way as us.

To be honest PB's comments are neither here nor there, on the subject of SP. Don't know why people are getting worked up about it.

Roger Moore's comments about QOS, being difficult to enjoy, and follow the film, due to the poor editing of the film........were actually spot on.

Getafix

mepal1 wrote: »

DRush76 wrote: »

So what? I don't care. I may be a fan of his, but I couldn't care less whether he liked "SPECTRE" or not. Nor do I care whether Moore liked or disliked "QUANTUM OF SOLACE". My opinion is the only one that matters to me.

True, at the end of the day, it is how we all individually feel about the film that counts.......but its also good to know, if other people feel the same way as us.

To be honest PB's comments are neither here nor there, on the subject of SP. Don't know why people are getting worked up about it.

Roger Moore's comments about QOS, being difficult to enjoy, and follow the film, due to the poor editing of the film........were actually spot on.

If it's only your opinion that matters what are you doing wasting your time on here?

Aziz_Fekkesh

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »

Is this really a thread? We've lost two good members (at least temporarily) for this childish garbage? So many rant about the PC culture we now live in and how it robs us of certain freedoms, but really what that boils down to is that we are dismissive of others' opinions when they differ with ours and the majority of a society. Therefore, by taking Pierce to the gallows for his own opinions, certain people here are simply continuing to feed the fires of that sad culture, where more and more free speech and open-mindedness is being sheltered from the light and becoming masked wholly by darkness.

I've read Pierce's thoughts, on SP recently and Dan and his era over the years, and none of it, that's right, NONE of it, speaks of ill-will, unsophistication or low-blows of any kind. In fact, when Pierce does criticize anything about the recent Bond films (of which I can't think of much), Dan is always one element he points at as working at the highest capacity. Such were his comments here-he felt SP needed some work in the story department, a comment which is well supported and felt amongst the community here, but he also went on to say, as others have posted, that Dan was spectacular. Furthermore, he went on to support Dan in the media avalanche that is now covering him head to toe because of comments (wrist slashing) he made in good fun, but that imbecilic interviewers/commentators chose to misinterpret either because of their aforementioned stupidity or for the potential of turning out a few more stories about whether or not he's done with Bond. Pierce wasn't obligated to stand up for Dan or anything, yet he did all the same, and shared some insight into the exhaustive process of making Bond films that leaves you zombified at the end (it's a lot of work, case you didn't know), which for some reason, many people can't seem to grasp.

So, what does this all boil down to, you ask? Well, quite simply, Pierce, much like everyone else, is entitled to have an opinion. Those who see his comments about SP as being defaming or rude to Dan obviously haven't read them, as again, Dan was one of the elements/parts he has always praised, above all other things. More importantly, why the hell should everything that he says about anything, SP included, always be through-the-roof positive? He's got free will, Calvinists be damned, so he should be able to express himself like the grown man he is without the worry of being flamed for it by the internet's brigade of keyboard warriors, who, incidentally, don't have a license to kill themselves. He's not biting the hand that fed him, just being open and honest about an experience he and Dan have shared, and the pressures and demands of which they know all too well. And, though Pierce has had a rough time of it personally, recently losing his daughter in the same way as his first wife, he still goes out of his way to give props to his Bond predecessor. I honestly don't think he could be a cooler, more kind hearted guy if he tried, and with the personal hell he's been in lately, he has no reason or obligation to be such a beacon of light. He does it just because that's the kind of guy he is, and I'm sorry some people can't see that.

In addition, these so called "digs" Pierce made about Dan in past interviews, of which I've also watched, were done in FUN. Remember that elusive, three letter word? When Brosnan quipped that he was back on the spy scene in Bond territory and all that, his comments were playful, as regardless of what his bashers think, he respects the Bond brand and the opportunities it's given him as an actor and that respect extends to the others actors who've come both before and after him. I hate to spoil some people's fun around here, but there's no private war going on under the radar between Pierce and Dan. You can wish for it all you want, but it's never going to happen, and the sooner some people realize that, the better.

Now, can we all please get back to discussing the things that really matter, and leave Pierce to practice his natural human right to free speech? We can? Excellent. :)>-

Jesus, some constructive words at last! Common sense just isn't that common anymore.

The Reaper seems to be the only one making a mountain out of a molehill here and exaggerating the negative repercussions of Broz's statement. Let's be honest here, you could promote the next film by putting "007" and the date on a white background and the film would still make 800 million + worldwide (which is exactly what SF did).

The_Reaper

Getafix wrote: »

mepal1 wrote: »

DRush76 wrote: »

So what? I don't care. I may be a fan of his, but I couldn't care less whether he liked "SPECTRE" or not. Nor do I care whether Moore liked or disliked "QUANTUM OF SOLACE". My opinion is the only one that matters to me.

True, at the end of the day, it is how we all individually feel about the film that counts.......but its also good to know, if other people feel the same way as us.

To be honest PB's comments are neither here nor there, on the subject of SP. Don't know why people are getting worked up about it.

Roger Moore's comments about QOS, being difficult to enjoy, and follow the film, due to the poor editing of the film........were actually spot on.

If it's only your opinion that matters what are you doing wasting your time on here?

Heh. That's a good point. Obviously everyone here cares at least to some extent about others' opinions.

HASEROT

Roger Moore didn't care for QOS at all.... so where is the hate thread for him?..

oh that's right, he's not Brosnan.... silly me.

Ottofuse8

Pierce Brosnan also didn't like OHMSS, which like SP, is one of my favorites. I completely agree with rogers comments on QOS on the other other hand

Getafix

Ottofuse8 wrote: »

Pierce Brosnan also didn't like OHMSS, which like SP, is one of my favorites. I completely agree with rogers comments on QOS on the other other hand

Oh I rememer that. Pieece thought OHMSS was the rubbish one that no one liked. Turns out that's actually DAD!

DoctorKaufmann

He does not say anything negative about Craig, on the contrary. And he is entitled to give his opinion, if he is asked to do so. He says, the SPECTRE script could have been tighter, and if he thinks so, he is allowed to say this. He even defends Craig's reaction about the "slitting his wrists"-thing. He was part of the franchise, he WAS Bond, and he certainly understands Craig's feelings.

Getafix

I don't remember any of the previous Bonds criticising any of Brosnan's films although Lord knows, they deserved it.

Imagine if Dalton had come out and said GE had the worst Bond score he'd ever heard, but oh, Pierce was great. He'd have got slated.

HASEROT

Getafix wrote: »

I don't remember any of the previous Bonds criticising any of Brosnan's films although Lord knows, they deserved it.

Imagine if Dalton had come out and said GE had the worst Bond score he'd ever heard, but oh, Pierce was great. He'd have got slated.

media coverage during the 90s wasnt even close to what it is now... now you have to get a sound bite from everyone and their mom.

Creasy47

I think this thread has run its course. It's serving no purpose now but to fuel negativity and bash Brosnan, for which there are infinite threads for, unfortunately. I think everyone has said what needs to be said, and there's no more forward progress to be made here.

Locked.