What is your least favourite Brosnan flick ?

17891113

Comments

  • edited October 2012 Posts: 73
    royale65 wrote:
    • The action is kick ass.

    Are we watching the same film?

    Actually, I'd agree that the opening hovercraft chase is a good set piece, but the climactic battle between Bond and Graves - or Bond fighting a purple-electricity shooting RoboCop on a CG plane - is woeful. I guess it's because it's a man of almost 50 and a guy in restrictive body armour. Inexusably poor though. You could easily believe that Brosnan and Toby Stephens were sitting in arm chairs while they filmed it.

    What is it with Brosnan and lame climactic fight scenes? In GoldenEye, he had one of the best ever with Sean Bean. Yet TWINE and DAD offer incredibly weak, amateurish final fights.
  • Posts: 1,146
    Goldeneye blows the doors off the rest of the other Brosnans. It's not even close.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I think after GE, the Brosnan era fell into stunt casting, removing that organic feel to the performances of the characters we're supposed to be watching.
  • Posts: 1,146
    Puus the stories were horrible.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Its hilarious reading all these Brozzites scrabbling over Pierce's meagre legacy. It's like watching dogs fighting over scraps from a garbage can. It would be even funnier if it wasn't so tragic. A wasted decade and 4 dud films. When you look back it's just a crying shame.
  • Posts: 7,653
    Getafix wrote:
    When you look back it's just a crying shame.

    Corrected your sentiment brother. ;)

    Indeed worthy of a fifth movie that would have given him the well deserved send-off and a swansong that stayed away since GE, even if the first part of DAD did look promesing. :D

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited October 2012 Posts: 17,789
    Getafix wrote:
    Its hilarious reading all these Brozzites scrabbling over Pierce's meagre legacy.

    He ruled in his time, bro. His first three were solid entertainment, and better than any Moore film, and most Connery ones.
    PPK's at dawn, I take it?
    8->
  • Two thirds of Moore's releases were better than half of Brosnan's efforts is all I'll say. Really was a success with his debut film in '95, but had an alarming dip and was a real disappointment for his second showing, before getting back on track with a mighty fine third release at the end of the last century, before in 2002 for his last appearance, well we don't really need to go into that, in that it was such a poor release

    The one thing that I think about now before sleep takes me, is that for all of Brosnan's movies as Bond, there was a definite lack of substantial characters. Maybe I was concentrating too much on the poorer releases, but especially towards the adversaries and villains, they were mostly poor and mundane. Elliot Carver, Gustav Graves, even Renard and Zao into that. Although to be fair the others such as Trevelyan, Stamper, Elektra and Onatopp maybe, actually did work for the most part

    But Brosnan will never again enter into the top three of James Bonds for me. Would of been before Craig came in, but since the new Bond, Brosnan is down at #4 now for overall fine Bondness, and even then is in competition with Moore for that placing all said, but I think it may be too close to call but I'll give the Irishman his fourth place on this night

    #1 Timothy Dalton
    #2 Sean Connery
    #3 Daniel Craig
    #4 Pierce Brosnan
    #5 Roger Moore
    #6 George Lazenby
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Well, your first place is totally spot on!
  • There are a few Dalton favorites around and about the pages, and that includes myself. Ever growing number now with new participants which is good to see. Only Timothy himself and Connery, ever came that close to resembling the very essence of the original Fleming creation
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    :)>-
  • Posts: 11,425
    Two thirds of Moore's releases were better than half of Brosnan's efforts is all I'll say. Really was a success with his debut film in '95, but had an alarming dip and was a real disappointment for his second showing, before getting back on track with a mighty fine third release at the end of the last century, before in 2002 for his last appearance, well we don't really need to go into that, in that it was such a poor release

    The one thing that I think about now before sleep takes me, is that for all of Brosnan's movies as Bond, there was a definite lack of substantial characters. Maybe I was concentrating too much on the poorer releases, but especially towards the adversaries and villains, they were mostly poor and mundane. Elliot Carver, Gustav Graves, even Renard and Zao into that. Although to be fair the others such as Trevelyan, Stamper, Elektra and Onatopp maybe, actually did work for the most part

    But Brosnan will never again enter into the top three of James Bonds for me. Would of been before Craig came in, but since the new Bond, Brosnan is down at #4 now for overall fine Bondness, and even then is in competition with Moore for that placing all said, but I think it may be too close to call but I'll give the Irishman his fourth place on this night

    #1 Timothy Dalton
    #2 Sean Connery
    #3 Daniel Craig
    #4 Pierce Brosnan
    #5 Roger Moore
    #6 George Lazenby

    No one seems to make the connection between a weak lead actor and a dodgy supporting cast. It's as if the unfolding catastrophe that was the Brosnan era never had anything to do with him.

    Doesn't the poor casting and lacklustre performances that surround Pierce in every film say everything we need to know? He was an actor out of his depth who never got a proper grasp of the role. The consequences were ever diminishing returns and a series of films that feel progressively less and less convincing.

    That said, IMO TND is far and away Brozza's best outing.
  • Posts: 1,492
    Getafix wrote:
    No one seems to make the connection between a weak lead actor and a dodgy supporting cast. It's as if the unfolding catastrophe that was the Brosnan era never had anything to do with him.

    Doesn't the poor casting and lacklustre performances that surround Pierce in every film say everything we need to know? He was an actor out of his depth who never got a proper grasp of the role. The consequences were ever diminishing returns and a series of films that feel progressively less and less convincing.

    That said, IMO TND is far and away Brozza's best outing.

    I don't think the acting and characterisation were a priority in the Brosnan era just like they weren't in the Lewis Gilbert era. It was all spectacle and dumb oneliners. They tried it abit in TWINE and it was a big fat splodge. With Tim and Dan you had to make the supporting cast first class because their characterisation demanded it.

    Mind you, Sophie Marceau tried her best with very erratic characterisation.

  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,189
    With Tim and Dan you had to make the supporting cast first class because their characterisation demanded it.

    What about Telisa Soto? A rather inexperienced actress in a more demanding role. I don't think she was cast because of her acting talent but more because she was young, beautiful and exotic.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Soto was fine IMO. The only time I thought wtf abd subsequently burst into laughter was when she barged into the hotel room where Q and Pam were and she declared how she "loves James so much". Now that's what you call, jumping the shark.
  • Posts: 11,189
    Everyone seems to cite that example :))

    There's a couple of other moments of hers that feel a bit jarring to me

    "You should go straight out of here, go to the airport and never come back"
    "James listen to me...there's guards all over the place you'll never make it"
  • Posts: 1,052
    I hate to hit a film while it is down but it has to be DAD, followed by TWINE, GE and then TND being my personal fav of the Brosnan era.
  • Posts: 1,492
    BAIN123 wrote:
    With Tim and Dan you had to make the supporting cast first class because their characterisation demanded it.

    What about Telisa Soto? A rather inexperienced actress in a more demanding role. I don't think she was cast because of her acting talent but more because she was young, beautiful and exotic.

    You say Talisa Soto....

    I give you back..

    Denise Richards...

    and..

    AND..

    Halle Berry

  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    What does everyone see in TND?

    I'm the only one who hates it, right? *walks away in tears* :((
  • Posts: 1,052
    JamesCraig wrote:
    What does everyone see in TND?

    I'm the only one who hates it, right? *walks away in tears* :((


    I think there are plenty of people who don't like it, personally I just like it, it's a straight forward film, Bond hasn't become a wet blanket like in TWINE and DAD and there isn't too much M etc or much personal/trust issues other than Teri Hatcher's brief appearance.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,189
    actonsteve wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    With Tim and Dan you had to make the supporting cast first class because their characterisation demanded it.

    What about Telisa Soto? A rather inexperienced actress in a more demanding role. I don't think she was cast because of her acting talent but more because she was young, beautiful and exotic.

    You say Talisa Soto....

    I give you back..

    Denise Richards...

    and..

    AND..

    Halle Berry

    Yep, I'm not arguing with that. My point was that the casting decisions in Dalton's films werent always "first class" either. That said Soto probably is a step (or several?) above those two.

    So far the cast in Craig's films has been top notch.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,205
    Getafix wrote:
    Its hilarious reading all these Brozzites scrabbling over Pierce's meagre legacy. It's like watching dogs fighting over scraps from a garbage can. It would be even funnier if it wasn't so tragic. A wasted decade and 4 dud films. When you look back it's just a crying shame.

    You're too easily amused.
  • For me currently it's a toss/up between TWINE & DAD (least favorite in the whole series I might add)
    However, I am working my way through my Bondathon, and while GoldenEye has always been my #1, Tomorrow Never Dies has actually gone up many spaces!

    Maybe I'm remembering these movies to be worse than they are; time will tell. I'll be watching TWINE & DAD within weeks end :-SS
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Getafix wrote:
    Its hilarious reading all these Brozzites scrabbling over Pierce's meagre legacy. It's like watching dogs fighting over scraps from a garbage can. It would be even funnier if it wasn't so tragic. A wasted decade and 4 dud films. When you look back it's just a crying shame.

    You're too easily amused.

    Well, "sound" of that post could've been a bit noicer, but Getafix has a point.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,205
    JamesCraig wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Its hilarious reading all these Brozzites scrabbling over Pierce's meagre legacy. It's like watching dogs fighting over scraps from a garbage can. It would be even funnier if it wasn't so tragic. A wasted decade and 4 dud films. When you look back it's just a crying shame.

    You're too easily amused.

    Well, "sound" of that post could've been a bit noicer, but Getafix has a point.

    I know he has a point and he has said a few things I agree with. But his constant condescension and provocative tone leaves a lot to be desired.
  • Posts: 140
    But it is also hilarious reading all the crap that Pierce gets (usually form Danny-Boys and Girls).

    Take Getafix's point about a weak lead man. On Her Majesty's Secret Service is rightly regarded as one of (if not the best) Bond film yet George Lazenby is hardly considered an Olivier.

    Brosnan's last three films were blighted by what I call the '90's Malaise', no originality, strong characters or clear direction. None of which can be attributed to Pierce Brosnan.
    For me Brosnan is Bondian to the 9th degree unfortunately his films are not.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    TND isn't as bad many people make it out to be, although, the problems I have with the movie are the, Tom and Jerry style fight scenes and everything from the moment Bond ends up in China.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    edited October 2012 Posts: 3,497
    I'm not a Danny-boy, I happen to like his era so far much more than Pierce's. I'll happily admit that he was NOT helped by the scripts, and he can act, he has proven it enough outside the Bondseries.

    But his Bondmovies are still seen by some as "how it was, is, and always should be". GE is not even that "special", but at least it's still watchable, and Sean Bean is a good villain, even more so because most others during PB's tenure simply...sucked.
  • Posts: 140
    You won't find me arguing about Brosnan's last three films (though Die Another Day has its moments) I am pissed about the crap Brosnan gets on this webiste though.

  • Posts: 13
    Yeah Die Another Day, pre-credit sequence was excellent...shame it couldn't maintain the tone for the rest of the film. Invisible car and over use of cgi, enough said.
Sign In or Register to comment.