The Brosnan era was actually more fun for Bond fans

1131416181929

Comments

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    The first half moves, is entertaining as hell, Brosnan’s best (for me, and by far; he looked like he was having fun), but; as soon as he jumps out of the plane until the end, I became more and more bored.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited March 2020 Posts: 8,216
    I understand people not liking the stealth boat finale for its machine gun orientation, but I think the bike chase in Saigon is fantastically staged and brilliantly scored; marred only by the obvious dummy work during the last few seconds.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited March 2020 Posts: 8,183
    TND was my first film. When TWINE came out on VHS I was given a copy as a gift and thought it was ok at the time, but not enough to make me want to check out more Bond films. Then my cousin brought over the GE N64 game and that actually made me want to rent the actual film, which blew my mind on much better it was than TND and TWINE. From then on I caught an with others in no particular order.

    Over the years I’d revisit TND to see if I felt any differently, maybe I’d appreciate it more. But it never clicks with me.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    I'd love to have seen Michelle Yeoh return. I wonder how close they came.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    She’s easily the best thing of TND. Would have liked to see her pop up again.
  • Posts: 11,425
    peter wrote: »
    The first half moves, is entertaining as hell, Brosnan’s best (for me, and by far; he looked like he was having fun), but; as soon as he jumps out of the plane until the end, I became more and more bored.
    She’s easily the best thing of TND. Would have liked to see her pop up again.

    Exactly how I've always felt about it as well.

    I remember after seeing TND thinking that perhaps they were going to get the Brosnan era on track, but then TWINE happened.
  • Agent_47Agent_47 Canada
    Posts: 330
    My Brosnan era ranking

    1. The World Is Not Enough
    2. Goldeneye
    3. Tomorrow Never Dies
    4. Die Another Day

    I enjoy all of them. They are not incredible films, they are not cinema, they are just escapist popcorn entertainment. Which is fine by me, I'm not a film fanatic... just a Bond fanatic.
  • Posts: 12,466
    For me it’s order of release:

    1. GoldenEye
    2. Tomorrow Never Dies
    3. The World Is Not Enough
    4. Die Another Day
  • 1. GE
    2. DAD
    3. TND
    4. TWINE

    TND & DAD can switch places though depending on the mood. That second half.. X_X
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,547
    FoxRox wrote: »
    For me it’s order of release:

    1. GoldenEye
    2. Tomorrow Never Dies
    3. The World Is Not Enough
    4. Die Another Day

    Same here, although I haven't seen TWINE in awhile.
  • GatecrasherGatecrasher Classified
    Posts: 265
    Brosnan’s era is kind of a mixed bag for me. I grew up on GoldenEye and it cemented my love for Bond, definitely; I’ll never forget watching it it on a Blockbuster rental VHS at 7 years old (a year after its release) and I was hooked! But each film after became progressively worse as time went on, and I realize just how little substance those films have. Sure they tried giving his Bond some depth with TWINE but it backfired, and DAD was desperately trying to cash in on the over-the-top action of the XXX films of that period.

    If I could rank his films, it’d be the order of their release, with TWINE and DAD switched around:

    1. GE
    2. TND
    3. DAD
    4. TWINE
  • Posts: 12,466
    Brosnan’s era is kind of a mixed bag for me. I grew up on GoldenEye and it cemented my love for Bond, definitely; I’ll never forget watching it it on a Blockbuster rental VHS at 7 years old (a year after its release) and I was hooked! But each film after became progressively worse as time went on, and I realize just how little substance those films have. Sure they tried giving his Bond some depth with TWINE but it backfired, and DAD was desperately trying to cash in on the over-the-top action of the XXX films of that period.

    If I could rank his films, it’d be the order of their release, with TWINE and DAD switched around:

    1. GE
    2. TND
    3. DAD
    4. TWINE

    I also have mixed feelings about the era. For me it's quite easily the overall weakest of any actor, though Brosnan himself is a good Bond still. I think GE is a great Bond film, TND is mostly good but suffers a weak third act, TWINE has a fair share of good stuff but also flaws and dull stuff, and DAD has a catastrophic third act in addition to a few other issues earlier on (though the first half is mostly enjoyable). GE is the only one that strikes me as a very good Bond film from start to finish, TND comes close sometimes but the third act just kills the pacing, TWINE is too uneven, and DAD has much of the most cringeworthy and unfortunate content of the whole series.
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    I myself personally find all the Brosnan movies to be highly entertaining and fun to watch. Sure they relied on being very formula based and good fun action movies anyone could enjoy even if they're a non fan but honestly I never saw the issue with that approach, I mean why fix what's clearly not broken and is working just fine you know? Always found Brosnan to be the most fun and engaging Bond Alongside Moore. GoldenEye is mainly the movie that cemented my love for Bond, sure the N64 game also was a huge factor as was games like Nightfire and Agent Under Fire. But honestly GE is what got me hooked. I may have seen CR first (I would've been barely 4 when it came out in theaters) but GE was the first one I myself truly remember and it left an instant impact as did Brosnan. Brosnan just is the one Bond I can put on whenever I'm feeling bored or wanting a good time and I can just sit back and enjoy the ride. I'm sad he didn't get to do at least 1 or 2 more as I feel he had 2 or 3 more left in him but I'm still satisfied with the fun 4 we did get.
  • Agent_47Agent_47 Canada
    Posts: 330
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    I myself personally find all the Brosnan movies to be highly entertaining and fun to watch. Sure they relied on being very formula based and good fun action movies anyone could enjoy even if they're a non fan but honestly I never saw the issue with that approach, I mean why fix what's clearly not broken and is working just fine you know? Always found Brosnan to be the most fun and engaging Bond Alongside Moore. GoldenEye is mainly the movie that cemented my love for Bond, sure the N64 game also was a huge factor as was games like Nightfire and Agent Under Fire. But honestly GE is what got me hooked. I may have seen CR first (I would've been barely 4 when it came out in theaters) but GE was the first one I myself truly remember and it left an instant impact as did Brosnan. Brosnan just is the one Bond I can put on whenever I'm feeling bored or wanting a good time and I can just sit back and enjoy the ride. I'm sad he didn't get to do at least 1 or 2 more as I feel he had 2 or 3 more left in him but I'm still satisfied with the fun 4 we did get.

    +1

    His films aren't cinema, they are unapologetic blockbusters. They were highly entertaining at the time and a reliable moviegoing experience. They remain so for me, always will.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    The Brosnan era is ok. An era of passable mediocrity. Serviceable, but unremarkable.
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    suavejmf wrote: »
    The Brosnan era is ok. An era of passable mediocrity. Serviceable, but unremarkable.

    That description better suits Craig's era tbh as at least Brosnan acts like Bond and not a Jason Bourne clone like Craig does. CR and QOS are fine movies in their own right but then you have the 1 2 punch combo of Skyfall and Spectre which are just...awful honestly for a variety of reasons.

    But hey different strokes for different folks I suppose
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Brosnan does play Bond way way too smooth most of the time in line delivery, his mugging for the camera, his soft spoken, which makes him hard to understand as a character with not a lot going behind the eyes. I never have that issue with Connery, Moore, Dalton, and Craig.

    But Lazenby sucked, so at least Brosnan is ahead of him.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    edited March 2020 Posts: 3,497
    Not that Bourne clone bs again.

    /:) [-X
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    edited March 2020 Posts: 210
    Lazenby is a weird one. He certainly tries hard but he just doesn't look or sound like Bond does at all tbh. He did good action scenes and emotional scenes well but he just doesn't really feel like Bond to me personally, though I'll give him credit as he was relatively new at acting at the time. Lazenby's best scene as Bond is easily the ending of OHMSS, just a shame they felt the need to blare the Bond theme out of nowhere which..why?

    Honestly when it comes to the Bonds: Connery, Moore, Dalton and Brosnan are all 4 top notch and almost untouchable in how good they are as Bond. Sure Connery got misfires like TB and YOLT and Dalton had issues in his 2 movies (more so TLD than LTK) but honestly the 4 of them are all engaging no matter what and they make the movies all entertaining to a certain degree and tend to be the highlight of their entries though of course there's other highlights and great factors in their films too that make them fun.

    Actually being honest I'd say Craig had better movies than Lazenby, sure I've mentioned SF and SP are less than stellar but CR and QOS are entertaining in their own way and I find them more fun than Lazenby if I'll be honest. My only issue with Craig in CR and QOS was a lack of Bond signature formula elements. Otherwise I enjoyed the characters, story and the darker tone was a nice idea to freshen things up but I feel after Quantum things should've slowly but surely returned to normal. They didn't do that sadly and when Spectre tried, it felt forced and lazy, besides we know how messy that one turned out on the whole, yikes.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    EON does that all the time as if to make sure audiences don’t leave on a down note. QOS does this with a very somber ending and then DAH DAH! BUUUURMMM DAH DAH! BUUURRRMMMM DA-DA DA-DA-DAH!!!
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    EON does that all the time as if to make sure audiences don’t leave on a down note. QOS does this with a very somber ending and then DAH DAH! BUUUURMMM DAH DAH! BUUURRRMMMM DA-DA DA-DA-DAH!!!

    xaKAyIx.gif
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    edited March 2020 Posts: 210
    It's unfortunate, leaving with a somber ending would be far more impactful. Speaking of endings can we mention how good CR and QOS's endings really are? Cause they're pretty great ending scenes imo.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    It's unfortunate, leaving with a somber ending would be far more impactful. Speaking of endings can we mention how good CR and QOS's endings really are? Cause they're pretty great ending scenes imo.

    Once again, it all comes down to personal taste. But then again, I never "hated" QOS as much as many of our members.
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    I never did either tbh, I did have a phase in 2018 I think it was where I was trashing it hard but that calmed down after a rewatch. I've enjoyed Quantum since I was a kid and Saw it in theaters back in 2008, was the first Bond film I can fully recall on the Big Screen too so it's special. Plus I may have played the Nintendo DS game of Quantum a whole lot as a kid too.
  • edited March 2020 Posts: 11,425
    SF and SP are great Brosnan movies. SF is basically a remake of TWINE but with a worse score.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited March 2020 Posts: 13,978
    Getafix wrote: »
    SF and SP are great Brosnan movies.

    73ae9fe6298250bb208b0503d0f56fae.jpg

    (Not going to apologise for posting any Capt. Picard meme)
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Brosnan would have been lucky to have had SF.
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    I'm glad he didn't have SF, SF is just TWINE 2.0 but garbage compared to the Original TWINE and I don't mean the theme song. Spectre and Skyfall would not work no matter who is the lead role because when something is awful it's awful, 1 small change like who plays Bond won't fix it. You can't fix dog crap cause it's Dog crap. The movies would need a big rewrite and remake process to even be able to be made good in all honesty. It's not like Thunderball where better pacing would be the only real fix you'd need to have a great Bond film on your hands. Brosnan may be fantastic but even he can't save Skyfall or Spectre, neither could Connery or Dalton or Moore. It's just unsalvageable in it's current form apart from some good things sprinkled throughout
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited March 2020 Posts: 5,131
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    The Brosnan era is ok. An era of passable mediocrity. Serviceable, but unremarkable.

    That description better suits Craig's era tbh as at least Brosnan acts like Bond and not a Jason Bourne clone like Craig does. CR and QOS are fine movies in their own right but then you have the 1 2 punch combo of Skyfall and Spectre which are just...awful honestly for a variety of reasons.

    But hey different strokes for different folks I suppose

    IMO option CR is the best Bond film since the 60’s. So that film alone raises the era above mediocrity.
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    CR is a great movie, but a good Bond movie it is not. It's a poor Bond film but as a regular movie? It's fantastic
Sign In or Register to comment.