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
Understandable, everyone has their biases and opinions. I kind of felt a bit biased at first towards Craig, I was only a kid at the time, but as a kid whose only exposure to Bond was Brosnan’s films and video games along with some of the earlier films, it was a tough act to follow, and I’ll always fight the corner for Brosnan. He was, imho, the perfect actor they could’ve gotten for that part back then, and he perfectly balanced everything that had come before into a nice package complete with a bow on top. I understand the frustration some may have, and can also see why people criticize Brosnan for that reason, but I’ve seen enough of his own personality and charm as well, and some of the elements he brings in those 4 films to where I just simply disagree.
With Craig’s tenure behind us, it’ll be interesting to see how the next actor will stand in comparison. Obviously we’re all going to give him a shot (unless it’s that one fellow who only watches Connery that you mentioned), but just as I and plenty of others felt Brosnan was a tough act to follow, we all feel and know that following Craig will not be easy, but as Craig and his tenure proved, anything can happen. Hell the next actor they cast could very well be much better than the others, who knows, I’m just celebrating Daniel, finally being able to appreciate what he did for the role after watching NTTD, and I’m very excited for the future. It’s an exciting time to be a Bond fan in my opinion!
Nuff said
Although, to be fair, I agree GE is the best Brosnan film.
As do I, despite my love for TND and TWINE.
I'd go for Connery, Dalton, and Brosnan as the better Bonds (though Moore admittedly inhabited the part well), but I agree with your point. Just as I think there is no full overlap between *a good film" and "a good Bond film", I think being a good actor does not necessarily translate into being a good Bond. Who is, after all, a blunt instrument, and I think Craig's acting skill made him take the role too seriously, as it were. I am not sure I can objectively compare Craig's and Dalton's acting ability as I am biased due to finding Dalton more charismatic, but for all the un-campiness of his Bond, I think Dalton approached the character with a lighter touch.
B-)
I'd agree with this - you've explained it well there, in bold
Sean Bean would have been excellent as 007. Great actor - FANTASTIC voice & line delivery.
Although he might have had to stay Northern - I think GE showed that his Southern plummy accent was a bit dodgy! :D
I'm of this mind. The Brosnan Era is one I have simply stopped watching. Generally speaking I found the films noisy and visually dull. I too often felt embarrassed with Brosnan (although I found him very whimsical and fun in the first half of TND). Some say that he should have got a more gritty film, and often those same people point to the first thirty minutes of DAD as proof; I may be alone on this, but I found Brosnan sorely lacking and melodramatic in the first bit of DAD (and really any time he tried to be "cold" or "serious"). I think he would have failed as a grittier Bond because he wasn't believably "the blunt instrument"... He just wasn't as talented or natural to pull this side off, IMO.
This was just a blah and cookie-cutter era for me.
Cubby would have turned down Craig on his height alone. He did the same over Burt Reynolds when they were looking at American actors, referring to Reynolds as a "shrimp" as he was 5'11".
+1
Said it better than I ever could!
And I love Daniel Craig as Bond.
Yes, this is somehow possible. ;)
SPOILERS for NTTD below ... (in spoiler tag)
For me, GE and TND are classic, wonderful and genuinely great Bond movies.
GE is flawed only with its music.
TND is where Brosnan makes Bond his own, plays him with great confidence and easy charm, just hits his stride perfectly, and gave him some very good more serious moments. I adore those two movies.
TWINE was a mixed bag for me in several ways, yet I still enjoyed Pierce ... but I did feel his portrayal was more up and down. Not a settled or as wholly satisfying for me as he was in TND. Fun PTS, Sophie was good, but I felt let down by Robert Carlyle (I like him so much, so I was disappointed), and I thought it was good, not great.
DAD - Hey, I liked the 1st half quite a bit. I did enjoy Brosnan's more mature Bond and I thought he handled this role more evenly than in TWINE and was strong in it. But the script left me annoyed and unhappy at times, Halle was lovely but just okay; her character tended to annoy me (again, this often ridiculous script), and oh how I wanted to like it a lot. But it was one I found fun only in parts. I kept wishing, afterwards, that they had kept Bond in the tone of the first half hour. There was too much empty malarkey after that. I still liked Brosnan in the role, because I always liked him, and I wanted VERY much for him to have a fifth and truly great Bond movie again. Alas, that was not to be. (I am sure Pierce was more disappointed than any of us.)
I think Pierce was a good Bond and he is a good, sometimes really damn good actor ... but his performance can be lesser depending upon the director and script. This is just my opinion (all of this, of course). I do think that can be said of many actors, by the way.
Then finally, after a longer wait than we were used to after Brosnan's era ...
With CR, Daniel Craig burst upon the scene, surprising all of us (yes, pretty darn near all of us Bond fans; even those who knew him already and liked him as an actor). He is superb in CR from the first moment - raw, realistic, and cast perfectly for this particular story of the beginnings of this 00 agent.
I knew, from the opening on, that this Bond was different and that Craig had the acting chops to give us a very different, far more realistic take on Bond than we had with any other previous Bond movies. If EON would go along that path ... and they did, much to my great pleasure. I have plenty of fun moments, in Craig's Bond movies; and overall, they are more satisfying for me.
We started to endure longer periods between Bond movies.
At last, SF ... which hit me in every good way from first viewing and is still one of my all time favourite Bond movies. Simply stunning, emotionally just right, epic, gorgeously filmed, fine storytelling and direction - and again continuing to give us Bond's personal story and emotions, his genuine development as a person happening with each of Craig's films. Like a blessed oasis after a drought and trek across the desert, SF was satisfying in every way for me. It still is.
SP, a bit of a wait (now resigned to never having Bond films every 2 years again - I hope no more than 3, though). SP started well for me but went on a more predictable (meaning harkening back to Moore and Brosnan times) path that left me enjoying it with popcorn only; fizzing out like flat soda pop soon after. I wanted to love it. I liked it. I enjoyed Daniel in it, but I missed the depth and thoughtfulness that his previous 3 films had. The ending was ... yay? Okay. I liked Madeleine and him being together. I felt like this was the send off for a deeper Bond I had enjoyed; the ending was not truly satisfying for me. I only saw it once in the cinema. I don't own the DVD.
Very long wait. Was it worth it ...?
NTTD - Yes, considerably.
This stellar, stunning movie is a gem. More than what I was hoping for, and I was hoping for a LOT, believe me. Eon took the risks and gave me a film I cherish.
I was moved, thrilled, emotionally filled up ... and nothing in this film disappointed me much at all. I have only tiny things I would change a bit. This story bravely went full steam, with exactly the right director and cinematographer, to give us the most fitting end for Craig's Bond. It completes his journey. It gave this Bond some deeper, mature love, and a family of his own. And peace before he died. Importantly, his death was heroic in every sense.
I enjoyed the tying up of connections to previous films. I enjoyed the brilliant, fun moments, fine dialog, stunning cinematography and set design; so much to engage us. I enjoyed the full story it gave us with Madeleine's background lighting the way for u - weaving it all together in a compelling, moving, and ultimately noble end for this very special James Bond. Every actor exactly on point and superb, and none shone greater than Daniel. He gave us everything in this movie; heart and soul and courage of this James Bond. His acting had the right tone, the right beat. I don't think any of NTTD is overdone or "off." I think EON hit it out of the ballpark (as they did with SF).
How can I enjoy a film with such a tragic ending? Because it is appropriate and left us with James Bond truly being the Bond I know from Fleming, as well as from previous films in part and from Craig's earlier Bond films in particular. It does have fun, lighter moments; but overall, it is one of the most satisfying Bond movies ever for me.
Brosnan's movies WERE good fun for me, and two I consider outstanding. I think GE is a superb (and exactly what we needed at that time) and it belongs in the top 10 forever. I enjoy Brosnan's Bond a lot.
Craig's films have fun moments that are thoroughly enjoyable, but his movies are definitely more satisfying for me and all of them put together are a much more enjoyable ride for me. And I mean compared to all previous Bond films, by all the actors.
I will watch all of his more than Pierce's. But GE and TND I will always revisit and enjoy immensely.
As a Brosnan fanboy here, even I find myself going through the Connery-Dalton eras more than both Brosnan’s and Craig’s. Just prefer Classic Bond.
I don't know why people dump on the Brosnan era. I guess if people can't find joy in remote control BMWs, parahawks, and buzzsaws dangling from helicopters, that's their loss, not mine.
Die Another Day fails, however, because while the other Brosnan features balanced the silliness with somewhat seriousness, DAD was just silly.
Now that Craig has replaced Brosnan in the zeitgeist, and his flavor of film is in vogue, anything that takes Bond as anything less than deadly serious is perceived as inferior, even debasing to this new, earnest legacy.
Just don't take it too serious, or you'll realize you're more interested in Le Carre than Ian Fleming.
Very well put! =D>
+1
Funny you recognized parahawks and buzzsaws dangling from helicopters as exciting and fun as those are sequences I was going to point to as part of why TWINE is my least favorite Bond film and why those sequences in particular are why Bond films were giving way to other action films at the time. Those scenes are the antithesis of exciting with their timed explosions, predictability, and caviar factory in particular, focused on amusement rather than excitement. I never felt Bond was in any danger during these sequences, just a case of insert action scene here. But it has your whimsy in abundance and if that's your thing, you're in luck.
When CR opened with a low-key pretitles sequence of how Bond gained his 00 status it spoke volumes more to me than any overblown sequence designed to showcase a stunt. Then the Parkour chase was the most original and exciting action sequence in years. That's what I call fun and exciting and didn't need a cheap quip to make it complete.
As I mentioned in a previous post, if a Bond who's a "synthesis" of other Bond's traits without being an improvement on them and delivers witty lines with "aplomb" then that's your right. I get more satisfaction from a Bond who delivers the spy grit rather than a line.
as did DAD.
DAD is actually the closest we ever came to an adaptation of MR. That is pretty messed up...
One thing I loved in the Moonraker novel, that we haven t seen in the films yet, is all the little tidbits about Bond s job.