› ›

every past actor sucks- a pattern in the bond films

thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
edited December 2011 in Actors Posts: 12,837
So it seems everybody hates brosnan, even though everybody was begging for him to play the role for years. But after goldeneye people said brosnan was an improvment over dalton. And apparently daltons darker films were better than moores homourous ones, which apparently saved the franchise after DAF. It seems like every time a new bond actor is cast people decide he's better than the last one. The only exception I can think of is lasenby.

EG

1973: audience: wow, that was much better than the last one, moore has saved the franchise

1987: audience: the new darker films are much better than moores campy comedy films!!!

1995: audience: brosnan is way better than dalton, he has saved the franchise!!!

2006: audience: craig! craig! craig! craig! CR is the best film ever. Craig has saved the franchise!!!!!



See the pattern??? now I like all the bonds, so its a shame this happens.

Comments

  • KennonKennon
    Posts: 297
    Naw, don't really see it that way. Every past fashion sucks is more like. With a new actor there generally comes a new style and that is what oftimes divides audiences. But old actors also have their own strong fanbase, see Connery and Moore.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    I think 'audience' is used very liberally in those examples, @thelivingroyale. Fans and casual Bond viewers usually react somewhat differently.

    Also, there will always be those who like the next thing because it's a new thing and those who dislike the next thing because they can't let go of the old thing.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Is see it more like:

    Sean>>>>>>>George
    George(or any of them really)>>>>>>>>>>>>Roger
    Roger<<<<<<<<<<<<<Tim
    Tim<<<<<<Brosnan
    Brosnan<<<<<<<<<<<<<Dan
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited December 2011 Posts: 4,399
    by that logic @thelivingroyale..... someone like me, who really does like and enjoy the 2 Craig outings, would find every movie before, especially Brosnan's, awful then.. right?...

    Goldeneye still ranks as one of my favorite Bond films...

    Connery is still my favorite Bond, and From Russia With Love is still my favorite 007 adventure...

    and this is from someone who was introduced to the franchise with GE and TND..

    so...face..
  • JBFan626JBFan626
    edited December 2011 Posts: 1,497
    @thelivingroyale: I think you're probably right for the most part. But I don't think it was always quite that extreme. Moore didn't really make a splash in '73 and '74. It wasn't really until Spy, that Moore was fully embraced it seems. I'm also not sure if the general audience lauded Dalton with mass fanfare, as his box office numbers show. I see his tenure more-so reflecting the times of audiences wanting a more down and dirty serious action thriller akin to Die Hard.

    But I think essentially your argument represent the cycles of changing public opinion, which seems to be accurate through the years.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    JBFan626 wrote:
    I'm also not sure if the general audience lauded Dalton with mass fanfare, as his box office numbers show.

    I think that can be safely assumed... there was still a Moore hangover, and the mass public wanted Brosnan in the role badly... so when Dalton was announced, I dont think the public warmed up to him as quickly....

    plus, i do think a lot conspired against LTK that summer than just the theory of Dalton being so bad that no one wanted to see his movie... there was a reason why after LTK, the producers moved Bond releases to the fall..... had LTK been released in the fall like the films after it, I think it's safe to say it might have made quite a bit more... that summer in '89 was packed tight.

  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    edited December 2011 Posts: 1,778
    I def see what you mean @thelivingroyale but personally I always loved Dalton and was disappointed he only did two before the role moved onto Brosnan. But you have a point. I seems as if the only actors ammuned to this were Connery and Lazenby.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited December 2011 Posts: 4,399
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    I def see what you mean @thelivingroyale but personally I always loved Dalton and was disappointed you only did two before the role moved onto Brosnan. But you have a point. I seems as if the only actors ammuned to this were Connery and Lazenby.

    I don't even think Lazenby was immune...

    the only one who wasn't is Connery, because he was the first, and had nothing to compare against........ well, maybe Barry Nelson lol.

  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    HASEROT wrote:
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    I def see what you mean @thelivingroyale but personally I always loved Dalton and was disappointed you only did two before the role moved onto Brosnan. But you have a point. I seems as if the only actors ammuned to this were Connery and Lazenby.

    I don't even think Lazenby was immune...

    the only one who wasn't is Connery, because he was the first, and had nothing to compare against........ well, maybe Barry Nelson lol.

    Well no one was saying that Lazenby was an improvement over Connery back in 1969. And Conenery was immune in that no one ever said he sucked. Till this day he's widly considered the best Bond.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    HASEROT wrote:
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    I def see what you mean @thelivingroyale but personally I always loved Dalton and was disappointed you only did two before the role moved onto Brosnan. But you have a point. I seems as if the only actors ammuned to this were Connery and Lazenby.

    I don't even think Lazenby was immune...

    the only one who wasn't is Connery, because he was the first, and had nothing to compare against........ well, maybe Barry Nelson lol.

    Well no one was saying that Lazenby was an improvement over Connery back in 1969. And Conenery was immune in that no one ever said he sucked. Till this day he's widly considered the best Bond.

    ok, i read your quote backwards then lol - my bad... i was thinking that you had said Lazenby wasn't drawing comparison arguments.. and here i am going "he replaced Connery! how could be not?!" lol.... so sorry about that.......

    so, yes, i do agree with you.
  • KennonKennon
    Posts: 297
    Well, Connery's YOLT was already a little past it and DAF was borderline. But outright 'sucks' I don't think I've heard.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    edited December 2011 Posts: 1,778
    How do you guys suppose Moore had aged? I think he's still considered popular.
  • JBFan626JBFan626
    Posts: 1,497
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    Speaking of DAF being borderline what do you guys think of my new photo? Connery letting it all hang-out so to speak in DAF.

    <img>http://0.tqn.com/d/paranormal/1/0/s/A/patterson_bigfoot_lg.jpg</img>;
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    I def see what you mean @thelivingroyale but personally I always loved Dalton and was disappointed he only did two before the role moved onto Brosnan. But you have a point. I seems as if the only actors ammuned to this were Connery and Lazenby.

    so do I, dalton is my fave bond.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    I think I went too extreme with the opening post but you know what I mean
  • SAMSAM
    Posts: 107
    I know exactly what you mean thelivingroyale. I'm afraid mass audiences are quite capricious i.e. change opinion on whim.

    Each time a new James Bond 007 actor is announced - everyone (or most) believe that they are better than previous Bonds.

    Though once their tenure passes, their records are duly criticised once their successors have been announced. Having said that, that criticism can be justified when directed at Pierce Brosnan's tenure.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited December 2011 Posts: 11,189
    Yes, I know what you mean.

    It goes like this.

    "He's brilliant. (insert name) is the best since Sean Connery". I remember it in 1995 and I know the same thing is happening now. Rather tedious tbh.

    Don't get me wrong, I like DC but its funny to hear how general concensus suddenly changes so dranstically.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    edited December 2011 Posts: 1,778
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Yes, I know what you mean.

    It goes like this.

    "He's brilliant. (insert name) is the best since Sean Connery". I remember it in 1995 and I know the same thing is happening now. Rather tedious tbh.

    Don't get me wrong, I like DC but its funny to hear how general concensus suddenly changes so dranstically.

    You're right on the money there. I've heard that "best Bond since Connery line" used liberally during Dalton, Brosnan, and Craig's runs. Granted I was too young to remember uch from Dalton's years but I've read/watched crtics reviews to that effect.
  • karatemanchan37karatemanchan37
    Posts: 584
    You know why this is happening?

    Because every Bond actor always ended their run on a bad note...
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    edited December 2011 Posts: 1,778
    karatemanchan37 wrote:
    You know why this is happening?

    Because every Bond actor always ended their run on a bad note...

    True. Everyone except Dalton IMO. LTK still stands as one of my top 5 favorite Bond films. But DAF, AVTAK, and DAD were all embarassing ways to go out.
  • thelordflasheartthelordflasheart
    Posts: 1,370
    I think that a lot of audiences, especially younger ones (say, the coveted 16-25 demo), really identify with what is current and think what is recently past is passe - whether stars, films, music, clothes, etc. Mind you that I'm talking about the general audience, not the fine folks here.

    For myself, I was often the opposite. I loved the Connery Bond films even though Moore was the current Bond when I was a kid. My schoolmates ridiculed me because it was obvious that Connery was a loser because he wore Brylcreme in his hair and wore "stupid" clothes - he wasn't as cool as Moore with his safari suits and hairsprayed hair.

    Then when Brosnan came on the scene I still liked Dalton as much as I ever did. I will said that I quite liked Brosnan in GE; a lot of that had to do with worries that he would be far wimpier and more campy than he was (and although his confidence grew with every new film he made so did the smugness and bad humour).

    I will concede that there was a bit of a retroactive diminishment of Brosnan's performances in my mind once I saw what a great actor could do with the role. It's not so much that I suddenly didn't like Brosnan anymore, it's just that the problems that I always had with him were shown in starker relief.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    each new Bond usually speaks and connects to a new generation of movie goer...

    but i still don't see the need as to why the movie goer should think one way or the other..... because honestly, if they didn't like each new actor more than the one before - the film series probably would've died off long ago
  • JBFan626JBFan626
    edited December 2011 Posts: 1,497
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    karatemanchan37 wrote:
    You know why this is happening?

    Because every Bond actor always ended their run on a bad note...

    True. Everyone except Dalton IMO. LTK still stands as one of my top 5 favorite Bond films. But DAF, AVTAK, and DAD were all embarassing ways to go out.

    But financially and for ticket sales, the numbers were low. I was a kid 1989 and I hadn't even heard of the movie, but I did know about Indiana Jones Last Crusade, UHF, Star Trek V, Ghostbusters II and Batman!! There wasn't exactly Bond-mania going on around that time. It seemed like Brosnan's arrival in 1995 was seen as a vital boost, because Bond had lost a lot of popularity by the end of Dalton...for whatever it's worth.

    But yes, from a fan's perspective, you could definitely make the case that Dalts was an exception to this rule. Although me personally, I would also defend Connery, as I don't think he made a bad film as Bond, and I didn't exactly see LALD as any great saving grace of the series, that's for sure.

  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited December 2011 Posts: 11,189
    I like LTK but the last time I saw it, the film fell a bit short. It didn't seem "Bond" enough for some reason but maybe thats because I saw OHMSS right before it.

    On the one hand you have grusome exploding heads and on the other you have winking fish and a random (but nonetheless fun) visit from Q. The film seemed...kind of muddled and Dalton's attitude was getting annoying.

    Get on with your damn job. You should know the risks and its not as if you'd worked with Felix all that much in the years before it.

    Not really Dalton's fault though. He did what he could.
Sign In or Register to comment.