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
I like that one too. And Brosnan carries a revolver!
And has one of Craig’s Bond girls in it...Olga Kurylenko!
It’s all tastes and preferences, but at the end of the day, the films should never be a reflection on the actor. If they were, then Lazenby would be commonly declared the best Bond because of how many people view OHMSS as the best. I think Brosnan is still one of the best Bonds regardless of the movies he was placed in, and if it wasn’t for his portrayal, Bond would never have survived beyond the Cold War. He was the right man for the job in 95, and arguably brought the franchise to new heights, and introducing an entire generation of fans to the films. As far as not understanding some of the praise, it’s all just ones personal enjoyment factor. Like I personally don’t understand the praise thrown into Skyfall, not to say that I think it’s a bad film by any means, but I can’t understand how some people can look past some the Meta Commentary of that film when it just doesn’t work at all, and I also just think there are better Bond films. I guess as a Brosnan fan, part of my enjoyment of his era and his films (GE, TND, and TWINE each being in my top 10) comes down the light, breezy tone of his films, and the man himself.
I’m going to get laughed at here but I don’t care at all, this is just my opinion, but I think Brosnan the only other actor (besides Connery) to have successfully nailed every element of the Cinematic Bond. Lazenby, Moore, Dalton, and Craig (although great in their own ways) each had trouble doing that, whereas Brosnan was able to tap into those elements effortlessly.
But I feel the exact same way about it now as I did then; I doubt there will be a 3rd viewing.
GE became the template for me the instant I saw the film in '95. The reason TND disappointed me two years later is that it wasn't GE² (pretty much also why QOS didn't do it for me at first: it wasn't CR²). To this day, I still hold GE in extremely high regard. It's still a strong thriller in my opinion, clever and well-acted. I absolutely adore the cinematography and the cold, calculated story-telling. If TND is a fun afternoon at a theme park, then GE feels like a serious night out in the real world.
Yes, and the next two films as well. I think it’s a huge missed opportunity to not have Brosnan in a Flemingesque adventure, so much so to where his era does stick out a bit like a sore thumb because of that reason, especially when all of the others have had that type of film at least once during their tenure.
I never criticized Brosnan. Just his films.
I do feel sorry for Brosnan, though. After the brilliance that is GE, he was dealt a "stupid fun" script (TND), a pedestrian wannabe-dramatic script (TWINE) and "Yo Momma" / "Read THIS, bitch!" (DAD). In other words, Brosnan received one chance to prove himself a really awesome Bond. But, to be fair, he managed to maintain a straight face in the cartoonish and silly follow-ups to his debut, and that deserves a lot of praise too. He was a fine Bond; he could've been a great Bond if his films had treated him better.
All that and the fact he got rather unceremoniously kicked to the curb, and fair enough the producers recognize he was a great Bond, but it always stings what happened to him.
All Bond movies have flaws. Even those I’d consider great films and even masterpieces. As a Bond fan though these flaws are more than compensated by things that I love about them so I can look past the flaws to be rewarded by movies that i cherish.
Even what I would consider to be the most flawed Bond movies, those that sit with TND towards the bottom of my rankings, films like DAF and SP, I still find things in them I love and that I return to.
There is nothing about TND that I love or even like. To me it’s a bland forgettable meh 90s action flick. It tries so hard to compensate for its meh-ness and half baked script by shoving groaning ‘look this is a Bond movie’ elements in the viewers face. That leaves us with the things like the ‘Pump her for information’ banter, a truly painful low point, Jonathan Pryce’s smoked ham performance, and the most perfunctory of all Big Blonde Dude henchmen.
If pushed I’d say the best thing about it is David Arnold’s score. But even there I can’t whole heartedly say I think it’s a good score. It veers too close to pastiche and is probably the ultimate ‘look this is a Bond movie’ offender. He’d go on to do much better and more interesting work for the series, producing what I consider genuinely great scores for CR and QOS. Here though it’s as if the producers told him to make sure the music left the viewers in no doubt that they were watching Bond, and to dial it up, and there is no subtlety or lyricism in the score.
Unfortunately there is nothing I like about this movie. There is lots i dislike. Carver, easily my least favourite villain. The finale, easily the most forgettable, generic, half baked piece of meh in the series. Not one interesting piece of story telling or film making going on, just Bond duel wielding guns.
Some of the action set pieces earlier in the film are well conceived but fall so flat and feel so unexciting in execution.
And finally, I don’t like hearing the Brosnan groan. The scene where Bond and Wai Lin escape Carver’s tower by tearing down the huge banner has probably worst of all Brosnan groans
We reach!
He got four films and finished his contract. I can’t feel too bad for him. Dalton on the other hand…
Depends on the story you hear, I’ve heard of the MGM executives who weren’t hot on Dalton returning for Goldeneye, but have also heard that Dalton had the opportunity to come back, but chose not too due to having to sign on for additional films after. Brosnan on the other hand did finish his contract, and was invited back before the producers changed their minds and decided with the reboot, completely catching Pierce off guard.
I like your style. I agree Brosnan was able to touch all those bases, and because of that, and having no really dramatic script to get his teeth into, he's often seen as a vanilla 'greatest hits' Bond. Unfortunately.
That’s why I always lament him not getting a 5th, more down to earth film like FYEO. Pierce has shown on numerous occasions outside of the series that he had the chops to go darker, and he himself wanted to do just that, that’s why I fight the corner for him so much against those comments, that and nostalgia.
He proved himself in other films with dramatic scripts to get his teeth into (most recently November Man). He was the best Bond that there could be in his four films, given the writing & direction.
Not Brozz.
Sorry.
Get into a ring with a fighter.
Then tell me Brozz knew what he was doing...
Of all the criticisms I’ve seen about Brosnan, his “inability” to convincingly throw a punch is one I’ve never seen before...
This is a statement that could be levelled against most actors, including a couple of others who have played Bond. Tim wasn't particularly great with the scraps either, nor was Moore (often laughably so, in real life he'd have been knocked on his ass with the amount of time it took him to bring his fist up); and for my money, even a couple of Craig's fights fall victim to being overchoreographed to the point where it looks too neat - the exception to this day still being the bathroom and stairwell fights in CR.
The point being: get into a ring with a proper fighter and most people won't know what they're doing. That's why they're actors and not fighters.
I think George was the one who threw the best punches, personally.
Peter. Calm down. This is fantasy. Did Brozz know how to swordfight in DAD? Can YOU? As a martial artist I don't need perfection move per move in a movie not based in fighting (like Enter The Dragon or Defiance or Raging Bull). Sometimes a good punch comes from intent & not training. Sometimes we get a great fight in a Bond movie (FRWL, QOS), but most times it's standard stuff in service of the drama. Trying to dis Brozz because you might be able to throw a punch better than he because you trained hard at a skill that was not his center of attention as an actor is kind of easy.
Pierce when he hears this criticism....
;)
LAZ thew terrible punches! They sped up the action. Lazenby was a clumsy fighter. But.... OHMSS has been my number one for a while...
I'm not talking about most actors (Stallone would be crushed inside of Round One in a real match, btw); I'm talking about Bond/brosnan; Brosnan definitely couldn't fight.., but his fans always site the GE fight. He was terrible. Bean sold it, and; Brozz was never capable of a more realistic fight beyond GE.
And short story on Craig: he sold a punch EVERY TIME coz he knew how to fight
Love it. :))
It's only in the wake of the Bourne movies that EON decided Bond must be visibly proficient in multiple martial arts. Before that, being a creative asymetrical fighter was enough. Brosnan was up to the challenge every time IMHO.
Ugh...
And @CraigMooreOHMSS ... Compare that stylized punch that Brozz did in your cliip to the crackling punches in CR (any fight), QoS (any fight).... Shall I continue?
I used to do this at the office everytime I offered to light a cigarette.
Anybody got a job?
What makes him terrible in the GE fight? Granted, I've been very vocal about how awful the fight during the TWINE climax is, so I'm really quite interested in hearing why the GE fight is also bad; I don't think it's really that difficult to throw a punch and I think he does it quite well there. I don't buy the notion that Bean carries the sequence. If Brosnan was truly as bad as you say, and if Bean was that much better than him, people wouldn't hold the fight up as an example. The opposite would likely be true, in fact.
As noted above, happy to concede CR. Wonderfully raw and brutal style on display throughout the film. But I don't think the fights in QoS are sold well because they're choreographed to within an inch of their life - you can almost see the performers trying to remember the moves before they're supposed to make them. Conversely, that is not realistic to me.
Say what you will about Brosnan’s fight scenes, but they never resorted to outright copying Bourne for their fight scenes, damn shame one couldn’t say the same about Craig/QOS...