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
And if I am being honest, i think the last 3 films have played some part in this, too.
For me, he was best in GE (in the sense that he fit into the movie best). His best performance likely was in DAD, but the film was a comedic joke. His TWINE performance was his worst by far, imho.
I am in agreement with @Thunderfinger that on the whole, much as I like Brosnan, he was not suited for Bond. I think he acknowledges that too now, since the years have passed and he's not so bitter about it.
I think Brosnan was suited and maybe even ideal for what they wanted to do at the time. GE I'm sure would have been a success without him but not as much. The franchise needed someone more superficial for Bond (for lack of a better term). However his tenure was by the number and unimaginative and he was partially responsible for it. He had no control over the scripts but if they were by the numbers he did not have to play by the number.
I understand where you're coming from, that's exactly how I feel towards Brosnan and his Bond films. But make no mistake, as much as my opinion of Brosnan has softened over time, I would still replace him with Dalton. Dalton lacked Brosnans pull with the public, but he could have done so much more, even with the same material as Brosnan.
And then there's the acting, of course. I think Craig is by far the best when compared to Brosnan. So any judgement on Brosnan looking back is blurred by the fact that Craig outperforms him, which isn't really fair.
matinee idols such as Cary Grant, Rock Hudson etc had nothing on Bond in the looks department.
But Bond was also blunt instrument.
Tough and dangerous.
Best Bond is the rough playboy ie Connery and Laz.
The other 4; nice try but not quite.
Well said @CommanderRoss. This sums it up for me perfectly. Brosnan will always be compared with his immediate successor, who is a far superior actor (to possibly all the Bonds.....). So any retrospective comparison will not be favourable to Brosnan as a result, and that is somewhat unfair to him.
However, the lack of gravitas description you mention is something I felt during his tenure (from the get-go) in comparison with all his predecessors.....not just in comparison to Craig. This was further compounded by the somewhat indestructible, superhuman aspect that characterized his era (number of machine gun kills, explosions etc.), which was not his fault at all, but rather, that of the producers. The two impressions were in direct conflict with one another for me, and so strained credibility.
<font color=blue size=7><b>SF restored the Secret Service crew (Q, M, MP) in its old glory but for modern times.</b></font>
Possibly? I think we would need to see Spectre before we could answer that accurately I think?
I agree that we need to see SP to be sure.
Definitely it seems that way for both M (strong, intelligent, resourceful, trusting) and Q (funny, thinks highly of his work and his abilities, condescending and unappreciative of 007's talents, geeky).
For me, the jury is still out on MP. During the great Lois Maxwell's day, she was resourceful, intelligent, accomodating, and with a huge crush on Bond. Since Lois, we've had several iterations and permutations, each not even close to being on par with the original imho. I reserve judgement on Naomi's MP. She appeared to be an incompetent in SF, which to me wasn't appealing, which had unfortunate subliminal (and probably unintended) racial stereotype overtones, and which is not customary for this character. Hopefully my concerns can be put to rest with a positive showing by her character in SP.
Ralph Fiennes is just about the most perfect M I can imagine. When I first heard of his casting in Skyfall I was hoping beyond hope he would ultimately become the next M. Now, we only saw Fiennes officially as M for a single scene and just one or two lines—more of a preview of future things than anything—but I can tell already he's going to do Bernard Lee proud and will have fantastic chemistry with Craig's Bond.
Whishaw and Harris are another matter, however...
I'm fully onboard with the reinvention of Q as a young, sassy hipster-techie, and I like Ben Whishaw's casting. There's a lot of potential behind the idea of reversing the age dynamic between Bond and Q yet keeping their friendly head-butting at play. That said, the Q scenes in Skyfall fell short for me on account of what felt like forced dialogue and an overly theatrical staging. None of the banter felt natural. This is, however, an issue I had with many of the performances/scenes in Skyfall so I chalk it up to Mendes's direction. With Mendes at the helm again for Spectre, I feel we're likely to get the same stilted deliveries from Bond and Q in their scenes together, but there's definitely potential for a really interesting and fun dynamic to develop between Whishaw and Craig (or whoever assumes the role next) in the future—maybe even with Spectre...we'll see.
The reinvention of Moneypenny is a bit rockier for me. I wasn't sure how I would feel about a field-tested, gun-saavy Moneypenny, and I'm still not entirely sure how I feel about it. It's okay, I guess. It opened up the possibility of this sort of sparring office interplay we got to see between Harris's Moneypenny and Craig's Bond, which worked pretty well. Again, however, I had a similar problem with Harris's performance as I did with Whishaw's: stilted, unnatural line deliveries. If these kinks can be worked out, and perhaps with some sharper dialogue, I don't see why Harris and Craig couldn't recapture some of that "old glory." I like Harris as an actress.
So, in summary: Skyfall promises a new M who will indeed recapture the old glory of the early days, yet reveals that with Q and Moneypenny there is much work to do.
I don't think Eve was incompetent. She seems to hold herself very well, she only made to take a difficult shot when she was ordered to do so. What bothered me more is that I find it difficult to believe Moneypenny was at any time a field agent, talented or not. And that she was too sexy, but that is another matter entirely.
I liked Samantha Bond
There are two alternatives to this: either no Q and MP at all, or trying desperately to mimic our beloved friends from the old days. We need to accept that sometimes the best approach is to restore these characters in their original function, but looking different, more adjusted to our modern times, and slightly spiced up in their attitude.
As for M, I think Ralph Fiennes is going to be a stunningly good M. We can already say for sure he's a very good actor and that is worth a lot. His interactions with Bond are no doubt going to have some spark and I'm glad, though I loved Dame Judy as M, that the motherly lectures are finished for some time. ;-)
So did I. But no one can compare to the original lineup.
I admit Cleese is a stinker, why they did that I'll never know. Fawlty Towers is superb, but he isn't Bond material.
As for Samantha Bond, I don't get the hate. Her chemistry with Brosnan is absolutely superb. With Bond and Dench, I think they are damn near perfect in GE and TND. Dench was never as good as in these two movies and I include all the Craig movies in that. As for Harris, thus far, she does not trump Bond for me.
I can't get on with Harris as MP though. She just seems wooden in the role, I don't like her new failed field agent backstory and she has no chemistry with Craig. Shame as I was actually quite excited to see her in SF. It's weird because before SF came out we were all certain that Naomi would be great while we were worried about Berenice because of her limited acting experience. But Berenice was brilliant as Severine and stole every scene she was in while Harris was poor as Eve/MP imo.
Obviously Lois is still the best one but I think Samantha Bond was much better than what we've seen of Naomi Harris so far. She had genuinely great chemistry with Brosnan, the kind you can't force and the kind that Craig/Harris don't seem to have. I'm hoping SP will prove me wrong but I'm not sure.
Anyway in response to the question, well they've restored them but I'm not sure if it's in its old glory yet. I like Fiennes, good actor and a great fit for M, but so far I prefer Dench. Wishaw is great, but as I said, I'm not a fan of Harris as MP. So we'll see I guess, I think to judge overall we do have to wait until SPECTRE as M and MP hadn't really settled into their roles throughout most of SF.
I did really like how similar M's office is to the old films though, with the door and everything. That was a really nice touch.
On the other hand, Craig and Harris do not have chemistry, and their attempts of banter was a slight stain on the otherwise impeccable casting of Skyfall.
Fiennes is a terrific actor, and is going to be fun to see him and Craig bounce of each other.
<font color=blue size=7><b>Should SP make more money than SF, it might have more to do with it being a franchise film and less with its quality.</b></font>
We'll probably have to wait for the movie to come out to make any real headway on this question, though.
I also see that James Bond has grown considerably in the USA as compared to Europe. In the USA James Bond always had stiffer competition from other franchises as compared to Europe: Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, True Lies, Mission Impossible, Fast & Furious, Hancock. With SF that has changed, and I seriously believe SP can outperform on SF's domestic box office share. More than 400 Million is possible. Add to that a more than 100 Million box office take in China, and you only need 500 Million more for the rest of the world = another 1 Billion Dollar. But I think, also looking at the immensely good reactions on this week's trailer, SP can go easily past $1.2 Billion, which is already 100 Million more than SF.