› ›

Would you rather a PTS with a big stunt or action piece OR a more grounded PTS?

1…5758606263…152

Comments

  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 7,507
    R1s1ngs0n wrote: »
    Let’s see… Layer Cake, Logan Lucky, the two Benoit Blanc movies (all of which I vastly prefer to any of Craig’s Bond films) vs. The Man Who Would Be King, The Great Train Robbery, The Name Of The Rose, The Untouchables…
    Connery all day long!

    Forgot about 'The Name of the Rose', another good one!
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,709
    Sean. Definitely. A legend!
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,139
    I've got to go with Sean here, even though I quite like a few Dan entries as well. Just so happens Sean has made a few more films that I like.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Sean has quite the filmography, with an amazing amount of different genres: The Anderson Tapes, The Man Who Would Be King, Outland, Highlander, The Russia House…. But I like Dan’s output too: Enduring Love, Cowboys and Aliens, The Mother, Layer Cake, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo…

    I suppose the answer for me is, it would depend on my mood.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,218
    Craig's made a few great films outside of Bond, but a lot of Sean's highs are absolute classics.

    No contest. Connery. And I think it would be the same of any other Bond actor was the opponent, too.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,475
    I’m more in the mood for something with Craig today, but that can change at any given time.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    edited October 2023 Posts: 9,041
    If you count all non-Bond films as well, I guess that Connery would be my choice. For instance, THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER is one of my go-to films when I don't feel I have to watch something new, and none of Craig's movies, even those I liked. But if the question is restricted to Bond movies, I can only give the standard lawyer answer: It depends. My top five of the franchise, in chronological and no other order, are FRWL, GF, CR, SF and NTTD. So there's maybe a 60:40 advantage to Craig, but then I may also decide to watch some lesser Connery films, e.g. DAF simply for the dialogue, nonsensical as the movie may be in other regards.
  • delfloriadelfloria
    Posts: 1,860
    Connery, any day, any time.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,139
    Looking at the non-Bond films I love, I would have to give Craig Munich and the Knives Out duology.

    But for Sean it's a whole lot more. The Hunt for Red October and The Wind and the Lion are two of my favourites, but nothing beats The Name of the Rose.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,170
    Sean Connery.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    I've watched 34 Connery films (7 Bonds + 27 non-Bonds) and 8 Craig films (5 Bonds + 3 non-Bonds). I would say I'd rather watch a Connery film than a Craig film, as the era of films Connery was part of is more appealing to me. Nostalgic, too. I also like the kinds of films he made, and I like recognizing actors in small roles in those films. There are many non-Bond Connery films I love, and only one I don't care for too much, which is The Anderson Tapes.

    That said, I have very much enjoyed the non-Bond films I've watched with Craig, I'm very excited about the upcoming Queer and Knives Out 3, and I look forward to watching more Craig films, both old and new.
  • ColonelSunColonelSun
    Posts: 1,493
    Sir Sean Connery - unbeatable. But I also have great respect for Craig, my second favourite Bond.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,438
    It was an unenviable task putting up Sir Sean against Daniel, well any actor. Lets do a would you rather that might spur more of a contrast or a challenge.

    Lets pit Sir Roger Moore's non-Bond movies against Pierce Brosnan's non-Bond films.

    Sir Roger produced some wonderful work away from Bond. I fondly recall the film The Wild Geese. Fflokes is another title that gets some love from folks on the board. Lets skip past Spice World, although some appreciate it for it's camp.

    Pierce has been in some entertaining flicks. The Thomas Crown Affair, The Matador, After the Sunset stand out for me. Pierce has even warbled on the big screen with Mama Mia.

    Would you rather watch a Sir Roger film OR a Pierce Brosnan flick?
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,789
    I liked Moore's TV shows, not much on his non Bond films, my favorite of the lot is The Persuaders, for such a brief TV show, it's one of the best, it worked in all aspects especially the acting and chemistry between the leads (Moore and Curtis), that makes me wished Tony Curtis played Felix Leiter in Live And Let Die instead, I could never get over to it, it's just so fun!

    So, when it comes to films, Brosnan, without a doubt, and it helps that he's much more of a bigger Movie Star than Moore, I though liked his appearance on Black Adam, and his fun performance in The King's Daughter, he's the brightest thing in those films, and yes, there are the likes of The November Man, The Matador, and The Tailor In Panama.

    I prefer Moore in TV Shows
    I prefer Brosnan in Films
  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 7,507
    Definitely go with Rog!
    The Wild Geese is one of my favourite go to films, and Rog is also great in The Sea Wolves, North Sea Hijack, The Man Who Haunted Himself, Escape To Athena, and Crossplot!
    Brossa? , well he was ok in The Thomas Crown Affair, though he was outshone by co star Rene Russo! After that I cant even think of what I saw him in, The Fourth Protocol was really Michael Caines gig, and pretty dire it was! Oh yes, he's in the brillant The Long Good Friday, but thankfully not a big part!
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,553
    Brosnan.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Only one of these two men was in Cannonball Run, and that man is the clear winner.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,139
    A tricky one. For me Rog's best non-Bond film is The Man Who Haunted Himself, while I also enjoyed Escape to Athena.

    That being said, I think I'll go with Pierce here: The Thomas Crown Affair, The Matador and The Ghost Writer are all favourites of mine.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 4,173
    I’d say that while Moore is the better actor, Brosnan has a handful of decent non-Bond films. Moore’s post Bond career isn’t always great either honestly. So Brosnan it is I guess.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,475
    Brosnan. There are several more films he's done outside of Bond that interest me than Moore.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 2023 Posts: 16,428
    007HallY wrote: »
    I’d say that while Moore is the better actor, Brosnan has a handful of decent non-Bond films. Moore’s post Bond career isn’t always great either honestly. So Brosnan it is I guess.

    Yeah, I'd rather watch Roger, but Pierce has the better selection of films really. I love North Sea Hijack, but I couldn't put my hand on my heart and say it's an actually good film :) ; and I've never even got all the way through Shout At The Devil, and Gold is one of the dullest films I've ever seen. Pierce does a lot of old rubbish but there's also some proper bits of gold in there like Mars Attacks or Thomas Crown, films that are genuinely good.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited October 2023 Posts: 3,789
    Moore had good and better TV shows than his films, The Saint and The Persuaders were all better than his filmography outside of Bond, the only remarkable films he'd starred in were the Bond films, of course.

    Brosnan's films were better than his TV shows, his Bond films and his non Bond films were all better than his TV shows, e.g. Remington Steele.
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    I’d say that while Moore is the better actor, Brosnan has a handful of decent non-Bond films. Moore’s post Bond career isn’t always great either honestly. So Brosnan it is I guess.

    Yeah, I'd rather watch Roger, but Pierce has the better selection of films really. I love North Sea Hijack, but I couldn't put my hand on my heart and say it's an actually good film :) ; and I've never even got all the way through Shout At The Devil, and Gold is one of the dullest films I've ever seen. Pierce does a lot of old rubbish but there's also some proper bits of gold in there like Mars Attacks or Thomas Crown, films that are genuinely good.

    It shows that Peter Hunt never followed the level of his work in OHMSS, both films you've mentioned are directed by him: Gold and Shout At The Devil.

    Or it's just that he's just lucky to have a good material to worked with in Bond (OHMSS), and talented people on his side at that time: Cyd Cain (Set Designer), Michael Reed (Cinematographer), and some great cast Diana Rigg, Telly Savalas and etc.?

    But these two Moore Non Bond films you've mentioned shows that Hunt is not actually a good director, and he's just lucky to worked with talented people and to have a good material to shoot?

    Both Gold and Shout At The Devil are both directed by Peter Hunt and indicates that he's not actually a good director?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 2023 Posts: 16,428
    Yes, I tend to think we got lucky with Hunt's one 007 flick and we possibly would have got a dud if he'd done another Bond.
  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    Posts: 1,371
    Hunt was a poor man's Terence Young.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited October 2023 Posts: 4,173
    I think Hunt had more technical filmmaking expertise than Young. But it’s worth saying both were directors from a specific generation and system. Hunt began in the editing room before working as a 2nd Unit Director as a pathway to directing OHMSS. It’s a career trajectory that isn’t particularly common for a director nowadays, more akin to working your way up the ladder in an office or something. In the context of Bond the director was viewed as another worker, albeit a more senior one, and not quite the creative guiding light (or auteur) that I think we view them as nowadays. Their job was to make the most of the project/script assigned to them. Obviously that’s oversimplified and there were obviously wonderful British directors who could be considered artists under similar systems, but this was the general view of things.

    From what I’ve seen of Hunt’s other films they’re technically competent but just not all that interesting from a script perspective at best, and conceived badly at worst. So yeah, had he directed another Bond it may well have not been a masterpiece.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,218
    Brozza, absolutely. I've never really connected with much of Moore's non-Bond film work.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,438
    This was a bit freaky! Calvin did a review of "Wild Geese" yesterday!

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,428
    CraigMooreOHMSS wrote: »
    Brozza, absolutely. I've never really connected with much of Moore's non-Bond film work.

    It's a shame he didn't get more comedy to do, I feel like he'd have enjoyed that more (don't mention Pink Panther!). Instead he ended up doing a strangely large amount of quite gritty stuff like Naked Face, which I'm not sure really suited him.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,069
    Brosnan.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,220
    Moore… The Spy Who Loved Me a classic
Sign In or Register to comment.