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
It proves that having all the money and backing does not make a great Bond film. Most Bond films had meagre budgets but to compensate the story was better written. And so was the dialogue.
Old Bond always had cool dialogue and it was a trademark as much as the stunts.
So why did Roger get away with Moonraker whilst Pierce took the fall?
Totally agree. Maibaum (and perhaps MGW?) crafted some excellent dialogue. This seems to have largely withered and died. There was some half decent dialogue in CR and I liked Silva's entrance speech in SF but these are meagre pickings compared to the delicious scripts we used to savour back in the classic era.
IMO, MR is actually a better film. The plot is daft but the climax is actually rather nicely staged and filmed. Having Ken Adam sets certainly helped - everything he ever did just looks pure class. He trained as an architect in the classical tradition but harboured a love of modernist design. His production designs always seamlessly combine old and new - if only Denis Gassner was half the designer Adam is.
Any way, slightly sidetracked. Yes, despite MR being way too OTT, it is still a better film than DAD, with some redeeming scenes, a Bassey title song and Barry score. And Roger is a much better Bond.
Moonraker is the only Bond film I can't make myself sit through anymore. It's just too silly for me, personally
No one was a better 'cinema' Bond than Brosnan.
Just like no one was a better 'literary' Bond than Dalton.
Well, I do agree Brosnan did a good job playing James Bond. Not his fault the material he had to work with didn't work for many people (myself included).
I don't think he was the best "cinema" Bond, nor do I think Dalton is the quintessential "literary" Bond.
Yeah, old school Bond dialogue is the best ever! Sanchez was an old school Bond villain and wears a pink shirt to prove it in some scenes. Pink shirt in Bond means a badass villain!:)
As for Moonraker, to me it is not that far off from TSWLM. Both are OTT Bond but done with the right humour. Also the parts where the film is sending itself up are so winking at the camera and laughing with you. Roger's style let you forgive that. But Roger did not take it seriously or act like a machine gun wielding macho.
I mean like when he punches Jaws is funny. He is so out of his depth and I guess that film is part of my childhood. But Drax is a good villain and Roger Moore is ultra classy in his dialogue.
Roger knew how to mix the absurd and the deadly serious. But his personality was the reason they got away with it. Pierce took it way more seriously than Roger in his films and was also very competitive to outdo the other actors. Roger never competed with Connery.
Not sure about his flares though or safari suit?:) With flares like that you don't need a parachute to land safely on earth:)
The new 'man that almost finished off the Bond franchise'.
Man, did he suck. I never realized it before... I had thought he did fine with the limiting material... now I see he was as bad as everyone now is saying. A pox on him!! I'm throwing my GE, TND and TWINE DVD's out right now. And every other movie I have with him in it.
Don't do that! His other stuff's quite good...
Okay, now THAT made me LOL! :))
Did not see that comin'.
What are your feelings on Taffin? :P
Kind of liked it, myself. Live Wire too.
So I always imagined his Bond acting to be like that. He seemed more at ease in that film and got the elements for a deep Bond more believably down in that.
He is good in Polanski's The Ghost. I can now see the flaw Eon made was in making him the perfect Bond as that is what audiences saw in him before casting.
I am not saying by any means he is a bad Bond, because I really thought he was fine in TND and had elements closer to The Fourth Protocol. He actually looks good as a serious character and could have taken Bond higher hence there being no need to cast Craig.
The Brosnan era is a signpost of what can happen when you take no risk with the character and rest on your laurels of the past.
That felt very Bond to me
That's a great scene, I agree.
I really thought he would play Bond with that steely determination which is kind of what Craig is doing now. Brosnan looked the part and I think EON short changed him with the scripts.
Even minor scenes he is very good in. I guess he felt no pressure in that film being the villain. But I think the Bond expectation was heavy on his shoulders and he tried to accomodate all fan expectations which is the danger.
I think I read somewhere once upon a time he wanted to take a lot more chances with the character, take him to much darker places, than the studio allowed him to do at the time.
Well when they see you doing Visa commercials during TND playing a light Bond, they will not want to change that perception. I think the too early praise he got on Goldeneye's release hindered him. It seemed so accepted and the studio wanted to go no further than that.
Also because of his popularity they took risks with the sillier aspects of the Bond franchise. They thought they could get away with murder and anything goes because the whole world loves Pierce. And they did.
Yes, it solidified his image as the lighter Bond and it is hard to change track once you head in that direction. And the producers will get feedback from fans that they like it and so we get more.
I am sure many people love him as Bond anyway. Who is the third favourite?
You KNOW who my first is... ;)