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
True and true. Brosnan was terrible, his movies were mostly terrible, and all of this over the top bad acting B-level garbage melodrama prompted the producers to fire him and make drastic changes. Had Dalton made GE, followed up by a capable actor, or had GE been made with Dalton's capable successor, who knows where the series would have gone. Necessary evil maybe? Who know, but one thing is for sure, the nightmare is over.
He wasn't terrible. I agree he's not the world's most versatile actor, he was pretty much born to play the good looking suave guy...and was perfect as a 90's Bond. I think the ticket admissions speak for themselves when it comes to Dalton. Had he been in Goldeneye, the series would most likely have 'done a Superman.'
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy Dalton...but for me, he sorely lacked the charisma needed to play Bond. You might say he's a better actor than Pierce and you're probably right but as BOND...Tim just wasn't right.
I will agree he overacted sometimes BUT he can't have been that bad if he was well received by, not only the average Joe Public but by more serious fans.
"I like Pierce Brosnan as James Bond. He’s got all the right qualities a good Bond should have: he’s tall dark and handsome, he handles the humour well, he’s believable in the action scenes—and the cinema-going public love him! Unfortunately I don’t think the films measure up to his ability as an actor to do something more with the role than he’s been allowed to show to date. In GoldenEye, a colourless drab looking film, he was given little to do except react to the other characters and situations around him. Tomorrow Never Dies was his finest hour as Bond, and I do mean hour. The first half of the movie is the best Brosnan/Bond to date, with some nice Bondian touches, up until the model of his BMW crashes off the hotel roof through a flurry of polystyrene bricks, then the film just simply rambles until it falls apart. I thoroughly enjoyed The World Is Not Enough, which had the best narrative structure of all the Brosnan/Bond films, and the story unfolded much more in the style of a Sixties’ Bond. Although the film is uneven, it’s about 200% better than the dire Die Another Day—quasi science fiction badly executed and acted by everyone but Brosnan".
Graham Rye - editor of 007 Magazine.
It could easily be argued quite convincingly that the GE box office numbers were mostly caused by the long drought between LTK & GE combined with the new actor. Any somewhat known actor in the states that is.
As for Dalton, again, his numbers were quite disappointing in the states, which at the very least could be attributed to horrendous publicity for his flicks combined with his lackluster name in the states. MGM was doing so poorly at the time and the phenomenal competition at the box office, Connery, Ford, Willis, etc.
Pardon me for not being satisfied by anything but quality. I wouldn't even complain about temporary mediocrity either. ;)
If that was true, CR should have made atleast $700 millions at world wide box office. The GE box office numbers are out of this world. Brosnan didn't just improve the box office after the massive disappointment that was LTK, he sky rocketed the box office.
Brosnan worked because everyone demanded him as Bond. Anyone else as Bond would likely have only been a minimal improvement in box office revenue, and the actor would most likely have been booted in 1997.
Craig's BO is outstanding, considering the horrendous press he got and him being a nobody in the states. Thanks for strengthening my point ;)
Any other actor than Brosnan for GE was a risk. If the box office numbers didn't double, the actor would have been booted after his 2nd outing.
And Craig's box office numbers for CR are passable, not good/great.
1. Horrendous publicity - well it is a Bond film ultimately. Surely the "James Bond" name would be enough to attract interest regardless of the competition at the time.
2. Connery and Craig were also not THAT well known in the states prior to Bond but they were lapped up. Sure Craig did a few BIT parts in big films but that was about it.
None of them are really. It's Connery and LALD. But the era speaks loudly about this, going to the cinema isn't what it used to, the audience is divided with dozens of choices per month, it isn't a once in a quarter type event.
--
As for the state of Bond post Moore, I'd go as far as to state that Moore himself wouldn't have done any better rating-wise than Dalton, the audience was tired. An few years away from Bond after AVTAK would have likely been a good thing at the time as well.
It seems, sadly, that people just didn't take to Dalton. I've heard people describe him as dull. Shame really - although I sort of see where Connery's coming from when he said Dalton "underestimated the role".
What I meant is that for a film with a 'new Bond factor' , it didn't set the B.O. on fire like Moore or Brosnan did. CR did well only because DAD did well. The new factor brought the usual improvement, but it was only a passable/ok improvement. Had DAD been disappointment, CR's box office probably wouldn't have beaten GE, which would be a bit alarming and Brosnan wouldn't have had all the backlash he has now, since GE would have been a bigger success than CR. Given DAD's hatred and CR's admiration, it's hard not to wonder why CR didn't make $700 millions at the box office. The Craig backlash didn't help, but it doesn't explain why CR only did ok at the box office.
We've had one mediocre Bond film since Brosnan left might I add ;) Would I take GE or TWINE over it (perhaps even TND)? Absolutely.
And you don't see me complain about it. Unlike the previous era where 3 flicks didn't even reach high enough to be mediocre ;) But yeah, Hopefully SF will be better!
I would have preferred that Dalton continued through GE and maybe TND. Actually he could have done the whole Brozzer era. He was born in 1946, so age 49-56 for GE-DAD.
It could have worked.
You know very well that this is all flawed. CR beat most if not all of Brosnan's movies with the only relevant metric: ticket sales. I don't have the numbers here, but I know that you know this too. Throwing a random BO value like 700M means little to nothing. With all the negative publicity Craig had and again, being a small fish in the states, did indeed make for disappointing numbers in the states and as you know, CR didn't beat Happy Feet at the BO, which only proves how popular he was everywhere else.
DAD's BO number has zero correlation with CR's other that they're Bond movies. You can spin it any way you like, but deep down you know the whole "new Bond" thing is what generated interest for CR, not DAD. Your change of heart regarding Craig is clouding you my friend ;)
No Rog and no Broz. No Broz is no loss. Rog would be missed but Laz was better IMO.
That's a timeline I've considered myself and something I could envision favourably. I do think that Moore is overly criticized by the Connery fanatics, but Lazenby could have done things Moore wasn't capable of regarding physicality.
CR beat DAD by 12 millions, while LALD beat DAF by 21 millions and GE beat LTK be 42 millions.
I think Danny boy's bad press would have only helped CR ticket sales. I'd wager that a lot of viewers were those who wouldn't necessarily have gone to see it, though went along to see if he'd f*** it up or not and see what the fuss was all about.
DC you were right maybe, how about figures TLD beat AVTAK? or OMHSS beat YOLT?
OHMSS did 19 millions LESS than YOLT, and TLD only beat AVTAK by 6 millions.
Welcome to the forum 007RogerMoore! Nice to see you are educating your little 8 year old in the ways of Bond! ;) :D
Thank you very much, RogueAgent.
I´ve been a member of a swedish Bond forum for 5 years, but decided to try this as there is more action here. Actually I joined CBn a couple of days ago, as did my twin brother. A moderator saw that we had the same IP-adress and suspended us, believing I hade two accounts. That was it, they had their chance, now I´ll be one of you instead.
Back to topic, nowadays however, I´d like Dalton in GE, especially since Brosnan was stiff in it. But I prefer the way it is, since GE started it all. Besides, Brosnan might not have gotten the job if Tim stayed for GE. That would be a shame, just as it was that he didn´t get a last film in 2004.
Yes, but still only a passable improvement over the Brosnan era.
Passable? Craig era is huge improvement over the Brosnan era, financial term and quality wise IMO.
lol! Like you said its there loss! Well? you will find plenty of conversations on here to get involved in! Enjoy! :D