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'm glad they didn't have Sylvia Trench instead, especially not played by Teri Hatcher! Why and how would Trench suddenly turn into an American? And Trench was not meant to be someone Bond falls for. Or her to fall for Bond. Their affair was entirely sexual. It would have spoiled one great character in so many ways, just to give the fans an unnecessary Easter egg.
Controversial opinion: I'm a huge fan of the Brosnan Bond films - all of them
^ Now that is a controversial opinion. I could be charged for heresy on these forums. A few users on here would have me hung if they could. I'm pretty sure you're allowed to have any controversial opinion except this one, forum policy.
You can't even express joy of any kind for the Brosnan films without the "**** you and Brosnan and everything you enjoy" train showing up to tell you that your opinion is wrong and you should be scolded for liking his era.
Ultimate controversial opinion... I love the Brosnan era, close thread, can't be topped.
To be fair, there's really only two or three rabid Brosnan haters on this forum, but they do tend to dogpile any opportunity they get. ;)
Paris was supposed to be Natalya originally.
"Impotent beach boys"
Heroes, the lot of them.
Giving balance to the force.
I'm just right in the middle, criticizing and appreciating what the Broz brought to the franchise. That's TRUE balance. ;) I'll blast his performance in TWINE, but if you give a bad word about him in DAD I'll blow up diamonds in your face.
I've noticed a lot of love for Brosnan's performance in DAD on the forums lately. I may have to pop that one in and reevaluate it a bit.
Brosnan's performance in TWINE is my favourite of his (minus 2 scenes where he drops the ball) but I've always felt that his most consistent performances were TND and DAD.
You need to hang out in the Brosnan appreciation thread more. There are many dedicated Brosnan fanatics here. Me being one of them. And there aren't really that many haters, after a couple month on here you know them all by name and it will be easy to ignore them ;)
Funny enough, I remember Lee Tamahori (in the BTS featurette) claiming he didn't feel the need to really direct Pierce because he knew Bond by this point.
I really should. Expect to find plenty of posts in the Brosnan thread from me moving forward.
Something just feels wrong about Bond in America to me.
TND however doesn't quite cut it for me. Apart from that, I love both GE and TWINE, and DAD will always be the first 'upcoming Bond' I experienced.
I've got to add NF and EON too, couldn't stop playing them. Eventually the Pierce films made me a fan and I'll be eternally grateful for that.
I've been curious, why doesn't TND work for you? I remember it being around the bottom of your rankings.
It only works so well in the books for just one reason: Fleming's narration/commentary on America. It's incredibly difficult to depict Bond in America without that commentary because Bond is such a internal person you won't hear his perspective beyond body language and brief remarks, which isn't a whole lot. It's some of my favorite aspects of even his weaker novels like Live and Let Die and Diamonds Are Forever.
Why is LALD a weaker novel? I think it's one of the best.
His second book in the James Bond series was very exciting. Full of dangers from poisonous fish, voodoo and a sophisticated crime syndicate based in Harlem. I found the action in this one (especially at the finish) to be raised several notches above the previous book (Casino Royale).
The second Bond novel works fairly well as a suspense thriller with some genuinely pulse-pounding moments, including Bond's midnight swim to Mr. Big's hideout.
To charge this book with racism, as many reviews have done so, is absurd. The book and attitudes were of the time and obviously these views are expressed within the pages. The same charges could be aimed at Sherlock Holmes, Agatha Christie, Bulldog Drummond and any classic character.
I don't dislike any of the Hamilton films, apart from DAF. They just don't have any real visual flair.
It's still watchable of course, but I never liked the way they just went for non-stop action and dual-wielding gunplay in the entire second half. It also has something to do with the uninteresting locations. While other Brosnan entries boast more (post) Cold War-esque worlds with St. Petersburg, the Caucasus and North Korea, and more glamourous locals like casinos, fencing clubs or even an ice palace, TND is a bit drab on that account. Still though 3 out of 4 is a good score for Pierce.
He seemed to be fairly passive making his post-Goldfinger films. I always cringe a little when I watch the "Inside DAF" documentary and he describes the Mustang stunt and how his attitude when the drivers did it on the wrong set of wheel was basically "meh, it's all the same."
I feel like that attitude comes across in the remaining films. That said, I do love LALD.
"There's no point in LIVING if you can't feel ALIVE?!"
Considering the rest of the film it probably saved Brosnans' performance....
Another shout out to the awesomeness of the LALD novel, and then a truly controversial opinion:
People find Denise Richards unbelievable because of sexism. They think a nuclear phisisist just can't be that hot, but in fact a good student should be able to finish university at 22-23. She might be working on her PhD at the site..
I agree. People should be ashamed of themselves.
It may be my favourite Bond movie but that one scene... ugh.
There's several reasons why TWINE feels like a film that pulls its punches, and the presence of Christmas Jones is the biggest. That said, I have nothing against Denise Richards, I think she was just given a lousy role that no one could have made interesting because the character really serves no substantial purpose beyond exposition dumps about nuclear science and being the conquest at the end. She was also pushed onto EON by MGM, and EON did a pretty lousy job treating the actress.
It needs that cushion because it is lazy.
No, the problem is not that she looks hot, the problem is that she is completely out of her depth acting the part. A good looking physicist would be believable if she was able to convey some conviction in her lines and general presence. She doesn't.
I don't think Brosnan knew Bond, but I think by Die Another Day as mentioned, he had given up the facade of being a hybrid of Connery/Moore and approached the film as Pierce Brosnan would. It's for this reason that DAD represents Brosnan's best performance in the role. It's also another reason why I think The World Is Not Enough is painstakingly awful. The delivery of lines such as "There's no point in living, if you can't feel alive" are really overly acted, IMO. Then there's Brosnan's pain face. The whole film feels like an episode of Bold & The Beautiful, whereas despite DAD being undeniably stupid, I enjoy Brosnan's more natural, carefree portrayal. Brosnan never understood the character of Bond, he had a perception of who Bond was based upon those that preceded him, IMO.
Very well said. DAD might have major problems with its second half, but it has an advantage above its three predecessors, which is Bronan's performance. He had finally relaxed into the role and was no longer posing.