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
Pretty much sums up my feeling. Brosnan knows enough about acting to tell that his own performances were pretty poor. He's said as much himself.
Maybe he read your comments and felt that way. =))
May be...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/10755167/Pierce-Brosnan-I-was-never-good-enough-as-Bond.html
I've been on record as saying I could have been a better Bond than Connery, so I guess that's also true.
Clooney says he messed up in Batman & Robin. He's also correct- it had nothing to do with the script or director.
Lucas says Star Wars was severely lacking. Glad he got the chance to fix that crap movie, over & over...& over.
:))
Well said, minus the melodramatic step backwards in TWINE.
I also don't think Pierce was, by and large, the problem. And aside from TWINE and the majority of the back half of DAD I don't personally there is much of a problem.
Well, like you say, Clooney was correct. And he didn't need four films to work that one out...
Not sure how that supports your argument that Brosnan was actually really good. Yes, the writing and directing may have been awful, but professional actors also take responsibility for their own performances. Ultimately, if an actor is being given substandard material and consistently poor directors, they can walk way. I have heard Brosnan blame the material but I've never heard him bad-mouth his directors. They may not have been Scorcese, but each of his directors had something to bring to the table. I think most people were pretty excited when Tamahori was announced. May be the actor bears some responsibility for not working well with any of his directors? I don't hear Craig complaining about the material in QoS, of Mark Forster, to make excuses for his performance in QoS, which was damn good any way, despite all the challenges.
I'm not beating up on Brosnan, who I actually like - I'm just essentially repeating what he's said himself.
It's worth noting that Brosnan never makes the general statment 'I can't watch myself on screen' that some actors use. He very specifically refers to not being able to watch his Bond performances. Why not actually give Broz the respect he deserves and take him at face value? Obviously everyone is free to disagree, but when a professional actor says he doesn't think much of his four performances as Bond, I think that's something worth paying attention to.
he doesn't know what he's talking about! ;)
I see where he's coming from! The great thing about Laz though is his vulnerability in the role, which must stem partly from his insecurity as an actor. I'd always heard Hunt didn't speak to Laz on set, and assumed this was because he didn't like him (which may also be true), but apparently it was a deliberate decision to keep Laz feeling isolated and alone. Hunt thought it would improve his performance. May be it did.
Interesting I think. EON is famous for being a cosy family, and to be honest, that comes through in a lot of the movies. But OHMSS feels different, and Laz's performance does stand out for its vulnerability. You really have that sense of one man toughing it out. The scene where Bond is cornered at the ice rink and Tracy skates up is a classic.
Because of his inexperience as an actor ?
And an actor can also refuse to say some lines if he finds them stupid.
I think Brosnan worked very hard to get the role, but never thought of how to work with it once he had it.
It was his to lose from the start. He was the one with the most buzz since 1986 when he first had it and then lost it. Nearly everyone wanted him, including the paparazzi, and I wanted him too. He should have done more with it imo. I think he tried. Sure he had crap scripts but he bears a lot of the blame too. I'm not knocking his efforts. Just, for the most part, the results.
@Boldfinger well said. Exactly right. He looked like he was trying too hard, and I never understood it, because he did not need to do that. I think he played a better Bond (one more suited to him) in the Thomas Crown Affair (at least the way he takes advantage of Rene Russo's character) than he did as Bond. That and the emotionality/overt sentimentality he brought to Bond were not acceptable to me. That's my real criticism.
When I saw Craig's Bond look at Vesper in the shower before he goes to comfort her, I knew Bond (at least the way he should show sentimentality towards women imo) was back.
oh I agree. Everyone wanted Brosnan. The public, at least the American public, wanted Brosnan, the medias wanted Brosnan, the critics wanted Brosnan. Brosnan wanted Brosnan. The expectations were too high on all sides. But he should have done far better. People were ready to follow him I think, had he been daring. No Bond actor was ever as accepted before filming even started.
But they did follow him idn't they? Brosnan was the best Bond since Connery before anyone saw him in the part. I think the hype only worked in his favor. People might have been more Critical if it wasn't for the fact that it was already decided that he was the best fit for the part. Compare that to what Laz and Craig had to deal with? And Dalton. He was labeled the second choice from the start... No, Broz was pretty lucky actually...