›

Brosnan's Last 3 Bond Films: The Problem?

12345679»

Comments

  • GetafixGetafix
    edited January 2015 Posts: 11,425
    boldfinger wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I do find it odd that I prefer Brosnan's performances in pretty much everything apart from Bond. I think he was sort of overwhelmed by the part.
    Yes, I think one can say that. If he would have taken the Moore route and shamelessly opted for limitedness he would have had no limits.

    Good point. And one of Roger's biggest strengths was knowing exactly what his limitations were. It's often overlooked as well, but Roger is a classically trained actor - RADA don't you know. He is not a 'great' actor, or perhaps even a particularly 'good' actor - but because he knew the tricks of the trade, had oodles of experience in front of the camera and never tried to do things he knew that he could not carry off, his performances as Bond are very solid. You might not like him, but technically he is very good.

    In contrast Brosnan feels like an actor feeling his way into the part and never quite reaching his destination. A work in progress that got sort of left unfinished in the corner of the studio.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited January 2015 Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    The ironic thing is that, now, you admire Brosnan and label Dalton a "loser".

    That's my judgement on the men themselves. Brosnan is much more likeable and has a much more successful career than Dalton. I find Dalton's career trajectory sad and a waste of talent. He could have carved out a Patrick Stewart type niche for himself but instead he lives in Beverly Hills and does nothing. He doesn't even suit Hollywood. He's not married, has a child with Mel Gibson's weird looking ex-girlfriend. It's all a bit tragic.

    But my judgement on their performances has nothing to do with whether I like them as people. All I care about is what's up there on the screen, and in that respect Dalton wipes the floor with Brozza.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,713
    @Getafix I was sad that Dalton didn't get the role of Alfred for the new Batman (Ben Affleck). He could have started a 2nd career in the spotlight with that, as the Batman films are huge.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    @Getafix I was sad that Dalton didn't get the role of Alfred for the new Batman (Ben Affleck). He could have started a 2nd career in the spotlight with that, as the Batman films are huge.

    Exaclty - that's exactly the kind of part I see him doing. Was he actually in the running for it?

    At least Simon Pegg is a big fan. Reckon he must be a TLD fan - would be his generation.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    The problem with the last three Brosnan films, is they were four too many.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,106
    jobo wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/10755167/Pierce-Brosnan-I-was-never-good-enough-as-Bond.html
    Well then, that proves it.
    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, 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.

    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.

    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...

    They followed him until DAD, I think. it truly was the moment when people in general started looking at his whole tenure with a more critical eye. And yes, Brosnan was plebiscited like no other Bond actor ever was before.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,106
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    @Getafix I was sad that Dalton didn't get the role of Alfred for the new Batman (Ben Affleck). He could have started a 2nd career in the spotlight with that, as the Batman films are huge.

    On the plus side, Dalton won't have to play with Ben Affleck.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    =))
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,713
    IMO, DAD the way it is was the only reason they decided to go with the reboot that gave us Craig. Yes, the reboot was inevitable after 9/11 and stuff like Bourne and 24, but I think if they hadn't made DAD, and Brosnan's fourth was another GE - well received, box office hit, popular with the fans, etc - EON would have gone the safe route and made a FYEO with Brosnan for Bond 21. Afterall, why recast if your previous outing was a hit in every department? They'd have rebooted with Bond 22 to further ciment the new direction, but by then Craig would never have cast as he'd have been in his 40's. All IMO of course.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Before i joined here in 2010 I remember seeing old archives on this forum pre CR. The comments then (2005-2006) were quite different to now. Most defended Broz.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Before i joined here in 2010 I remember seeing old archives on this forum pre CR. The comments then (2005-2006) were quite different to now. Most defended Broz.
    I never stopped.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,713
    I was also a member of the old MI6 forums before the current one was made. And if you went surfing through old posts from the beginning (DAD's release to about 2004), you couldn't find many members who didn't want Brosnan back for Bond 21.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,106
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    I was also a member of the old MI6 forums before the current one was made. And if you went surfing through old posts from the beginning (DAD's release to about 2004), you couldn't find many members who didn't want Brosnan back for Bond 21.

    I wanted him back for a Bond movie circa 2004, who would have been his FYEO.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,713
    I am so angry that EON didn't get their shit together quicker after DAD. IMO they could have made a smaller, more serious film with Brosnan for late 2004, which was around the time Layer Cake got released so now that they knew where they wanted to go, Craig could have been cast quicker and CR (Bond 22) out for late 2006. Sadly, this didn't happen.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    At the time I didn't think that switching actors was the solution. I kept trying to think of ways to right the ship with Brosnan still on board. I still think it could have been accomplished with better writing, improved casting decisions and directors who would have handled the series with more care.

    It obviously didn't happen that way and when Dan was cast everything was radically altered. Did Craig really have that much input? Were the producers really lost at sea without him? Or was it all just an opportunity for a fresh start by hitting the reset button?
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    at least we got Everything or Nothing (VG) even though at times it feels like your committing genocide with all the unlimited henchmen around. :))
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,106
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    I was also a member of the old MI6 forums before the current one was made. And if you went surfing through old posts from the beginning (DAD's release to about 2004), you couldn't find many members who didn't want Brosnan back for Bond 21.

    I wanted him back for a Bond movie circa 2004, who would have been his FYEO.

    Without the goofy shit (talking parrot, Thatcher, hockey rink, delicatessen and so on), I assume.

    Even with the goofy stuff it wouldn't have been as bad as DAD.
Sign In or Register to comment.