› ›

Would Goldeneye have been a success with Dalton?

1…4243454748…104

Comments

  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    GE was a commercial success, but since when does that equal a good piece of work...? Have the Farts & Furious 'movies' taught us nothing...?
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    edited November 2015 Posts: 1,731
    ForYourEyesOnly wrote: »
    Dalton was a good actor, he just didn't have enough on-screen charisma. You can see pretty easily from the way he delivers a vast majority of his lines. As I said, he acts well (ie. Saunders' death), but his delivery of the lines is inferior to Brosnan's, despite the fact that Pierce also screwed up a couple of line deliveries.

    Dalton is capable of humour (he has appeared in comedies before), but not the type of humour he was given. The one-liners in LTK were definitely better than the awful ones in TLD. "Salt corrosion" and "he met his waterloo" sucked, lol.
    [/quote]

    I'm sorry, did you watch a different film?!
    Brosnan's (script/line) delivery was better than Dalton's..?? @-)
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited November 2015 Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Why do people always go on about Dalton being a 'stage actor'. Is he any more of a stage actor than Brosnan or Craig?

    As someone pointed out above, there are lots of ways to do humour, not just the Moore style, and Dalton is clearly capable of handling humour, especially when it's written to suit his style - the same goes for all the Bond actors.

    Yes. He's often looks around dramatically and tenses up his face. There's a very "visual" quality to quite a lot of his acting.

    For me, this is most obvious in LTK during the scene with Lupe in the casino (I think it's probably his weakest performance as Bond too). You can see him trying to act angry and aggressive with him turning his head all the time.

    The pause, followed by his dramatic delivery of "TAKE ME TO HIM" doesn't feel particularly natural to me either.

    I think Dalts did a lot of good stuff in LTK but I don't feel he excels in this scene. All I can think in my head is "he's acting".

    How I often wished I could have said the same thing of Brosnan as Bond. Sadly, I too often found his 'acting' so wooden, it was like someone had thrown a chair onto the set.

    Pretty much by his own admission Brosnan was overawed by the role and frankly didn't know what to do with the character. Hence you have the sense of a bloke turning up on set and just trying to 'look cool', rather than giving any thought to who/what Bond is.

    Give me Dalton, with whatever his flaws were, any day of the week. As Bond at least.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    I get that some people love Brosnan. I do. The guy is good to look at, boyishly charming and appealing, in a naive sort of way.

    But trying to defend his 'acting' is like trying to talk your way out of a watertight Nuremberg trial...
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    With Brosnan it's all about casting and direction. I'm not having a go, because I actually like him, but he's not the kind of actor who 'brings' much to the table in terms of ideas. Therefore you need to cast him in the right kind of role and ensure he has good direction, otherwise he'll go into Remmington Steel autopilot. With good directors - Boorman, Polanski - and the right role, then he is capable of perfectly good screen acting IMO. At his best I really enjoy watching him.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited November 2015 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Why do people always go on about Dalton being a 'stage actor'. Is he any more of a stage actor than Brosnan or Craig?

    As someone pointed out above, there are lots of ways to do humour, not just the Moore style, and Dalton is clearly capable of handling humour, especially when it's written to suit his style - the same goes for all the Bond actors.

    Yes. He's often looks around dramatically and tenses up his face. There's a very "visual" quality to quite a lot of his acting.

    For me, this is most obvious in LTK during the scene with Lupe in the casino (I think it's probably his weakest performance as Bond too). You can see him trying to act angry and aggressive with him turning his head all the time.

    The pause, followed by his dramatic delivery of "TAKE ME TO HIM" doesn't feel particularly natural to me either.

    I think Dalts did a lot of good stuff in LTK but I don't feel he excels in this scene. All I can think in my head is "he's acting".

    How I often wished I could have said the same thing of Brosnan as Bond. Sadly, I too often found his 'acting' so wooden, it was like someone had thrown a chair onto the set.

    Pretty much by his own admission Brosnan was overawed by the role and frankly didn't know what to do with the character. Hence you have the sense of a bloke turning up on set and just trying to 'look cool', rather than giving any thought to who/what Bond is.

    Give me Dalton, with whatever his flaws were, any day of the week. As Bond at least.

    I know Brosnan sometimes overdid it too and I'm not going to pretend otherwise.

    I was talking about Dalton though.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Why do people always go on about Dalton being a 'stage actor'. Is he any more of a stage actor than Brosnan or Craig?

    As someone pointed out above, there are lots of ways to do humour, not just the Moore style, and Dalton is clearly capable of handling humour, especially when it's written to suit his style - the same goes for all the Bond actors.

    Yes. He's often looks around dramatically and tenses up his face. There's a very "visual" quality to quite a lot of his acting.

    For me, this is most obvious in LTK during the scene with Lupe in the casino (I think it's probably his weakest performance as Bond too). You can see him trying to act angry and aggressive with him turning his head all the time.

    The pause, followed by his dramatic delivery of "TAKE ME TO HIM" doesn't feel particularly natural to me either.

    I think Dalts did a lot of good stuff in LTK but I don't feel he excels in this scene. All I can think in my head is "he's acting".

    How I often wished I could have said the same thing of Brosnan as Bond. Sadly, I too often found his 'acting' so wooden, it was like someone had thrown a chair onto the set.

    Pretty much by his own admission Brosnan was overawed by the role and frankly didn't know what to do with the character. Hence you have the sense of a bloke turning up on set and just trying to 'look cool', rather than giving any thought to who/what Bond is.

    Give me Dalton, with whatever his flaws were, any day of the week. As Bond at least.

    I know Brosnan sometimes overdid it too and I'm not going to pretend otherwise.

    I was talking about Dalton though.

    I think Dalton got it right more often than not though. I'm not claiming his performances are flawless, I just think he was very good in the role. My view has always been that he delivered one of the best debut performances in the series.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Why do people always go on about Dalton being a 'stage actor'. Is he any more of a stage actor than Brosnan or Craig?

    As someone pointed out above, there are lots of ways to do humour, not just the Moore style, and Dalton is clearly capable of handling humour, especially when it's written to suit his style - the same goes for all the Bond actors.

    Yes. He's often looks around dramatically and tenses up his face. There's a very "visual" quality to quite a lot of his acting.

    For me, this is most obvious in LTK during the scene with Lupe in the casino (I think it's probably his weakest performance as Bond too). You can see him trying to act angry and aggressive with him turning his head all the time.

    The pause, followed by his dramatic delivery of "TAKE ME TO HIM" doesn't feel particularly natural to me either.

    I think Dalts did a lot of good stuff in LTK but I don't feel he excels in this scene. All I can think in my head is "he's acting".

    How I often wished I could have said the same thing of Brosnan as Bond. Sadly, I too often found his 'acting' so wooden, it was like someone had thrown a chair onto the set.

    Pretty much by his own admission Brosnan was overawed by the role and frankly didn't know what to do with the character. Hence you have the sense of a bloke turning up on set and just trying to 'look cool', rather than giving any thought to who/what Bond is.

    Give me Dalton, with whatever his flaws were, any day of the week. As Bond at least.

    I know Brosnan sometimes overdid it too and I'm not going to pretend otherwise.

    I was talking about Dalton though.

    I think Dalton got it right more often than not though. I'm not claiming his performances are flawless, I just think he was very good in the role. My view has always been that he delivered one of the best debut performances in the series.

    I agree with you actually that he got it right more often than not and that his debut performance in TLD is solid.

    I think Brosnan did some good things in GE though. You'll probably disagree with me but I think he's very good here:

  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    He's okay in that scene. I just can't help think how it would have worked with Dalton... I also would have loved to see Helen Mirren as M.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,120
    I always thought that Dalton's GE could have been the film that cemented his legacy with audiences. Now it seems that only fans and some critics can appreciate him.

    Anyway, I don't think it would have been as commercially successful as it turned out to be with Pierce "this guy was supposed to be Bond back in 87" Brosnan.

    I have to say, I do enjoy GE a lot as it is and I think Brosnan was perfect in it. One thing is for sure though, if Dalton would have been in GE, no way the Eric Serra score, which I actually like, would have worked.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    having lived the months leading to GE and knowing the excitement the casting of a new Bond brought, I can safely say that Brosnan was at least instrumental to GE's success and that the movie would not have been as successful with Dalton. With a new Bond actor, maybe. But not with the actor who was perceived, unfairly (I insist so no Dalton fan will flame me), as an impostor. My assessment of Pierce Brosnan as Bond and indeed as an actor has dramatically changed since then, but casting him for GE was the smart move.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Ludovico wrote: »
    having lived the months leading to GE and knowing the excitement the casting of a new Bond brought, I can safely say that Brosnan was at least instrumental to GE's success and that the movie would not have been as successful with Dalton. With a new Bond actor, maybe. But not with the actor who was perceived, unfairly (I insist so no Dalton fan will flame me), as an impostor. My assessment of Pierce Brosnan as Bond and indeed as an actor has dramatically changed since then, but casting him for GE was the smart move.

    There's no denying Brosnan's financial success as Bond. As a fan though that is no compensation for a string of abysmal Bond movies.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Getafix wrote: »
    There's no denying Brosnan's financial success as Bond. As a fan though that is no compensation for a string of abysmal Bond movies.
    It's true. I'll take excellence over box office any day, as a fan.
  • TreefingersTreefingers Isthmus City, Republic of Isthmus
    Posts: 191
    After reading the first draft of GE by Michael France I have to say it would hae been a solid film, with the exception of only a couple of action set pieces which shamelesly spat upon the laws of physics.

    I don't think it would have been the smash hit it finally became, but it would have served as a proper sendoff to Dalton, who I believe would have delivered an even better performance, being seasoned in the role and having a better direction/writing.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    As much as it pains me to say it (Dalton is my favourite) after 6 years to have Dalton again would just have been wrong. And even Dalton was intelligent enough to know it and stepped down from the role.

    But if there wouldn't have been a hiatus and GE would have been Dalton fourth movie in 1993 then yes, I believe GE would have worked and would have been a success.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited November 2015 Posts: 11,425
    Funny how things change over time. I used to think I was the only person in the UK who rated Dalton over Brosnan.

    Now you seem to get a lot of people saying stuff like this:

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/apr/14/james-bond-pierce-brosnan-007-goldeneye

    Could have been written by me.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Getafix wrote: »
    Funny how things change over time. I used to think I was the only person in the UK who rated Dalton over Brosnan.

    Now you seem to get a lot of people saying stuff like this:

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/apr/14/james-bond-pierce-brosnan-007-goldeneye

    Could have been written by me.
    I'm afraid I agree with every word in that article. However, I think it took Daniel Craig to really make many people realize this. Some were blind to it at the time, but once Craig came along, it became clear to many, if not all.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Funny how things change over time. I used to think I was the only person in the UK who rated Dalton over Brosnan.

    Now you seem to get a lot of people saying stuff like this:

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/apr/14/james-bond-pierce-brosnan-007-goldeneye

    Could have been written by me.
    I'm afraid I agree with every word in that article. However, I think it took Daniel Craig to really make many people realize this. Some were blind to it at the time, but once Craig came along, it became clear to many, if not all.

    There are people that still rate Brosnan. Some as the best of the series. Whether you, I, or anyone else agrees is irrelevant. It's fact.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Funny how things change over time. I used to think I was the only person in the UK who rated Dalton over Brosnan.

    Now you seem to get a lot of people saying stuff like this:

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/apr/14/james-bond-pierce-brosnan-007-goldeneye

    Could have been written by me.
    I'm afraid I agree with every word in that article. However, I think it took Daniel Craig to really make many people realize this. Some were blind to it at the time, but once Craig came along, it became clear to many, if not all.

    There are people that still rate Brosnan. Some as the best of the series. Whether you, I, or anyone else agrees is irrelevant. It's fact.
    And no one said otherwise. He has many fans here, some vocal, some closet, and many out there in the public as well. That was never in doubt.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Funny how things change over time. I used to think I was the only person in the UK who rated Dalton over Brosnan.

    Now you seem to get a lot of people saying stuff like this:

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/apr/14/james-bond-pierce-brosnan-007-goldeneye

    Could have been written by me.
    I'm afraid I agree with every word in that article. However, I think it took Daniel Craig to really make many people realize this. Some were blind to it at the time, but once Craig came along, it became clear to many, if not all.

    There are people that still rate Brosnan. Some as the best of the series. Whether you, I, or anyone else agrees is irrelevant. It's fact.

    There are people who consider George Clooney a great Batman and others who belief the earth is flat. It doesn't mean they're right.
  • RC7RC7
    edited November 2015 Posts: 10,512
    bondjames wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Funny how things change over time. I used to think I was the only person in the UK who rated Dalton over Brosnan.

    Now you seem to get a lot of people saying stuff like this:

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/apr/14/james-bond-pierce-brosnan-007-goldeneye

    Could have been written by me.
    I'm afraid I agree with every word in that article. However, I think it took Daniel Craig to really make many people realize this. Some were blind to it at the time, but once Craig came along, it became clear to many, if not all.

    There are people that still rate Brosnan. Some as the best of the series. Whether you, I, or anyone else agrees is irrelevant. It's fact.
    And no one said otherwise. He has many fans here, some vocal, some closet, and many out there in the public as well. That was never in doubt.

    Hence your comment about 'many if not all' isn't particularly well founded. People still buy his take and don't find him either lazy or smug.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Funny how things change over time. I used to think I was the only person in the UK who rated Dalton over Brosnan.

    Now you seem to get a lot of people saying stuff like this:

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/apr/14/james-bond-pierce-brosnan-007-goldeneye

    Could have been written by me.
    I'm afraid I agree with every word in that article. However, I think it took Daniel Craig to really make many people realize this. Some were blind to it at the time, but once Craig came along, it became clear to many, if not all.

    What do you mean some were blind at the time? Blind to what?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Funny how things change over time. I used to think I was the only person in the UK who rated Dalton over Brosnan.

    Now you seem to get a lot of people saying stuff like this:

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/apr/14/james-bond-pierce-brosnan-007-goldeneye

    Could have been written by me.
    I'm afraid I agree with every word in that article. However, I think it took Daniel Craig to really make many people realize this. Some were blind to it at the time, but once Craig came along, it became clear to many, if not all.

    There are people that still rate Brosnan. Some as the best of the series. Whether you, I, or anyone else agrees is irrelevant. It's fact.
    And no one said otherwise. He has many fans here, some vocal, some closet, and many out there in the public as well. That was never in doubt.

    Hence your comment about 'many if not all' isn't particularly well founded. People still buy his take and don't find him either lazy or smug.
    It is founded, because the opinion of him being the 'New Connery' was far more established in people's minds before Craig came along. That is the point of that article.

    That opinion is now much less so than it was at the time. From what I have read anyway. Of course, he still has his fans.....as I said, some are very vocal and some are strangely closet, but they are no doubt there in numbers. Not denying that. Even they won't make the 'best since Connery' comment so confidently any more though.....maybe a few.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    bondjames wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Funny how things change over time. I used to think I was the only person in the UK who rated Dalton over Brosnan.

    Now you seem to get a lot of people saying stuff like this:

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/apr/14/james-bond-pierce-brosnan-007-goldeneye

    Could have been written by me.
    I'm afraid I agree with every word in that article. However, I think it took Daniel Craig to really make many people realize this. Some were blind to it at the time, but once Craig came along, it became clear to many, if not all.

    There are people that still rate Brosnan. Some as the best of the series. Whether you, I, or anyone else agrees is irrelevant. It's fact.
    And no one said otherwise. He has many fans here, some vocal, some closet, and many out there in the public as well. That was never in doubt.

    Hence your comment about 'many if not all' isn't particularly well founded. People still buy his take and don't find him either lazy or smug.
    It is founded, because the opinion of him being the 'New Connery' was far more established in people's minds before Craig came along. That is the point of that article.

    That opinion is now much less so than it was at the time. From what I have read anyway. Of course, he still has his fans.....as I said, some are very vocal and some are strangely closet, but they are no doubt there in numbers. Not denying that. Even they won't make the 'best since Connery' comment so confidently any more though.....maybe a few.

    Don't remember the new Connery angle, just the 'best since', which everyone gets. I'm sure many have downgraded him, people always need a scapegoat.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Funny how things change over time. I used to think I was the only person in the UK who rated Dalton over Brosnan.

    Now you seem to get a lot of people saying stuff like this:

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/apr/14/james-bond-pierce-brosnan-007-goldeneye

    Could have been written by me.
    I'm afraid I agree with every word in that article. However, I think it took Daniel Craig to really make many people realize this. Some were blind to it at the time, but once Craig came along, it became clear to many, if not all.

    There are people that still rate Brosnan. Some as the best of the series. Whether you, I, or anyone else agrees is irrelevant. It's fact.
    And no one said otherwise. He has many fans here, some vocal, some closet, and many out there in the public as well. That was never in doubt.

    Hence your comment about 'many if not all' isn't particularly well founded. People still buy his take and don't find him either lazy or smug.
    It is founded, because the opinion of him being the 'New Connery' was far more established in people's minds before Craig came along. That is the point of that article.

    That opinion is now much less so than it was at the time. From what I have read anyway. Of course, he still has his fans.....as I said, some are very vocal and some are strangely closet, but they are no doubt there in numbers. Not denying that. Even they won't make the 'best since Connery' comment so confidently any more though.....maybe a few.

    Don't remember the new Connery angle, just the 'best since', which everyone gets. I'm sure many have downgraded him, people always need a scapegoat.
    He benefited earlier from Dalton's lack of popularity and Moore's long non-Connery Bond. I think many were quick to suggest he was a 'new Connery' (and I remember hearing this a lot in the media) because of that. In my opinion, such assessments were premature then. Time was needed to put his run and performance in perspective.

    The same applies to Craig as well. Any comparisons to Connery at this time are premature. He needs his successor to do a few before his run can be looked at with the benefit of hindsight and some objectivity, imho.

    Brosnan still has his fans, and they are numerous...., as does Moore and Dalton. However, he was on a pedestal of sorts for a time, and this is no longer the case.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    IMO, Craig's Bond lacks the light and shade, and the same adeptness at romance, drama, comedy etc. that Connery conveyed so effortlessly. Craig's good, but he's not Connery good. Craig will no doubt go down as one of the better Bonds but I think it's highly unlikely anyone is going to look back and consider him a real rival to SC.
  • CowleyCowley
    Posts: 486
    RC7 wrote: »
    Don't remember the new Connery angle, just the 'best since', which everyone gets. I'm sure many have downgraded him, people always need a scapegoat.

    "Pierce is absolutely right: the perfect 007. Born to play him, if you like, in the sense that he lights up the screen with a winning mixture of action, humour and romance. He's also a damned good actor and knows exactly what he's doing"

    Campbell certainly spoke some bullshit when publicising Goldeneye!

    Funny how he said "Tim Dalton, I felt, looked too angry and unrelaxed" and then gave us the more sombre CR. Makes you wonder which of the two styles of GE\Brosnan or CR\Craig he preferred. I'd suspect the latter and appreciate he was just towing the line back in 1995 but I've still never respected the man for so publicly denegrating Moore and Dalton in order to promote Brosnan.

    I'd have liked a third Dalton film but six years was too large a gap to come back from and I'd have hated Dalton being in Goldeneye itself given how excruciatingly awful the dialogue was.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Cowley wrote: »
    "Pierce is absolutely right: the perfect 007. Born to play him, if you like, in the sense that he lights up the screen with a winning mixture of action, humour and romance. He's also a damned good actor and knows exactly what he's doing"

    Campbell certainly spoke some Truth when publicising Goldeneye!
    Fixed. GoldenEye was a perfect Bond film. I wouldn't have it any other way.
  • CowleyCowley
    Posts: 486
    Murdock wrote: »
    Cowley wrote: »
    "Pierce is absolutely right: the perfect 007. Born to play him, if you like, in the sense that he lights up the screen with a winning mixture of action, humour and romance. He's also a damned good actor and knows exactly what he's doing"

    Campbell certainly spoke some Truth when publicising Goldeneye!
    Fixed. GoldenEye was a perfect Bond film. I wouldn't have it any other way.

    Brosnan being the perfect Bond? Delusion and publicity junket hyperbole from Campbell rather than any smidgen of truth.

    The problem with Brosnan's performance is that he actually acted like he thought he was born - or had a god given right - to play the role but sadly he did nothing with it. So maybe Campbell's only direction to him was "perfect Pierce, you're just perfect".
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Cowley wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Don't remember the new Connery angle, just the 'best since', which everyone gets. I'm sure many have downgraded him, people always need a scapegoat.

    "Pierce is absolutely right: the perfect 007. Born to play him, if you like, in the sense that he lights up the screen with a winning mixture of action, humour and romance. He's also a damned good actor and knows exactly what he's doing"

    Campbell certainly spoke some bullshit when publicising Goldeneye!

    Funny how he said "Tim Dalton, I felt, looked too angry and unrelaxed" and then gave us the more sombre CR. Makes you wonder which of the two styles of GE\Brosnan or CR\Craig he preferred. I'd suspect the latter and appreciate he was just towing the line back in 1995 but I've still never respected the man for so publicly denegrating Moore and Dalton in order to promote Brosnan.

    I'd have liked a third Dalton film but six years was too large a gap to come back from and I'd have hated Dalton being in Goldeneye itself given how excruciatingly awful the dialogue was.

    I agree with you on the GE dialogue. I've always thought it was awful.

    The things is that a good actor can make something even of the worst script, and I've always felt GE might have actually suited Dalton's scenery chewing tendency. He's shown especially more recently that he can camp it up with the best of them. I actually think he could have elevated the nonsense in GE to a different level.
Sign In or Register to comment.