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
Update: Figured it out. Somehow the thread was bookmarked. Don't know how. Damn keyboard.
Yeah, TND has its moments. The pretitles are very good. And I prefer to watch DaD over GE or TWINE - it has that so bad it's good thing going on. Did they just do that? Etc.
BUT there's quite a few cringy moments though, my personal pick of worst is when Brosnan holds up the watch:
"this looks familiar"
Wai Lin: "We've made some improvements
Urgh!!
I saw a fair chunk of TWINE the other day funnily enough. I actually think the first half hour or so is pretty decent. We get some action, humour, a good location (the Scottish castle) and some poignancy (Q's last scene). But the cracks start to appear soon afterwards.
It may have been Brosnan's classically handsome pretty/boy features that worked against him (plus a light voice), but it was difficult to feel any threat from him.
But back in the day he was the only obvious choice for Bond. Probably the only time a new actor has been so clearly destined to be Bond. Bookies stopped taking bets.
Not particularly tough but definitely handsome and striking.
An excellent point about the voice and looking a little strained on occassion @NicNac.
Whenever I watch a Connery or Moore Bond I'm impressed by their line delivery, but I think a lot of it does have to do with their voices....deep and confident naturally.
Brosnan had it down in the looks dept. however. No question about that, particularly in GE (I'm a fan of the longer hair look that characterized his pre-Bond days). He seems to be posing and a bit strained in the photo below too, while the two lovely ladies by his side appear quite natural.
If one looks for fun and don't have to stick into nitpicking and criticizing the computer-generated imagery (such as in Die Another Day, despite being poorly executed I've got to admit), his second and the fourth are his best. However, that is only my opinion. And the way I enjoy my Bond escapades, nothing can change that. Being grown up with Brosnan's films, I can't argue the impact his films have given me. From all those promotional images to the video games (especially when Nightfire came out) I've always been on top of the world. Not saying I have less of a liking of the contemporary take on the films, but my enthusiasm, as it was ten years ago has never been the same. Probably it's an age thing. Brosnan will always remain a great piece of nostalgia to me and I'll always enjoy them.
I agree on what you said on the Brosnan era, im not into video games but Pierce's films were pure action fun.
The only thing i disagree with is The world is not enough, thats my second favorite abond movie and i thought it was a great balance between a good story and Action just like Goldeneye.
The other two Tomorrow never dies and die another day are more focused in the action but still never boring and always engaging from the very beginning.
I guess most of us are influenced on the Bond we grew up with and our second favorite Bond will be the one which we find the most similar to the guy we saw first.
When i saw Sean Connery i saw a classic version of Pierce a little more sexist but these two actors( Sean and Pierce) for me are the whole package of the Perfect James Bond.
He looks a bit like a 6th Former in that photograph.
Yes i agree that picture makes him look a bitt more baby faced than the eay he looked in the actual film.
In the film he looked much better but still his looks improved as the films went by getting at his best in The world is not enough though in Die Another day he still looked great.
He looks very uncomfortable. I can almost feel the butterflies in his stomach in that scene.
Meanwhile, the Dr. No introduction is flawless.
I think that was one of the first scenes he shot and he later admitted in the EON doc he was on edge.
Still, I think he sounds ok.
I love his introduction and the use of that classic line, and I've always enjoyed how the music cuts out momentarily while he introduces himself.
He knew he could be the man who would be known to have laid Bond to the grave had he failed.
Therefore I will always have the upmost respect for that man.
Agreed 100%
:)>- ^:)^
He's not my favourite Bond, but I do think he did a great job as 007. =D>
Not surprised to be honest as he looks kind of awkward in that scene too.
I think this might be a little excessive in all fairness. Bond will always survive, even if some actors can, for a period of time, cause it to lose its box office lustre, relatively speaking. James Bond will always return.........
I can kind of understand why Broz was nervous. This was probably the biggest comeback the series had faced up until that point.
To be frank, Broz was then a B-movie actor and, despite his popularity, had starred in quite a lot of crap. Now he was the face for the most popular film series of all.
Lazenby in my opinion had the job of the decade trying to follow the star of the decade in 1969. The pressure there must have been absolutely immense.
While EON/MGM may have not had faith/confidence in their product in 1995, and idiots in the media were spinning the Bond story, there was actually tremendous pent up demand among the fan base for James Bond in 1995. Many (at least those I knew) were longing for the return of James Bond, to show all the pretenders (Harry Tasker, Jack Ryan etc..) who does it best. They actually played that desire up in the teaser "You were expecting someone else"
I agree.
I did think of Moore in TSWLM but I suppose the difference with that film along with OHMSS was that a lot of the old guard (i.e. Cubby) were still on active duty. This time (in 1995) you had a very different production team.
That is a fair point. The pressure as a result must have been quite intense. Moreover, I think an MGM head insisted on Brosnan to replace Dalton (regardless of Dalton leaving on his own accord or not) so that could have added to the pressure on him.
Well except for Goldeneye the scripts weren't the best but i stay with my thought that at those times scripts were not that important in action flicks. Pierce was a Bond of his times and he did a great job.
Maybe if those movies were made in 2006 they would have cared more for the scripts, getting important directors, oscar recognised actors for the villains and art house Darling beauties who appear often in film festivals.
The Brosnan era was all about the action and having fun because that's what the 90s and early 2000s called for.
So they got good actors and beautiful woman where didn't mind if they were taken seriously asactresess except for Sophie she is the only Craig type of Bond girl in Pierce's era.
I feel bad for repeating it since what im gonna say was once said by a troll in another Bond but i feel like this series has been taking itself too seriously and aming to win an oscar and be one first action movies to get one.
The production people knew what they were doing at the time, or any time might I say. By the time Casino Royale came out, the era of the cinema along with the audience were changed. They were looking for things along the line of Christopher Nolan's Batman and the sense of seriousness, grim, reality and bit of a gory grit.
And to say, Brosnan was never responsible for helping the franchise revive, being assured as to "James Bond always returned" (as if the six-year gap wasn't enough), then that is highly disrespectful.
I don't mind if anyone doesn't like him or his Bond or the films because tastes and opinions vary. But, to overlook facts and fire shots at it with the intention of just antagonizing the man is just out of place. And my apologies if my statement goes onto any offense.