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
You are my hero if you put it online ^:)^ ^:)^ ^:)^
Me too, I just finished watching it within the hour and had tears in my eyes several times, plus a few good laughs and tons of memories. Fantastic documentary, the best one I've ever seen on Bond. I will be more than happy to own it when it becomes available, and heartily give my stamp of two thumbs up approval and my recommendation as a must have for any serious collection :-bd ^:)^
Could you send me one too?
yes please!!!
I'd love to watch it too @Artemis81. Thanks for taking the time to make this for all of us who can't watch it otherwise.
That was cool, told me lots of stuff I didn't know. And the gunbarrel at the start was awesome.
But why didn't he make his feelings known sooner?? I went off Brosnsn as he appeared to ONLY be interested in the $$$.
Craig was quite quick to let his feelings about QOS so maybe if Brosnsn had spoke out even during his tenure things may have worked out differently???
Bullsh*t. He's said before he loves Bond and if he didn't would he really be doing a documentary for the people that fired him? And I don't think he's getting paid, otherwise Connery would show up.
Not sure what you're saying here. "Craig said after QOS came out he didn't like it so if Brosnan had done that DAD would be better!" Besides, Craig has been lucky enough to get more creative input than any Bond.
I think everyone came across well, Connery's comments obviously being from the archives weren't anything we didn't already know but I guess it was his decision not to participate. Kevin McClory seems very much the villain of the piece although Connery's comment on that U.S chat show during the publicity for NSNA seemed quite hurtful referring to Cubby as the first Bond villain, sums up Sean's attitude to the whole thing really, it was all about the money but as the series has proven no actor is bigger than Bond!
Agree entirely with thelivingroyale.
Whatever you think about Brozza as Bond he loved the role and he would also have loved a crack at a gritty CR script. Any faults with his film are largely down to poor script, directing and casting decisions and I dont think a lot of criticism can be levelled at Pierce except in terms of natural acting talent where he is obviously lacking when compared to the likes of Dalton and Craig.
TND and TWINE werent too bad in terms of the tone they tried to take and on paper the whole North Korea thing sounded interesting and gritty and I dont see how Pierce could have predicted how shambolic it would become so I dont know when he was supposed to speak out exactly. Post DAD wouldnt be much use to anyone and as the film was such a blatant catastrophe EON didnt need anyone telling them that things needed to change.
Had he spoken out after TND or even TWINE enough then maybe DAD wouldn't have been the shambles that it was.
TWINE was really poor or (dire as Barry Norman put it) but yet they carried on regardless and went even further on DAD.
If Brosnan showed any interest in doing a gritty bond why did the producers not pick up on this and give him a script that was gritty? Instead they kept giving him lucklusture scripts and crap directors and eventually let him go and recast. They took bond back to Fleming after MR with the same lead so no reason why Brosnsn couldn't have been brought back for CR but without the reboot
When Moore was around Cubby was too, and TWINE (which I like) wasn't really unrealistic like MR.
Brosnan did show intrest in doing a gritty Bond but at the time EON didn't. And like I said, Craig has been lucky enough to have much more creative input than any Bond.
All Brosnan did was turn up to work and do his job, and to be honest I think a good one. If you don't think his films were "gritty" enough, then blame the producers and the script writers, don't say "it's all Brosnans fault, he only cares about money!!!"
Exactly.
The direction the series takes is down to EON and not the hired hand. I dont think Rog was very keen on the gritty realism (for a Rog Bond film) of FYEO but he didnt moan he got on with his job. And I'm pretty sure there are quotes from Sean during the making of TB when he said the gadgetry was taking over and how much notice was paid to that for YOLT? And both Sean and Rog had more clout at their peak than Brozza ever did.
I'm certain Brozza was quoted as saying he would love to remake OHMSS as Fleming wrote it but was any notice taken of that?
At the time Babs and MGW were finding their feet without Cubby and the films were making money - so if it aint broke dont fix it was the maxim. It was only with DAD that they realised it was broke and they had to do some drastic repairs.
I really dont see how you can lump the failures of the Brosnan era at Pierces door when he actually stepped up and saved the series under enormous pressure to deliver. For this alone, no matter what we think of him as Bond or as an actor, he deserves respect.
Craig has a privileged position afforded to no other Bond in terms of putting his oar in creatively which is largely based on the fact that Babs fancies him.
:)) True.
It's on some cable thing on America, in the UK you have to go to any Odeon cinemas that are showing it (and it's not many), and some places don't get it at all.
If you're outside of America your best bet is the internet. @Artemis81 has a link.