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
Grow up and start acting like someone who isn't a 14 year old dweeb then.
Ha ha priceless. Someone who prefers 007 Legends to OHMSS. Clearly a man of taste and intelligence.
I wouldnt lose any sleep over coming across as a bit of a clown though mate as you've already long passed that point with your imbecilic drivel.
Lazenby did great with no acting experience but he lied his way into the part and ultimately it shows on screen. Physically Lazenby was brilliant in the fights but you have a male model trying to be Connery.
I love OHMSS as an overall film but no question, Connery would have been great in it too. But OHMSS is what it is and it is Lazenby's film and always will be!
I'm wondering how long it will be before he gets banned.
Personal likeability goes a long way for me in a Bond and is an extension beyond the performance. It is how a Bond actor acts outside the role that can also affect the franchise publicly, and that matters too. You boys do act a little soft when your precious Georgie is prodded. No worries, why the hell would the man care what I or millions of other Bond fans think about him? He loves himself enough for everyone in the galaxy.
It is abit awkward and Laz in deerstalker and glasses looks strange.
I have grown to enjoy Lazs' performances over the years but some directors producers decisions are very obvious
I wish he would as he is indescribably tedious. I think the best thing we can do from here is just ignore him rather than rising to his stupidity.
also, willy, you might want to ruminate on that dweeb adage yourself, stop bashing everyone who dislikes daniel craig, because there is a hell of a lot of us, you come across as a total fangirl, its disgusting, hell, over 80% of the users here disgust me, i thaught the old Mi6 was becoming a troll haven in the wake of CR, but now, uggh, barely a Male amongst half of you; most of you come across as teenage girls trying to pretend to be men, half of you dont even rank as echo to me, let alone Alpha, no wonder you prefer pussy bonds, because you dont have the testicals to know what a real man is.
oh, and praytell, were is the stupidity, i call attacking people and denouncing there posts as nonsensical drivel because they, say, may prefer brosnans Portrayal of bond, as an actor, and have been baught up to be manly and not some walt whitman hippie who cries when the dime store runs out of square jean patches, sheer mindnumbing stupidity. also, a ban,. fine, i dont care. if all this place welcomes now is a bunch of craigfangirl total utter trolls who cannot stand any opinion that is not there own, then its not even worth being a member here, trust me, ive had more intelligent conversations on facebook!
Well said @0Brady Lazenby is fine until you see his interviews where he is too up his **s
Lazenby clearly behaved like a moron because Harry told him he was a star. George pissed off most of the crew as well as some actors and did not stop and think.
So if Harry told George to jump off a cliff? I guess George would also have been stupid enough to do it!
George's pride came before his titanic fall. When you are the man replacing Connery then common sense would dictate just a smidgen of humility!
And Lazenby is idiotically sexist when he boasts about banging anything that moved. A gentleman keeps his mouth shut. Connery never bragged and neither did the other Bonds.
Bruce Feirstein wrote 007 Legends? Wow, that says sooo much. No wonder the story was a complete abortion of anything James Bond.
Lazenby.
Unfortunate to be the first 'non-Connery' Bond, he has taken an unbelievable amount of flak for little good reason, IMO. Whilst not in the same class as an actor as Dalton or Craig, Lazenby nonetheless gave a solid, believable performance.
Unlike another half-witted contributor to this thread (who shall remain nameless, because like a spolit child they don't deserve the attention) I think his reaction in the final scene is entirely authentic and in no way at all 'unmanly'.
Anyone who thinks otherwise seriously needs help.
I'll grant you I took your comments out of context, but thats not being illiterate. If you want an example of illiterate I think you'll find this is a pretty textbook effort:
Still hearty congratulations for spelling illiterate correctly (I doubt I would have risked betting a quid you could manage that) even if you don't quite comprehend its meaning.
OK sorry all; I said I would ignore him and starve him of the oxygen of publicity - but its just too much fun.
I should be more mature and not get involved in such pointless exchanges - I've been 'baught' up better than this!
His plots for Bond games are messes. Blood Stone is a fun Bond game if you completely forget the shambled wreck of a story, and I was just commenting on that.
seriously, the only thing its an abberation on is flemings bond, and i dont mind that, i want that, because to me, flemings bond was a wimp, if i was M i wouldn't trust him to make the tea. Bruce gives us Terrance Youngs bond, a 100% man, an ALPHA MALE.
Plus, i think bruce is the best bond scribe since Miabaum
he doesnt bother with cissy emotions or trying to appeal to teenage girls (like perwade), he uses, despite being an american, BRITISH idioms like lift and mobile phone. were as perwade use americanisms like cell phone and elevator, and his one liners never ceaes to crease me in laughter, and his films have sheer class, were as perwade make bond come across as a street thug 1 grand assassin. ive got a lot of time For Bruce, hell the sooner he comes Back to the bond movies and stops wasting his talents on rushed out COD/GOW clones, the sooner bond can start acting like a MAN again.
PS. any of you arrogant bungholes ever heard of dyslexia or aspergers syndrome, YOU try spelling properly and acting calm when you have those. god, what is this, the aryan brotherhood or something?, because there is some serious learning difficulty intolerance here.
Fair enough, I agree on Bloodstone but I think his films were good. TND was alright if a bit generic and Goldeneye imo is a classic.
I could say the same about you. Fleming's Bond a "wimp"? Show some respect. As if you would know a well constructed Bond when you saw one. If you don't like Fleming, why read him? It's in Moonraker where he is at some of his lowest, and the end shows his broken and angry. Isn't that too wimpy for you? I see why you like the Brosnan films, not to mention how Bruce ruins every Bond game with a crappy story, especially where he butchered FRWL for a video game remake nothing like the film. Bruce/P&W and EON ruined any potentially moving moments for Bond to deal with in the weak scripts. Bond makes the decision to kill his lover in TWINE. Instead of a moving scene where we actually see more of his hurt that a stupid peck on the mouth, he goes superman again and continues on his mission, as if he pretends that Electra never existed. That isn't showing Bond as a man, that is just horrible scriptwriting by people that wouldn't know Bond if he came up to them and gave em' a double tap. I, like everyone else here sick of your baseless Bond related speeches will just ignore you and flag away.
You've already used this line in an earlier post and it wasn't funny then. If you insist on clogging up the boards with your childish prose at least try and come up with something original hmm?
Sorry I said I would leave him to it. Discipline Wizard, discipline.
To be honest I'm just passing the time till MOTD starts.
Agreed. I think theres a perception that because GE is a reasonably decent script that Fierstein is some sort of indispensable Bond writer extraordinaire. Theres a reason he spends most of his time writing games.
We should be happy that we have a proper screenwriter like John Logan signed up for the next 2 films rather than bemoaning the fact that EON no longer hire mediocrity to work on Bond films.
That's funny because most people on here seem to think he shouldn't have stopped and mourned at all. Anyway, there was a nuclear meltdown being set up outside. He didn't exactly have time to start grieving. Him kissing her showed he was hurt fine imo.
I think the point of that scene was that Bond didn't care about her enough in the end to let it get in the way of the mission. He's not a rookie, he had to be a professional. If he let every death he caused get in the way then he'd have been fired ages ago. And he didn't forget all about it, he taunted Renard about her while he was fighting him.
Maybe at the end he could've turned down Christmas or something because he still felt bad about Elektra but after he killed her I can't see any other way of handling it.
And I think Purvis and Wade wrote TWINE, not Fierstein.
He didn't kiss Electra. He just leaned over her body and touched her hair for a few seconds. TND was where he kissed his dead lover. I think the intention was a moment of reflection before Bond carried on.
So if Sean and Dan had only made DN and CR Brozza would be the better Bond? Not sure this argument holds water.
Back on topic folks and play nice.
Brosnan was a limited actor but he did bring a lot of charm to the role. When he tried to act it came off as either trying to hard or, even worse, hamfisted. But he was certainly adequate in most cases and was immensely popular with the audiences.
OHMSS was my favourite Bond film until CR came out, and it alternated with FRWL for "best" (as opposed to favourite) until it was bested by CR in this category as well. One of the film's charms is Lazenby who, like Brosnan, has a genial, good-natured presence (although without the smugness).
Had Lazenby made even one more film I think he really would be regarded more highly. In addition to the charm and affable nature of his Bond his take on the character is also more down to Earth, a nice counterpoint to Connery. There's also a touch of Fleming's "everyman" quality to his Bond.
While Laz never overacts he is quite stiff and wooden in some scenes. However, in others he's nothing short of fantastic. Many people have mentioned that he really did "learn on the job" how to act, and I believe that with a second film we would have seen all of his strengths but none of the rookie weaknesses from a first-time actor.
I think that Laz had the potential to be a better Bond than Brosnan but I'd need a second film to determine that - let's face it, Brosnan got a lot more screen time to settle in as Bond. But I'm tremendously grateful that we got Lazenby's more human Bond in OHMSS. And his fight scenes :-)
On the basis of the movie alone OHMSS is easily better than any of Brosnan's films in the eyes of fans, those anyway who have the level of maturity to handle something that doesn't involve excessive machine gun fire, something blowing up every 10-15 minutes, and the idea of romance past cracking innuendos, and wiping computer tears away. OHMSS is a real story brilliantly crafted by Fleming, that shows Bond is also a man with human feelings and not just a caricature that at times he became later on.
On the basis of acting this is where the line becomes blurred, because you can't so easily promote Lazenby's performance as better if you dislike Brosnan to begin with. The fact for me is that neither display emotion nearly at the level the other Bonds have done. Some folks say Lazenby would have by default been better than Connery during Tracy's death scene because he was out of shape and didn't want to do another Bond film. One honest look at Connery's career makes the theory look ridiculous, let alone the performance he gave in "Robin And Marian". If Sir Sean took that role, he would have understood that it required him to be in shape and give a performance that would have challenged his skills, and responded accordingly. It may have been better for Hunt to let George cry the way he wanted to, it would have made the scene better in my estimation. This "sob" people mention sounded to me more like a whimper, it fails compared to what we saw in CR, and lacked the complete range of emotions it should have when the love of your life dies suddenly- I've been there and anyone else here who has understands the difference between these performances as far as what is actually felt. The shock aspect George handles very well though, but overall I feel sorry for Bond and not because Lazenby is evoking those emotions in the manner an actor like Connery, Dalton, and Craig can. But I'm not going to be an apologist for either- George is an action star, not a dramatic actor. He was in way over his head in terms of script and definitely had to be carried along and constantly coached. OHMSS is great because of Rigg, Savalas, Ferzetti, and Steppat plus the regulars, and of course the story itself, but not because of George by any means in my honest opinion and background in performing as a musician and the occasional theatrical stage back in school.
On terms of experience, Brosnan should get the nod. He was certainly established for a decade before filming GoldenEye. His defenders will blame the scripts for his deficiencies and there is some validity to that, but here George has an excuse for the unexcusable in Brosnan's case- he was green. What is Brosnan's excuse? An actor of his experience, let alone the passion he has for the character, should have been counted on to bring much more than performances that are mostly as basic as a paint-by-numbers drawing. His accent, like Lazenby's, doesn't help. Neither sound much like Bond. And the scripts seem to acknowledge this with all the vast amounts of action sequences that don't allow him to create a version of the character that is unique and distinguishable from the others, unless of course you think ticking the box of every known Bond cliche created by Connery and Moore, and looking the part makes you Bond. Each of the 4 actors we're not discussing brought their own perspective of the character and worked hard to make their version as unique as possible, and Craig is still working on that and showing clear progress. Brosnan hits a peak in TND, and then goes down with a ship that sprung a leak in TWINE and went to the bottom with along with the Devonshire in DAD. What he does have in abundance is charm, but there has to be a lot more than that and he failed if a combination of Connery and Moore was the goal because a unique portrayal didn't happen for most Bond hardcores. And the general public just wants to be entertained and doesn't care about the same things the rest of us do.
Purely in terms of expectations given experience, I give the very slight edge to Lazenby, but again to me that isn't saying much.
I don't know, Lazenby if he made more Bond movies he cloud have developed his Bond.
But we are evaluating Bonds, not movies. OHMSS is one of the great movies in the series, but that doesn't make Lazenby better.
Brosnan, depsite his bad/ average films, except Goldeneye, was the right man for the job.