›

Biggest change in opinion regarding anything Bond-y?

123468

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    At the risk of permanently regretting this post, I have to say that I am reassessing Brosnan as Bond more positively these days. While I still think he was disastrous in TWINE, and just average in TND, I do like him a lot in GE/DAD.

    I'm coming round to the opinion (long held by many others) that he was short changed by EON. I used to blame him for much of it, and I now think that's unfair.

    He had the potential to be a much better Bond (as did Dalton) and I think both were somewhat limited due to circumstances imho.

    It's a real pity that Brosnan had to do The Tailor of Panama as a sort of mid-stint audition to show EON what he was capable of with the right strategic vision.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,358
    bondjames wrote: »
    At the risk of permanently regretting this post, I have to say that I am reassessing Brosnan as Bond more positively these days. While I still think he was disastrous in TWINE, and just average in TND, I do like him a lot in GE/DAD.

    I'm coming round to the opinion (long held by many others) that he was short changed by EON. I used to blame him for much of it, and I now think that's unfair.

    He had the potential to be a much better Bond (as did Dalton) and I think both were somewhat limited due to circumstances imho.

    It's a real pity that Brosnan had to do The Tailor of Panama as a sort of mid-stint audition to show EON what he was capable of with the right strategic vision.

    I think you are correct: Brosnan's best performances were in GE and DAD. My biggest change is TWINE: I thought it was the strongest of the three Brosnans when it came out in theaters because it dared to go dark, but now I just see it as a tonal and casting mess, and Brosnan's worst performance by a large margin.

    I still like Marceau (how could you not? With a better script she could have been truly mysterious and dangerous, up there with the best Bond women), but Carlyle's character makes no sense and lacks menace (compare him to Cigar Girl, who is ironically afraid of him), and the less said of Richards, the better.
  • bigladiesmanbigladiesman
    Posts: 1,009
    A bit of a hodgepodge:

    OHMSS: from my least favourite Bond film to my personal Top-5 thanks to getting older and understanding Peter Hunt's directing style.

    Tomorrow Never Dies went from one of my fav Bond songs to one of the worse after repeated hearing. It gets old fast.

  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,514
    Some of my biggest:

    -Used to not like George Lazenby's performance as Bond or OHMSS very much when I first saw OHMSS. Now, OHMSS ranks as my #2 favorite Bond film, and Lazenby is my third favorite Bond.
    -FYEO used to rank as one of my least favorite Bond films ever - around #18-20 I think. Now it is my #12 and one of my favorites from Roger Moore.
    -TMWTGG used to rank a lot more highly on my list - I think as high as #12 or 13 before. Now it is #20.
    -TWINE also used to rank much higher for me than it does now, which I think may have even been a Top 10 Bond film for me once. It's at #19 on my list right now.
  • The_DonaldThe_Donald
    Posts: 170
    It seems that TND and particularly TWINE are commonly reappraised unfavourably and I think it's easy to see why. There's no substance to Brosnan as Bond. With all his cheesy one liners, he's a walking talking innuendo, a cliché whose next pun you can see a mile off. It even comes across as sleazy at times. I think comparing him to Dalton is terribly unfair on Tim, who said he was only going to do Bond if it went back to who the character really was. The line in TLD where he says with asperity that he'll thank M for firing him is quintessentially Bondian. Brosnan's Bond would never do that, could never do that. Brosnan's idea of Bond was someone who cared more about the neatness of his clothes than the mission, or someone who spied on woman's undergarments. People say Moore was cartoon Bond; I would argue Brosnan hit that brief much better.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    LALD has always struggled a bit in my rankings and I've equally struggled to like the film. To me, it had the makings of a good Bond movie (cast, score, atmosphere etc.) but it was tied together in a very bizarre way, and I often held that bizarreness against the movie. But on rewatching it, I've found that I like it a lot more, and I've come to appreciate the whole bizarre factor a lot more. It's a truly unique entry in the way that it occasionally delves into the supernatural, which no other Bond movie has really done. There's some great acting from Moore in his debut flick and some pretty good action scenes. I think it also needs to be credited for moving Bond beyond the Blofeld era and proving that Bond could exist in such an era.

    I still think the beginning and fight with Kananga are quite weak, along with Pepper, but I liked the actual ending on the train. On the whole, the movie's pretty solid and has moved into my top ten (albeit barely).

    Now I think I'm going to task myself with liking TMWTGG, which I've always considered to be Moore's worst and just hard to like, lol.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    The_Donald wrote: »
    It seems that TND and particularly TWINE are commonly reappraised unfavourably and I think it's easy to see why. There's no substance to Brosnan as Bond. With all his cheesy one liners, he's a walking talking innuendo, a cliché whose next pun you can see a mile off. It even comes across as sleazy at times.
    That is certainly how he comes across. Very much so. I'm just not sure if the blame can be laid at his feet alone, given the tripe he was given to work with over 7 years (post-GE).
    The_Donald wrote: »
    I think comparing him to Dalton is terribly unfair on Tim, who said he was only going to do Bond if it went back to who the character really was. The line in TLD where he says with asperity that he'll thank M for firing him is quintessentially Bondian.
    Yes, that was an excellent scene, and reminded me of Laz in OHMSS when he resigned. Same character.
    The_Donald wrote: »
    Brosnan's Bond would never do that, could never do that. Brosnan's idea of Bond was someone who cared more about the neatness of his clothes than the mission, or someone who spied on woman's undergarments. People say Moore was cartoon Bond; I would argue Brosnan hit that brief much better.
    I completely agree, but again I believe that is on account of the dismal direction he was given from his superiors. After seeing the last effort, I realize that Brosnan isn't the only one who was seriously short changed by the producer's ineptitude (assuming Craig didn't have a say in some of the nonsense that made its way into SP).
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,198
    My biggest changes in opinion regard Moonraker and Tomorrow Never Dies.

    Moonraker has proven to be the ultimate style-over-substance Bond film, nonsensical but my goodness it's gorgeous, epic and amusing throughout.

    Tomorrow Never Dies is in my opinion a spectacular film that also nods to the power of mass media which relevant even more today.
    Furthermore, I have a much more favorable view of Pierce Brosnan the last couple of years. I think Pierce is an incredible James Bond and he's become one of my favourite actors.

    But don't worry I'm still and always will be a big Dalton fan ;).
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    edited August 2017 Posts: 1,984
    I get decreasingly critical of Moonraker with my every viewing as well, but I don't think I could ever shift my opinion of such an over-the-top film to any dramatic extent.

    Tomorrow Never Dies was another big shift for me, but it went down unfortunately. It was just too by the numbers. A few rewarding moments and I still find both Carver and Wai Lin excellent but it just felt retread and a bit cliched, with a rather lackluster final act. The first half of the movie is solid but from there on it goes into a downward spiral IMHO. It's a shame that such strong elements of a Bond flick weren't tied together better, but I wouldn't say it's nearly as guilty of such a failure as TWINE.
  • The_DonaldThe_Donald
    edited August 2017 Posts: 170
    bondjames wrote: »
    I completely agree, but again I believe that is on account of the dismal direction he was given from his superiors. After seeing the last effort, I realize that Brosnan isn't the only one who was seriously short changed by the producer's ineptitude (assuming Craig didn't have a say in some of the nonsense that made its way into SP).

    You are right that Brosnan could have been better served, but the interesting thing for me is that Dalton was the driving force behind the change in his film's from Roger's. I also don't think Brosnan could have acted that type of Bond, though of course he could have improved on what he did given the right material. In the end though I think it was a definite miscast.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    The_Donald wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I completely agree, but again I believe that is on account of the dismal direction he was given from his superiors. After seeing the last effort, I realize that Brosnan isn't the only one who was seriously short changed by the producer's ineptitude (assuming Craig didn't have a say in some of the nonsense that made its way into SP).

    You are right that Brosnan could have been better served, but the interesting thing for me is that Dalton was the driving force behind the change in his film's from Roger's. I also don't think Brosnan could have acted that type of Bond, though of course he could have improved on what he did given the right material. In the end though I think it was a definite miscast.
    IF you've not seen The Tailor of Panama, I highly recommend it. Brosnan doesn't play Bond in that film of course, but he definitely shows aspects that he could have brought to Bond. More of a rogue charmer with a dark side. I actually see elements of it in his DAD performance and they are the aspects I like the best.

    Ultimately though, as some have speculated, I don't think Brosnan entirely had the trust of Babs. So I don't think he necessarily had the same leverage on direction as Dalton had with Cubby. Craig is her vision, for better or for worse, depending on the point of view.
  • The_DonaldThe_Donald
    Posts: 170
    bondjames wrote: »
    The_Donald wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I completely agree, but again I believe that is on account of the dismal direction he was given from his superiors. After seeing the last effort, I realize that Brosnan isn't the only one who was seriously short changed by the producer's ineptitude (assuming Craig didn't have a say in some of the nonsense that made its way into SP).

    You are right that Brosnan could have been better served, but the interesting thing for me is that Dalton was the driving force behind the change in his film's from Roger's. I also don't think Brosnan could have acted that type of Bond, though of course he could have improved on what he did given the right material. In the end though I think it was a definite miscast.
    IF you've not seen The Tailor of Panama, I highly recommend it. Brosnan doesn't play Bond in that film of course, but he definitely shows aspects that he could have brought to Bond. More of a rogue charmer with a dark side. I actually see elements of it in his DAD performance and they are the aspects I like the best.

    Ultimately though, as some have speculated, I don't think Brosnan entirely had the trust of Babs. So I don't think he necessarily had the same leverage on direction as Dalton had with Cubby. Craig is her vision, for better or for worse, depending on the point of view.

    I will look out for that, as I was a while ago and then forgot about it.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    edited August 2017 Posts: 2,730
    I hated FRWL as a kid, even up until 1 year ago, but after reading the book, I was inclined to revisit it, and with more mature eyes, it has become my second favorite bond film
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    I hated FRWL as a kid, even up until 1 year ago, but after reading the book, I was inclined to revisit it, and with more mature eyes, it has become my second favorite bond film
    Same. Couldn't stand it as a kid. My parents introduced it to me (it was my first Connery film) to show me who the 'real Bond' was. Boooring! I couldn't understand what the big deal was. Well, I have a completely different perception today.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    I've mentioned this elsewhere, but I initially hated Roger Moore as Bond. It wasn't until I saw MR years ago that my opinion of him changed and I now rank him second best. You can't help but love the guy.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    BMW_with_missiles wrote: »
    I've mentioned this elsewhere, but I initially hated Roger Moore as Bond. It wasn't until I saw MR years ago that my opinion of him changed and I now rank him second best. You can't help but love the guy.
    Out of curiosity, but at the risk of being fearful of the answer given your monicker, who's your #1 @BMW_with_missiles?
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    bondjames wrote: »
    BMW_with_missiles wrote: »
    I've mentioned this elsewhere, but I initially hated Roger Moore as Bond. It wasn't until I saw MR years ago that my opinion of him changed and I now rank him second best. You can't help but love the guy.
    Out of curiosity, but at the risk of being fearful of the answer given your monicker, who's your #1 @BMW_with_missiles?

    @bondjames You guessed correctly, my #1 is Brosnan. I've been meaning to update my rankings in the appropriate thread as there has been some movement since my last post.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    BMW_with_missiles wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    BMW_with_missiles wrote: »
    I've mentioned this elsewhere, but I initially hated Roger Moore as Bond. It wasn't until I saw MR years ago that my opinion of him changed and I now rank him second best. You can't help but love the guy.
    Out of curiosity, but at the risk of being fearful of the answer given your monicker, who's your #1 @BMW_with_missiles?

    @bondjames You guessed correctly, my #1 is Brosnan. I've been meaning to update my rankings in the appropriate thread as there has been some movement since my last post.
    Thanks @BMW_with_missiles. Well, then all I can say is we share the same #2!

    I've begun to reassess Brosnan more positively of late, but not so much that I can move him up yet. Maybe after a few more positive viewings of his films.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    My ranking of the actors used to be
    1. Craig
    2. Brosnan
    3. Moore
    4. Connery
    5. Lazenby
    6. Dalton


    Now it is
    1. Moore
    2. Connery
    3. Brosnan
    4. Dalton
    5. Craig
    6. Lazenby
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited August 2017 Posts: 15,423
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    My ranking of the actors used to be
    1. Craig
    2. Brosnan
    3. Moore
    4. Connery
    5. Lazenby
    6. Dalton


    Now it is
    1. Moore
    2. Connery
    3. Brosnan
    4. Dalton
    5. Craig
    6. Lazenby
    Not too different from my ranking! Your current ranking that is. :D
  • The_DonaldThe_Donald
    Posts: 170
    I assume that order is worst to best? Haha only kidding but I think even Moore would have put Connery ahead of him. I don't know why I say even because the great man was typically self deprecating. I don't think he was a very good Bond, but I nowadays find myself defending him from more unkind relatives because I find much to enjoy in his performances such as his joking nods to opponents and he often had great delivery with one liners (particulary MR to Drax).
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    The_Donald wrote: »
    I assume that order is worst to best? Haha only kidding but I think even Moore would have put Connery ahead of him. I don't know why I say even because the great man was typically self deprecating. I don't think he was a very good Bond, but I nowadays find myself defending him from more unkind relatives because I find much to enjoy in his performances such as his joking nods to opponents and he often had great delivery with one liners (particulary MR to Drax).

    Here is what I think. They are so completely differant that its really hard to compare, and I love them both but in differant ways. However, Moore is far more consistant at giving a good performance then any other bond actor so thats why he takes my top spot.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    I know I am not going to get much agreement on this, but the Dalton Bonds have steadily declined in my rankings in the last couple of years. Both where in my top 7 but they dont make the top 10 now, and definetly not due to the newer films.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,198
    The only thing I think will never change is my love for the three films starring Laz and Tim.
  • StrogStrog
    Posts: 684
    My biggest opinion shift has definitely been regarding the 80s sequence. When I was 13/14 I loved them. Each film was in my top ten. Two of them, FYEO and AVTAK, spent time at #1, and I thought Glen was the severely under-appreciated and best director Bond had known.

    Now I think that period represents the series's lowest point. OP aside, each of the other four would probably be in my lowest tier of Bond films.
  • The_DonaldThe_Donald
    Posts: 170
    Strog wrote: »
    My biggest opinion shift has definitely been regarding the 80s sequence. When I was 13/14 I loved them. Each film was in my top ten. Two of them, FYEO and AVTAK, spent time at #1, and I thought Glen was the severely under-appreciated and best director Bond had known.

    Now I think that period represents the series's lowest point. OP aside, each of the other four would probably be in my lowest tier of Bond films.

    Why the Dalton ones, especially TLD?
  • StrogStrog
    Posts: 684
    The_Donald wrote: »
    Strog wrote: »
    My biggest opinion shift has definitely been regarding the 80s sequence. When I was 13/14 I loved them. Each film was in my top ten. Two of them, FYEO and AVTAK, spent time at #1, and I thought Glen was the severely under-appreciated and best director Bond had known.

    Now I think that period represents the series's lowest point. OP aside, each of the other four would probably be in my lowest tier of Bond films.

    Why the Dalton ones, especially TLD?
    I just see all the tonal inconsistencies of the Moore era (specifically the later Moore era) refusing to go away. There's a real hangover. A hesitation to fully indulge Dalton's take. With Moore the goofy stuff was at least matched to his 'higher pitch' performance as Bond, whereas with Dalton this stuff is at odds with his take on the character. The result is, for me, a kind of cartoonishness, if that makes sense.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Strog wrote: »
    The_Donald wrote: »
    Strog wrote: »
    My biggest opinion shift has definitely been regarding the 80s sequence. When I was 13/14 I loved them. Each film was in my top ten. Two of them, FYEO and AVTAK, spent time at #1, and I thought Glen was the severely under-appreciated and best director Bond had known.

    Now I think that period represents the series's lowest point. OP aside, each of the other four would probably be in my lowest tier of Bond films.

    Why the Dalton ones, especially TLD?
    I just see all the tonal inconsistencies of the Moore era (specifically the later Moore era) refusing to go away. There's a real hangover. A hesitation to fully indulge Dalton's take. With Moore the goofy stuff was at least matched to his 'higher pitch' performance as Bond, whereas with Dalton this stuff is at odds with his take on the character. The result is, for me, a kind of cartoonishness, if that makes sense.
    I agree. They didn't fully embrace Dalton's take and tried to have it both ways. It resulted in some tonal mismatches. That's why I prefer LTK to TLD. I think they committed more to Dalton's interpretation with the 2nd film, and it's better for it.
  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 7,532
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    The only thing I think will never change is my love for the three films starring Laz and Tim.

    +1
  • The_DonaldThe_Donald
    Posts: 170
    I don't see any tonal hangover from AVTAK to TLD. Ok writing this I'm remember the face shoved in boobs moment. I think that's the only moment it intrudes. The car chase is fun, but that's not Moore exclusive.
Sign In or Register to comment.