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
I was at a wedding yesterday and I wore my midnight blue dinner suit and the subject of Bond came up and I was asked if I had seen the new SPECTRE trailer. I just smiled. I was told how Bond-like I look (which I did by the way) and was happy to hear how excited these casual/non-Bond fans were in seeing the new film. The discussion quickly turned to the actors Connery, Moore, Brosnan and Craig and that how the Bond series was an old fashioned franchise before Brosnan came along but nothing was done with his era. Brosnan's movies and I quote "hollow 90's action fluff". However, the Craig movies have more substance to them and feel like "elevated quality movies" with Craig like Connery and Moore establishing himself as a "legitimate" icon.
The whole discussion was interesting to me because I wasn't expecting those opinions let alone having the conversation but it's abundantly clear that, it really depends on who you ask or talk to on the matter.
I like Brosnan, as I said I find him entertaining in a fun kind of way and I personally do feel he was overshadowed and let down by peripheral matters that pushed for all round mediocre efforts, that yielded financial success but that clearly wasn't enough. I also think that Brosnan coveted the role so much that he put an insane amount of pressure on himself to really enjoy the role in the way that he had hoped but oh well. If you look back to when Fleming was alive that's when the movies were and aimed for a higher standard and we're seeing a return of such quality standard of film making with the Craig era and going forward I hope. I dont know, maybe the Brosnan era was a test phase and feeling period and unfortunately for Brosnan he was the Bond candidate for that era but regardless, I think as Bond fans we can all find some satisfaction or enjoyment in what Brosnan contributed to the series.
That's true actually. Don't think I've ever come across anyone who dislikes Connery.
What if he wasn't the first Bond?
I agree, many people I know really like Brosnan and during his tenure a lot of the public/critics and press were generally saying he was the best since Connery.
Goldeneye was a massive success critically and at the box office, his other 3 had mixed reviews but none were slated and Brosnan was always praised and they made a lot of money.
In recent years and in retrospect I think some have changed their opinion on Pierce but I like him and appreciate he held some of those films together. I think he deserved better scripts, casts and directors after Goldeneye, I wish Martin Campbell had done at least one more with Pierce, either TND or TWINE.
Brosnan was ranked #4
I take any poll that puts the current Bond in a highly ranked position with a pinch of salt - it's just the advantage of incumbency. If Craig is still ranked number 2 in thirty years time then it will mean something.
MI6-HQ has an interesting poll. It ranks the Bonds based on the average scores of each of their films from fans on here. Laz comes top as OHMSS is ranked so highly by most fans. Connery comes second because YOLT and DAF drag his average down. Brosnan comes last.
I have no problem with him in other films and really look forward to anything he does, but as Bond he did not sit well with me. Keep in mind this is my view irrespective of the rubbish directors he endured and the terrible casting during part of his tenure. I am referring only to him.
I love GE, but not really because of him. More because of everything else, which is so much fun for me. I rarely watch his other Bond films any more. His interpretation of Bond was not my cup of tea in all honesty. A little too sensitive and sometimes emotional for my liking. I never saw him as all that credible in the action dept. either.
That's a bit of a cop out answer IMO. They are all Bonds for different eras. Sean was perfect for the 60s but might not have handled the 70s and 80s as well as Rog. That doesn't make them all equally good.
:))
No, it just annoys me. :P
=D>