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
This. For some reason it always seems fashionable to bash the previous Bond and praise the incumbent. I remember seeing a lot of articles in the 90's, praising Pierce to the hilt, and decrying Dalton as the nadir of the series. This is nothing different.
Pierce was the right Bond, at the right time. As have all the others been. Each Bond is a product of his time, and each era is influenced by the cinematic zeitgeist. The 90's was all about OTT action and brash leading men. Brosnan's era fit that, perfectly.
Well said,both of you,100% agree. =D>
+1
Nothing good about him?
You must be new around here lol.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k8YpQKzl_k&t=1m11s
(I know you like him outside of Bond, it's just a joke)
I'm not. I know he strongly dislikes him. I was saying I wonder If there is any aspect at all that he likes.
Pierce is great in that movie.
I've relegated him since and I think it is simply because, for me, Daniel Craig is just so brilliant in the role. He is how I want Bond to be portrayed. Horses for courses.
On reflection it's a bit unfair for me to criticise Brosnan simply because he isn't Daniel Craig!
He isn't bad at all really, it's just his version can feel a little dated and a bit pastiche. I think as the years continue to role on and we get a new , inevitably different Bond characterisation Mr B will be re-evaluated. Hopefully more favourably. (Because one thing Pierce did do was help ensure the continuation of Bond. Had he/GE flopped in '95 we wouldn't have B25 in production that's for sure. So he deserves a bit more love just for that)
He really is. He's very skillful at that style of acting.
Exactly this! In 1995, we needed that kind of Bond. We hoped for that kind of Bond. I can't honestly think Craig's Bond being successful between 1995-2002, he's great for these times, but wouldn't have been what we needed for the 90s.
Dalton fans hate Brosnan for "usurping" the role from him. Just like how Brosnan fans hate Craig for doing the same to Brosnan. Like how Craig fans will perceive the next actor taking the role.
So spiteful! So petulant!
Not my case, really. As much as I wished Pierce to do another two, I welcomed Craig with the open arms and in fact I enjoy his films, particularly CR and SPECTRE. But you're right, I don't get why so many people has to hate the Bond which is different to the one they liked. In the end, all of the six actors were successful or we wouldn't be talking about Bond now.
I agree, Brosnan and Craig are my favorites, no need to choose sides. It's ridiculous.
Still, I don't blame it on Brosnan at all. With a half-way decent script and competent direction like in GE and TND he was IMO even a better Bond (in the sense of closer to Fleming's vision) than Roger Moore, not to mention Laz.
Yes, I wish Dalton had made another two Bond films in 1991 and 1993, or 1995 and 1997. But I don't hate Brosnan. He looked the part once he filled out a little in TND, and he was good in the action scenes. I just feel that he lacked presence in his own films. He put bums on seats (which was important at the time, but less so now), but in all the docs I have seen of his films, it sounds like he didn't have a plan when approaching the role. He just turned up, read the lines, made few suggestions, and left. He didn't, or didn't have a chance to, create HIS Bond.
Betrayal. He was the first Bond who had to really cope with betrayal in the line of duty. He was fooled by Elektra and Miranda Frost, by Trevelyan for a while. i go as far as saying that most of the things we have seen in the Craig films had a precedent in the Brosnan era, the thing is that back then producers didn't dare to go further with that, but it was a production decision mostly.
-Skyfall takes a lot of TWINE: MI6 is blown, the big threat emanates from M's past, the villain is someone M wanted dead, survived and is now retaliating with everything he's got. Bond is also inactive and someone "approves" him for the mission. The villain himself is a mix between Trevelyan and Boris: a former MI6 agent going on his own but with a computer hacking knowledge. Just like in TWINE, M trusts Bond with something that leans into the personal field.
-SPECTRE has a villain coming from Bond's past, like Trevelyan. Someone Bond thought he was dead for years.
-QOS has Bond disavowed by MI6 with the Americans considering him a liability, just like in DAD, with M ultimately trusting him even when the CIA or NSA is pressuring her.
-Most important of all, the role of women. I'd say without doubt Brosnan is the one who had women questioning his way of life. All of the "resign before loving me" charade started implicitly with Natalya and Paris. The idea that Bond's job is incomplatible with formal relationships (Yes, ok, OHMSS - but there it was Bond who thought of that, not the girl). In other words, Natalya and Paris set a huge precedent for Vesper and Madeleine.
DAD has also anticipated the crude, gritty and raw tone we had in the Craig films. Compared to the first three ones, the violence is kind of strong during the first part.
By no means I'm taking merits away of Craig's Bond, just bringing up that I do think Pierce was a mix between his predecessors but has also brought unique things we haven't seen in previous Bond. I can't imagine anyone else acting out the Elektra death scene and making it convincingly. Connery is too devil-may-care. Lazenby? We didn't know him enough. Certainly not Moore. Dalton would have been a bit overacted and maybe Craig as well. It needed that unique flair of emotion and regret that comes naturally with Pierce on his many roles.
Spottiswoode did do a very fine political thriller called Under Fire in 1983. So maybe that got him the gig. But his Direction is uninspired on TND, particularly the finale on the stealth boat, which is really badly helmed.
Agree with a lot of this.
I don't hate Brosnan for taking over from Dalton. When it was announced Brossa was going to take over from Roger, before the MTM Remington Steele contract issue intervened, I knew he was wrong choice then. Mark Gatiss made a good point about GE, that it was a film by a committee, here are all the traits of Bond, the car, the gadgets etc, but they are presented in such a bland way, and Brossa is part of that, for me, he wears the tux, reads the lines and doesn't fall over the furniture, but that's not enough to be Bond. Brossa just didn't (doesnt) cut it for me.
Yeah they seem to have zero sense of humor (or as dry as a Martini), and are constantly angry... Ironically just like their favorite Bond actor lol
It's funny, it's almost like with dogs and their owners. People here seem to share certain characteristics of their favorite Bonds. Brosnan guys always go for the puns and the shitty jokes in any situation. Dalton fans just seem to be pissed off and angry about anything. Obviously there are many exception to that rule, there are even people who like both equally, but you can still notice it to a large degree.
Hey, I love Brosnan, but I'm an ironic misanthrope. See, the irony wasn't lost on me.
Seriously now, I totally get what you mean. Soulless people, they are, unless they only criticise DAD. In that case, they just have good taste.
;)
Funny you talk of angry Dalton fans, @00Agent. I seem to remember a group of absolutely not angry Brosnan fans absolutely not setting up a campaign to get Craig removed as Bond. Yeah, not angry at all. Dalton fans get angry at Brosnan. Right, so Brosnan fans get apoplectic with rage at Craig, start a campaign to remove him as Bond, and even go out of their way mock every possible pic of him.
So it would be no surprise if certain fans of those two feel their Bonds were robbed of a longer legacy, and that resentment would spill over onto the actor that took over the role. Given that Craig may leave with fiveunder his belt (which no actor has done since Moore neary 40 years ago) in a time span of over a decade, I don't expect to see a number of Craig fans be resentful of who the next actor will be. Like Connery and Moore, I think many of us will believe Craig did more than enough for the franchise and that when he bowed it that it was simply the right time. At least, I like to think that's how most of us will feel.