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 genuinely don't understand your logic here. YES Brosnan was a bit on the weedy side in GE but he had the basics. I'd argue that in TND and TWINE he looked perfect. In TND for instance when he locks his car and walks to the car park looking over his shoulder I can say THAT'S James Bond. His manner is more confident than it was in GE.
If he was "so bad" in the role then why was he continuously described as "the best since Sean Connery" up until Craig came along? I for one accepted him in the role. The vast majority of people did. To quote Graham Rye again:
I like Pierce Brosnan as James Bond. He’s got all the right qualities a good Bond should have: he’s tall dark and handsome, he handles the humour well, he’s believable in the action scenes—and the cinema-going public love him! Unfortunately I don’t think the films measure up to his ability as an actor to do something more with the role than he’s been allowed to show to date. In GoldenEye, a colourless drab looking film, he was given little to do except react to the other characters and situations around him. Tomorrow Never Dies was his finest hour as Bond, and I do mean hour. The first half of the movie is the best Brosnan/Bond to date, with some nice Bondian touches, up until the model of his BMW crashes off the hotel roof through a flurry of polystyrene bricks, then the film just simply rambles until it falls apart. I thoroughly enjoyed The World Is Not Enough, which had the best narrative structure of all the Brosnan/Bond films, and the story unfolded much more in the style of a Sixties’ Bond. Although the film is uneven, it’s about 200% better than the dire Die Another Day—quasi science fiction badly executed and acted by everyone but Brosnan.
[b]I’m still not convinced that we’ve seen the last of Brosnan regardless of what’s been said or reportedly said and printed in newspapers, websites etc. I certainly hope he’ll return because he’s still the only man for the job! He has no natural successor. And as for the short list that’s been dragged out in various publications and on websites—it’s laughable.[/b]
Craig's better. I'm not going to dispute that but for christ sake, you just have it in for Brosnan. Shut it! Its getting annoying.
I'll ingore your last sentence, which seems slightly out of character for you.
Predictably, I completely disagree with you. I for one certainly never thought he was the best since Connery. Perhaps Jonathan Ross believed this, but I was massively disappointed by Brosnan from the get go. I appreciate that he was your 'first' Bond and all that, and I understand how this colours your appreciation. However, I do believe, from an objective viewpoint, that Brosnan is the least convincing actor to have ever played the role. Lazenby was immeasurably superior, taking the role by the scruff of the neck from his first moment on screen.
It is out of character but you're trying my patience. I understand if you don't like him but I'm sure you realise that a lot of people did.
I for one accepted him as Bond and was disappointed when he left.
Yes Laz was good in the fight scenes but he didn't even speak all his own dialogue. :)) :))
For the record DaltonCraig I'm not anti Daniel Craig just because I enjoyed PB. I just can't stand the crap that Brozza (who was my childhood idol) sometimes gets. Jesus if he saw some of the stuff on here he'd probably kill himself :p
Yes, and your insistence that Brozza carried off the role is rather wearing for me too, but I suggest we don't need to resort to insults...
If you haven't noticed I've actually acknowleged the validity of your position - he was your first Bond and obviously you hold him in high regard. What I'm saying is that for many people he was the absolute pits - the very lowest point in the entire series, when going to watch a Bond movie became a form of public humiliation. I also recognise your arguments about Dalts, who you think was a wooden thespy type and not a convincing Bond - I disagree, but you're entitled to your view. What would be nice is if rather than droning on about how nice Brosnan looked or his box office takings, you actually acknowledged that for many people he was as about as charistmatic as a wet rag and with all the screen pressence (as Bond) of a shop window mannequin. That way we can agree to disagree.
Also, for the record I have never described Dalton as "wooden". Far from it, he's a good actor but (IMO) he's just too "thesp" like.That's the conclusion I formed after re-watching some of TLD the other week. If he wasn't he'd have been a bigger, more distinguished star. As it is he's paled along side the likes of Connery, Moore, Brosnan and even Craig. People like them more.
Thirdly, many people do find Brosnan charismatic. If he wasn't he wouldn't have had the film career he has. You may not like him but you cant argue the guy can attract an audience.
So I am staying out of this
apart from saying
Quantum of Solace is a little dinky masterpiece while DAD made me want to give up on Bond forever.
That is all gentleman. Stand at ease.
I'm no QoS fan @actonsteve but I will admit it didn't reach the lows DAD did.
I don't know who this Graham Rye character is, but he seems a little confused. I totally agree that the first half of TND is far and away Brosnan's finest hour - I've been saying this ever since walking out the cinema. It actually gave me hope that TWINE might be a decent movie, which it wasn't. Any way, your Graham Rye correctly states that the TWINE story had some potential. If this was the case, then how can he also claim that Brosnan was never given decent material to work with? I'd argue that TWINE was the film where Brozza was given the chance to show off his acting chops and all we got was the pain face. DUD was a direct response to Brosnan's failings in TWINE. They gave him the chance to 'act' and he blew it - they therefore resorted to special effects and an overblown plot to try and cover up the cracks in DUD.
Oh, and your lead witness describes Goldeneye as 'a colourless drab looking film'. Couldn't agree more.
If this is the best you can do...
Rye's made the longest running 007 Magazine and has interviewed many of the stars over the years. He knows his Bond.
http://www.007magazine.co.uk/biography/biography.htm
Is GE "colourless and drab"? Well, apart from Monte Carlo...yeah it is! But I think it suits the film and adds to the "cold-war" "soviet Russia" atmosphere. Thats where him and I disagree.
The problem I have with TND is that its heavily reliant on ACTION. Combine that with the naff casting of Teri Hatcher. At least GE had a better ratio of action/drama.
As for TWINE, I'll agree that that were some skids in his performance BUT I've heard people claiming it to be his best (Haphazard for one). Personally I disagree but I think he was effective in parts of TWINE.
This Rye guy must be a bit of a joker. He writes an article saying that Brozza never really got a proper crack at the whip; that his finest hour was the first half of TND; that DUD sucked; that GE was colourless and drab... and yet he still claims there's only one man for the job... Even you must have to admit that this is one of the weakest 'defences' of Brosnan ever written.
By damning through faint praise however, I think it confirms every point I've previously made.
Oh, of course... Brosnan was never given a CHANCE! It wasn't the fact that he was useless that meant the films stunk. They should have given him one more shot at it... What a joke!
Thank god EON finally put him out of his misery and realised there was an excellent, if not obvious, candidate waiting in the wings.
Many people didn't think he was useless at the time though. I certainly didn't, he's still very popular. I'd in fact argue he's currently the third most popular Bond behind Connery and Craig. Even people who are critical of Brozza admit that as he got better and more comfortable in the role the films he was given got worse.
Oh and the quote was from part of an interview:
http://commanderbond.net/2834/the-graham-rye-cbn-interview-part-ii.html
I should bleeding well hope so! After 4 movies even I'd be feeling pretty comfortable in that tux.
I remember hearing somewhere that Brozza considered his best performance to be DAD.
Actually here's a compilation of clips from the Brozza era. You can see by his body language he's gets more and more comfortable with each film.
He'll be in a group of one then, won't he...?
DAD is by far Brosnan's best performance as Bond.
I think its either DAD or TND (but funnily enough GE and TWINE are better as overall movies - IMO).
Blimey. Doesn't this belong in the controversial opinions thread?
Btw, Bain, aren't the comments that Brozza makes in that video all complete and utter nonsense? He talks about unpealing layers of the character (is that what he was doing?!), he claims he's more confident by the time of TWINE (previous actors, arguably, nailed it from day one) and that DUD is going to be more 'real'. If nothing else, he's got a great sense of hunour.
Not really! It WAS one of his best performances in the part.
Moore arguably didn't nail it until his third film. Connery apparently once said dalton never nailed the part.
Timothy Dalton never got a handle on the role. He took it seriously in the wrong way. The person who plays Bond has to be dangerous. If there isn't a sense of threat, you can't be cool.
Many also claim that Craig's Bond hasn't even been seen in his finished article yet (although he was superb in CR).
Yes the 'more real' stuff is nonsense but Brosnan has to sell the movie doesnt he? In theory he should be right. Getting captured and tortured IS more intense and real.
I think Rog is pretty good from the get go, but the tone of the films overall wasn't right. With TSWLM they made a Bond movie that matched up to Rog's talents.
Actually, I suspect producers didn't fully appreciate Roger to start with. He has decent acting chops and brings real tension to his later movies. Never misunderestimate the Rog.
Wow! Now we're getting radical.
You actually rate the Brozinator over Sir Roger? This is fascinating. A perfect storm of controversy!
QoS is visually better looking, has better characters, take it's self serious compared to DAD. I do even think that Forster knew the esscence of Bond way better then many other directors ( Tamahori, Spottiswodde, Apted, Gilbert, Hamilton ) and he knew how to mirror how a man in Bond's situation would be after CR.
QoS is a worthy follow up to CR just because QoS sort of meaning was to show the emotions that Bond had carried since CR. And his only goal was out to get the man behind Vespers betrayal. The movie is much like LTK in that sense.
QoS is really a great movie, and i hope Skyfall can live up to it!
I also rank Brosnan way higher than Moore.
Sorry but that is quite insulting. Sir Rog is a far greater human being than you. Sorry but no-one here, not even you, holds a candle to Sir Rog's greatness as a human being.
I don't think so BUT watching FYEO the other day I suddenly realised "I'm watching Roger Moore playing James Bond".
Maybe its because I grew up with Brozza but sometimes I forget I'm watching Brosnan AS James Bond and instead just think "I'm watching James Bond". There's a controversial opinion if there ever was one ;) The only other times I felt that was with Connery and Craig.
I don't I have great respect for Rog.
No. You misunderstand me. I HAVE great respect for Moore. For crying out loud I went to a talk of his and waited for ages to shake his hand and have a signed copy of his book.
This thread has officially entered the outer reaches of surrealness.
I never thought I'd hear someone who has actually watched the movies rate Brosnan above Roger Moore. You learn something new everyday!
TSWLM is one of the pinacles of the series.
Do you just rate Brozza more highly than Moore or also the films?
I'm a bit biased to Brosnan because he was my first glimpse of Bond. For me, and a lot of other people he "was" Bond.
Moore is probably more "classic" Bond. There's only one Roger Moore BUT he's mainly playing an extended version of himself - even when he's tougher (sometimes doing it pretty well in fairness) he still looks like Roger Moore, that cool uncle who can charm you with a fun story and cheekey smile. Maybe its his suave voice but he'll always be Roger Moore first and Bond second in my eyes.
Brosnan - sometimes I just "accepted" him as James Bond.
I do think Moore is the more inherently "likeable" Bond. Fleming never intended Bond to be that likeable, Brosnan was more smarmy, hence arguably not as likeable.
My ranking would probably go something like this:
Connery
Craig
Brosnan/Moore
Dalton
Lazenby
At the moment anyway. It changes.
Movie wise. No, most of Moore's films are better than Brosnan's.
Moore is definitely playing a version of Roger Moore, but fortunately he is such a legend I really don't mind. As you might argue about Brosnan, I actually think Moore saved the series. With DAF, Sean had clearly hit a wall and the series needed to go in a new direction. Roger pulled it off. He's often described as the camp, winking Bond, but I think DAF actually created that model. Roger's performances almost always have an underlying element of seriousness that many critics willfully choose to ignore. Moore's great talent was being able to switch the mood from high comedy to high tension almost effortlessly.
And that voice!
I'd agree but...I still feel like I'm watching Roger Moore first sometimes - even in his better performances like FYEO and OP.
His voice is just so distinctive.
I was watching FRWL the other day (I really watch too much Bond) and I forgot I was watching Sean Connery PLAY James Bond. I've had that same feeling with Broz in the past AND Craig in CR.
Moore's great...I love him dearly...but he's Moore.
So now we've gone from no respect to outright love! So fickle.