Whose idea was it to cast Brosnan as Bond?

145791018

Comments

  • Posts: 11,425
    Why do the Brozites always resort to the 'he made more money for EON' argument in defence of their mannequin? He also appeared in dreary, poorly scripted dross. The Transformers movies make lots of money but they're pretty dire in terms of content (although actually more enjoyable than a yawn-inducing Brozza film).
  • Posts: 7,653
    Getafix wrote:
    Why do the Brozites always resort to the 'he made more money for EON' argument in defence of their mannequin? He also appeared in dreary, poorly scripted dross. The Transformers movies make lots of money but they're pretty dire in terms of content (although actually more enjoyable than a yawn-inducing Brozza film).

    The Brosnan years were good /decent movie imho, and the man looked at least suave.

    Dalton looked lost in his two movies, one clearly written for the likes of Roger Moore and the other one was a compromise in what EON really wanted and somehow the scriptwriter watched too much Miami Vice but forgot that Crockett & Tubbs actually have a great chemistry.
    Craig should according to the fans be more seriousm but CR buthered one of Flemings best because it needed more action in favour of a tragic love-affair. You hire an actor and don't give him the material. Like DAD great first half frustrating last part. QoS was Bourne-light, while I am no fan of that franchise they actually delivered and the Bond22 was poorly put together and a lot of pouting went on and some incredible poor actionscenes (Boatrace & jumping out of a plane without a chute, Roger Moore did that far better in his movies and they did not need the poor editing to hide the poor camera work).

    I hope Bond23 works since it would be a shame having a decent actor and not actually using his skills. And as he grows older he kinda looks, on some pictures, more and more like Gollum. (but alas that part is already taken )

    O:-)
  • edited May 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    Why do the Brozites always resort to the 'he made more money for EON' argument in defence of their mannequin? He also appeared in dreary, poorly scripted dross. The Transformers movies make lots of money but they're pretty dire in terms of content (although actually more enjoyable than a yawn-inducing Brozza film).

    Now common. You're being silly. Yes most of Brozza's films weren't great but I'd take GE, TND or TWINE 1000x over the dreadful Transformers: Revenge of The Fallen. I literally struggled to sit through that film in the cinema.

    Brosnan had/has more charisma that Shia LeBoeuff and Megan Fox PUT TOGETHER

    Why do the Brozites always resort to the 'he made more money for EON' argument in defence of their mannequin?
    Because he did!! You can't dispute that.
  • Posts: 7,653
    Oeps I forgot to oppose the Transformer argument, or did I. Those movies are not my cup of tea, sat through two of them because of a friend really rates them and in friendship you accept the taste of your friends through bad and good. But they have no comparison to the Bondmovies with the exception that they are both supposed to be BO hits.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    Getafix wrote:
    Why do the Brozites always resort to the 'he made more money for EON' argument in defence of their mannequin?

    Be fair, I think that is the only argument. He brought money to the series, but characer wise nothing. I don't see any good qualites in Brosnan's Bond that had not been seen in Connery, Moore or Dalton's Bonds.

    Grahman Rye is often quoted as another defense of Brosnan. Before it happens again, i'd like to say that I would rather trust my own judgement, and not take his word as gospel.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited May 2012 Posts: 15,718
    It seems Brosnan and Craig make people go up in arms at an alarming rate whenever a positive argument (on Brosnan) or a negative argument (on Craig) is made....
  • edited May 2012 Posts: 11,189
    It seems Brosnan and Craig make people go up in arms at an alarming rate whenever a positive argument (on Brosnan) or a negative argument (on Craig) is made....

    Can you blame people defending Brosnan? For A LOT of people (me for one) he made them fall in love with Bond. Up until 6 years ago he was seen as "the best since Sean Connery"
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited May 2012 Posts: 15,718
    BAIN123 wrote:
    It seems Brosnan and Craig make people go up in arms at an alarming rate whenever a positive argument (on Brosnan) or a negative argument (on Craig) is made....

    Can you blame people defending Brosnan? For A LOT of people (me for one) he made them fall in love with Bond. Up until 6 years ago he was seen as "the best since Sean Connery"

    I am not blaming anyone !! I love Brosnan as Bond ! I was just saying that whenever there is a) a positive post on PB or b) a negative post on DC, some people go bananas and the thought police starts attacking the poor person who made the post......
  • 002002
    edited May 2012 Posts: 581
    ...
  • edited May 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Like it or not Brosnan was probably the right Bond for the period. After the jump from the comical Roger Moore to the stern thesp Dalton (and the mixed reception he subsequently received) a "greatest hits" Bond WAS the right call - especially in the "greatest hits" decade of the 90s.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited May 2012 Posts: 15,718
    002 wrote:
    the more i read this the more i loose faith in humanity....

    Look Goldeneye, Tommorow Never Dies and The World is Not Enough were made in The 90s a time in which movies were popcorn exciting entertainment films and lets face it compared to Craig's Action films (which lets face it there is nothing really bond about it its just craig punching and shooting people) Brosnans films were great- i mean all of Brosnans films (even Die Another Day which wasnt the best are superoir to Qantum of Solace- the worst bond film ever created

    Brosnans films were pure escapism and thats what made Bond survive 40 years...craigs films are gritty yes but they lack the fun and excitement of the bond films...

    Pierce's Bond had a developing story and from what my friends said he wasnt the mysoginist dinosaur compared to the previous bonds..he took it on and he was great- his best peformance was in his worst film: Die Another Day and its a shame that Babs and MGW dumped him for a blonde actor with only 2 emotions...

    and comparing Brosnans Bond films to Transformers is an insult...bond films are better than that pile of crap

    This post will make a few people go ballistic... not that I disagree with it.... really, the debates between pro-PB/anti-PB, anti-DC/pro-DC, pro-DC/pro-PB, pro-PB/pro-TD, pro-TD/anti-TD are endless.... there are certain opinions here that produce extremely heated debate, and these threads are borderline insult competitions.
  • 002002
    Posts: 581
    002 wrote:
    the more i read this the more i loose faith in humanity....

    Look Goldeneye, Tommorow Never Dies and The World is Not Enough were made in The 90s a time in which movies were popcorn exciting entertainment films and lets face it compared to Craig's Action films (which lets face it there is nothing really bond about it its just craig punching and shooting people) Brosnans films were great- i mean all of Brosnans films (even Die Another Day which wasnt the best are superoir to Qantum of Solace- the worst bond film ever created

    Brosnans films were pure escapism and thats what made Bond survive 40 years...craigs films are gritty yes but they lack the fun and excitement of the bond films...

    Pierce's Bond had a developing story and from what my friends said he wasnt the mysoginist dinosaur compared to the previous bonds..he took it on and he was great- his best peformance was in his worst film: Die Another Day and its a shame that Babs and MGW dumped him for a blonde actor with only 2 emotions...

    and comparing Brosnans Bond films to Transformers is an insult...bond films are better than that pile of crap

    This post will make a few people go ballistic... not that I disagree with it.... really, the debates between pro-PB/anti-PB, anti-DC/pro-DC, pro-DC/pro-PB, pro-PB/pro-TD, pro-TD/anti-TD are endless.... there are certain opinions here that produce extremely heated debate, and these threads are borderline insult competitions.

    you have a good point there DaltonCraig007 i was just acting on instincts- Daniel Craigs bond is diffrent from Brosnans and he has done a good film- Casino Royale and Bond 23 looks promising but i cant help but defend Brosnan as he was my childhood hero and my favourite bond...i just wanted to defend him..thats all...my apologise to anyone i offended
  • Posts: 11,189
    002 wrote:
    002 wrote:
    the more i read this the more i loose faith in humanity....

    Look Goldeneye, Tommorow Never Dies and The World is Not Enough were made in The 90s a time in which movies were popcorn exciting entertainment films and lets face it compared to Craig's Action films (which lets face it there is nothing really bond about it its just craig punching and shooting people) Brosnans films were great- i mean all of Brosnans films (even Die Another Day which wasnt the best are superoir to Qantum of Solace- the worst bond film ever created

    Brosnans films were pure escapism and thats what made Bond survive 40 years...craigs films are gritty yes but they lack the fun and excitement of the bond films...

    Pierce's Bond had a developing story and from what my friends said he wasnt the mysoginist dinosaur compared to the previous bonds..he took it on and he was great- his best peformance was in his worst film: Die Another Day and its a shame that Babs and MGW dumped him for a blonde actor with only 2 emotions...

    and comparing Brosnans Bond films to Transformers is an insult...bond films are better than that pile of crap

    This post will make a few people go ballistic... not that I disagree with it.... really, the debates between pro-PB/anti-PB, anti-DC/pro-DC, pro-DC/pro-PB, pro-PB/pro-TD, pro-TD/anti-TD are endless.... there are certain opinions here that produce extremely heated debate, and these threads are borderline insult competitions.

    you have a good point there DaltonCraig007 i was just acting on instincts- Daniel Craigs bond is diffrent from Brosnans and he has done a good film- Casino Royale and Bond 23 looks promising but i cant help but defend Brosnan as he was my childhood hero and my favourite bond...i just wanted to defend him..thats all...my apologise to anyone i offended

    I want to defend him for the same reasons too BUT I'm not going to pretend that his era was "the golden age" for Bond. Far from it. Looking back most of his films WERE cheese-fests, matching the cheesey era they were made in.
  • Posts: 12,837
    Dalton will always be my favourite Bond but I really enjoyed Brosnan (my 2nd fave along with Connery) and I will defend him till I die.
  • Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    002 wrote:
    002 wrote:
    the more i read this the more i loose faith in humanity....

    Look Goldeneye, Tommorow Never Dies and The World is Not Enough were made in The 90s a time in which movies were popcorn exciting entertainment films and lets face it compared to Craig's Action films (which lets face it there is nothing really bond about it its just craig punching and shooting people) Brosnans films were great- i mean all of Brosnans films (even Die Another Day which wasnt the best are superoir to Qantum of Solace- the worst bond film ever created

    Brosnans films were pure escapism and thats what made Bond survive 40 years...craigs films are gritty yes but they lack the fun and excitement of the bond films...

    Pierce's Bond had a developing story and from what my friends said he wasnt the mysoginist dinosaur compared to the previous bonds..he took it on and he was great- his best peformance was in his worst film: Die Another Day and its a shame that Babs and MGW dumped him for a blonde actor with only 2 emotions...

    and comparing Brosnans Bond films to Transformers is an insult...bond films are better than that pile of crap

    This post will make a few people go ballistic... not that I disagree with it.... really, the debates between pro-PB/anti-PB, anti-DC/pro-DC, pro-DC/pro-PB, pro-PB/pro-TD, pro-TD/anti-TD are endless.... there are certain opinions here that produce extremely heated debate, and these threads are borderline insult competitions.

    you have a good point there DaltonCraig007 i was just acting on instincts- Daniel Craigs bond is diffrent from Brosnans and he has done a good film- Casino Royale and Bond 23 looks promising but i cant help but defend Brosnan as he was my childhood hero and my favourite bond...i just wanted to defend him..thats all...my apologise to anyone i offended

    I want to defend him for the same reasons too BUT I'm not going to pretend that his era was "the golden age" for Bond. Far from it. Looking back most of his films WERE cheese-fests, matching the cheesey era they were made in.

    That's my problem with the age of Brozza actually. I don't think the 90s or early 2000s were that cheesy, especially compared to the 70s and 80s. In terms of music, design, architecture, fashion, things were actually pretty interesting. Bond should have been reflecting all that. Instead, the Brosnan era often feels like a bad throwback. I'm still a bit gutted we never got a Portishead title song.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited May 2012 Posts: 15,718
    Getafix wrote:
    That's my problem with the age of Brozza actually. I don't think the 90s or early 2000s were that cheesy, especially compared to the 70s and 80s. In terms of music, design, architecture, fashion, things were actually pretty interesting. Bond should have been reflecting all that. Instead, the Brosnan era often feels like a bad throwback. I'm still a bit gutted we never got a Portishead title song.

    The 90's were much more fun than the world post-9/11. I have very fond memories of my 1990's childhood... the music of 'Scatman John', tv series 'Father Ted', 'Hakkinen-Schuey' battles in grand prix, the end of the career of Pete Sampras, loads of GE007 multiplayer battles on the N64 with friends, Donkey Kong 64.........
  • edited May 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Well look at the big movies we had in the 90s.

    Independence Day
    True Lies
    Terminator 2
    Under Siege
    2/4 of the Die Hard films
    Cliffhanger
    Total Recall
    Desperado
    Eraser
    Titanic (watched it again the other week - very cheesey)
    Air Force One
    The Rock (awesome movie btw)
    The Fugitive
    Speed/Speed 2
    Twister
    Jurassic Park/The Lost World
    Mission Impossible 1 and 2 (2 especially)
    Face/Off
    Broken Arrow
    Batman Forever
    Batman and Robin (urgh!)

    Those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Not all those movies are necessarily "bad" but they are/were big, loud "popcorn" films.
  • Posts: 12,837
    Exactly. Just like Craig's films fit in with the whole dark and serious thriller film era, Brosnans films fit in with the 90s big action film era.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited May 2012 Posts: 15,718
    there's been lots of great things in the post-9/11 gritty and serious world, like The Wire, 24, CR (as a film), Batman Begins, Dark Knight, Rome, Game of Thrones, Person of Interest.... but IMO I prefer the world pre-9/11. The 90's were a blast IMO, even if I only remember the latter half of it.
  • Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Well look at the big movies we had in the 90s.

    Independence Day
    True Lies
    Terminator 2
    Under Siege
    2/4 of the Die Hard films
    Cliffhanger
    Total Recall
    Desperado
    Eraser
    Titanic (watched it again the other week - very cheesey)
    Air Force One
    The Rock (awesome movie btw)
    The Fugitive
    Speed/Speed 2
    Twister
    Jurassic Park/The Lost World
    Mission Impossible 1 and 2 (2 especially)
    Face/Off
    Broken Arrow
    Batman Forever
    Batman and Robin (urgh!)

    Those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Not all those movies are necessarily "bad" but they are/were big, loud "popcorn" films.

    Correct me if I'm wrong but haven't there been plenty of big action fillms in the 80s and 2000s as well? Many of the films on your list are far more entertaining than the Brozza films as well - come to thing of it, they should have just ripped them off directly.
  • edited May 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Well look at the big movies we had in the 90s.

    Independence Day
    True Lies
    Terminator 2
    Under Siege
    2/4 of the Die Hard films
    Cliffhanger
    Total Recall
    Desperado
    Eraser
    Titanic (watched it again the other week - very cheesey)
    Air Force One
    The Rock (awesome movie btw)
    The Fugitive
    Speed/Speed 2
    Twister
    Jurassic Park/The Lost World
    Mission Impossible 1 and 2 (2 especially)
    Face/Off
    Broken Arrow
    Batman Forever
    Batman and Robin (urgh!)

    Those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Not all those movies are necessarily "bad" but they are/were big, loud "popcorn" films.

    Correct me if I'm wrong but haven't there been plenty of big action fillms in the 80s and 2000s as well? Many of the films on your list are far more entertaining than the Brozza films as well - come to thing of it, they should have just ripped them off directly.

    Yes. There were and that influence was starting to take hold in LTK (the slo-mo shot of Felix and the DEA agent in the PTS).
  • Posts: 11,425
    So your point is...?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Why do the Brozites always resort to the 'he made more money for EON' argument in defence of their mannequin? He also appeared in dreary, poorly scripted dross. The Transformers movies make lots of money but they're pretty dire in terms of content (although actually more enjoyable than a yawn-inducing Brozza film).

    Now common. You're being silly. Yes most of Brozza's films weren't great but I'd take GE, TND or TWINE 1000x over the dreadful Transformers: Revenge of The Fallen. I literally struggled to sit through that film in the cinema.

    Brosnan had/has more charisma that Shia LeBoeuff and Megan Fox PUT TOGETHER

    Why do the Brozites always resort to the 'he made more money for EON' argument in defence of their mannequin?
    Because he did!! You can't dispute that.

    Shia is great when he's given a good script and direction, of which he hasn't had much of since Disturbia.
  • Posts: 11,189
    I've never seen Disturbia actually. The only films I've seen him in are the first 2 Transformers films and Indiana Jones.

    But from those...he never really "grabbed" me.
  • Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I've never seen Disturbia actually. The only films I've seen him in are the first 2 Transformers films and Indiana Jones.

    But from those...he never really "grabbed" me.

    I never saw the last Jones movie. I imagine it would be as painful as watching all 4 Brozza movies back to back, followed by the Star Wars Prequels.

  • Atleast, Lebeouf is great at delivering one word.
  • Posts: 11,425
    No he's not!

    ;)
  • Posts: 1,492
    Grahman Rye is often quoted as another defense of Brosnan. Before it happens again, i'd like to say that I would rather trust my own judgement, and not take his word as gospel.

    He did?

    Graham Rye wanted me to do a review of the Brosnan era back in 2002. In retrospect as it was finishing. I said no because I didntn own much of the Brosnan era and he said he would send me his DVDs as he wasnt really watching them. He gave me the impression he wasnt impressed with the era at all. I had his DVDs until recently.

    And he was the president of the James Bond British fan club.

  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,217
    Brosnan films were a lot of things, but they were never yawn inducing.
  • edited June 2012 Posts: 3,494
    The first three not at all, nor most of his non-Bond catalog, but DAD almost put me to sleep in the theater :P
Sign In or Register to comment.