Whose idea was it to cast Brosnan as Bond?

1679111218

Comments

  • Posts: 4,762
    Creasy47 wrote:
    Whoever did cast Brosnan deserves many, many thanks. If it weren't for him/her/they, then I may not have enjoyed the incredible beauty that was GE, and therefore, experienced the entirety of Brosnan's excellent pre-and-post-Bond roles, leading him into my 'Favorite Actor' position. I love that man.

    He is such a.....well, to quote my own username, a BEAST! Hahaha. If it wasn't for the genious who casted Brosnan, I might not have had such an impact with 007 Nightfire, and certainly wouldn't with GoldenEye the movie, and therefore wouldn't know the full swagger and suaveness of James Bond the man.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    Exactly, @00Beast, I missed the biggest point, aside from GE: Brosnan's Bond invited me and made me fall in love with the world of James Bond. I have many thanks to give to him.
  • Posts: 4,762
    Creasy47 wrote:
    Exactly, @00Beast, I missed the biggest point, aside from GE: Brosnan's Bond invited me and made me fall in love with the world of James Bond. I have many thanks to give to him.

    And so do I, his very presence in the Nightfire game made more than a satisfactory impact on me!
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    But Brosnan didn't even do the voice in Nightfire, correct? He wasn't much of a presence then, but only in likeness.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,217
    But Brosnan didn't even do the voice in Nightfire, correct? He wasn't much of a presence then, but only in likeness.

    Correct.
  • Posts: 11,425
    As much as I personally would have much prefered to see TD return for a third outing, I perhaps can concede that he was not as popular with the audiences as PB turned out to be.
  • Posts: 4,762
    But Brosnan didn't even do the voice in Nightfire, correct? He wasn't much of a presence then, but only in likeness.

    Yeah, the voice was a different guy, but even still, just knowing that I was playing as Pierce Brosnan's 007 was enough!
  • Posts: 4,813
    I think the voice was that dude from Grease 2- you know, the guy who's never been in anything else? :-/
  • edited July 2012 Posts: 12,837
    I think the voice was that dude from Grease 2- you know, the guy who's never been in anything else? :-/

    Not true, he was in a crap soap called Emmerdale that my fiance watches for about 5 seconds =))

    Anyway, I've heard alot of people say Brosnan didn't put his own stamp on it. But I think he did. He made his own take on it by mixing up elements of past Bonds, he had Moore's comedy, Connery's charm, and sometimes Dalton's ruthlessness. In a way, it's sort of what Craig's doing, as he has Dalton's ruthlessness, Lazenby's physicality and sometimes Connery's charm.
  • edited July 2012 Posts: 11,189
    I think the voice was that dude from Grease 2- you know, the guy who's never been in anything else? :-/

    Not true, he was in a crap soap called Emmerdale that my fiance watches for about 5 seconds =))

    Anyway, I've heard alot of people say Brosnan didn't put his own stamp on it. But I think he did. He made his own take on it by mixing up elements of past Bonds, he had Moore's comedy, Connery's charm, and sometimes Dalton's ruthlessness. In a way, it's sort of what Craig's doing, as he has Dalton's ruthlessness, Lazenby's physicality and sometimes Connery's charm.

    There is an element of truth to that. Even Brosnan later admitted he often felt in the shadow of Connery and Moore BUT there are many moments in each of his films when I feel he IS Bond and not just an imitation. The way he moves, the little smiles he gives etc. I've got mixed feelings about that argument.



    I mean just look here for instance. The guy is 007 in these clips - especially towards the end :p
  • Posts: 11,425
    Brosnan definitely put his stamp on Bond! No one can dispute that. The debate is about whether it was a mark of quality or not.
  • Posts: 12,837
    Getafix wrote:
    Brosnan definitely put his stamp on Bond! No one can dispute that. The debate is about whether it was a mark of quality or not.

    I think it was. Even in DAD, his worst film, his performance was one of the high points.
  • Posts: 1,708
    "He did not want his big screen Bond on the small screen every week"

    Kinda like they didn't want to show Andre the Giant too often on TV in the "old" days , to leave the fans yearning for more/avoid overexposure ;)
  • Posts: 5,634
    Don't mention him, or I'll be on about the WWF back years ago when I used to take an interest, The Iron Sheik, Bruno Sammartino etc. Would of been a great villain years back in the Moore tenure I should add. Would of had Jaws for breakfast. In any event, Brosnan, once again, quality Bond?, Yes and No. Bit of a mixed bag as stated before, did one release to many for me, but still a capable actor and was at times, close to Connery and Dalton or even Moore sometimes, with regards to Fleming-esque qualities
  • edited July 2012 Posts: 1,708
    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.

    Batman TAS
    Batman Mask of Phantasm
    Batman Sub Zero (twas all right imo)
    The Crow
    Mortal Kombat (many bash the video game films but it's pretty good in it's genre)
    Street Fighter II animated movie
    Police Story III (Jackie and Yeoh in the same movie is pretty cool)
    Matrix (didn't it come out '99 ?)
    True Lies

    OT : WWF Attitude Era (SCSA , Rock , Taker in his prime....sadly this was when Owen died :(

    WWE would prolly gone belly up if not for SCSA/Rock.....in '95 they were in financial trouble.
  • Posts: 12,837
    I watched WWF in the 90s. I loved that show. It had hot girls wearing skimpy outfits, Steve Austin flipping people off, people jumping of giant cages, really entertaining. I sort of lost intrest around 2000. tbh I think I've sort of outgrown it, it was cool to watch when I was a teenager but not sure I'd like it anymore. Is it any good now?
  • Posts: 5,634
    Who is the WWE champion now incidentally, I don't have time to watch it anymore, and just lost interest over the years. I liked it when it was the championship only and now there's like two title belts, and so many additional titles I simply lost count

    I was at Wrestlemania 17 in Houston and the next one in Toronto, Ontario when Chris Jericho was champion at the time, that was around the time I lost interest, or a year or two directly after. Never was one for the Smackdown/Raw split, they shoud of just kept it all together instead of two brands
  • edited July 2012 Posts: 12,837
    Oh yeah I forgot, it's WWE now. I'm gonna google who the current champion is and see if he was in it when I watched it.

    EDIT: Apparently it's CM punk. Well idk who he is. He wasn't in the show when I watched it.
  • Posts: 5,634
    It's been WWE since about 2003 now ?!

    CM Punk? Yes, I know the name, not a name I remember much either from my viewing days and attending live events, but apparently he's quite good, a sort of Cena type wrestler apparently
  • edited July 2012 Posts: 1,708
    I watched WWF in the 90s. I loved that show. It had hot girls wearing skimpy outfits, Steve Austin flipping people off, people jumping of giant cages, really entertaining. I sort of lost intrest around 2000. tbh I think I've sort of outgrown it, it was cool to watch when I was a teenager but not sure I'd like it anymore. Is it any good now?

    After the Benoit incident (he killed his son/wife and then himself.....depression/constant head trauma after his friend Guerrero died.....needless to say chair shots to the head is now banned) WWE has become more "family friendly" thus Cena is sort of the new Hogan.....CM Punk is like the rebel.

    Big Show (he's now evil which I find amusing)

    Daniel Bryan (sure the "yes" chants can become annoying but he's cool)

    Sheamus (nice to see that a fish puddin colored pale man can become HW champ , Sheamus rules !)

    HHH (still active , I think he's cool although many AE era fans is fed up with him , kinda like Hogan where he got too much backstage control)

    Undertaker (I went to see him 4 yrs in a row (WM 25-28).....that says it all. He can no longer give 100% in the ring but it will be a VERY sad day for me when he quits :(

    Divas are very pretty but the matches bores me to tears , I did see a ppv Beth Phoenix match recently that was all right.

    I never saw the AE era , only watched until '95 when HHH started out.....I like todays WWE , Raw is OK to watch but doesn't feel "must see" like the 80s/90s (PPVs excepted)

    Sorry but I think we're going a tad OT now.....it's my fault for bringing it up though ;)

  • Posts: 12,837
    The only ones I knew from all those guys you mentioned were Undertaker (total badass btw), HHH and Big Show.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Brozza's Bond would have made an excellent WWE character - they could have called him "Pain Face".
  • Posts: 3,327
    Getafix wrote:
    Brosnan definitely put his stamp on Bond! No one can dispute that. The debate is about whether it was a mark of quality or not.
    Yes he put a big ugly stamp on Bond, and no it definitely was not a mark of quality. Just watched LTK last night, followed by GE, and these 2 films are worlds apart in terms of quality.

    LTK is very underrated, and GE is very overrated by critics, but watching the 2 movies back-to-back, it is glaringly obvious which film is the superior of the two.

    Dalton's performance is up there with Craig, in terms of a tough, no-nonsense, realistic approach, but the script itself stays well clear of the cheesy, naff, soap opera drama that would plague the Brosnan films, even in GE.

    For all its 80's feel and make-up, LTK's stunts are hugely impressive and are completely free of any naff CGI. GE on the other hand....

    Brosnan starred in the worst Bond films of the franchise, littered with bad scripts, bad CGI, and absolutely void of any connection from the Fleming novels.

    Every other Bond actor appeared in at least one scene based on a Fleming novel, except Brozza, and boy did it show. The 90's are easily the most forgettable of the entire franchise, and a period I wish to block out, erase from my mind and wish they'd never happened. For me the Bond films end in 89 with LTK, and begin again in 2006 with CR. It was just an awful long wait inbetween, while an imposter shamefully claimed to be James Bond.






  • edited August 2012 Posts: 1,082
    Dalton's performance is up there with Craig, in terms of a tough, no-nonsense, realistic approach, but the script itself stays well clear of the cheesy, naff, soap opera drama that would plague the Brosnan films, even in GE.

    For me the Bond films end in 89 with LTK, and begin again in 2006 with CR. It was just an awful long wait inbetween, while an imposter shamefully claimed to be James Bond.

    I agree that Brosnan's movies had their fair share of drama, and TWINE was IMO buried in it, but why give CR a free pass? No offense, but comparing CR to TND for instance, I'd say the latter is not the one filled with soap opera drama. At times during the last half hour of CR I'm wondering whether I'm watching Bond or "The Notebook" or something. And OHMSS & QOS have pieces of drama too, IMO.
  • Posts: 278
    Getafix wrote:
    Brosnan definitely put his stamp on Bond! No one can dispute that. The debate is about whether it was a mark of quality or not.
    Yes he put a big ugly stamp on Bond, and no it definitely was not a mark of quality. Just watched LTK last night, followed by GE, and these 2 films are worlds apart in terms of quality.

    LTK is very underrated, and GE is very overrated by critics, but watching the 2 movies back-to-back, it is glaringly obvious which film is the superior of the two.

    Dalton's performance is up there with Craig, in terms of a tough, no-nonsense, realistic approach, but the script itself stays well clear of the cheesy, naff, soap opera drama that would plague the Brosnan films, even in GE.

    For all its 80's feel and make-up, LTK's stunts are hugely impressive and are completely free of any naff CGI. GE on the other hand....

    Brosnan starred in the worst Bond films of the franchise, littered with bad scripts, bad CGI, and absolutely void of any connection from the Fleming novels.

    Every other Bond actor appeared in at least one scene based on a Fleming novel, except Brozza, and boy did it show. The 90's are easily the most forgettable of the entire franchise, and a period I wish to block out, erase from my mind and wish they'd never happened. For me the Bond films end in 89 with LTK, and begin again in 2006 with CR. It was just an awful long wait inbetween, while an imposter shamefully claimed to be James Bond.






    Obviously not a Brosnan fan then :)
    I agree mostly and I always compare LTK to GE as LTK is also one of my favourites.
    Brosnan was a fine Bond with some nice little moments (like the Monte Carlo boat scene in GE), but as mentioned, he was let down massively by rubbish scripts.

    I think the problem is that most of the Bonds have some definitive moments - films or large screen time segments when they really shine and Brosnans were too brief and small because the scripts were very poor.
    GE - nice film that looked like it was shot on the backlot.
    TND - Die Hard Bond - Loads of Machine guns!!!!!
    TWINE - Christmas Jones, enough said. Also very boring despite a fab pre-credits.
    DAD - 1st half very good, 2nd half invisible cars and that surf scene so enough said.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited August 2012 Posts: 12,480
    Getafix wrote:
    Brosnan definitely put his stamp on Bond! No one can dispute that. The debate is about whether it was a mark of quality or not.
    Yes he put a big ugly stamp on Bond, and no it definitely was not a mark of quality. Just watched LTK last night, followed by GE, and these 2 films are worlds apart in terms of quality.

    LTK is very underrated, and GE is very overrated by critics, but watching the 2 movies back-to-back, it is glaringly obvious which film is the superior of the two.

    Dalton's performance is up there with Craig, in terms of a tough, no-nonsense, realistic approach, but the script itself stays well clear of the cheesy, naff, soap opera drama that would plague the Brosnan films, even in GE.

    For all its 80's feel and make-up, LTK's stunts are hugely impressive and are completely free of any naff CGI. GE on the other hand....

    Brosnan starred in the worst Bond films of the franchise, littered with bad scripts, bad CGI, and absolutely void of any connection from the Fleming novels.

    Every other Bond actor appeared in at least one scene based on a Fleming novel, except Brozza, and boy did it show. The 90's are easily the most forgettable of the entire franchise, and a period I wish to block out, erase from my mind and wish they'd never happened. For me the Bond films end in 89 with LTK, and begin again in 2006 with CR. It was just an awful long wait inbetween, while an imposter shamefully claimed to be James Bond.






    So you and Getafix are new best friends. ;)
  • 002002
    Posts: 581
    Getafix wrote:
    Brosnan definitely put his stamp on Bond! No one can dispute that. The debate is about whether it was a mark of quality or not.
    Yes he put a big ugly stamp on Bond, and no it definitely was not a mark of quality. Just watched LTK last night, followed by GE, and these 2 films are worlds apart in terms of quality.

    LTK is very underrated, and GE is very overrated by critics, but watching the 2 movies back-to-back, it is glaringly obvious which film is the superior of the two.

    Dalton's performance is up there with Craig, in terms of a tough, no-nonsense, realistic approach, but the script itself stays well clear of the cheesy, naff, soap opera drama that would plague the Brosnan films, even in GE.

    For all its 80's feel and make-up, LTK's stunts are hugely impressive and are completely free of any naff CGI. GE on the other hand....

    Brosnan starred in the worst Bond films of the franchise, littered with bad scripts, bad CGI, and absolutely void of any connection from the Fleming novels.

    Every other Bond actor appeared in at least one scene based on a Fleming novel, except Brozza, and boy did it show. The 90's are easily the most forgettable of the entire franchise, and a period I wish to block out, erase from my mind and wish they'd never happened. For me the Bond films end in 89 with LTK, and begin again in 2006 with CR. It was just an awful long wait inbetween, while an imposter shamefully claimed to be James Bond.


  • Posts: 11,189
    Argh. The 90s may not be the greatest period in Bond's history but they DID have their positive moments - some of which :O :O involved Brosnan.

    GE is still a cracker in my book. It has more charm than LTK hands down.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    The problem with Brosnan for me, is that he forces the charm. There comes a point where it goes from being charming to grating on my nerves. With Brosnan, he goes straight to the grating.
  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    The problem with brosnan is that he is not great actor, merely a good actor.
    I think you have to be born a great actor to be one. In other words you have to have a distinctive voice,physically look the part (in this case bond) and be highly motivated to perform when the cameras roll.
Sign In or Register to comment.