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
Nice, hearfelt praise for Brosnan. Re your point about not settling for 2nd best, some fans knew this already - that's why they were never satisfied with Brosnan in the first place.
But your second point is well made. As much as I was disappointed with the Brosnan era, he did pass the baton on with the series in good financial shape. DAD was awful, but in a sense it made it easier to return to the grittier and more authentic style that many had been waiting for.
See I knew you could say something good about the Brozz!
I've always had a fondness for Brosnan's Bond as I was one of those people who grew up in his era. He defined the role for me and I enjoyed both him and his films each time I went to watch them in the cinema. All through my youth and my early 20s I genuinely regarded him as the best Bond. He was slick, charming, funny, charismatic, looked the part and had some good serious moments too.
Now, although I still enjoy watching him I've come to realise that most of his era wasn't all that great (partly through coming on here). I can still enjoy TND, TWINE and DAD but there's little about them that can genuinely be regarded as "classic". GE on the other hand does remain one of my favourites in the series and has been so for almost 20 years. It's always been a film I've had a lot of fun watching and I can forgive the film for its weaknesses.
Despite the many flaws of his era watching Broz sometimes feels like watching an old friend. I'm sure many people who grew up with Rog feel the same.
@Birdleson I want to say thanks for posting that video and pointing those facts out. It is curious how people complain about Zorin gunning down the mine workers, claiming that it was not appropriate for a Bond film; then they whine about the murder/deaths in LTK but with Pierce "Terminator" Brosnan, the silence is deafening.
Have we become desentitized by cinema violence these days?
Final note: Sean's killing of Vargas with the speargun seems more personal and brutal than "spray and pray" with automatic/assault rifles. Go figure.
CommanderRoss and royale65 - I really enjoy reading all the interesting details, as you looked back at when you first viewed Brosnan's films. @royale65, you said, "With time, the films of Brosnan started slipping down my rankings. But I always enjoy them primarily because of Pierce Brosnan." and "BTW I feel that Brosnan brought much more to the Bond table than just an amalgamation of previous Bonds." I agree completely with both of those statements. That is true for me.
I can find fault with every Brosnan film - okay, only a little with GE (Caroline the bimbo examainer and yes, the falling cyclists!) - but Brosnan's Bond is the main reason why I enjoy his films. He did have his own style. The producers wanted a mixture of elements that had been in the Moore/Connery films pretty much and the scripts reflected that, which at times hurt the overall films. But I do think Pierce was a fine Bond. My enjoyment of his performance as Bond has not dimmed, although I find flaws with his films more clearly.
@CommanderRoss, I really liked Michele Yeoh in TND, so we disagree there. Yet I understand what you are saying about the films. And may I add that Valentin was one of my favorite characters, too, in all of the series. Some of the highlights to this day for me are Brosnan's Bond with Q and every scene Valentin was in. (Sadly, I have never managed to steal a theatre poster or cardboard cutout, even though I have positively yearned to do so.)
As noted earlier, @OHMSS69 and @Birdleson, I agree that the machine gunning in the Brosnan era took away from the quality of the films. That aspect, the overkill, was too common in action films of the time and did not reflect the best of James Bond. I loved that Craig's Bond stabbed Silva to kill him in Skyfall; personal in every way.
And on we go, chatting about Brosnan. I'd love to hear from some more Originals about this time, especially since we had come up through Sean, George, Roger, and Timothy and now to Pierce. Quite a variety of personal styles in there. I think most of us older fans were first of all just relieved and happy to get another Bond film, after such a long wait. And I honestly do not know how many of us had an open mind to Pierce. I had not ever seen Remington Steele and knew pretty much nothing about him. I thought his looks were fine, but I so wanted Goldeneye to be a good Bond film, not just because the new Bond actor looked the part. I was very satisfied indeed.
So my interest is keen to hear from more older Bond fans. I know there are more of you out there, and some do read this thread. If any other older longtime, seasoned fans would care to give us their personal memories of transitioning to the Brosnan era, how long that wait felt for them, and their first impressions of Brosnan and how their feelings about him or his films has changed over the years ... now would be the ideal time to share that as it is the Brosnan Era week. B-)
Cheers!
I'm not the only one who found her exceptionally irritating. Good. :))
But he *did* play a Bond-like character in Jackie Chans' The Tuxedo. FWIW.
(Edited )
Back later ... carry on, all! B-)
I did go look at Hoagy on line, but I don't really see Bond from the novels that I read. Hmmm. And I cannot merge him with the other actors successfully. Ah well.
But ... I must say: by the way, let's tone down the accusatory tone/namecalling, @chrisisall and @Birdleson, please. Thanks.
Let us move on.
Thanks.
I definitely liked Samantha's Moneypenny, no problem with her. However, I like Naomie Harris much, much better.
SirHenry didn't say Samatha's Moneypenny looked smutty, but that she acted smutty. He really did not like her. I am sensing people either liked her a lot or not at all.
So far we have, in our votes:
Brosnan's Moneypenny ~ :-c
Yes - 4
No - 6
(I need to recount the yes's ... but I think that's it so far)
OK, with Samuel001 we now have:
Yes - 4
No - 7
You are testing me here. Itching to make a comment.
No, I am better than that... :-S
And quite good chemistry with the match of Pierce playing Bond. B-)
Scratch your itch elsewhere, dear Thunderfinger. Thanks. :)>-
It does seem - back to Moneypenny - that more members dislike her than I guessed. Hmmm. Definitely an improvement over Caroline Bliss (again lovely, but a stupid character). I am infinitely more pleased with Naomie, though.
We shall be discussing (not bashing) Brosnan for about 2 more days. Make your most salient points, gentlemen and ladies. What did you like best about him? What personal memories do you recall from seeing one of his films in the theater? Some members have already talked about their remembrances; that is always welcome and interesting. I'd just like to hear more before we move on to the new Craig era.
Cheers!
lol
I have no problems with Brosnan Non Bond roles. (The Fourth Protocol, Nobel House, that western he did with Liam Niesson, etc)
I just can't stand him as Bond.
I'm totally the same. I think he's a lightweight actor - that's never going to change - but he does have qualities that make him quite effective in some roles. He's very good at doing smarmy/untrustworthy. That's why he's really quite good in films like The Tailor of Panama and The Ghost, but was badly miscast as Bond. Polanski casting him in the Tony Blair type role was quite inspired.
The sad thing is I actually think there was an interesting take on Bond to be had from Brosnan - something that played much more on the character's moral ambiguity. I think DC tries to convey this sometimes in his films, but Brosnan would have been perfect in that kind of role and very believeable. Instead EON or perhaps just Brosnan, decided to go for a straight, one-dimensional action man hero depiction, which (IMO) just fell flat.
Ok, I'll wake up again. Good morning, everybody! >:D<
Just because I feel like it, I'll post my thoughts on Brosnan's role in each of his Bond films. Rather than pick and choose, I'm just giving you most of what I wrote from my original reviews on this thread, with only a few changes. Here we go ...
Pierce Brosnan in ~
Goldeneye - For his first Bond movie, Brosnan's James Bond is not just a winsome playboy - although that part of the character was in play at the outset and Pierce's charm is evident. But if Bond were just one dimensional, or played by someone who really couldn't act, this film would have gone under like quicksand and the series jeopardized. He had the looks, all right, but a good Bond actor must have a LOT more than that for sure. And I liked Pierce's Bond, right from this first one. For many reasons: His self confidence in doing his job (driving his car or a tank, bungee-jumping to work, standing up to villains, etc. ), his ease with the ladies (reminiscent of Roger Moore, yet not a copy), his lovely give-and-take with Q, his going toe-to-toe with M, his gutsy fighting, his determination to save Natalya and to make sure that Goldeneye was destroyed for good, his loyalty to England, and his devastation at learning of 006's betrayal - all were nicely played by Pierce, building as this movie went along. Other than perhaps a too softly played intro of the "Bond, James Bond" line, I cannot fault him and I think he finishes as a very good Bond indeed, competent compelling, and strong. I couldn't wait for his next Bond film.
Tomorrow Never Dies - Ah, here Pierce finds his own take on Bond - and he is in grand form indeed. Elegant yet rougher, definitely tougher, and a more fully well rounded Bond. Brosnan is clearly more comfortable as James Bond, and he shows us several facets of Bond's character, including a moving glimpse of the pain and emotional core that is buried deep inside. Pierce's moments as Bond in his hotel room, with Paris lying there dead, were simultaneously touching, achingly real, and very Bond. One of my favorite scenes of Brosnan's, ever. Indeed, even just the brief scene of him waiting in his hotel room, downing vodka, and Paris shows up; that was well done, too. The rest of the film showed Brosnan in control, very good during the action scenes, and with excellent rapport with Q and Wai Lin, in particular. He handled the one liners with more ease, too. Overall, very satisfying and a Bond I love to watch again and again.
The World is Not Enough - I was ready for more of his Bond from TND, yet this one - despite the opener (I loved the PTS!) - looked a bit different already. And after he was dispatched to King's pipeline headquarters, it went downhill from there. I wasn't sure what was missing at first (besides the storyline being rather a mess), what didn't sit quite so right with me. Although I really liked his interaction with Valentin again (and the very end, as Valentin aims cleverly and rescues Bond, and they exchange final acknowledgements, was nicely done for sure). But it was otherwise all a definite step down from TND, rather like Brosnan had lost his "zing" ... and, may I say the haircut didn't help (like a blunt mower attacked him and aimed for "businessman" hair).
Brosnan, in this movie, was too staid, too grim/serious, too reigned in for the majority of the film and a bit too melodramatic in some other parts. Not an even portrayal. Like having the very best lasagne (from TND) served up again as lukewarm leftovers, with hardly any spice or sauce. And no meat in it (where's the beef, Pierce?). I like my Bond to be a feast (continuing with the food metaphor here, bear with me ...), a smorgasbord of palpable excitement mixed with fun, a driven killer who kills when necessary, patriotic, charming, clever, with a heart well hidden, and elegant, yet badass. All of which I felt Brosnan had in TND. Hard to put into words, but I missed the Bond I saw in GE and TND. The best part of this Bond was his interaction with Q and his scenes with Valentin.
Die Another Day - In his final outing, Brosnan was ill served by the script and main Bond girl, and yet ... he is more than competent as Bond, portraying him with real grit in the PTS and continuing through the film as confident, smooth, and determined. Not as compelling, suave, or dynamic as his Bond in TND (my favorite of his portrayals of Bond), Brosnan nevertheless still holds the screen and though not his strongest film, I cannot fault him below a 3.5 for here he is more than average for me still (especially strong first half of this film). This was a more mature Bond, and I like Brosnan a lot in this admittedly mostly awful film. I feel he was a better Bond in this one than in TWINE.
That is my wrap up of his four portrayals of James Bond. Pierce Brosnan will always be a Bond that I enjoy.
Getting ready to dig into the current Craig era soon. I may change over tomorrow evening, actually, depending upon what else folks here would like to discuss regarding the Pierce Brosnan era.
Cheers! Carry on ...
Yes - 5
No - 7
What would I change? Ok, here I go ... :-B
Goldeneye -
~ A tad stronger intro line from Pierce (the "Bond, James Bond" bit); I felt it was a bit too soft or underplayed.
~ No falling cyclists
~ No super bimbo examiner Caroline (or at least make her stronger and not such a fawning idiot)
~ No Eric Serra, really; we need the more traditional James Bond theme in it, in action sequences, when called for, and the theme song woven in at times (was it at all? I can't even remember it); the music is lacking. I remember being definitely disappointed in the music, but that didn't take away much from my enjoyment of the film. That's about it; GE sparkles still, a great Bond film.
Tomorrow Never Dies -
~ Less machine gun fire from Bond
~ Less time on the stealth boat
~ Monica Belucci as Paris (Teri nowhere in sight)
~ A bit more from Jonathan Pryce - he was slimy; I guess I want more oomph from him (what a great technical word) maybe louder, meaner (he never seemed really angry, just loopy)
~ Surrender as the main theme song
That's about it, but that would have made TND even better I think. Overall, I really enjoy the film.
The World Is Not Enough -
Where to start ...?
~ Bond with better hair (gotta start somewhere) and a more even performance. Bond not completely falling for Elektra, no.
~ Renard played to badass slimy nasty creepy psycho criminal perfection by Robert Carlyle (I know he had it in him!); much stronger performance needed
~ M not flying across the globe and getting kidnapped. No. Come up with something else; that still irks me. A new script is actually called for, now that I think of it.
~ Dr. Christmas Jones played by Michelle Pfeiffer (and give her better lines! Denise Richards not in sight, except maybe eye candy in the PTS somehow)
~ Even more Valentin! :)
Die Another Day -
I know where to start ...
~ Directed by Martin Campbell (Tamahori nowhere in sight)
~ Script by .... well, I don't know, but somebody else; I'll work on that one
~ Very little to no CGI
~ Make the film as the best Bond film they could and forget about sticking anniversary reminders into the film
~ Throw out ALL the over the top campy horrible humor/puns
~ No Jinx; bring back Wai Lin instead as Bond's partner (any number of back stories available to make them pairing up again interesting)
~ More Rosamund Pike and maybe make her not a villain, or amp her villainess role
~ No R, gimme somebody like Stephen Fry at his driest wittiest best as Major Boothroyd
~ No invisible car
~ No face change; yeah we just need a whole new story here ...)
~ More Cuba scenes; more grit and suspense all around (not super realistic or as heavy as CR, but toned way way down from what it was)
~ Jean Reno as a compassionate and amusing ally, a la Colombo
~ Jet Li as the villain (pretty much nothing like Graves, though)
...and I could go on and on and on ...
Whew! That was a bumpy ride. From the sublime to the ridiculous, really. (And I think Pierce would agree.)
I am so glad to have GE and TND. I enjoy parts of TWINE still. I only watch DAD rarely and Pierce is the only thing I like about the film.
Those are changes I would make if I could. Hindsight is always 20/20. But as this is a kind of wish fulfillment list, that would be mine. If anybody would like to make their own list, please go right ahead (keep the anti-Brosnan snarkiness* down to a minimum; thanks).
:)>-
*I don't mind you saying you wish he played it more like this or that, please do - but true bashing is not allowed (I'll be reminding that of everybody when we come to Craig soon, too). If you really cannot stand him (a few of you cannot), just don't make a list. Or do make a list; just make note of what you'd change in the films, sure, but don't say change the Bond actor; that's not on. If you have specific ideas about what you'd love to change in those 4 films, please do list them. I think everybody handled the Moore era extremely well, so let's carry on in that similar tone.
I just added a couple (Jean Reno and Jet Li). Basically I made DAD into a whole other film completely; why not? It deserves that. Ha!