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
Well, part of the fancying must be Babs wanting to step out of the shadow of her old man. Brosnan was his boy, Craig is now hers. Her find. Her big star, the first Bond actor chosen under her sole tenure as carrier of the Bond flame (Wilson notwithstanding).
He left the franchise in better shape than he found it.
Not every Bond actor can say the same.
In fact, they ARE my three favourites.
agreed i think Sean, Roger, Tim and Pierce are the best bonds...imagine them in the original Goldeneye 64 Deathmatch...
Personally I think Brosnan was a top notch Bond, Was just as cold as Connery and didn't mind shooting Bond girls or giving them a good back hander when needed. Was just as childish/rude as Moore and could double entendre just as well as anything in the "carry on bond " era that Roger Moore did so well.Equally as suarve and Gentlemanly as Dalton and just like Poor old Lazenby this HAS now happened to the other fella! Most of my Bond loving friends agree he ticked all the boxes and all consider GOLDENEYE to be one of the best all round bond films ever.
I agree with this. Brosnan was the most financially sound casting choice at the time too. That said, I don't think he could have gone on after DAD, he was really getting too old.
That may be so, but I personally have him equalled with Dalts as the third best Bond, ahead of Moore and Lazenby. Craig in second and Connery in first, naturally.
This man knows what he's talking about.
Brosnan was the first "current" Bond I was consciously aware of (GE came out when I was 11), so his films carry a certain nostalgia for me, although I dislike TND and hate DAD. I much prefer him to Moore, because Brosnan brought more humanity to the role. Moore, especially in his last few films, was completely predictable in his delivery and performance (as he himself often jokes). While Brosnan's not as talented as Craig, Connery or Dalton, I think he is a solid actor when he's given good material (TAILOR OF PANAMA is phenomenal).
I kind of see Brosnan as "Moore Jr" in his approach, whether he intended it or not I don't know, I think he was going for super spy GF/TB/YOLT Connery from what I've read. Bottom line for me since I love Sir Rog even in my 4th place is that Pierce came up short for me by way of natural comparison.
Piggybacking on what Charlie D just said, my favorite Brosnan movies are not his Bond films. Given a good script he does just fine, no doubt he can be a solid actor in that respect. But he isn't what I'd call exceptionally talented either to be truthful. He got the public on board for him as Bond, and the series did need that at that time, but in his last two films he became a box ticking caricature of Bond and that's part of why he needed to move on from the role and into other opportunities. That will happen to Craig one day and it'll be on to the next one.
Well see while I always loved Sir. Rog as a person and a figure, I never really took to his take on Bond. Brosnan for me was superior because he at least took it seriously 80-90% of the time. I don't agree that he was a caricature of Bond in TWINE, but in DAD yes, most definitely. But it wasn't only him, the series became a caricature of itself in the space of those two hours of DAD. In TWINE his acting chops were shown to be limited, but at least he tried even if it didn't work. The only difference between Brosnan and Lazenby here is that Lazenby had stronger material and acting around him to carry him through.
The issues I have with DAD are not with Pierce.
I am glad the reboot happened when it did; it was appropriate.
I do like Lazenby. I think he's good in OHMSS and especially brilliant in the final scene.
But I completely agree with you and I don't think you can question it really. Even if you think Lazenby is a better Bond I'm not sure you can really say he was a better actor than Brosnan.
Christ Laz wasn't even an actor at all until OHMSS, and I think when you compare their careers post Bond it speaks for itself. Lazenby has become a joke thanks to his crap career outside of OHMSS while Brosnan has gotten some good films and acclaimed performances under his belt outside of Bond (although Lazenby was going to work with Bruce Lee, which is pretty awesome).
As I see it, most of these actors put their own stamp on the Bond series, but Brosnan failed in this crucial test. Connery defined the role...and Moore redefined it in his own fashion. Dalton strove to revive the character in the Fleming mold...and Craig rebooted the series quite effectively. I believe that Brosnan's biggest mistake was in trying to be an "EveryBond." His Bond was blended from a base of Connery with a strong dash of Moore and a twist of Dalton. In trying to please everyone, he ended up satisfying very few fully.
I think if he had been a bit more particular about what he expected from scripts or special effects -- if he had campaigned for a more appropriate partner than Denise Richards in TWINE or against the atrocious CGI in DAD -- his standing would be much higher among Bond fans today. Instead, he saw himself as little more than a hired hand in the fields of Eon, and his tenure as Bond was somewhat the worse for this well-intended attempt at "professionalism."
Do you mean, very few HARDCORE fans there? Because the public at large LOVED him.
You talk about what Fleming intended, a real portrayal of the character. Only Dalton and Connery ever made the mark. Craig is good, but just has those one or two deficiencies weighing him down. Brosnan did an OK job, nothing overly special. At least not compared to some of the previous names mentioned
I think Pierce is a little too harsh with himself and even more with Barbara and Michael
First with himself because he was great, a mix between Connery and Moore but very nicely done. I loved him as James Bond and makes me sad he didnt feel he wasn't good enough.
With Barbara and Michael he should understand they were under huge presure after box office failures which were the Dalton films, everyone would be scared in their position.
They didn't want to screw him.
They didnt have bad intentions with him and he had to be a little more comprehensive towrads them.
Anyway i love that he accepts to like sex scenes he is the only one accepst that and thats really cool.
I love pierce as an actor and enjoy his intreviews very much but inwished he would stop having hard feelings against Barbara and Michael
Good posts and I agree with both of you. Pierce is likeable and perfectly serviceable when properly cast and well directed. He has a useful role as an actor, just not as Bond. And I agree that from what I've seen he is not someone who can carry a poor movie on his own - few can, to be fair. I think Craig is the same in that sense - as his lack of success outside Bond demonstrates.
I Also agree that the creative confusion began before Brosnan and that LTK already showed that EoN really weren't sure what direction to go in.
Any way, Pierce was definitely not a scapegoat. He carries a lot of the responsibility for the quality of his Bond performances. I do think though that it was EON who didn't reAlly know what to do with him. With the right director and script he could have done a decent Bond movie. I would have love to see Tarantino directing him as Bond. I still kind of hope that EoN one day has the balls to hire Tarantino. Such a shame we never got a Spielberg Bond as well.
I even go so far that this is general consensus.
I agree. Certainly amongst my generation at least (late 20s/early 30s) it's still very popular.
I'm yet to meet anyone in person who has a negative view of the film.
I think you're probably right.
I have seen it ranked quite low in several online best of Bond rankings though. As I said I will rewatch it some time, but my memories of it are that it's pretty dismal.
I didn't like it. PB matured nicely in TND but GE was lame. Overacted ..trying to hard for a catch phrase, ...not near as bad and unentertaining as LTK as indicated by the BO performance but not there yet IMHO.
Ha ha. Love your insistence on getting a dig In at LTK every post!
I prefer LTK to GE, but I don't buy this idea LTK is a classic either.
Count me in with these three favorites
Pirece Brosnan, Sean Connery and Timothy Dalton.
I think these three have all the things i look the most for in a Bond actor.
=D>