› ›

The PIERCE BROSNAN Appreciation thread - Discuss His Life, His Career, His Bond Films

1…119120122124125…138

Comments

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Agents….. and I’m not talking about the secret service types.

    Craig didn’t negotiate his deal.

    Brosnan didn’t ask for $25-30 million…

    Agents.

    One was lucky to read the tea leaves correctly; the other not so much and out-priced his client.

    As a producer (s), the agent (s) may’ve made it a helluva lot easier to walk away from Brosnan.
  • 007ClassicBondFan007ClassicBondFan
    Posts: 2,270
    peter wrote: »
    Agents….. and I’m not talking about the secret service types.

    Craig didn’t negotiate his deal.

    Brosnan didn’t ask for $25-30 million…

    Agents.

    One was lucky to read the tea leaves correctly; the other not so much and out-priced his client.

    As a producer (s), the agent (s) may’ve made it a helluva lot easier to walk away from Brosnan.

    That’s actually a good point. I wonder if Brosnan’s agents may have overplayed their hands when trying to renegotiate for one more film.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,217
    That's a good point too, @peter! Too many cooks and all that - they muddy the waters and add a cynical edge to every proceeding.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited August 2022 Posts: 8,188
    007ClassicBondFan wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    007ClassicBondFan wrote: »
    Mallory wrote: »
    007ClassicBondFan wrote: »
    I sympathize with Brosnan too. It’s a real crappy thing to get fired over a telephone call. I understand that’s the nature of the business, but for the man who kind of singlehandly revived your film franchise, a bit more of a dignified exit would’ve done.

    It also came down to money. Brosnan wanted $25m for a fifth Bond film. And he wasnt fired, he was out of contract.

    Even if he was out of the contract, it was still practically a firing. Kind of like how employers would phrase it as “We’ll have to let you go”, it’s still the same thing pretty much.

    Not really! Brosnan was a Producer himself. He was long enough in the business to know about contracts. He had a 3 picture deal with an option of a 4th, which was DAD! They were under no obligation to keep him on, and despite the films success, box office wise, they surely felt as some of us did, the films were going nowhere with him in the role! It was totally the right decision, and their 'gamble' on Craig proved correct, and the boost the series needed!

    I’m not questioning the decision to let him go. I’m questioning the decision to do it over a phone call. You can say all you want about the man, and his films, but to still practically dump him over a phone call when he was the man who helped saved this franchise from the brink of death is an undignified move on the part of Broccoli and Wilson. The least they could’ve done was tell him in person.
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    “Fired” is a bit dramatic.

    Brosnan had finished his contract, then demanded for more money. Eon decided to look elsewhere.

    @Mathis1 is 100% correct that Eon was under no obligation to bring back Brosnan for another.

    But it’s not like Brosnan was in the wrong for asking to earn more. He was a huge part in why those films were successful despite reviews. It was no different than Craig negotiating for a higher wage for NTTD, and just because EON felt no obligation to continue with Brosnan, does not mean the way they went about telling Brosnan was okay.

    I wasn’t saying it was wrong of Brosnan (or his agent) to demand more money, I’m just saying that’s part of why Eon decided to look elsewhere and there’s nothing wrong with that decision on their part.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    CraigMooreOHMSS wrote: »
    That's a good point too, @peter! Too many cooks and all that - they muddy the waters and add a cynical edge to every proceeding.

    They do @CraigMooreOHMSS … they’re a necessary evil.

    I’ve been in negotiations for the past six weeks to own the film and tv rights to a NYT bestseller. Some on here know the song and dance we’ve been going through….

    Let’s just say that I’m happy I went bald quite early— there are no strands left for me to pull out in utter frustration, 😂!!
  • 007ClassicBondFan007ClassicBondFan
    Posts: 2,270
    Regardless of the circumstances, I do think it was the right call to let Brosnan go if they were to commit to the idea of doing CR as a reboot. Doesn’t make me any less upset about the way they went about it, nor does it take away my disappointment of not having a much more grittier, down to earth Brosnan adventure. But I do believe that Brosnan had grown too old for the part. One of my bigger gripes with both AVTAK, and NTTD is how visibly aged Moore and Craig looked. It wasn’t as glaring with NTTD, but I still find myself thinking Craig had stuck around too long.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    I love Craig's Bond, but to the honest, I don't think Craig's era had to be a reboot, since Brosnan's era was already successful.
  • 007ClassicBondFan007ClassicBondFan
    Posts: 2,270
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I love Craig's Bond, but to the honest, I don't think Craig's era had to be a reboot, since Brosnan's era was already successful.

    I partly agree since we went from Moonraker to FYEO without a change of actor, but it helped Batman Begins to severe any ties from Batman and Robin, and by all means the obsession with rebooting film franchises did start there. It was probably for the best to separate Casino Royale/Craig from what had come before.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,188
    Eon had held the rights to CR since 1999, so the fact that they opted not to use it in 2002 tells me they had always planned to use it as a springboard for a new actor rather than as a new entry with Brosnan. So if Eon had decided to do fifth with Brosnan we would have likely gotten a grounded original adventure in 2005, and then maybe Craig or another actor for 2008/2009.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    edited August 2022 Posts: 4,247
    007ClassicBondFan wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I love Craig's Bond, but to the honest, I don't think Craig's era had to be a reboot, since Brosnan's era was already successful.

    I partly agree since we went from Moonraker to FYEO without a change of actor, but it helped Batman Begins to severe any ties from Batman and Robin, and by all means the obsession with rebooting film franchises did start there. It was probably for the best to separate Casino Royale/Craig from what had come before.

    Yeah, it was an obsession indeed.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited August 2022 Posts: 13,355
    From back in the day. Negotiations broke down over a difference of $3 million:

    https://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond_21_brosnan_pay.php3

    Cubby went through hell sometimes getting Roger Moore signed back on. I wonder if he would have decided to make a change so quickly. Part of me thinks you pay the man his asking fee. Different times, different people I guess.


    A recent situation of this is Neve Campbell not returning for Scream 6 as she was not getting paid what she thought she was worth.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    I would've sent my guy a cool $3 million to make up the difference if I had it. Shame what we could've seen from a fifth Brosnan installment while still ushering in a fresh Craig era afterward.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    Brosnan was down for two more back in the day with a new Bond planned for 2012.

    I'll dig out some of those links when I have time.

    It's one of the reasons 'The November Man' has his active service mentioned as 1987 - 2008. Get it. 😉 Cute.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited August 2022 Posts: 3,152
    Given the way that things worked out, I have to say I'm glad it went the way it did. At the time, yes, I did think that Brosnan was hard done by - but with hindsight, I can't (or don't want to) imagine where the series would've gone (or would be now) if they hadn't got Craig and made CR when they did. Craig was the right guy and CR was the right film, at the right time.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    They could have had the courtesy of sending him a singing telegram.
    Singing-Telegram-philadelphia-1-e1430931536773.jpg
    "You ve been a great James Booond!!"
    (puts a grin on his face)

    "Up there with the beeest"
    (makes him think the 5th one is given)

    "But now your contract is oooover,
    well you know the reeest."
  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited August 2022 Posts: 4,162
    I think from the producer's perspective, the writing was on the wall. It wasn't the fact that the Bond series was unsuccessful (financially it certainly wasn't) but I suspect the mixed critical reaction to the last few films, as well as I presume fan reaction at the time, pointed to the main problems - the films had become too 'silly', reliant on things like OTT gadgets, and the old Bond formula etc. DAD especially was almost a remake of DAF in places, bizarre plot twists and all. They needed to do something different. Add to that the fact that The Borune Identity had come out in 2002, the Batman reboot was in its earliest script stages with Darren Aronofsky writing, and I think the producers knew they couldn't keep going down the route they had done up until that point.

    I think the problem with comparing Moore returning from MR to FYEO is that while the latter was more grounded, the series didn't take all that big a U-turn on that occasion. Yes, you had a more down to earth Bond adventure, but by and large that film still retains a lot of the Moore era's humour (a Margret Thatcher lookalike talks to a parrot over a radio, and that's only one example of how ridiculous that film is). This was also just before the era of action blockbusters which would have proven more tricky competition for Bond like the series did with Borune in the early 2000s. No, the next Bond after DAD had to be fundamentally different in order to get many fans and critics back on board, all while still making money. It had to be a new actor. Unfortunately that left Brosnan in that awkward position, regardless of how much this creative direction or the simple financial/contract side of all this was the first to kick in.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited August 2022 Posts: 3,152
    Yes, BB, MGW and Lee Tamahori went to see The Bourne Identity together and said they came out afterwards thinking that 'we were dead in the water'! Pierce's days were probably numbered from then on.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited August 2022 Posts: 4,162
    Venutius wrote: »
    Yes, BB, MGW and Lee Tamahori went to see The Bourne Identity together and said they came out afterwards thinking that 'we were dead in the water'! Pierce's days were probably numbered from then on.

    It's not even as though that film made as much money as DAD did. BB and MGW simply understood what the problems with DAD, and by extension the Bond series up until that point, were. They also seemed to understand where action films and blockbusters were going at that point.
  • Agent_Zero_OneAgent_Zero_One Ireland
    edited August 2022 Posts: 554
    007HallY wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    Yes, BB, MGW and Lee Tamahori went to see The Bourne Identity together and said they came out afterwards thinking that 'we were dead in the water'! Pierce's days were probably numbered from then on.

    It's not even as though that film made as much money as DAD did. BB and MGW simply understood what the problems with DAD, and by extension the Bond series up until that point, were. They also seemed to understand where action films and blockbusters were going at that point.
    Ironically, Purvis and Wade said their original draft for DAD was a darker, Spy Who Came In From The Cold kind of film...
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,551
    Whenever I think of SWCIFTC, I think of M getting punched in the face.
    Enjoyed that movie, though.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,188
    Agent_Zero_One wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    Yes, BB, MGW and Lee Tamahori went to see The Bourne Identity together and said they came out afterwards thinking that 'we were dead in the water'! Pierce's days were probably numbered from then on.

    It's not even as though that film made as much money as DAD did. BB and MGW simply understood what the problems with DAD, and by extension the Bond series up until that point, were. They also seemed to understand where action films and blockbusters were going at that point.
    Ironically, Purvis and Wade said their original draft for DAD was a darker, Spy Who Came In From The Cold kind of film...

    Yeah, there was supposed to be a ton of more emphasis on Bond tracking the mole that betrayed him. It feels like that gets pushed aside when we focus more on Gustav Graves and the gene therapy plot. I think the closest you can find Purvis & Wade’s original take is in a few scenes the Bond getting captured and tortured. I do wonder if that VR training with MI6 under attack was at one point supposed to be an actual scene, only it would have played out longer.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 4,162
    Agent_Zero_One wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    Yes, BB, MGW and Lee Tamahori went to see The Bourne Identity together and said they came out afterwards thinking that 'we were dead in the water'! Pierce's days were probably numbered from then on.

    It's not even as though that film made as much money as DAD did. BB and MGW simply understood what the problems with DAD, and by extension the Bond series up until that point, were. They also seemed to understand where action films and blockbusters were going at that point.
    Ironically, Purvis and Wade said their original draft for DAD was a darker, Spy Who Came In From The Cold kind of film...

    That actually makes a lot of sense when you think about it. The film begins with Bond being captured and tortured for a year in a North Korean prison camp. A lot is made about him finding out who 'betrayed him' and compromised his mission. It's only a bit later that the film starts to change course and shifts into the remake of DAF territory.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited August 2022 Posts: 3,152
    007HallY wrote: »
    It's not even as though that film made as much money as DAD did. BB and MGW simply understood what the problems with DAD, and by extension the Bond series up until that point, were. They also seemed to understand where action films and blockbusters were going at that point.
    Yes, exactly. Profit wasn't the problem with DAD. They weren't 'dead in the water' financially, but they were artistically. Having seen The Bourne Identity, BB and MGW knew what was coming and how out of step the series was with it, and that a drastic realignment was needed. They gauged it right and, with Craig and CR, played it perfectly, IMO.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,188
    I don’t think it was just THE BOURNE IDENTITY, but also in 2004’s THE BOURNE SUPREMACY solidifying their idea that Bond should be retooled for post-9/11.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited August 2022 Posts: 3,152
    Yeah, no doubt. I've only seen them address it in direct reference to The Bourne Identity, though, so that's the only reason I kept it to that. Interestingly, they hired Identity's second unit director for CR - but look what happened when they replaced him with Supremacy's second unit director for QOS! ;)
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,188
    I definitely prefer Alexander Witt’s second unit stuff. I’ll be curious if they keep him around for Bond 26. Aside from QOS, he oversaw all the Craig era. Only film that’s active with him after NTTD is FAST X.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,152
    Agreed - Witt > Bradley, as the kids would say! EON obviously actually wanted QOS to have Bradley's style from Supremacy and Ultimatum, but I by far preferred Identity anyway and I'm glad they went back to Witt for the rest of Craig's run.
  • 007InAction007InAction Australia
    Posts: 2,531
    What Pierce Brosnan Thought Of Each Previous James Bond Actor

    https://screenrant.com/james-bond-pierce-brosnan-previous-actor-thoughts/
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,044
    Brosnan is simply very likeable. Love the guy!
Sign In or Register to comment.