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
I don't think their faith in Brosnan's ability had anything to with it. If they didn't believe he could do the role justice then they wouldn't have kept him or had him there in the first place. That, and the fact that he was still appearing in several other big movies during his tenure as Bond makes me find little merit in your statements. Brosnan is a much better actor and was far better in the role than you give him credit for.
You have to see my hatred (it's not really hatred - I actually quite like the guy when he's not playing Bond) from a historical perspective. TLD was my first cinema Bond and I thought it was brilliant and still do. For me Dalts was perfect for the times and brought the character believably up to date while still maintaining the heritage of the series. TLD IMO is the last truly classic Bond movie. Any way, as a massive Bond and Dalton fan I spent the years after LTK waiting for the next movie.
It was a long wait!
I was pretty disappointed when Dalton stepped down. I was never a huge fan of LTK (although I appreciate it more now than I used to) but was confident that his third film would be a cracker. And then this guy called Pierce Brosnan came along. I don't know where you're from but in the UK Brosnan was an almost total unknown. I remember at the time thinking who is this guy that the studio bosses are foisting in EON? To me he was a completely unknown entity. The first time I saw him on TV was whenn he appeared at the press launch sporting a daft beard (a warning of what was to come!) and an even cheesier grin. I can't say I immediately warmed to him, but at the same time I wanted a new Bond movie and trusted Cubby to make the right choice (I respected all of EON's previous casting decisions).
So I went to see GE and could tell within minutes that both Brosnan and the film were complete stinkers. Gone was Dalton's edge and in its place was a quivering jelly of a Bond. And Brosnan most definitely did not have Roger's presence or charm. I am a loyal fan however and continued to go along and see the movies. I even thought TND was a great improvement and held out hope that things were getting back on track. Then came TWINE. By the time DAD was released I was not remotely surprised by how bad it was - I fully expected it.
So for me, Brosnan not only stole the part from Dalts (okay that's being a little unfair), but his films wrecked what should have been a decade of cinema-going pleasure. I still wish Dalts had hung on for just one more, partly so that perhaps Brozza would by then have been seen as being too old.
Any way, we now have a very good Bond in some not always so good movies, which is a marked improvement on what came before. Even when I dislike a DC Bond movie (as with SF), I appreciate what they were trying to do and only wish it had been done better. I now see the Brosnan era an unfortunate blip - fortunately receding ever further into the past.
I agree. A darker Bond would've suited Brosnan perfectly. Just watch his movie The Fourth Protocol (with also the always fantastic Michael Caine). He's just fantastic in a role more silent, like Craig does nowadays (he doesn't talk too much).
However, I do find his acting very poor throughout. He just overacts completely the whole time, whether its yelling, grimacing, doing ridiculous pointy gestures wth his outstretched hand and fingers, and I never once felt like his characterisation was anything remotely connected to Fleming.
Bond was introvert, a complex, rather shy human being, slightly depressive at times, who rather hated violence.
Brosnan's Bond was a cardboard super hero, slightly smug, arrogant, extrovert, cheesy, wimpish, and Brosnan himself brought these undesirable qualities to the role.
Does Broz overact the entire time? I never found that and I've seen his movies many times. Sometimes yes but not all the time. I think you are summarising the infamous TWINE scene - which I admit was poor.
I remember seeing an interview with Broz in which he describes Bond:
"Pretty dark, obsessive, solitary...he's a survivalist...and he just lives for the job, he lives well! Lives with the greatest of confidence. Would you like him? You'd certainly feel his presence in the room thats for sure, you'd certainly feel you were in the company of a man who has lived"
It may be brief but I think that's a fairly accurate description, of Bond.
Brosnan isn't the greatest of actors but I think he had some great moments (which others have mentioned) and a stern expression that really suited the character.
I like Brosnan, his quotes are interesting.
You are spot on. Someone else once said that EON was "playing it safe" during the Brosnan age and I never understood why they chose this path. They had a very popular "people's choice" in Pierce Brosnan and should have pulled out all the stops but no, they gave us the weak lean years of 95-02.
Brozza himself once admitted that he never felt that he "nailed the part" and I for one never knew who the hell his Bond was. If he had taken the time like Dalts and read the friggin novels maybe he would have had better insight into the character he was portraying.
His films made boat load of money but I think they got worst after GE.
The joke has been made. Move along.
Couldn't agree more with both of you, every point you both make rings very true to me as well.
Of course Barb and Mike would say he was a great Bond, he made them and every shareholder a boatload of money. In that respect the hire was very successful. But to call Brozzer the fall guy implies that none of it was his fault, and that's simply not true. Little to no effort went into his character after the first two films, many want to entirely blame the scripts and give him a pass because they love the guy but when you take off the rose colored glasses, what you find is Pierce coasting after 1997 and content to tick the boxes. Whereas both Dalton and Craig were continually trying to add dimension and grow the character within the boundaries set down by Fleming.
The thing that really upsets me about this forum is that Brosnan era seems to have a protected status. Why can't you call a spade a spade and just say the Brosnan era sucked. The scripts were atrocious. This is true. I believe the scripts contributed to the crappy films more than Brosnan's acting ability and lack of respect of Ian Flemming's James Bond character. Brosnan lays some of the blame. Judi Dench's M for example was sublime. Even with the sh*tty scripts of the Brosnan era, she played the role of M to a tee, and left a legacy all the way to Skyfall.
However there are those on this forum which lay all the blame on the scripts. I disagree. It's the scripts being used as the "fall guy" by the adamant Brosnan supporters.
I suspect that GoldenEye and the other Brosnan films may have been the first introduction to the Bond series for some. If you support Brosnan for that reason, I kind of understand. I'm 28, and while that would put me in the Brosnan era myself, I was fortunate enough that the first Bond movie was from Russia with Love followed by Goldfinger when I was a kid. (On a funny note, I thought the chess player was James Bond for the longest time until I re-watched the movie in my teens. lol)
Anyway, you can ban or delete my posts if you want for speaking the truth about the Brosnan era films. I said my peace.
Damn. My gun's jammed.
:))
It's a DUD :))
Brosnan rocked in his time. I still love his first three, and if my virtual gun hadn't jammed, you'd be taking damage for your diss on him bro. :))
[-X
No Brosnan looked more like a male model then a damn secret agent, he never rocked once in a Bond film. I walked out of all his Bond films never once thinking he was cool or suave. Connery,Dalton and Craig pulled it off making you want to be Bond with Brosnan i wanted the bad guys to kill Bond cause he was awful.
My gun's still jammed. *throws a snowball*
Doesn't mean he wouldn't have had it, either.
http://metro.co.uk/2013/02/12/pierce-brosnan-to-snub-oscars-tribute-to-james-bonds-50th-anniversary-3444627/
That's why