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 love Brosnan's Bond but he wasn't ready in the 80s.
Plus I can't bear to imagine a world without Dalton as Bond.
Considering most casual movie goers don't even know who he is or that he has been Bond, we basically do in some part.
Its great to see Pierce watching them as a fan like us again! Good on PB! :-bd
Hahahahaha, I don't care! We rabid Dalton fans HAVE GOT his glorious two to worship over & over!!!! ^:)^
A blend? I see more of moore then connery but he was never really his own man.
I've felt that way for many years and have said so in numerous threads. I can see why Moore fans like Brosnan better than Dalton or Craig, this era is "Moore Jr" and mostly overcooked, no one can do Bond quite the way Sir Roger did and get away with it. Yet, Brosnan is much more a Connery devotee. It really makes me wonder how he managed to be mostly very un-Connery like, and part of the answer is that he didn't put his foot down and put his own stamp on the role as those who came before and followed him have done. The latter part of his era (1999-2002) is the worst in series history by some margin IMHO, and while I wish him well and like him in other roles, I'm not too worried that his new franchise will be much, if any competition for the now superior product in his old job.
So there.
:P
I do like all the Bonds (with the exception of Lazenby), and I find plenty to like in Brosnan. I agree that his first 2 films were the best, but I don't share the same observations as others who say he was never Bond. Respectful but firm disagreement there, gentlemen.
Question though, was Lazenby too womanizing or too lacking in thespian skills for you? I thought he was pretty good, considering.
edit: I was able to find the pages, on page 7 of the Originals thread we have SirHenry's excellent review of OHMSS and then we all follow on more or less with our reviews; mine is on page 9 of that thread. Just in case anybody wants to read the full reviews and have not visited that thread yet.
"Lazenby misses the mark for me in this role, by some substantial margin. Yes, the man can fight and move very well - action scenes were believable and had power. Good intro, too. And I believe he undoubtedly tried his best, but he is just not a very good actor. He looked the part enough (and I am maybe more flexible in my requirements in this area than other fans), but I just did not get any of the elements I want in Bond, that make me believe it is James Bond, the believability in that character - and that, truly as demonstrated in what is missing in this film, can only come from a fine actor. "
More than fair enough. L-)
But he is only dubbed for 40-minutes or so in the middle of the film. The rest of the film is his voice.
It is still a big part of the film where this occurs, and crucial to the plot. Baker dubbed more than just the Bray stuff, though it wasn't that much additional stuff, just some lines here and there it is still present. My point is, 40 minutes is a huge chunk of time. Apparently they shot the Bray scenes with George doing the voice and only after he walked did they have Baker talk over George. I then believe George only found out about the dubbing at the premiere.
I'm not counting it against him, since it isn't his fault. It is just something that bugs me.
I love Moore but I have to admit that most of the time I just saw Roger Moore. At least with Brosnan I saw Bond more.
I'd be more aligned with this way of thinking too.
Count me in as well. Moore wasn't playing Bond as much as he was playing Roger Moore playing Bond. I always feel like he's winking at the audience and saying "isn't this just a laugh - I'm playing James Bond!". There's almost no difference between his approach in the Bond films (especially his later stuff) and his role in The Cannonball Run. And that's ok if it's just lighthearted fluff. But, personally, I don't want my Bond to be lighthearted fluff. With Moore I'm often reminded of an old Bevis and Butthead episode where they're watching a music video by the great, but notoriously slacker, band Pavement. B&B's critique was a simple, frustrated, "Try harder, damnit!". I love Moore (more as an ex-Bond, really) and I do enjoy his Bond films when I'm in a certain mood, but I do wish he would've "tried harder" in a lot of his later films.
I'm not the biggest Brosnan fan either, but I'll take his Bond over Moore's anyday.
I agree with this, while some of Moore's films may have been better (FYEO & TSWLM) than one or two of Brosnan's (DAD), I find Brosnan's take more interesting because he played it straight the whole time. Moore was just there for a laugh sometimes, it seems. That said, when Moore was good, he was VERY good.
With that said, I don't mean this to be insulting to Pierce (but I don't know if it can be taken any other way), but does anyone feel Brosnan is jealous of Craig and his tenure?
=D>