Controversial opinions about Bond films

1224225227229230707

Comments

  • stagstag In the thick of it!
    Posts: 1,053
    Only my opinion of course but..... I attempted to watch TWINE last night. I simply could not not get past ten minutes. To me Brosnan is the worst Bond by a country mile. He was a poseur extraordinare who gurned and jaw clenched his way through his tenure and brought nothing to the role except the idea that Bond had somehow become metrosexualised.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    stag wrote: »
    He was a poseur extraordinare who gurned and jaw clenched his way through his tenure and brought nothing to the role except the idea that Bond had somehow become metrosexualised.

    But don t you love how he strokes his index finger over his cheek, at the side of his mouth? That s acting!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,956
    stag wrote: »
    Only my opinion of course but..... I attempted to watch TWINE last night. I simply could not not get past ten minutes. To me Brosnan is the worst Bond by a country mile. He was a poseur extraordinare who gurned and jaw clenched his way through his tenure and brought nothing to the role except the idea that Bond had somehow become metrosexualised.

    Now tell us how you really feel!
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited January 2017 Posts: 10,591
    stag wrote: »
    Only my opinion of course but..... I attempted to watch TWINE last night. I simply could not not get past ten minutes. To me Brosnan is the worst Bond by a country mile. He was a poseur extraordinare who gurned and jaw clenched his way through his tenure and brought nothing to the role except the idea that Bond had somehow become metrosexualised.
    Wow, my opinion differs by a country mile.

    Forgive me if I'm wrong on this, but aren't you the member who has largely avoided watching the Brosnan era films? Without giving the man a chance, your post lacks a certain credibility. Unless of course you have, in which case you can disregard my response.
  • stagstag In the thick of it!
    Posts: 1,053
    As said - and following the thread title - my opinion. I don't expect anyone to agree yet I give it.
    You're quite correct, apart from the utterly dreadful DAD I have only seen snippets of other Brosnan films. Why? Because I cannot stand the sight of Brosnan and his truly awful take on the role. Although I have tried to watch his other films, his performance makes me reach for the off button as soon as I see him. From my perspective His encounter with the new Q in last nights film sums up perfectly everything that is wrong with him. That is my reason and frankly I doesn't really matter to me if you don't find it credible. This brings me neatly back to the thread title 'Controversial opinions about Bond films'.

    This does not extend to his other acting parts - that said i have only seen him in a film with Michael Caine where he played a Russian agent. I did enjoy that but James Bond NO!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,956
    You should give some of his other non-Bond roles a chance, particularly 'The Tailor of Panama' and 'The Matador.' I'm a big fan of 'Seraphim Falls,' as well.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    stag wrote: »
    As said - and following the thread title - my opinion. I don't expect anyone to agree yet I give it.
    You're quite correct, apart from the utterly dreadful DAD I have only seen snippets of other Brosnan films. Why? Because I cannot stand the sight of Brosnan and his truly awful take on the role. Although I have tried to watch his other films, his performance makes me reach for the off button as soon as I see him. From my perspective His encounter with the new Q in last nights film sums up perfectly everything that is wrong with him. That is my reason and frankly I doesn't really matter to me if you don't find it credible. This brings me neatly back to the thread title 'Controversial opinions about Bond films'.

    This does not extend to his other acting parts - that said i have only seen him in a film with Michael Caine where he played a Russian agent. I did enjoy that but James Bond NO!
    Not being able to stand him is one thing, but to bluntly dub Brosnan's Bond as "a poseur extraordinare who gurned and jaw clenched his way through his tenure and brought nothing to the role except the idea that Bond had somehow become metrosexualised" and not having seen 70% of his material does garner a loss of credibility, IMO. Avid anti-Brosnan members such as the likes of Thunderfinger and Getafix have at least given his four films a chance before expressing an informed opinion. Yours happens to be based solely on his poorest outing (arguably), and snippets from his prior three outings. Therefore, it's difficult for me to take your opinions seriously compared to those that have given his complete tenure a watch.
  • gt007gt007 Station G
    Posts: 1,182
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    You should give some of his other non-Bond roles a chance, particularly 'The Tailor of Panama' and 'The Matador.' I'm a big fan of 'Seraphim Falls,' as well.
    I love Seraphim Falls and Brosnan's performance in it. One of his very best IMO. He was good in The Matador too. I'm embarrassed to admit I've never seen The Tailor of Panama.

    Brosnan to me never felt anything else but naturally cool. His Bond was just as effortlessly cool as Connery's and Moore's IMO. In fact, I think he's one of the best Bonds we've had (which I'd say is a controversial opinion around here).
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,956
    If you enjoyed him in 'The Matador,' you should like him in 'The Tailor of Panama.' He's just as sexually crude and foul mouthed in the former as he is in the latter, I love it. Not a side of Brosnan we get to see in too many of his films ('Live Wire' is another one that comes to mind).

    Agreed, Brosnan is beyond cool. I've never had an issue with believing him in the role.
  • gt007gt007 Station G
    Posts: 1,182
    Thanks, @Creasy47. I'll definitely check it out some time. It's been in my watchlist for way too long. In fact I have it on DVD too.

    As far as controversial opinions go, here's one of mine. I genuinely like Lulu's The Man With The Golden Gun. I find it a very enjoyable and fun song and I think it works great with the film.
  • stagstag In the thick of it!
    Posts: 1,053
    jake24 wrote: »
    stag wrote: »
    As said - and following the thread title - my opinion. I don't expect anyone to agree yet I give it.
    You're quite correct, apart from the utterly dreadful DAD I have only seen snippets of other Brosnan films. Why? Because I cannot stand the sight of Brosnan and his truly awful take on the role. Although I have tried to watch his other films, his performance makes me reach for the off button as soon as I see him. From my perspective His encounter with the new Q in last nights film sums up perfectly everything that is wrong with him. That is my reason and frankly I doesn't really matter to me if you don't find it credible. This brings me neatly back to the thread title 'Controversial opinions about Bond films'.

    This does not extend to his other acting parts - that said i have only seen him in a film with Michael Caine where he played a Russian agent. I did enjoy that but James Bond NO!
    Not being able to stand him is one thing, but to bluntly dub Brosnan's Bond as "a poseur extraordinare who gurned and jaw clenched his way through his tenure and brought nothing to the role except the idea that Bond had somehow become metrosexualised" and not having seen 70% of his material does garner a loss of credibility, IMO. Avid anti-Brosnan members such as the likes of Thunderfinger and Getafix have at least given his four films a chance before expressing an informed opinion. Yours happens to be based solely on his poorest outing (arguably), and snippets from his prior three outings. Therefore, it's difficult for me to take your opinions seriously compared to those that have given his complete tenure a watch.

    For your information I said I couldn't stand Brosnan as Bond - this bears no relation to him as a person or his other acting roles. I just cannot stand him in the role of 007. It is my opinion and only my opinion - I don't ask nor expect you to take it seriously - however that is my opinion and I stand by it. As I've already mentioned I tried to watch his other Bond films but just cannot take him seriously for the reasons I have already pointed out. Another point is at the very least I expect a Bond (actor) to have some latent menace about him and - Frankly - Brosnan fails miserably to deliver on this area too. Even Sir Rog had more 'bad boy' about him!

  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited January 2017 Posts: 10,591
    stag wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    stag wrote: »
    As said - and following the thread title - my opinion. I don't expect anyone to agree yet I give it.
    You're quite correct, apart from the utterly dreadful DAD I have only seen snippets of other Brosnan films. Why? Because I cannot stand the sight of Brosnan and his truly awful take on the role. Although I have tried to watch his other films, his performance makes me reach for the off button as soon as I see him. From my perspective His encounter with the new Q in last nights film sums up perfectly everything that is wrong with him. That is my reason and frankly I doesn't really matter to me if you don't find it credible. This brings me neatly back to the thread title 'Controversial opinions about Bond films'.

    This does not extend to his other acting parts - that said i have only seen him in a film with Michael Caine where he played a Russian agent. I did enjoy that but James Bond NO!
    Not being able to stand him is one thing, but to bluntly dub Brosnan's Bond as "a poseur extraordinare who gurned and jaw clenched his way through his tenure and brought nothing to the role except the idea that Bond had somehow become metrosexualised" and not having seen 70% of his material does garner a loss of credibility, IMO. Avid anti-Brosnan members such as the likes of Thunderfinger and Getafix have at least given his four films a chance before expressing an informed opinion. Yours happens to be based solely on his poorest outing (arguably), and snippets from his prior three outings. Therefore, it's difficult for me to take your opinions seriously compared to those that have given his complete tenure a watch.

    For your information I said I couldn't stand Brosnan as Bond - this bears no relation to him as a person or his other acting roles. I just cannot stand him in the role of 007. It is my opinion and only my opinion - I don't ask nor expect you to take it seriously - however that is my opinion and I stand by it. As I've already mentioned I tried to watch his other Bond films but just cannot take him seriously for the reasons I have already pointed out. Another point is at the very least I expect a Bond (actor) to have some latent menace about him and - Frankly - Brosnan fails miserably to deliver on this area too. Even Sir Rog had more 'bad boy' about him!
    I figured. Look, I can respect the fact that you have at least attempted to watch his other three films, though I believe that any Bond fan should explore each film in full-length at least once.
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited January 2017 Posts: 1,243
    patb wrote: »
    Perhaps we were spoiled in the long term as Cionnery/Moore were so seemingly effortless in this area that we took it for granted and, since then, we have seen a series of respected actors struggle with this part of Bond's persona.


    Regarding Connery and Moore, they are chalk and cheese. If it comes to humour, then the styles of the aforementioned actors could not be. more different. @bondjames

    For me Connery had the best balance and you did not see it coming. Moore you could set your watch to it. The humour comes from the personality and Connery's humour was written exclusively for him.

    Whether you read interviews with Tom Mankiewicz or Lewis Gilbert-who both worked with the two actors - it became obvious that you had to write to their strengths.

    Watch the making of LALD on the dvd, and Mankiewicz says you could have Connery stab a woman in the back, whilst the same scene would come off nasty for Moore's character.

    And for TSWLM, Gilbert said there was no point in presenting Moore as tough, like Hamilton had tried in the previous two films. Gilbert also said that many fans preferred Moore to Connery,because Moore had that easy liveability.

    I grew up on Moore, and as a child I found Connery too serious. I compared him to Moore. But with maturity, I grew to see why Connery is so highly regarded.

    This leads me to say that with each new actor you have to treat them as their own man. In other words, as an example, you could not expect Connery to mimmick Moore. Or Moore to mimmick Dalton's darkness and intenseness.

    If you cast Johnny Depp. then you would not ask him to be like Tom Hardy.

    Dalton said comparisons between the actors are fruitless. And he even suggested the same for the films. They are products of their time and political/cultural climate.


  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    acoppola wrote: »

    This leads me to say that with each new actor you have to treat them as their own man. In other words, as an example, you could not expect Connery to mimmick Moore.


    And yet he does, in NSNA.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    edited January 2017 Posts: 7,101
    I am an avid fan of both Dalton and Brosnan as Bond. Very different Bonds but both wonderfully enjoyable.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    I am an avid fan of both Dalton and Brosnan as Bond. Very different Bonds but both wonderfully enjoyable.
    Neither are my favourites, and I think it was a disappointing time for the franchise on the whole (bar LTK & GE). Having said that, I can live with the era, even if it's very late 80s/90s.
  • Posts: 11,189
    I've said this before on various threads but don't think I've ever put it in this one:

    I don't think Dalton has enough of a big screen presence and is a better fit on television.
  • Posts: 4,602
    It is stange the certain actors seem to somehow fit with cinema rather than others. I was watching a low budget movie called Black or White with Kevin Costner last week and he just seems to have that X Factor that makes him great. There are other actors who have been great on TV and/or stage but just cant make that transition to the big screen. I think Dalton did struggle with this .
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited January 2017 Posts: 1,243
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I've said this before on various threads but don't think I've ever put it in this one:

    I don't think Dalton has enough of a big screen presence and is a better fit on television.

    That is subjective. Dalton as an actor does a fine job with whatever he is given. Nobody in the industry who talks about him says he is a tv actor only. He is selective, and obviously something has to be relevant to his style and tastes.

    Moore was a tv star. What has Moore done since Bond, apart from The Spice Girls Film? Dalton was not interested in becoming a movie star. He just wanted to be a very good actor. Hence why he ignored films for most of the 70's., to focus on the theatre.

    Love him or hate him, Dalton is distinctive, in a sea of actors.

    But your comment is out of the ether and you once said Lazenby was a better actor in some scenes than Dalton, when it is common knowledge that Lazenby is no actor.

    I work alongside someone who used to work for the BBC as well as freelance in the film industry. I mentioned what you said about Dalton, and it caused a giggle. She worked with Craig on Our Friends In The North. She edited the series. She sat in the editing room with Craig and had many conversations with him. She thought Dalton was brilliant in Jane Eyre.

    John Wayne was a huge star and one of the worst actors. You confuse acting with stardom.

  • Posts: 4,325
    Stage and screen acting involve very different techniques. Judi Dench is someone who knows how to navigate both.
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited January 2017 Posts: 1,243
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Stage and screen acting involve very different techniques. Judi Dench is someone who knows how to navigate both.

    Dalton has navigated both. So obviously he knows. I do remember that critics thought he was too good an actor to play Bond. His acting was never in question. Do you realise that he was discovered by the legendary Peter O'Toole, who gave him his first role in The Lion In Winter?

    Bottom line, Dalton is a fine actor who knows what he is doing.

    What orifice are you talking from and how would Judi Dench be a reasonable comparisson? She would disagree with you about Dalton.

  • Posts: 4,325
    acoppola wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Stage and screen acting involve very different techniques. Judi Dench is someone who knows how to navigate both.

    Dalton has navigated both. So obviously he knows. I do remember that critics thought he was too good an actor to play Bond. His acting was never in question. Do you realise that he was discovered by the legendary Peter O'Toole, who gave him his first role in The Lion In Winter?

    Bottom line, Dalton is a fine actor who knows what he is doing.

    What orifice are you talking from and how would Judi Dench be a reasonable comparisson? She would disagree with you about Dalton.

    Uh? what? Of course I know about Dalton's role in The Lion in Winter - who's comparing Dench with Dalton?!
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited January 2017 Posts: 1,243
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    acoppola wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Stage and screen acting involve very different techniques. Judi Dench is someone who knows how to navigate both.

    Dalton has navigated both. So obviously he knows. I do remember that critics thought he was too good an actor to play Bond. His acting was never in question. Do you realise that he was discovered by the legendary Peter O'Toole, who gave him his first role in The Lion In Winter?

    Bottom line, Dalton is a fine actor who knows what he is doing.

    What orifice are you talking from and how would Judi Dench be a reasonable comparisson? She would disagree with you about Dalton.

    Uh? what? Of course I know about Dalton's role in The Lion in Winter - who's comparing Dench with Dalton?!

    You were comparing. You said Dench knew how to navigate stage and screen, implying Dalton did not. That is blatantly untrue. Put Dalton with the right actors and he is outstanding. Watch Penny Dreadful.


  • edited January 2017 Posts: 11,189
    But your comment is out of the ether and you once said Lazenby was a better actor in some scenes than Dalton, when it is common knowledge that Lazenby is no actor
    With all due respect I never said Laz was a better actor. I know he was a novice back in 1969.

    I said he had a stronger screen presence...and I still think he does. Probably yes, he was more of a "star" than an actor, but Connery was also not only a star but has a fairly solid reputation as an actor
    acoppola wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    acoppola wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Stage and screen acting involve very different techniques. Judi Dench is someone who knows how to navigate both.

    Dalton has navigated both. So obviously he knows. I do remember that critics thought he was too good an actor to play Bond. His acting was never in question. Do you realise that he was discovered by the legendary Peter O'Toole, who gave him his first role in The Lion In Winter?

    Bottom line, Dalton is a fine actor who knows what he is doing.

    What orifice are you talking from and how would Judi Dench be a reasonable comparisson? She would disagree with you about Dalton.

    Uh? what? Of course I know about Dalton's role in The Lion in Winter - who's comparing Dench with Dalton?!

    You were comparing. You said Dench knew how to navigate stage and screen, implying Dalton did not. That is blatantly untrue. Put Dalton with the right actors and he is outstanding. Watch Penny Dreadful.

    Once again, a television programme.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Controversial opinion here. I think both Laz & Dalts had a stronger screen presence than Brosnan, who was arguably more conventionally handsome, and that's what carried him through.
  • Posts: 11,189
    bondjames wrote: »
    Controversial opinion here. I think both Laz & Dalts had a stronger screen presence than Brosnan, who was arguably more conventionally handsome, and that's what carried him through.

    I think Broz has a fairly strong presence but I agree that that was down largely to his good looks and wardrobe.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Controversial opinion here. I think both Laz & Dalts had a stronger screen presence than Brosnan, who was arguably more conventionally handsome, and that's what carried him through.

    I think Broz has a fairly strong presence but I agree that that was down largely to his good looks and wardrobe.
    True. It's perhaps his voice which I find very weak. Dalton and Laz (dubbed or not) have very strong voices, as do Connery, Moore and Craig. Brosnan seems to need to strain to sound assertive: Baand. James Baand comes to mind.
  • edited January 2017 Posts: 11,189
    bondjames wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Controversial opinion here. I think both Laz & Dalts had a stronger screen presence than Brosnan, who was arguably more conventionally handsome, and that's what carried him through.

    I think Broz has a fairly strong presence but I agree that that was down largely to his good looks and wardrobe.
    True. It's perhaps his voice which I find very weak. Dalton and Laz (dubbed or not) have very strong voices, as do Connery, Moore and Craig. Brosnan seems to need to strain to sound assertive: Baand. James Baand comes to mind.

    yeah his voice is a little soft perhaps (his "banco" line to Xenia in GE).

    Lazenby's voice is ok but lacks variation and seems to have the same tone throughout the film.

    Dalton's voice is certainly the strongest.
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited January 2017 Posts: 1,243
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    But your comment is out of the ether and you once said Lazenby was a better actor in some scenes than Dalton, when it is common knowledge that Lazenby is no actor
    With all due respect I never said Laz was a better actor. I know he was a novice back in 1969.

    I said he had a stronger screen presence...and I still think he does. Probably yes, he was more of a "star" than an actor, but Connery was also not only a star but has a fairly solid reputation as an actor
    acoppola wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    acoppola wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Stage and screen acting involve very different techniques. Judi Dench is someone who knows how to navigate both.

    Dalton has navigated both. So obviously he knows. I do remember that critics thought he was too good an actor to play Bond. His acting was never in question. Do you realise that he was discovered by the legendary Peter O'Toole, who gave him his first role in The Lion In Winter?

    Bottom line, Dalton is a fine actor who knows what he is doing.

    What orifice are you talking from and how would Judi Dench be a reasonable comparisson? She would disagree with you about Dalton.

    Uh? what? Of course I know about Dalton's role in The Lion in Winter - who's comparing Dench with Dalton?!

    You were comparing. You said Dench knew how to navigate stage and screen, implying Dalton did not. That is blatantly untrue. Put Dalton with the right actors and he is outstanding. Watch Penny Dreadful.

    Once again, a television programme.

    Lazenby was never a star. Penny Dreadful is a television programme, but has many actors from films. I was referring to the cast and the quality. Is Eva Green a star? She does not get many movie roles, but she is arguably one of the finest actresses ever!

    If the public have sh*t taste, then that is neither the fault of Dalton or Green. Pop stars are more famous than classical musicians for instance.

    Connery is an exception. He is a fine actor, but he was as beloved as The Beatles. Bond was equal to Beatlemia at the time of Connery, and that has no been surpassed. Does not add to your argument. Dalton was never that famous, but I am talking about acting ability and that is an established fact in the film industry.

    You are talking about bankability.

  • Posts: 11,189
    You make a good point, but I do still wonder whether Eva Green has generally translated to the big screen in a way that Dalton hasn't quite managed. I get the impression both are fairly picky when it comes to scripts, but Eva seems to have cracked the big screen world more successfully (looking at her filmography she seems to like fantasy related films in particular).

    She's not only a strong actress but has the sultry looks of a film star.
Sign In or Register to comment.