40 replies to this topic

[Moomoo]

I promise you this isn't an anti-Brosnan post (honest), it's just something I've been wondering...

Why isn't Pierce Brosnan a bigger star?

Sure, when he is Bond he is a huge star, no doubt there, but his non-Bond films have been far from a success. He's only had one hit and that was The Thomas Crown Affair. The reason I am curious is Brosnan has the characteristics any aspiring movie actor would want:

1) He's very good looking - I think it's fair to say he is/was one of the best looking men in the world.

2) He can be very charming.

3) He can be funny (see his Remington Steele for that).

So given all of that, why has he never been more of a box office success? Look at his latest film Laws of Attraction - a real flop. Will be lucky to make 20 million dollars at the US box office. In real terms, no-one has gone to see it. And yet people are outraged when they consider the possibility he will be axed from Bond. It doesn't make sense. How can Brosnan be the billion dollar Bond and yet his fanbase disappears as soon as he makes another movie? Are fans that fickle? Is Brosnan just Bond and nothing else?

I really don't understand why he isn't a bigger star. Brosnan could have been the new Carry Grant. Think about it - name any other English actor who is that good looking, has charm, movie star quality etc? Hugh Grant is the only other candidate. But Brosnan had true matinee idol looks; he really had the potential to be the modern Carry Grant.

Are Bond fans that fickle that they don't care about the incumbent Bond when he's not playing the character. What has Brosnan failed to deliver to make his non-Bond films not a success? Why is Brosnan not a bigger star when he isn't playing Bond? Despite my recent negative comments about Brosnan and his inappropriate remarks, I believe he should have been a bigger star but, Bond aside, he isn't.

Can anyone shed some light on this because I can't understand why he isn't a bigger star (when not playing Bond).

Moomoo

[Moomoo]

With looks like this and Irish charm, he should have been a bigger star, don't you think?



Moomoo

[Moomoo]

And if that photo doesn't work/open, shoot me now!!!

Moomoo

Edited by Moomoo, 22 May 2004 - 09:10 PM.

[Xenia]

*bang*

You know moomoo, not everyone equates a successful movie to box office numbers or even the popularity of actors to those numbers. What your asking is a personal preference, not everyone enjoys romantic comedies or drama films. I totally enjoy all of Pierce's films, saw Laws of Attraction opening weekend. Not everyone has seen Evelyn, but I find it one of Pierce's best work. It's all in the taste of what movie genre's we enjoy.

[Bond Bug]

Brosnan looks like James Bond. He was born to be Bond, but face it he's fairly wooden. People don't connect with him. He seems aloof. He lacks that vital X factor: personality. Remington Steele was a hit, but his role unusual, as a sort of actor and being wooden suited the part.

Looking at the Hollywood A list, he's not a humourous character like say Robin Williams, Jim Carrey or Eddie Murphy. He looks more like a male model than having the acting credibility of other action heroes like Harrison Ford or Mel Gibson. He has no interesting hellraising past like say Jack Nicolson. He doesn't have a following like say Tom Hanks or Tom Cruise where over time the audience have followed their career and rely on them making a good movie. These actors are very likable, and have endeared fans with some standout movies. Bond may be Brosnan's standout movie, but Bond isn't Brosnan's in his own right. He's just another actor playing Bond.

Brosnan hasn't built a fan base up for non-Bond movies. Since Thomas Crown he hasn't made obvious hits. He had an afterglow effect after getting the Bond role, but that has faded. People are not excited by him as they are with other actors.
But to be fair, I would say the power of the Bond role is tough. It is very difficult to look at him in another role and not think "that's James Bond." So immediately the audience is distanced from him, instead of feeling an empathy.

Personally, I think if he could work for say Tarantino, in Bond or not, and do a high profile role where he can get roughed up and if Tarantino got a gritty performance out of him, he could gain a lot more credibility. That is what he lacks: credibilty outside Bond. He needs some high profile movies in which he isn't playing Pierce Brosnan.

[Tarl_Cabot]

I'll admit as much as I like Dalton and even Roger Moore, neither Bond, or even Connery for that matter(while Bond), were stars outside the series...Brosnan has been paid more money for non--Bond film roles while James Bond than any of his predecessors so he has had work to do consistently so his non Bond career is a success, albiet not very spectacular...Also, 'Laws of Attraction' was a chic flick for adult 40+ somethings...

Bond is ,in my opinion, the best job in show business, maybe the world but it's also a burden and a 'strait jacket' as Brosnan has described it. It may be a bad career move for someone like Hugh jackman who's profile has taken off... I think Bond is very cool yet the persona can be very boring too because Bond is such a perfect hero in many ways...

[Tarl_Cabot]

Superb post Bond Bug...

I'll add that the typical wallmart shopper-joe Six-pack guy does not relate to Pierce Brosnan or James Bond. He is too good looking ad does 'come across aloof' and high class or posh...I think Martin Riggs or Joh Mclane kicked Bond's butt at the box office because more people could see themselves in those characters and actors portraying him...and macho cultures like Latin America really look down on 'pretty boys' partially due to insecurity; suspicion that a guy as handsome as Pierce must be gay! or that a guy like Pierce will steal away your woman...


I'll add further that Brosnan is a really nice guy...he has been faithfully and successfully married twice; not divorced, no drug rehab, no arrests, no profanity in his interviews...no major political statements...no drama...so maybe if he was more of a bastard he would be more intriguing?

[Tarl_Cabot]

Holy *&@$ if anyone has cable check out House and Garden TV now...this pad looks like a Bond villian Lair!


OK the show is called "Liquid design". You guys have to see this! It looks like a cross between Scaramonga's pad and sanchez's. My two favs!

[Bond Bug]

Bond is ,in my opinion, the best job in show business, maybe the world but it's also a burden and a 'strait jacket' as Brosnan has described it. It may be a bad career move for someone like Hugh jackman who's profile has taken off... I think Bond is very cool yet the persona can be very boring too because Bond is such a perfect hero in many ways...

I agree with that. Perhaps the way out of the straight Jacket is to be involved in other big franchises, so the public don't perceive the actor only as James Bond. That would be ideal for Hugh Jackman.

If I was planning Pierce Brosnan's career from here I would look at:

1/ Avoid top billing to start with except for Thomas Crown 2

2/ Put him with other stars with heavyweight acting credentials, so the audience will come out to see them first, but let them be impressed while there with Brosnan's performance. This would be similar to Tom Cruise's earlier career path, working with actors like Paul Newman and Dustin Hoffman who both won Oscars.

3/ Stretch Brosnan and change his appearance (eg you could easily age him, grey hair, shave head, beard, whatever, give him gritty, dirty roles, slapstick roles, toff roles) basically so the audience don't say "that's Bond."

4/ Putting with directors that will get a sensational performance: eg Tarantino. Look what he did for John Travolta, who was in a similarly stereotyped uncool situation.

5/ Also I'd look at comedy, but in an ensemble cast. An audience won't come out just to see Brosnan, so put him in a starry cast.

6/ Get Brosnan to lighten up a bit in interviews: eg, we could see more of his fire-eating stunt. Get the audience to laugh with him.

7/ Look for a standout tragic role for Brosnan to play the lead in.

The expectations of Brosnan after Bond are near to zero. He should use that to his advantage and surprise some people.

[Onyx2626]

good points Tarl Cabot

he does seem to live a "real life", instead of an endless Hollywood story - ala George Clooney

he's not Bruce Willis, like Richard Gere he holds back a little of his personality, while trying hard as an actor too. i saw Robinson Crusoe on TV recently and it was compelling. but guys here want someone they can identify with easily. europeans don't fit that bill.

Bruce Willis is very open onscreen, but i must say: his joke-while-killing body of work is what pushed me back into rewatching Bond movies. Action movies today all act like they are comedies.

[Tarl_Cabot]

Right now, there are no real 'stars' as far as I'm concerned. I saw the Matrix 2/3 for the story, not Keanu. I saw LOTR for the story, not the cast. I like Viggo Mortensen but I was attracted to the premise of Hildago, not because of him-he certainly helped though...I will Star Wars III becuase I wanna see the saga complete, good or bad. So,I don't really see movies for a star but if Brosnan had another 'franchise' all his own he would be a bigger box office performer...If he had not changed the ending of Thomas crown he could have left the door open for more larceny and romance...and 'star' money!

[Bond Bug]

If he had not changed the ending of Thomas crown he could have left the door open for more larceny and romance...and 'star' money!

Oh yes, Brosnan has stated he wants to do Thomas Crown 2. That was part of his MGM deal earlier this year (allegedly!).

Edited by Bond Bug, 22 May 2004 - 10:51 PM.

[SeanValen00V]

SO WHAT????????

Timothy Dalton gave us 2 great Bond films, and he had competition at the box office, so what, those films were awsome and you got them on dvd.

People identify a actor with a certain role, and they like him in that role, HELLO???makes sense. Brosnan is famous as he's Bond.

[Ezekiel]

Brosnan's a huge star cos of Bond, gotta face up to that. You also gotta question why he bothered startin his own film company for self-employment, clever, but don't it say something about what Hollywood thinks of him?

On of yous said you'd like to see him on a big bill with some of the bigger names, so the public and critics can be pleasantly surprised, but do you [the forum members] really recon that he'll impress that much? I don't think he's Oscar material - but that he's a great bloke, really good father and husband - brill Bond.

Wot about pushing himself with varying roles? I think I'd like to see him do a Brad Pitt in 12 Monkeys, or Spacey in Se7en. Something small and striking just to test to see if he can make the impact - I'm very curious. Nothing he's done in the past has really tested him, I don't think. Look at Sean Connery, he made his career away from Bond no problem into his 70s. The Rock is great, you'd not think - yeah it's Sean Connery, it's James Bond, but I still see the Bond mantle sittin on Brosnan's shoulders the whole time. Rom-coms as well, they ain't gonna get you up there. If you want a clever A-list rom-com, go see Intollerable Cruelty, it's George Clooney having fun, because he can, because he's already got range. He walked away from the mess that was Batman. I can't see Brosnan wriggling out of his Bond DJ too quick, and getting the kick that puts him back on the big boys track. He needs an epic like Troy, or Gladiator, Master and Commander - he needs either to headline something great or he'll fade.

In terms of being tested and giving a gritty heart-felt performance, I think even Halle Berry's performance in Monsters Ball out-weighs anything he's been involved with.

[ChandlerBing]

Pierce should have replaced Harrison Ford as Jack Ryan instead of that putz they put in there. Either Pierce or Dennis Quaid would have worked good.

[Prav_007]

Pierce should have replaced Harrison Ford as Jack Ryan instead of that putz they put in there. Either Pierce or Dennis Quaid would have worked good.

Harrison Ford was a Jack Ryan, I never recall, I remeber Alec Baldwin in he Hunt for Red October, and Ben Afleck in that movie called....... i don't remember, the one with Morgan Freeman.

[Moomoo]

Some interesting points people have made.

I've no doubt Pierce is a decent man but not quite the 'great guy' some Brosnan fans suggest. After all, why get Bond, make millions and then complain that the role is limiting and a straightjacket? Surely that is disrespectful and biting the hand that feeds you? He clearly doesn't have much regard for Bond or those who control the franchise. He sees it as just another acting job. I guess what I'm saying is, my affection for Brosnan has long since gone. However, I loved him in Remington Steele - where he came across as funny and charming. In fact, I prefer him as Steele than Bond. That's where I saw the Carry Grant similarity. He never really capitalized on that which is a bit of a shame.

His role in the Tailor of Panama was probably his most radical departure acting-wise. Unfortunately, the character he played was rather unlikeable and the plot rather dull, and it didn't have any impact at the box office. Still, Brosnan gives a pretty good performance and it proves he has greater range if given more challenging material to work with.

Moomoo

Edited by Moomoo, 23 May 2004 - 09:40 AM.

[Martin Mystery]

Ah well, Pierce is history as Bond, remember? According to you, Jackman has already been signed... Any idea when EON is going to announce it?

[ChandlerBing]

That is very true. Right now, Pierce is hacing a similar career track as Connery did while he was still playing Bond. Your films get some good notices, but people stay away, because you're not Bond. Pierce needs to do some good character actor work once he's done with Bond--I hear it's what he wants to do anyway, so he's already on the right track.

[Tarl_Cabot]

"1) He's very good looking - I think it's fair to say he is/was one of the best looking men in the world.

2) He can be very charming.

3) He can be funny (see his Remington Steele for that)."


Hey! I'm all these things so why am I not a huge movie star!??

[blofeld123]

[SIZE=14][COLOR=purple] [code=auto:0]

Brosnan looked pretty darn ugly when i say him on Bravo interview.

[Moomoo]

Hey, even I haven't called Brosnan ugly. LOL. Can't imagine Pierce ever looking ugly, quite the opposite in fact! I don't really like that term anyway. I think 'less attractive' is a nicer term than 'ugly'. To describe someone as ugly seems a bit too harsh.

Moomoo

[Seannery]

Chandlerbing, alas Pierce is too old to make a Connery-like run after Bond unfortunately.

[Bond Bug]

On of yous said you'd like to see him on a big bill with some of the bigger names, so the public and critics can be pleasantly surprised, but do you [the forum members] really recon that he'll impress that much? I don't think he's Oscar material - but that he's a great bloke, really good father and husband - brill Bond.

Wot about pushing himself with varying roles? I think I'd like to see him do a Brad Pitt in 12 Monkeys, or Spacey in Se7en. Something small and striking just to test to see if he can make the impact - I'm very curious. Nothing he's done in the past has really tested him, I don't think. Look at Sean Connery, he made his career away from Bond no problem into his 70s. The Rock is great, you'd not think - yeah it's Sean Connery, it's James Bond, but I still see the Bond mantle sittin on Brosnan's shoulders the whole time. Rom-coms as well, they ain't gonna get you up there. If you want a clever A-list rom-com, go see Intollerable Cruelty, it's George Clooney having fun, because he can, because he's already got range. He walked away from the mess that was Batman. I can't see Brosnan wriggling out of his Bond DJ too quick, and getting the kick that puts him back on the big boys track. He needs an epic like Troy, or Gladiator, Master and Commander - he needs either to headline something great or he'll fade.

Yep I do. Given the right direction I think Brosnan could impress. As I said expectations of him are near zero, so he doesn't have to make much of a jouney to impress. I'm of the view that nearly any actor can deliver a powerful performance if they are prepared to let the right people help them.

OK he may need a lot of help, but I think he can do it. When I say gritty, I don't expect him to be up for an Oscar, but he needs to play against type. He needs to look like he's not Pierce Brosnan. He has to switch off the charm. He needs some attitude.

A lot of it is to do with having the guts to do it. I see Brosnan, like Moore; they became typecast, possibly through a lack of confidence to take on meaty roles. Maybe pretty boy actors that in their youth got by on model looks and not given the belief that they can stretch themselves. They built on what they had (and did well) but failed to push themselves. I see Brosnan as the only barrier that holds Brosnan back, a good director like Tarantino could change that.

I agree entirely about a small varying role. Even just 10 minutes in a movie, but I don't think an epic, at least yet, would work until he realigns his perceived pulic persona.

[Ezekiel]

Given the right direction I think Brosnan could impress. When I say gritty, I don't expect him to be up for an Oscar, but he needs to play against type. He needs to look like he's not Pierce Brosnan. He has to switch off the charm. He needs some attitude.

A lot of it is to do with having the guts to do it. Maybe pretty boy actors that in their youth got by on model looks and not given the belief that they can stretch themselves.

I agree entirely about a small varying role. Even just 10 minutes in a movie, but I don't think an epic, at least yet, would work until he realigns his perceived pulic persona.

Yeah, you speak sense dude, but mebbe I'm a cynic, I don't think Brosnan's got it in him, it feels too late in the day. Saying that, Morgan Freeman was unknown till he was about 60. It's going to take Brosnan a time to get away from Bond, esp. if he does the next one. But, Connery did manage it - altho I recons he had more time on his hands to play with n get stuff wrong.

About having guts. I think PB's a gutsy guy when he wants to be, but if he carries on pansying around with these movies of his own company, I'm not sure he's gonna get the talent in to really get himself out there.

Something more drastic than his moustache for The Matador, although I'll be interested to see what happens with that flick.

[Athena007]

Ok, I

[Bond Bug]

Ezekiel: I think it unlikely Brosnan will do it too, but I'm just saying I think it is not impossible. However, I do think if he worked with Tarantino, he might rethink his career strategy from there, but he's rich and famous and if he enjoys what he's doing I don't criticise him for carrying on as he is.

Edited by Bond Bug, 24 May 2004 - 05:54 PM.

[Bond Bug]

[quote name='Athena007' date='24 May 2004 - 17:49'] Ok, I

[Moore Not Less]

A lot of it is to do with having the guts to do it. I see Brosnan, like Moore; they became typecast, possibly through a lack of confidence to take on meaty roles. Maybe pretty boy actors that in their youth got by on model looks and not given the belief that they can stretch themselves. They built on what they had (and did well) but failed to push themselves.

I recall something that Roger Moore once said. I can't remember it word for word, but he basically said that when he had reached a certain level in his acting career he became lazy and didn't stretch himself as much as he could have done. However, there were rare occasions when he did stretch himself, most notably in the double role of Pelham in The Man Who Haunted Himself.

[Turn]

Brosnan may have been offered higher-profile parts in other movies he may have been either turned down for or turned down. He seems pretty content with his status, so he probably has little to worry about.

He also seems to get a pretty good reception when he does the talk show circuit, particularly with the female audience.