140 replies to this topic

[Colossus]

Say what you will about Brozza's last 3, but GoldenEye STILL amazes me where each day it looks better and better. In fact i like it more than Casino Royale and both of Dalton's.

[mrsbonds_ppk]

It could have been the movies, themselves. Chances are that Brosnan's talents were wasted during his tenure as Bond. Especially when you look at a few of his other movies like THE FOURTH PROTOCOL, THE TAILOR FROM PANAMA and THE MATADOR, in which he portrayed some very interesting characters.

I think you are right about that. I don't beleive he was really allowed to act his way. Still in all, I think Either Goldeneye or Tomorrow Never Dies was his best Bond film. Simply IMO wasn't given a chance to expand himself in the role and was cut-off after DAD.

Edited by mrsbonds_ppk, 08 June 2007 - 05:59 AM.

[sharpshooter]

Say what you will about Brozza's last 3, but GoldenEye STILL amazes me where each day it looks better and better. In fact i like it more than Casino Royale and both of Dalton's.

Agreed. GoldenEye stands out for me also, something about it.

[LadySylvia]

I like GOLDENEYE better than LICENSE TO KILL. As for THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS . . . I consider the 1987 movie more superior.


As for the rest of Brosnan's films . . . hmmmm. THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH was pretty good, except for the last half hour. And the first half of DIE ANOTHER DAY was also pretty good. However, I have a pretty low view of TOMORROW NEVER DIES. It seemed such an unoriginal and generic Bond film. It seemed like "James Bond - By-the-Dot".

[Blofeld's Cat]

The Broz era was bookended by two great movies, with the two middle ones wallowing in mediocrity. They are the two Bond movies in the whole list I least think about or want to watch.

[Scottlee]

DAD is the root problem. It still rankles with some people (including me) and leaves a difficult blemish to overcome when judging the Brosnan era. The first three films were all what I would call solid if not quite good enough to enter the classics league. More often than not, a very good film was tarnished by one or two weak aspects such as the sloppy editing on GE, the dull bike chase on TND, and the Cavier factory on TWINE. They were still celebrated Bond films though, especially at the times of release. When Brosnan's third film entered the market, there was talk in the media about how he might be destined to become one of the greatest ever James Bonds, how a classic to rival GF might just be around the corner, and how eventually Brosnan might match Connery's six films for longevity in the role.

Then, after 1999, things went down the tube. Three year gaps were introduced, DAD came out and was rubbish, Brosnan was axed arguably before his sell-by-date. This wasn't how it was all supposed to end. I always envisaged Brosnan as someone who would get a five film cycle with which to shape his legacy, and if I had to guess, I think he probably thought that too. No matter how bad DAD was (he must have worried about how bad it was during filming. He must have done), Brosnan probably consoled himself with the notion that there would be at least one more film with which to go out on a high. But it never came.

whenever I go back and watch the Brosnan era, I know I will always be entertained for three and a half pictures. However I always know I will eventually come to the second half of DAD, and when that's over I have a sour taste in the mouth.

[tambourineman]

Thats a really good point about DAD. There wasnt any of this anti-Brosnan sentiment prior to DAD. Sure, there were a few of the hardcore fans (many of them on this forum) who never really liked Brosnan, but the overwhelming majority of the public and media thought he was a great Bond. Over the course of his tenure I remember reading a lot about him being the best Bond since Connery and the general opinion of him was very favorable. But after DAD everything did a U turn, and people starting reassessing his entire tenure as Bond.

Now the very same media that spent a decade praising Brosnan now pours scorn on him at every opportunity. I dont think Ive read a single Casino Royale article that has not ridiculed Brosnan or the Brosnan era.

I think its a combination of Brosnan's last movie being so bad and Craigs first movie being so good that has really caused it all.

[Harmsway]

For me, the Brosnan era films (all of them, GOLDENEYE included) get worse with each viewing. At this point, I honestly don't care if I ever see one again.

[dodge]

I'm with Harmsway in being unable to rewatch the films. In the beginning was the end: after that brilliant opening setpiece in GE, we have Brozza's Bond in a nutshell, dropping down through the loo ceiling--without a hair out of place--to make a smarmy, ridiculous quip. 'Sorry, I forgot to knock.'

It was a Crying Game let-down, of sorts. I'd got lucky, I thought, with a great, rocking Bond--but instead got a well-tailored dweeb.

[Bond Maniac]

You are probably right in your comment regarding DAD triggering this U turn in Brosnan Era. But for me, since GE, a movie that i liked on first view, things were not that great. All his movies were all about action and none develpment in plot or character. Brosnan Bond always was that superhero, and not a cool one at that. Just a super guy who could take on any villain at anytime. The same could not be said about Connery, Dalton, heck....even Moore had his share of really dangerous situations. I could never find anything like these in the Brosnan

[Santa]

I'm with Harmsway in being unable to rewatch the films. In the beginning was the end: after that brilliant opening setpiece in GE, we have Brozza's Bond in a nutshell, dropping down through the loo ceiling--without a hair out of place--to make a smarmy, ridiculous quip. 'Sorry, I forgot to knock.'

It was a Crying Game let-down, of sorts. I'd got lucky, I thought, with a great, rocking Bond--but instead got a well-tailored dweeb.

I'm in this camp too, except that I do rewatch them to see if my dislike of Brosnan is unfair and misplaced, as has been suggested here. Haven't seen anything yet to make me agree with that.

[LadySylvia]

DAD is the root problem. It still rankles with some people (including me) and leaves a difficult blemish to overcome when judging the Brosnan era.

I think the reason DAD rankles with a lot of people is because it was the last of the Brosnan movies. Because I thought that TND was his worst film. It lacked any semblance of originality for me.

You are probably right in your comment regarding DAD triggering this U turn in Brosnan Era.

As I have stated earlier, I disagree with this comment. I think that TND triggered the Brosnan Era's U-turn. In fact, despite the invisible car and ice palace, DAD still strikes me as being slightly more original than TND . . . which seems so bland and mediocre to me.

Edited by LadySylvia, 11 June 2007 - 06:36 PM.

[Double-Oh-Zero]

Thats a really good point about DAD. There wasnt any of this anti-Brosnan sentiment prior to DAD. Sure, there were a few of the hardcore fans (many of them on this forum) who never really liked Brosnan, but the overwhelming majority of the public and media thought he was a great Bond. Over the course of his tenure I remember reading a lot about him being the best Bond since Connery and the general opinion of him was very favorable. But after DAD everything did a U turn, and people starting reassessing his entire tenure as Bond.

Now the very same media that spent a decade praising Brosnan now pours scorn on him at every opportunity. I dont think Ive read a single Casino Royale article that has not ridiculed Brosnan or the Brosnan era.

I think its a combination of Brosnan's last movie being so bad and Craigs first movie being so good that has really caused it all.

Yes, I'd be inclined to agree with most of that. But I think that the general moviegoing public still has a favourable opinion of Brosnan, despite the media's dismissal of his tenure after Casino Royale received such great reviews. It's already been mentioned on this thread, but people like Brosnan because he and his films were "vanilla Bond." Safe, crowd-pleasing moneymakers that featured logical, A-Z plots and a Bond who was easy on the eyes. Bond kills some blokes, knobs some birds, blows fings up; what more do people need, after this many films? He brought nothing new to the table, and aside from Bond fans, nobody really gives a toss about that. Bottom line is that people like him because Brosnan was the amalgamation Bond.

With that in mind, I'm somewhat ashamed to say that TND, the biggest culprit of "vanilla Bond," is my favourite Brosnan film. I suppose it could be due to the fact that it's about the only one of the four that doesn't pretend to be anything other than what the Brosnan films are: Action Hero Bond. As a whole, I do feel that the era was a somewhat wasted opportunity; they had a decent Bond in Brosnan, but didn't really know what to do with him.

[Bond James Bond 007]

Casino Royale which is different from the book although the directors say they tried to stay faithful to the book, which I am 95% done reading....but they didn't, and both the Dalton movies bored me so much I fell asleep watching them. At least with the Brosnan movies I was entertained. The Brosnan era movie that stands out for me is GoldenEye and probably Tomarrow Never Dies and whoever came up with that stupid concept that Tomarrow Never Dies is a vanilla movie....stupid,and why slam Brosnan's Bond as an action hero bond when James Bond STARTED as the first action hero.

Edited by Bond James Bond 007, 12 June 2007 - 03:08 AM.

[LadySylvia]

I don't think that Brosnan's Bond was "vanilla" so to speak. I think that his Bond was a poser. In fact, that is one aspect that Brosnan has brought to many of his roles, if not all. However, I think that Brosnan had used this "poser" aspect in Bond's character for the latter to hide any emotions he may feel.

[Blabbermouth]

Ulitmately this is the issue and it ties into the formula of Brozza Bonds as being films that wanted to appeal to all corners of the franchise. I've made fun of Broz and his onion-peeling because he still hasn't proved he's got it in him as an actor (I said this before and got hammered for it, but until someone lists the films that have demonstrated his range I'm adamant on this).

See Seraphim Falls - this is Brosnan as we don't know him. Excellent.

[LadySylvia]

Ulitmately this is the issue and it ties into the formula of Brozza Bonds as being films that wanted to appeal to all corners of the franchise. I've made fun of Broz and his onion-peeling because he still hasn't proved he's got it in him as an actor (I said this before and got hammered for it, but until someone lists the films that have demonstrated his range I'm adamant on this).

See Seraphim Falls - this is Brosnan as we don't know him. Excellent.

Or check him out in THE MATADOR, one of my favorite roles he has ever done.

[Bond James Bond 007]

I don't think that Brosnan's Bond was "vanilla" so to speak. I think that his Bond was a poser. In fact, that is one aspect that Brosnan has brought to many of his roles, if not all. However, I think that Brosnan had used this "poser" aspect in Bond's character for the latter to hide any emotions he may feel.

A poser what poser aspect......do you know what your even talking about are you high...well I guess your as blind as Ray Charles....In fact, that is one aspect that Brosnan has brought to many of his roles, if not all.....is not a sentence that makes sense....the era that was the worst for the bond franchise was not Brosnan's era,if it was there would be no James Bond,so how could his era be the worst?No, the worst is the mid to late 80's when practically everyone wrote off James Bond and the franchise looked like it was going to end,but then the so called "worst" era ever saves it.

Edited by Bond James Bond 007, 13 June 2007 - 12:19 AM.

[Bond James Bond 007]

I'm with Harmsway in being unable to rewatch the films. In the beginning was the end: after that brilliant opening setpiece in GE, we have Brozza's Bond in a nutshell, dropping down through the loo ceiling--without a hair out of place--to make a smarmy, ridiculous quip. 'Sorry, I forgot to knock.'

It was a Crying Game let-down, of sorts. I'd got lucky, I thought, with a great, rocking Bond--but instead got a well-tailored dweeb.

I'm unable to watch Casino Royale for the same reasons your unable to watch Brosnan's films Dodge. You don't like Brosnan as bond never will, I dont like Daniel Craig as bond and never will......oh and by the way Brosnan did have a hair out of place, just one,but I saw it.

[dinovelvet]

I'm with Harmsway in being unable to rewatch the films. In the beginning was the end: after that brilliant opening setpiece in GE, we have Brozza's Bond in a nutshell, dropping down through the loo ceiling--without a hair out of place--to make a smarmy, ridiculous quip. 'Sorry, I forgot to knock.'

It was a Crying Game let-down, of sorts. I'd got lucky, I thought, with a great, rocking Bond--but instead got a well-tailored dweeb.

Ah, wise words indeed. I must say, I'm disappointed I did not get an invite to a Brosnan bash fest. Still, here I am, fashionably late.
I find GOLDENEYE to be, ahh, garbage. Its too self-aware, too proud of its "I AM A JAMES BOND MOVIE! LOOK AT JAMES BOND DOING ALL THE THINGS JAMES BOND DOES!" posturing. Then you get Brozza struggling with a sliding door, and its all over. I think the man is trying too hard in this film, trying too much to BE James Bond, instead of fitting his personality into the role; he does better in TND, and in my scandalous opinion, DAD, where I think he reached his Connery TB/YOLT "the hell with it" phase and just played along, delivering a lighter, and more fun performance. Perhaps you could say his inner Roger Moore comes out here.

[RazorBlade]

I'm with Harmsway in being unable to rewatch the films. In the beginning was the end: after that brilliant opening setpiece in GE, we have Brozza's Bond in a nutshell, dropping down through the loo ceiling--without a hair out of place--to make a smarmy, ridiculous quip. 'Sorry, I forgot to knock.'

It was a Crying Game let-down, of sorts. I'd got lucky, I thought, with a great, rocking Bond--but instead got a well-tailored dweeb.

Ah, wise words indeed. I must say, I'm disappointed I did not get an invite to a Brosnan bash fest. Still, here I am, fashionably late.
I find GOLDENEYE to be, ahh, garbage. Its too self-aware, too proud of its "I AM A JAMES BOND MOVIE! LOOK AT JAMES BOND DOING ALL THE THINGS JAMES BOND DOES!" posturing. Then you get Brozza struggling with a sliding door, and its all over. I think the man is trying too hard in this film, trying too much to BE James Bond, instead of fitting his personality into the role; he does better in TND, and in my scandalous opinion, DAD, where I think he reached his Connery TB/YOLT "the hell with it" phase and just played along, delivering a lighter, and more fun performance. Perhaps you could say his inner Roger Moore comes out here.

Don't we all have an inner RM? Wouldn't the world be a better place if our inner RM was let out to play? What would happen if we let our inner RM out and then moved before he came back in? Lots of inner RM's running around lost is what.

And there you have it.

[RazorBlade]

I'm with Harmsway in being unable to rewatch the films. In the beginning was the end: after that brilliant opening setpiece in GE, we have Brozza's Bond in a nutshell, dropping down through the loo ceiling--without a hair out of place--to make a smarmy, ridiculous quip. 'Sorry, I forgot to knock.'

It was a Crying Game let-down, of sorts. I'd got lucky, I thought, with a great, rocking Bond--but instead got a well-tailored dweeb.

I'm unable to watch Casino Royale for the same reasons your unable to watch Brosnan's films Dodge. You don't like Brosnan as bond never will, I dont like Daniel Craig as bond and never will......oh and by the way Brosnan did have a hair out of place, just one,but I saw it.

Sounds like a personal problem to me. I hope you work it out. Maybe you should let your inner RM out to play.

[Santa]

[quote name='RazorBlade' post='746781' date='13 June 2007 - Don't we all have an inner RM? Wouldn't the world be a better place if our inner RM was let out to play? What would happen if we let our inner RM out and then moved before he came back in? Lots of inner RM's running around lost is what.

[/quote]
I seem to remember a night like that somewhere, somewhere in a field in Hampshire...

[dodge]

I'm with Harmsway in being unable to rewatch the films. In the beginning was the end: after that brilliant opening setpiece in GE, we have Brozza's Bond in a nutshell, dropping down through the loo ceiling--without a hair out of place--to make a smarmy, ridiculous quip. 'Sorry, I forgot to knock.'

It was a Crying Game let-down, of sorts. I'd got lucky, I thought, with a great, rocking Bond--but instead got a well-tailored dweeb.

I'm unable to watch Casino Royale for the same reasons your unable to watch Brosnan's films Dodge. You don't like Brosnan as bond never will, I dont like Daniel Craig as bond and never will......oh and by the way Brosnan did have a hair out of place, just one,but I saw it.

Sounds like a personal problem to me. I hope you work it out. Maybe you should let your inner RM out to play.

Well, it's good to get advice from an expert...on personal problems.

[Andy A 007]

I've never been a fan of Brosnan, but looking back I now see that, being the actor that he is, he had the potential to be a much better Bond than he was. His biggest problem was the terrible scripts he had to work with. He was great in Goldeneye, mostly because he was going off a script written for Timothy Dalton. If he had had some more realistic, well written, grittier scripts, he could have been a fantastic Bond, rather than the mediocre one he has become.

[Bond James Bond 007]

I'm with Harmsway in being unable to rewatch the films. In the beginning was the end: after that brilliant opening setpiece in GE, we have Brozza's Bond in a nutshell, dropping down through the loo ceiling--without a hair out of place--to make a smarmy, ridiculous quip. 'Sorry, I forgot to knock.'

It was a Crying Game let-down, of sorts. I'd got lucky, I thought, with a great, rocking Bond--but instead got a well-tailored dweeb.

I'm unable to watch Casino Royale for the same reasons your unable to watch Brosnan's films Dodge. You don't like Brosnan as bond never will, I dont like Daniel Craig as bond and never will......oh and by the way Brosnan did have a hair out of place, just one,but I saw it.

Sounds like a personal problem to me. I hope you work it out. Maybe you should let your inner RM out to play.

Well, it's good to get advice from an expert...on personal problems.

You want some advice on personal problems I'll give some to ya........ you and your stupid inner RM.

[Jim]

I'm with Harmsway in being unable to rewatch the films. In the beginning was the end: after that brilliant opening setpiece in GE, we have Brozza's Bond in a nutshell, dropping down through the loo ceiling--without a hair out of place--to make a smarmy, ridiculous quip. 'Sorry, I forgot to knock.'

It was a Crying Game let-down, of sorts. I'd got lucky, I thought, with a great, rocking Bond--but instead got a well-tailored dweeb.

I'm unable to watch Casino Royale for the same reasons your unable to watch Brosnan's films Dodge. You don't like Brosnan as bond never will, I dont like Daniel Craig as bond and never will......oh and by the way Brosnan did have a hair out of place, just one,but I saw it.

Sounds like a personal problem to me. I hope you work it out. Maybe you should let your inner RM out to play.

Well, it's good to get advice from an expert...on personal problems.

You want some advice on personal problems I'll give some to ya........ you and your stupid inner RM.

Play nicely, children, or the toy will be taken away.

[DLibrasnow]

Now the very same media that spent a decade praising Brosnan now pours scorn on him at every opportunity. I dont think Ive read a single Casino Royale article that has not ridiculed Brosnan or the Brosnan era.

Not me. I disliked Brosnan as Bond while he was the reigning 007. I really liked/like GoldenEye but I think the other three entries are total c*ap. My longstanding loathing for The World is not Enough is legendary on CBn.

[erniecureo]

I thought many parts of Goldeneye were as good as Bond gets--including the fight on the satellite dish at the end. Fantastic. But his legacy is tarnished by the last entry, especially.

I will always be glad that PB stepped in as Bond, simply because he is credited with rejuvenating the series. Whether that credit is due or not is another debate--but as for his films being the weakest, I'd call it a tie between he and Roger.

[Bondesque]

I like Pierce, but I find DAD, TND to be unwatchable. I also find TMWGG, Moonraker, DAF and LTK almost in the same catagory.

Pierce has a limited range. He can be good within that range, unfortunately the scripts were horrid even for that range. His best work is The Fourth Protocol and TOP.

I liked TC but Pierce was just playing Pierce. The value of his films is that it "woke" EON up to the fact that they needed to return to good writing and development.