210 replies to this topic

[DCI_director]

I loved Pierce Brosnan as Bond. Always have and always will. I agree that he has gotten a lot of BS from people on here. I never cared much for Lazenby, but I can appreciate what he brought. The same with Craig. I think he's okay, but for me, he's not my favoirte and I'm not going to bad mouth him. Craig's bringing a lot to the character and I can appreciate that. For Brosnan, hell, he turned the franchise around after the series was gone for six years! The public loved him. I know many on this forum are what I call the die hard Ian Fleming fans and will never call Brosnan their Bond, but he did bring a lot to the series and made a lot of people happy to see him playing Bond. His movie's box office profits prove that and I'm glad he got the chance to play a beloved cinema character.

[Shot Your Bolt]

I thnk thats why TSWLM and GE consistently rank above more "serious" movies like FRWL.

Ranks above... wow. Too funny.

I think he was referring to the general public's perception of Bond. Are you saying that you think FRWL would get more votes than TSWLM or GE in a public best Bond ever poll? Cause I can say with most of my certainty that it wouldn't.

I think he was upset that I posted it in a "matter of factly" way. I guess I need to say "IMO" after everything. IMO, TSWLM and GE > FRWL.

Although the Grant-Bond confrantation scene and the fight afterwards is the best Bond scene EVER.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

I never was a Brosnan fan, but I have to admit that in his time (mostly the 90's), I tend to defend him and kind of force to myself to like him as Bond, because I consider Pierce as the OO7 of my generation (I was in my teenage years in the nineties).

But now with the arrival of Daniel Craig, and becoming increasingly a Bond maniac in the leap of 2002 to 2006 (buying the entire DVD collection between other items, in that period), I get to the knowledge that Craig remind us how an authentic human Bond, and not a superheroe, would act in the real world.

With Brosnan I get used to an unbelievable portray of the character. In the past decade I didn't know it, because I wasn't such a die hard fan of the series, but what I saw in the first Bond movie that I ever watched in the cinema (TND) was a comic book version of the Fleming characther, full of cliches, not a true OO7.

And that was mainly a fault of Brosnan performance, because most of his line are delivered in a forced and unnatural way, that never happened before, not even with the cheesy scripts of the Moore era or in DAF.

A prove to the last argument, is that the movie that I like less of EON series is LTK, but even in that one I believe in Dalton as Bond, while Brosnan's movies I can't even see them as real OO7's films, they look more like regular action (video game style) with the Bond brand attached.

By the way, I'm not a big Brosnan hater, I do like many of his other movies like The Matador, or Thomas Crown Affaire, it's just I don't find him credible as Bond.

Edited by Mr. Arlington Beech, 13 September 2008 - 08:17 AM.

[broadshoulder]

To be honest, I was never a fan.

I've been a Bond addict since TSWLM in 1977 and never have a I seen such a lazy casting choice as Brosnan. He was an identikit Bond, a safe Bond - a mannequin strolling around the world delivering oneliners. And he didnt have Cubby behind him which gave credence to the RM days of doing the same. He also scored badly after the fresh exciting Dalton period which the Bond franchise was never the same again. To me, he was a dull safe pair of hands.

And then came his films.

I dont know whether MGM had too much input, the producers didnt know which way to go, the writers wernt up to the job, and the continual changing of directors hurt the series but the films got progressively worst culminating in one so bad the producers had to sack Brosnan and reboot the whole series. By the end of DAD I was hoping that was the last of James Bond so he would go down with ignominy.

How much is Brosnans fault? Well, not much. Would Craig and Dalton been better in a DAD? I expect both would have fulfilled their contract, gritted their teeth and pretended it wasnt on their CV - much the same as Brosnan did (although he does seem curiously proud of it on the commentary). I dont think he had that que ne sai quoi to polish a turd like RM or TD.

I consider his tenure the worst of the series and some of his films to being close to unwatchable.

Does he deserve the hate? Probably not? But he doesnt deserve any plaudits either.

[CM007]

To be honest, I was never a fan.

I've been a Bond addict since TSWLM in 1977 and never have a I seen such a lazy casting choice as Brosnan. He was an identikit Bond, a safe Bond - a mannequin strolling around the world delivering oneliners. And he didnt have Cubby behind him which gave credence to the RM days of doing the same. He also scored badly after the fresh exciting Dalton period which the Bond franchise was never the same again. To me, he was a dull safe pair of hands.

And then came his films.

I dont know whether MGM had too much input, the producers didnt know which way to go, the writers wernt up to the job, and the continual changing of directors hurt the series but the films got progressively worst culminating in one so bad the producers had to sack Brosnan and reboot the whole series. By the end of DAD I was hoping that was the last of James Bond so he would go down with ignominy.

How much is Brosnans fault? Well, not much. Would Craig and Dalton been better in a DAD? I expect both would have fulfilled their contract, gritted their teeth and pretended it wasnt on their CV - much the same as Brosnan did (although he does seem curiously proud of it on the commentary). I dont think he had that que ne sai quoi to polish a turd like RM or TD.

I consider his tenure the worst of the series and some of his films to being close to unwatchable.

Does he deserve the hate? Probably not? But he doesnt deserve any plaudits either.

It´s interesting you say that because Dalton´s LTK was practically the final nail in the Coffin for the Bond series so much so that MGM refused to make another Bond film with Dalton and forced Cubby´s hand in changing actor and thank god they did.Even Dalton went as far and said that he didn´t think that a Bond movie would be made after LTK because he knew the writing was on the wall that nobody liked him....studio,the puplic and the only one who stood by him was Cubby...

Love him or Loath him Pierce Brosnan saved the Bond Franchise.With No Brosnan there would never had been Daniel Craig....

[ChrissBond007]

When you look at the ratings of all the Bondfilm you see that only the Connery and Craig films are rated what they worth it. All the other actors are underrated, also Brosnan. I must say I did like Brosnan's Bond in Goldeneye more than Craig's Bond in Casino Royale. After Goldeneye, Brosnan didn't act that great in his other 3 films, but he was always fine in the role, in my opinion. Yes DAD is over the top (it isn't a awful film by the way), but mayby Brosnan thought the same when he saw it for the first time.

Edited by ChrissBond007, 13 September 2008 - 11:40 AM.

[Aris007]

Brosnan is my favourite Bond. Ilike the way he plays. He can be angry, calm, tense, funny. In generall he's a very good actor. I believe that the cast in his films wasn't very powerfull. I mean Richards, Berry and the guy that played Wade dont't fit in a Bond film. If he had Wright as an ally in TND and GE I'm preety sure that the films would be launched. Also the directors were not Bond directors. I'm preety sure that Tamahori had never heard of Bond before getting the job of the director. If Brosnan had a director such as Young or Marc Foster he would be able to catch the Bond meaning in a bigger extent. Even if we had Al Pacino as an actor, he wouldn't be convinving as Bond if he was guided by Tamahori!

[bond 16.05.72]

That's the thing about Brosnan fans thay always blame everybody else, he wasn't right for the role, he was not the actor he is now, end of story , I guarantee it's the younger fans that love Brosnan the most, I'm pretty sure my generation aren't that impressed.

[David_M]

I find the Brosnan era deeply disappointing and his four films are the ones I watch least. I'm not sure how much of that is his fault, really, but it doesn't matter in the end. If I don't like them, I don't like them.

Brosnan was a logical choice for the Bond role, with his matinee idol looks and old-Hollywood screen persona, but there's more to making a Bond picture than simply casting a guy who looks like Bond, then just hoping everything else falls together somehow. Brosnan has shown in other roles that he can be cold-hearted, tough, and most all interestingin a role, but he was never pushed to be any of those things in his Bonds. He was just stuffed into a tux and plopped in front of the cameras with, apparently, orders to "be charming." The filmmakers were out to create Bond films by the numbers, and Brosnan was treated as just one more "formula" ingredient. ("Car chase, check. Explosions, check. Now, get me a pretty boy and hand him a gun") Maybe he could have done something really interesting in the role, but we'll never know.

I still think casting Craig was brilliant in one respect; when you hire a guy who seems so very different from the standard Bond image, everyone working on the film has to be thinking every single day "how are we going to make this work?" That kind of atmosphere results in a much stronger film than, "Hey, we've got a guy who was genetically engineered to play Bond; whatever we do now will just naturally work out, right?"

It's not that I "hate" Brosnan. I'm not throwing darts at his picture, or writing him threatening mail. But I do intensely dislike his Bond films, and I'm not sure that will ever change.

[ImTheMoneypenny]

It's not that he was a bad Bond or that anyone hated him, it was just that aside from GOLDENEYE his movies weren't so great. Sorry, but there it is. I was disappointed by the Brosnan era while it was happening, not after the fact like many of the we-hate-people-who-hate-Brosnan assert, and when I saw DIE ANOTHER DAY, I was ready to give up on the series for good. When you have a franchise that has six different actors on the rosters, some are going to be favorites, some are going to be non-favorites. I think Brosnan had the potential to be a great Bond, it's just the filmmakers let him down.

I agree 100% HH007. I had just about lost all interest in the Bond films during Brosnan's run. It wasn't him, it was the movies. I sat down and watched TWINE, and all I felt was frustration because there was great potential that was wasted. Hate Brosnan? No way. Like you said I was disappointed that the filmmakers let him down.

I don't hate any of the actors who've played Bond, it's just varying degrees of love to like.

[Santa]

People make him out to be some dull mannequin when the truth is that Brosnan had lots of charisma and was a very good Bond.

In your opinion. That doesn't make it fact. Some of us don't happen to feel that way and never have, and you telling us he was a good Bond doesn't change our minds. Broz seems to be held up as some kind of sacred cow in Bond world - criticise him and you're tarred with the 'fickle hating Broz since DC came along' brush and it's simply not always the case. Some people liked Broz, some didn't, and that's fine - there's no absurd Brosnan-hating going on and, as far as I'm aware, it's only Daniel Craig who has had a whole website dedicated against him, so why are some people so worried that some others don't like Brozza?

[Royal Dalton]

Love him or Loath him Pierce Brosnan saved the Bond Franchise.

Which is quite ironic, considering his films made less profit overall than Dalton's.

[MooreisMore]

I know many people regard GE as one of the great Bond films, I find it rather middle of the road

It is in my Top 50 films of all time, I think it is a masterpiece of cinema honestly. Every single scene is just fantastic.

Only From Russia With Love and Casino Royale are better.

[Santa]

I know many people regard GE as one of the great Bond films, I find it rather middle of the road

It is in my Top 50 films of all time, I think it is a masterpiece of cinema honestly. Every single scene is just fantastic.

Editing all my posts on this discussion because I find it too weird .

[dodge]

It's gotten absurd, imo. Can any of the long-time members here inform us: was the initial reactin to, at least, GE and TND reasonably positive here?

I'd say I'd be willing to bet that it was. But then Hildebrand Rarity would start saying that I owed him money.

[MooreisMore]

Seriously? Even that 'boys with toys' e?

Yes, the St. Petersburg interrogation scene between Mishkin and Bond is amazingly shot and lit.

[bond 16.05.72]

Dalton never got particularly good scripts or a great director or material that was worthy of his portrayal but we don't go about oh if only Dalton had this and that like Pierce fans try to justify his tennure for being poor.

It's because Dalton made the character interesting and didn't play a caricature of all the other Bonds before him, he offered a fresh perspective on Bond, Pierce did not.

GE a masterpiece, every scene is perfect, god thats funny, I couldn't say that about any Bond film.

Your always looking for excuses for him, he was the public Bond but he wasn't the proper Bond, diluted for for the masses.

[MooreisMore]

GE a masterpiece, every scene is perfect, god thats funny, I couldn't say that about any Bond film.

I could say that about Goldfinger, OHMSS and Spy Who Loved Me as well as Goldeneye.

Dalton was a brilliant Bond but it's a shame we wasn't given as electrifying a script and production as Goldeneye. Goldeneye's cast are all unforgettable, even Defence Minister Dimitri Mishkin. It's become cool to hate the film now because of Brosnan's other films but I think it is an utterly brilliant film with a genius score that beats any of Arnold's efforts.

[Santa]

Seriously? Even that 'boys with toys' e?

Yes, the St. Petersburg interrogation scene between Mishkin and Bond is amazingly shot and lit.

As above.

[MooreisMore]

Calling someone a troll for saying something you disagree with is very disrespectful. In no way was that post inciting flames.

[Santa]

Calling someone a troll for saying something you disagree with is very disrespectful. In no way was that post inciting flames.

And again.

[MooreisMore]

The line is said twice.

I've seen that film a thousand times .

[Santa]

The line is said twice.

I've seen that film a thousand times .

And again again.

[dodge]

GE a masterpiece, every scene is perfect, god thats funny, I couldn't say that about any Bond film.

I could say that about Goldfinger, OHMSS and Spy Who Loved Me as well as Goldeneye.

Dalton was a brilliant Bond but it's a shame we wasn't given as electrifying a script and production as Goldeneye. Goldeneye's cast are all unforgettable, even Defence Minister Dimitri Mishkin. It's become cool to hate the film now because of Brosnan's other films but I think it is an utterly brilliant film with a genius score that beats any of Arnold's efforts.

I quite agree. Pity Eon lost its nerve, though I liked Arnold's work on CR.

[MooreisMore]

It is a very well shot, acted and scored scene. I love it.

"It's what keeps me alive"
"No, it's what keeps you alone"

I adore every single frame of that film and pretty much grew up watching it every day. It has the bext climax in the franchise's history which is far more engaging than the rather dull collapsing building sequence at the end of Casino Royale.

Sean Bean's Trevelyan is iconic. Everybody remembers and loves him.

[Santa]

Sean Bean's Trevelyan is iconic. Everybody remembers and loves him.

Why I have to get out of the conversation. But I'm sure you're not a troll. I had apologised for that but then edited the posts so I do apologise for that again.

[MooreisMore]

I just think the backlash against Brosnan is confusing seeing as pre-Craig he was adored on these boards. I remember back when Die Another Day wa sdeclared to be an amazing Bond film by a large amount of the community, now it's declared to be the worst of the series.

It is in fact an enjoyable film with some fantastic Cuba and Korea scenes.

[Stephen Spotswood]

My list of best Bonds:

1 Sean Connery

1 Timothy Dalton (Dalton and Connery I have tied, but Connery's movies had a freshness, and Cold War aspect no longer relevant during the Dalton years, and Connery had more outings as 007.)

2 Daniel Craig (subject to change after I see more of him.)

3 George Lazenby

4 Peter Sellers

5 David Nivens

6 Roger Moore

7 Pierce Brosnan

[bond 16.05.72]

I just think the backlash against Brosnan is confusing seeing as pre-Craig he was adored on these boards. I remember back when Die Another Day wa sdeclared to be an amazing Bond film by a large amount of the community, now it's declared to be the worst of the series.

It is in fact an enjoyable film with some fantastic Cuba and Korea scenes.

Probably because the board was full of Pierce fans, I see they are still here hence another thread about poor old Pierce.

I agree that some have definitley jumped on the Pierce hater bandwagon, some here probably did think DAD was class but now in the light of Craig in CR they have turned hater.

I think due to his huge popularity no one would dare slag him off but as his tenure came to an end and a proper actor got the role, people changed their minds or the original Pierce haters emerged knowing they'd got some support with a new Bond in the building.

Ok you loved GE and thought it was one of your 50 fav film, I do have ask what kind of films you watch though to think this, not one Bond film would probably get in my top 50 but saying DAD is enjoyable and a fine film I'm afraid seriousness in your discussion has gone out the window.

DAD was crap and most people acknowledge it.

I know some think when Craig leaves the process will start again and Craig hate will begin but I don't think it will like some think, maybe Brozzer fans who hate Craig will emerge and hail the next actor as the savour but I think Craig's casting has changed Bond maybe not forever but for a good few decades and EON will be unlikely be resting on their laurels and casting another Moore clone which it seems some would prefer.

Lets face it Brosnan was a stop gap till they got their act together, they needed to relaunch the series again after LTK supposed failure and the 6 year hiatus.
Brosnan rightly so got the money in and that we must be grateful for but they were never gonna get the chance to radically over haul the character like MGW obvioulsy wanted to do when his Step Father was alive.

Yes Bourne & Begins were an influence in what they did with Craig but I think MGW wanted to do some thing radical and his step sister only strengthened that.

They didn't see Pierce capable of this and thought he was better playing Moore Bond. The scripts didn't change or the angle because they'd sold him as the 70's blueprint Moore was famous for. Relaunching him as harder more gritty Bond would have been confusing to the audience, they didn't have the faith in him to do it.

[MooreisMore]

Being realistic doesn't automatically make it better. Goldeneye is just as brilliant as Casino Royale.


Goldeneye is barely in my Top 50 and not even my fave action film (That'd be Raiders of the Lost Ark or Terminator 2). This Brosnan bandwagon has gotten a little silly though.

I don't need the assurance of Bond fans behind me when i say Die Another Day was flawed but enjoyable. I am capable of making up my own mind and with a series this diverse you will find fans you won't agree with as Bond is so flexible as a franchise.

Edited by MooreisMore, 13 September 2008 - 08:35 PM.