105 replies to this topic

[DrNoNo]

The fans and the media loved Brosnan's Bond during the 1990s. Just as they love Craig now. And I suspect that not long after EON finds a new actor to portray Bond, the Craig bashing will commence in full force - in the same manner that Brosnan is being bashed right now.

I couldn't care less how he had reacted to being replaced by Broccoli and Wilson. All that mattered to me is that I found his movies entertaining. And I did. Even the slightly bland TOMORROW NEVER DIES.

Exactly. Who really gives a damn how Pierce reacted to EON giving him the boot? That doesn't have anything to do with his portrayal as Bond.

You think Connery got along with Saltzman and Broccoli?

Lazenby also had run-ins with the producers.

And I'm sure Sir Rog and Timmy had their ups and downs.

Fact of the matter is we live in such an age that if someone pisses on the moon, we know about it.

So, Pierce said some things and it was in the press, TV, internet etc etc etc

So what?

And, for what it's worth, I think Pierce DID get shafted by EON.

Pierce always wanted to do a more drama/less action style Bond flick. Just like CR.

Pierce dislikes TND for it's over abundance of action and not enough story.

Look at his relationship with Elektra in TWINE and the first hour of DAD.

Pierce wanted to flesh the character out more. He wanted to do a more CR style Bond film.

Babs didn't want to

So out goes Pierce and in comes Craig and they do a 2+ hour movie that is all story driven plot, less on the action.

Pierce has a right to be pissed.

[LazyAmerican24]

Extremely well said. For me Brosnan is right up there with Craig as one of the best Bonds ever.

[double o ego]

Brosnan was (still is) just a bad actor.

I wouldn't say he's a bad actor, I'd just say he's mediocre at best and as a Bond actor he was the worst. He had no screen presence at all. He relied on his pretty boy looks, the film makers had to over compensate by blaring the Bond theme almost all the time as well as giving him blatant, ear-catching, juvenile sexual innuendo. Look at who his costars were, Brosnan was overshadowed by the majority of his costars and that's why he and his films are so easy to isolate.

When Craig came along, lets face it, he's handsome but isn't the pretty boy that Brosnan was and this is where Craig suffered most of his criticisms. When Craig proved that his handsome and rugged looks combined with a killer body and most impotantly, acting dexterity, nothing else realy mattered. Hell, Craig has brought in more female audiences alone in 1 movie moreso than Brosnan did throughout his 4 movies.

Brosnan acted as though Bond was his birthright and simply settled for anything, just as long as he was Bond and he was getting paid, which he was, handsomly.

[CM007]

Brosnan was (still is) just a bad actor.

I wouldn't say he's a bad actor, I'd just say he's mediocre at best and as a Bond actor he was the worst. He had no screen presence at all. He relied on his pretty boy looks, the film makers had to over compensate by blaring the Bond theme almost all the time as well as giving him blatant, ear-catching, juvenile sexual innuendo. Look at who his costars were, Brosnan was overshadowed by the majority of his costars and that's why he and his films are so easy to isolate.

When Craig came along, lets face it, he's handsome but isn't the pretty boy that Brosnan was and this is where Craig suffered most of his criticisms. When Craig proved that his handsome and rugged looks combined with a killer body and most impotantly, acting dexterity, nothing else realy mattered. Hell, Craig has brought in more female audiences alone in 1 movie moreso than Brosnan did throughout his 4 movies.

Brosnan acted as though Bond was his birthright and simply settled for anything, just as long as he was Bond and he was getting paid, which he was, handsomly.

Okay I´m gonna give you a quick history lesson.Brosnan ain´t a pretty Boy so lets get that one out of the way,yes he´s handsome and very attractive and looks amazing for his age but is that really his fault,well maybe you haven´t been blessed with good genes,not sure I care.
Also on the Over use of the Bond theme.On TND Arnold scored the film with only 2 incidence when the Bond theme played at full glory and the Producers absolutley loved what Arnold was doing but MGM had a mickey fit and insisted on re-writes while the script was been re-written where Arnold had 3 months or so to keep writing new music.The problem for MGM was the outcry of Serra´s GE score that MGM made Arnold shoehorn every last bit of the Bond Theme that he could,so to answer your absolutely inaccurrate and analy intentetive reason for Brosnan not being a good Bond.

Now I have to recall if Brosnan ever immersed out of the Ocean in Tight Blue Shorts with a Model type pose and a Pout.........Nope.

Also Brosnan just didn´t settle for anything he was given.He fell out with BB over TND and insisted that Ferstien was brought in to touch up the script after Apted Wife re-wrote the Eleckra kings role in TWINE.

Also are you gonna blame Craig for the Cluster[censored] that is QOS....Thought not,you´re not a Bond Fan but a Mega Danile Badass Bond Craig fan....I´ve had enough of idiots like you around here.Muppet

[double o ego]

How immature. Thanks for playing but you've failed.

Edited by double o ego, 21 November 2008 - 08:55 PM.

[bond 16.05.72]

That´s what got Brosnan bitter,twisted and angry is that they never told him.That must off been hard to take and also the fact that they thought that he was to old to play Bond.While all this was going on Sony were courting Brosnan asking him to return before Daniel Craig was announced,actually 2 weeks before he was announced as his successor so the whole thing was just a big mess.

Have you got any evidence that Sony were courting Brosnan two weeks before DC was announced? Or is this just an urban myth?

No it isn´t an Urban Myth.Pierce stated in an interview in GQ I believe.Sony never wanted Craig but BB stuck her heels in as in No Craig no Bond films.

Yeah and Sony were wrong and BB proved that! I bet they're glad they bet on Craig in the end a CR with Broz would never had the impact Craig did, he was magnetic from the moment he faces off Dryden.

Brosnan was (still is) just a bad actor.

I wouldn't say he's a bad actor, I'd just say he's mediocre at best and as a Bond actor he was the worst. He had no screen presence at all. He relied on his pretty boy looks, the film makers had to over compensate by blaring the Bond theme almost all the time as well as giving him blatant, ear-catching, juvenile sexual innuendo. Look at who his costars were, Brosnan was overshadowed by the majority of his costars and that's why he and his films are so easy to isolate.

When Craig came along, lets face it, he's handsome but isn't the pretty boy that Brosnan was and this is where Craig suffered most of his criticisms. When Craig proved that his handsome and rugged looks combined with a killer body and most impotantly, acting dexterity, nothing else realy mattered. Hell, Craig has brought in more female audiences alone in 1 movie moreso than Brosnan did throughout his 4 movies.

Brosnan acted as though Bond was his birthright and simply settled for anything, just as long as he was Bond and he was getting paid, which he was, handsomly.

Okay I´m gonna give you a quick history lesson.Brosnan ain´t a pretty Boy so lets get that one out of the way,yes he´s handsome and very attractive and looks amazing for his age but is that really his fault,well maybe you haven´t been blessed with good genes,not sure I care.
Also on the Over use of the Bond theme.On TND Arnold scored the film with only 2 incidence when the Bond theme played at full glory and the Producers absolutley loved what Arnold was doing but MGM had a mickey fit and insisted on re-writes while the script was been re-written where Arnold had 3 months or so to keep writing new music.The problem for MGM was the outcry of Serra´s GE score that MGM made Arnold shoehorn every last bit of the Bond Theme that he could,so to answer your absolutely inaccurrate and analy intentetive reason for Brosnan not being a good Bond.

Now I have to recall if Brosnan ever immersed out of the Ocean in Tight Blue Shorts with a Model type pose and a Pout.........Nope.

Also Brosnan just didn´t settle for anything he was given.He fell out with BB over TND and insisted that Ferstien was brought in to touch up the script after Apted Wife re-wrote the Eleckra kings role in TWINE.

Also are you gonna blame Craig for the Cluster[censored] that is QOS....Thought not,you´re not a Bond Fan but a Mega Danile Badass Bond Craig fan....I´ve had enough of idiots like you around here.Muppet

That trunksd scene will always be brought to prove DC is a pretty boy bu your likes but Craig proved his Bond could be tougher that an y before him the Madagascar sequence could you really see Brosnan doing that without the use of gadget or two and for the record didn't like Broz in 95 still don't and have been a fan since 1977.

I just was pulled back to the films by Craig's presence after being put off by Brosnan's era, state the scripts all you like but it won't stop me thinking I found him plain wrong for the role and Craig's tennure will contine to date and ridicule Brosnan's era.

Mark my words!

[spynovelfan]

Lots of great points made already. Perhaps these haven't been:

Bond fandom during the Brosnan era was, in part, Brosnan fandom. He brought a lot of people to Bond who would not normally have been interested, partly because he was charming and astonishingly handsome, partly because of the great story about how he'd missed out on the role, so it seemed like just desserts after a very long build-up.

He was greeted by almost everyone as being the best thing since sliced bread, and loved for at least his first two films, possibly his third. But by Die Another Day, EON had become complacent. The previous films had been rather safe, but now they went all-out for an extravaganza, using the 40th anniversary as an excuse. That's how the series has often gone, of course: the excesses of Moore's era suddenly counter-balanced with the darkness of Dalton. Brosnan started out as a cross between Moore and Connery, and was loved for it, but DAD was full-on Moore-style territory, despite the first reel. Suddenly, it seemed a bit silly to be watching a film with an invisible car in it.

The world had also changed, of course, as the film rather clumsily tried to remind us, and perhaps audiences were no more in the mood for that type of light Bond film than they were in the mood for a very dark type of Bond film several years previously. The Bourne Identity had also recently been released, and suddenly showed in even starker contrast how far Bond had fallen, and what could still be done. That a secret agent film could be dark but also exciting, suspenseful and gripping but also intelligent and emotional... Perhaps the greatest flaw in DAD was not the invisible car or the CGI but the car chase: there was no longer any suspense. The villain, for no apparent reason, also had gadgets on his car, and they raced around like they were in a TV advert for a Bond video game. Bond was not in peril, and he looked like a rather middle-aged and uptight businessmen, out of place, trying to keep up with the new generation of action films and bullet-time speed and so on. The Bourne Identity stripped it all back to the basics and showed how you could have real danger and adrenalin and still have the globe-trotting and cool factor.

I don't think most of the millions of Brosnan Bond fans around the world gave two hoots for the way he was treated or his reaction to it. I think many of them grew up - literally so. I was 22 when GoldenEye came out, and it was a cool film and hey, Bond was back, the man who was born to be Bond had been given the part, and so on. But 29 is not 22. Perhaps more to the point, if you were 18 at the start of Brosnan's tenure, you were 25 at the end of it. So all those fans who joined Bond aged 18 for GE grew, and their tastes changed, and the world changed, and Brosnan's films became more outlandish. Bourne stepped into the breach, and from there arguably we have seen Batman and a lot more besides mine that vein. Bond, too, of course. But while I suspect Craig has lost some Brosnan fans, he's also done what Brosnan did all over again, which is to bring new fans who would not usually watch Bond films. But this time, I reckon many of them are in their 30s and 40s, and many are women.

[CM007]

That´s what got Brosnan bitter,twisted and angry is that they never told him.That must off been hard to take and also the fact that they thought that he was to old to play Bond.While all this was going on Sony were courting Brosnan asking him to return before Daniel Craig was announced,actually 2 weeks before he was announced as his successor so the whole thing was just a big mess.

Have you got any evidence that Sony were courting Brosnan two weeks before DC was announced? Or is this just an urban myth?

No it isn´t an Urban Myth.Pierce stated in an interview in GQ I believe.Sony never wanted Craig but BB stuck her heels in as in No Craig no Bond films.

Yeah and Sony were wrong and BB proved that! I bet they're glad they bet on Craig in the end a CR with Broz would never had the impact Craig did, he was magnetic from the moment he faces off Dryden.

Brosnan was (still is) just a bad actor.

I wouldn't say he's a bad actor, I'd just say he's mediocre at best and as a Bond actor he was the worst. He had no screen presence at all. He relied on his pretty boy looks, the film makers had to over compensate by blaring the Bond theme almost all the time as well as giving him blatant, ear-catching, juvenile sexual innuendo. Look at who his costars were, Brosnan was overshadowed by the majority of his costars and that's why he and his films are so easy to isolate.

When Craig came along, lets face it, he's handsome but isn't the pretty boy that Brosnan was and this is where Craig suffered most of his criticisms. When Craig proved that his handsome and rugged looks combined with a killer body and most impotantly, acting dexterity, nothing else realy mattered. Hell, Craig has brought in more female audiences alone in 1 movie moreso than Brosnan did throughout his 4 movies.

Brosnan acted as though Bond was his birthright and simply settled for anything, just as long as he was Bond and he was getting paid, which he was, handsomly.

Okay I´m gonna give you a quick history lesson.Brosnan ain´t a pretty Boy so lets get that one out of the way,yes he´s handsome and very attractive and looks amazing for his age but is that really his fault,well maybe you haven´t been blessed with good genes,not sure I care.
Also on the Over use of the Bond theme.On TND Arnold scored the film with only 2 incidence when the Bond theme played at full glory and the Producers absolutley loved what Arnold was doing but MGM had a mickey fit and insisted on re-writes while the script was been re-written where Arnold had 3 months or so to keep writing new music.The problem for MGM was the outcry of Serra´s GE score that MGM made Arnold shoehorn every last bit of the Bond Theme that he could,so to answer your absolutely inaccurrate and analy intentetive reason for Brosnan not being a good Bond.

Now I have to recall if Brosnan ever immersed out of the Ocean in Tight Blue Shorts with a Model type pose and a Pout.........Nope.

Also Brosnan just didn´t settle for anything he was given.He fell out with BB over TND and insisted that Ferstien was brought in to touch up the script after Apted Wife re-wrote the Eleckra kings role in TWINE.

Also are you gonna blame Craig for the Cluster[censored] that is QOS....Thought not,you´re not a Bond Fan but a Mega Danile Badass Bond Craig fan....I´ve had enough of idiots like you around here.Muppet

That trunksd scene will always be brought to prove DC is a pretty boy bu your likes but Craig proved his Bond could be tougher that an y before him the Madagascar sequence could you really see Brosnan doing that without the use of gadget or two and for the record didn't like Broz in 95 still don't and have been a fan since 1977.

I just was pulled back to the films by Craig's presence after being put off by Brosnan's era, state the scripts all you like but it won't stop me thinking I found him plain wrong for the role and Craig's tennure will contine to date and ridicule Brosnan's era.

Mark my words!

All this Daniel Love just gets me all hot inside.......ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Pathetic

[Mister E]

CM007 is pwned as usual.

[Doctor Shatterhand]

Having literally grown up with James Bond movies, (Barbara Broccoli and I are the same age) I feel that Brosnan was all wrong for the role. He occasionally would nail a scene or two, but he was too politically correct and would get hurt too easy.

Can you imagine him up against Oddjob or Red Grant? No of course not. He barely was able to fight Stamper and only by using the knife was he able to get away.

His love scenes were the worse. Bond is not suppose to reach climax like he did in DAD, the women are.

Lastly, Bond would have escaped from North Korea during those 14 months. Seeing Brosnan looking like a broken man was pathetic and I hope the producers don't go down that road again.

Sorry, Brosnan is the least favorite of the Bond actors in my book.

[JimmyBond]

Also are you gonna blame Craig for the Cluster[censored] that is QOS....Thought not,you´re not a Bond Fan but a Mega Danile Badass Bond Craig fan....I´ve had enough of idiots like you around here.Muppet

If he enjoyed the film why should Craig be blamed for it?

[Santa]

We don't have to open the car doors for them, we don't have to buy them a drink, we don't have to pull out a chair at a restaurant table for them, and we don't have to wait to "reach climax" until they have first.

Er, what???

[jaguar007]

Sony were courting Brosnan asking him to return before Daniel Craig was announced,actually 2 weeks before he was announced as his successor so the whole thing was just a big mess.

I recall this as well, but I think it was an MGM exec who said to Brosnan "why don't you come back as Bond".

Brosnan replied that it was not his decision.

[spynovelfan]

Sony were courting Brosnan asking him to return before Daniel Craig was announced,actually 2 weeks before he was announced as his successor so the whole thing was just a big mess.

I recall this as well, but I think it was an MGM exec who said to Brosnan "why don't you come back as Bond".

Brosnan replied that it was not his decision.

I think you're both thinking of this section from his October 2005 interview with GQ:

'But now, having resigned himself to bidding farewell to Bond, Brosnan finds his name in the frame once again. Dame Judi Dench, who has played the frosty M since Goldeneye has been quoted as saving Brosnan will get a fifth outing. What's more, it is rumoured that Sony, which has recently bought Bond studio MGM, wants Brosnan back in the saddle.

"Sony are pulling their hair out over it, apparently," he confirms with disarming honesty. "I was in their offices just a few weeks ago. pitching Thomas Crown 2. They said. 'Come back.' and I said. 'It's not up to me guys.' I think I was just caught up between the egos of the producers and the studios, really."'

I think it's worth pointing out that GQ has a lead time of several months, and that the source for this was Brosnan. Sony is quite a large company! No doubt some people from that company said to him 'Come back' at this meeting - whether or not they were people who would have had anything to do with his coming back as Bond is quite a different matter. Thomas Crown 2 has also not, of course, been made, so just how much clout Brosnan really had/has is open to question.

But I don't think this has much bearing on how he will be, or should be, remembered as Bond.

[broadshoulder]

I recall this as well, but I think it was an MGM exec who said to Brosnan "why don't you come back as Bond".

Brosnan replied that it was not his decision.

If this is true then we had a very lucky escape.

By the way, we sure have come a long way since that horrendous October press conference in 2005, when Craig was introduced to the press. The floppy hair....the rubber-ducky life vest over his three-piece suit...the look of sea-sickness washed over his face....who knew such a screen presence and actor existed underneath that hot mess? Sure didn't show it at the press conference, or in Lara Croft.

Some of us did. Craig had been a star on British TV and films for about ten years. I thought he was an excellent choice from the off.

[DaveBond21]

Born to be Bond. The saviour of the franchise. Billion dollar Bond.

Indeed.

No Brosnan, no Daniel Craig.