189 replies to this topic

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

I get the impression MGM was driving the Bond bus more than EON in '94, bringing Bond back was likely viewed as problematic at best if not outright risky, they wanted Brosnan (safe choice) and they got him. They also got the type of films from him they wanted, safe Bond-style entertainments in the TB mold. Can't blame MGM, it's a business after all and they got their return. Some fans like him and his films, some don't (IMO he's a middling actor and a jerk of a human being). The films were all good box office, at worst one could say he kept the Bond seat warm for Craig and that ain't bad.

That's my rap.

Good rap!

[iBond]

(IMO he's a middling actor and a jerk of a human being).

You mean since he's an environmentalist?

[00 Brosnan]

And his four films can't even stack up to Dalton's two...or even Lazenby's one.

I admit, The Living Daylights is a very good Bond film. It's not as good as GE or TND though. Dalton's only other Bond film, LTK is better than AVTAK..and that's about it. I love how certain people here act like Dalton is so superior to Brosnan, yet he wasn't popular in the role, one of his two films tanked and almost literally destroyed the series, and despite what some believe he jumped from the role before he was pushed...what an awesome legacy as Bond...

Some fans are too rabid to place Pierce on a pedastool and proclaiming him "The Best Bond Ever" when it's not the truth.

That's your opinion bro. I've heard the same thing about every other actor in the role. Heck, there's a whole fansite dedicated to ripping on Craig (tho I don't agree with it).

I can't watch any of his Bond movies because there's too much horrible use of innuendo and badly placed puns. Not one of his films are perfect, as with the actors before him.

You've got to be kidding me. Moore had a ton of horrible puns and innuendos and nobody has had a perfect film, so I don't know what you're getting at.

I was adamant about the reboot at first but then I came to the realization that it needed to happen. Austin Powers xXx, Johnny English, and even Jason Bourne helped put the hurt to the Bond franchise and Pierce wasn't exactly helping to remind the general moviegoing public of why Bond was the cornerstone of the spy genre anyhow.

You're joking right? You have to be. First of all, Austin Powers is a comedy. It isn't really part of the spy genre. Die Another Day made more money (almost double) than all three Austin Powers films, both XXX films combined, and the Bourne Identity....yeah Bond was an afterthought in the spy genre. Great logic.

In closing I don't believe he got a bad rap, whatever rep he currently has with Bond fans...for good or ill...he's brought it upon himself.

His "rap" isn't bad. It's bad with certain hardcore Bond fans....the majority are "older" people. Realistically, his biggest supporters are people my age. As far as how he'll be remembered in general and by the mainstream, well...popular is the word. I will now sit back and let all the Brosnan haters give this post negative feedback.

Edited by 00 Brosnan, 11 April 2011 - 06:42 AM.

[jaguar007]

I admit, The Living Daylights is a very good Bond film. It's not as good as GE or TND though.

I disagree with you on that point. In my opinion, TLD is top 5. It is better than GE mainly due to Dalton being much more commanding and confident as Bond than Pierce was in GE. The opening defection scene, the scene in Pushkin's hotel. Classic. TLD is probably the most romantic of all the Bond films (even over OHMSS and CR) as there is actually some true development of the relationship instead of it just happening.

His "rap" isn't bad. It's bad with certain hardcore Bond fans....the majority are "older" people. Realistically, his biggest supporters are people my age. As far as how he'll be remembered in general and by the mainstream, well...popular is the word. I will now sit back and let all the Brosnan haters give this post negative feedback.

I'm not going to give you negative feedback because I think you are correct. His biggest fans are people who grew up with him as Bond (the videogame generation). While he will probably not be remembered generally as the 'best' he will be remembered fondly by the mainstream public. I was at dinner with some friends/clients last month who are considerably older (in their 60s) and Bond came up (they know I am a collector). The table consensus was of course that Connery was the best, but they were surprised when I told them that Brosnan was my least favorite. As I said earlier that does not mean I dislike him, I just prefer the other Bond actors. For me personally I prefer the tougher Bonds and I always felt Pierce was a bit too thin and soft in the voice for James Bond. I loved him as Remington Steele.

[The Shark]

I admit, The Living Daylights is a very good Bond film. It's not as good as GE or TND though.

I disagree with you on that point. In my opinion, TLD is top 5. It is better than GE mainly due to Dalton being much more commanding and confident as Bond than Pierce was in GE. The opening defection scene, the scene in Pushkin's hotel. Classic. TLD is probably the most romantic of all the Bond films (even over OHMSS and CR) as there is actually some true development of the relationship instead of it just happening.

Well said. Even if TLD is flawed, at least it's stands up better than TND, which at its core is simply a glorified, soulless paean to 60s Bond.

The Oasis of Bond films.

[TheREAL008]

Turn the defense down.

If you compare one liners, dumb jokes, and the cringeworthy innuendos, at the very least you can laugh at Sir Roger's. It isn't Bronsan's fault for the lines he's spoken because the real culprits are writers who just fail at comedy. I never imagined Pierce sitting with P&W and thinking "What bad joke could we run with in this scene?"

Secondly: Sean had two bad movies (DAF,NSNA) Roger had two or three, Timothy one by many people's standards. Pierce on the other hand had about three total. There was such a dynamic shift in the 95-02 era that while I enjoyed, however looking back I find all Pierce's contributions just really god awful. I don't speak for everyone when I say this, but I'm probably not alone in my sentiment either.

And YES, there were, and still are rabid Pierce fans who just can't get it past themselves that his time is done and he won't be coming back. Like the majority of Highlander fans who can't get past a semi lousy television show, or the (I apologize in advance) Nolannazis who happen to believe that his version of Batman is the ultimate Batman there will ever be and proclaim TDK as the greatest movie ever, superior to Gone With The Wind, Casablanca, Ben Hur, and Citizen Kane.

And for the record, I don't expect the naysayers to shut it after Daniel is gone to. I think the militant Pierce fans will be proclaiming Bronsan's so called mistreatment for more years..perhaps another decade to come.

Don't come looking to fight at me again. I won't oblige you.

[iBond]

...they were surprised when I told them that Brosnan was my least favorite...For me personally I prefer the tougher Bonds and I always felt Pierce was a bit too thin and soft in the voice for James Bond...

And you think Moore was tougher than Brosnan?

Edited by iBond, 11 April 2011 - 06:14 PM.

[blueman]

Just to re-set, while Brosnan does have "his" generation of fans, many in that same age demographic found him smarmy to the max and tuned Bond out till he left the role. Begs the question, is a successful Bond someone who goes over well with the converts, or someone who brings in new fans? Brosnan pulled in video-gamers, but Wilson was right in thinking they'd gone as far as they could with him and needed somebody not just new but different to expand the brand. Enter Craig (backlash and all ).

Brosnan is what he is, and rather than bowing out gracefully he flung his bitter poo at the walls like a mad chimp. Glad he's gone.

[TheREAL008]

...they were surprised when I told them that Brosnan was my least favorite...For me personally I prefer the tougher Bonds and I always felt Pierce was a bit too thin and soft in the voice for James Bond...

And you think Moore was tougher than Brosnan?

I think it could be agreed that they were evenly matched in toughness.

[BoogieBond]

I suppose Pierce did get a bad rap in that he got the gig when the source material was more or less dried up.
However I like Goldeneye very much, so he got one really good film in his cannon.
Normally I find most people like one of his other 3 offerings(TND,TWINE or DAD) I happen to like TWINE best of the three.
Pierce did revive the box office and popularity of Bond, and for that he was exactly the right guy at the right time.
Re Box office receipts, look up the thread "Bond Movie Attendance Through the Years" it shows Sean's films where Bond was at his Peak(GF/TB), then Roger's 70's films were popular and ditto Pierce's. I daresay Craig's era will be as successful(fingers crossed).

[Loomis]

The Oasis of Bond films.

Then I guess the Dalton era was The Stone Roses: burst onto the scene in the late 1980s with an astonishingly assured debut brimming with some of the flavour of the classic 1960s era, blowing away the cobwebs of a stale scene with an injection of authenticity and credibility.... followed by a darker and somewhat messy (though in places still hugely impressive) second outing that divided the critics and the fans while failing to result in commercial gold. A hugely promising career cruelly cut short by legal wrangles, corporate shenanigans and a five-year hiatus, yet also a brief and brilliant flourishing of genius that's still championed by devoted fans to this very day.

[00 Brosnan]

I disagree with you on that point. In my opinion, TLD is top 5. It is better than GE mainly due to Dalton being much more commanding and confident as Bond than Pierce was in GE. The opening defection scene, the scene in Pushkin's hotel. Classic. TLD is probably the most romantic of all the Bond films (even over OHMSS and CR) as there is actually some true development of the relationship instead of it just happening.

See he always seemed plenty confident to me. I mean, you can tell he is more comfortable in the role in TND, but he never seemed hesitant or anything in GE. I'd have to say OHMSS or Casino Royale are the most romantic for obvious reasons.

I'm not going to give you negative feedback because I think you are correct. His biggest fans are people who grew up with him as Bond (the videogame generation). While he will probably not be remembered generally as the 'best' he will be remembered fondly by the mainstream public. I was at dinner with some friends/clients last month who are considerably older (in their 60s) and Bond came up (they know I am a collector). The table consensus was of course that Connery was the best, but they were surprised when I told them that Brosnan was my least favorite. As I said earlier that does not mean I dislike him, I just prefer the other Bond actors. For me personally I prefer the tougher Bonds and I always felt Pierce was a bit too thin and soft in the voice for James Bond. I loved him as Remington Steele.

I think a big part of it for a lot (not all) people is the generational thing. But, I don't necessarily agree about the toughness factor. He was definitely tougher than Moore all around, and only Connery and Dalton had a harder voice. But, Brosnan's Bond had no problem getting into it and he killed more people than anyone previous..just the way I define it.

Anyway, I can respect that. At least when you criticize Brosnan you do it w/ intelligence and respect, unlike some people.

If you compare one liners, dumb jokes, and the cringeworthy innuendos, at the very least you can laugh at Sir Roger's.

Moore had plenty of lame one liners bro. Some of them were funny, most of them weren't.

And YES, there were, and still are rabid Pierce fans who just can't get it past themselves that his time is done and he won't be coming back.

Oh, I have no problem with Craig. I think he needs to lighten up in the role a little bit though. I do wish Brosnan had gotten his 5th and final film though. If it hadn't been for the "ultra-realistic" reboots sweeping Hollywood, he would have.

Don't come looking to fight at me again. I won't oblige you.

I Wasn't looking to fight you man, that's ridiculous. You didn't need to respond, I was simply defending "my" James Bond.

[Dustin]

If you compare one liners, dumb jokes, and the cringeworthy innuendos, at the very least you can laugh at Sir Roger's.

Moore had plenty of lame one liners bro. Some of them were funny, most of them weren't.

The difference here would be that most of Moore's lines blended into the spirit of their time, which generally had a soft spot for the odd silliness.

I do wish Brosnan had gotten his 5th and final film though. If it hadn't been for the "ultra-realistic" reboots sweeping Hollywood, he would have.

A fifth Brosnan film may have been a more realistic prospect than another Moore film after AVTAK. But I don't see that it would have featured anything we haven't seen already in the GE through DAD period. On sober reflection I still feel fairly confident his tenure ended at just the right time. If anything I'd rather have a different TWINE or DAD from Brosnan than one more.

[JimmyBond]

I admit, The Living Daylights is a very good Bond film. It's not as good as GE or TND though.

I disagree, but hey, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

I love how certain people here act like Dalton is so superior to Brosnan, yet he wasn't popular in the role, one of his two films tanked and almost literally destroyed the series, and despite what some believe he jumped from the role before he was pushed...what an awesome legacy as Bond...

I'm not even sure how to debate that. Just because he wasn't as widely popular in the role doesn't meant people can't hold the opinion that he was superior to Brosnan. I don't care what joe sixpack things about who the better Bond is out of the two. I only care about what I think.

And do you have a source on that last piece of info you're trying to say is fact? Because around here it's pretty well known that Dalton was forced out by the new head of MGM.

[SecretAgentFan]

Also, Dalton did not destroy the series. He actually managed to keep it afloat after taking over from the beloved Roger Moore, a Herculean task that very often gets overlooked.

TLD actually was a big success. That LTK comparatively flopped was not Dalton´s fault. And just like Moore with TSPLM after the underperforming TMWTGG Dalton could have rebounded with his third film. But the law suit had caused a too long delay so everybody involved thought it best to reboot.

Dalton was a breath of fresh air IMO. He just had the bad luck to be Bond during a most difficult time for the franchise.

[Major Tallon]

The Oasis of Bond films.

Then I guess the Dalton era was The Stone Roses: burst onto the scene in the late 1980s with an astonishingly assured debut brimming with some of the flavour of the classic 1960s era, blowing away the cobwebs of a stale scene with an injection of authenticity and credibility.... followed by a darker and somewhat messy (though in places still hugely impressive) second outing that divided the critics and the fans while failing to result in commercial gold. A hugely promising career cruelly cut short by legal wrangles, corporate shenanigans and a five-year hiatus, yet also a brief and brilliant flourishing of genius that's still championed by devoted fans to this very day.

Very well said, Loomis. I entirely agree.

[Agent Sidewinder]

Also, Dalton did not destroy the series. He actually managed to keep it afloat after taking over from the beloved Roger Moore, a Herculean task that very often gets overlooked.

TLD actually was a big success. That LTK comparatively flopped was not Dalton´s fault. And just like Moore with TSPLM after the underperforming TMWTGG Dalton could have rebounded with his third film. But the law suit had caused a too long delay so everybody involved thought it best to reboot.

Dalton was a breath of fresh air IMO. He just had the bad luck to be Bond during a most difficult time for the franchise.

Not really. Dalton's problem was that he thought he understood Fleming's Bond back-to-front and inside out, when he fact he was making the same mistake as many a fanfic writer by emo-ing the character up. I believe one critic described Dalton-Bond as "looking like a candidate for the psychiatrist's couch". Outside of YOLT (and there were damn good reasons for that) and the beginning of TMWTGG, was the literary Bond ever like that? Nope, I think Craig does Fleming far better.

[SecretAgentFan]

Also, Dalton did not destroy the series. He actually managed to keep it afloat after taking over from the beloved Roger Moore, a Herculean task that very often gets overlooked.

TLD actually was a big success. That LTK comparatively flopped was not Dalton´s fault. And just like Moore with TSPLM after the underperforming TMWTGG Dalton could have rebounded with his third film. But the law suit had caused a too long delay so everybody involved thought it best to reboot.

Dalton was a breath of fresh air IMO. He just had the bad luck to be Bond during a most difficult time for the franchise.

Not really. Dalton's problem was that he thought he understood Fleming's Bond back-to-front and inside out, when he fact he was making the same mistake as many a fanfic writer by emo-ing the character up.

Well, I disagree.

[TheREAL008]

Also, Dalton did not destroy the series. He actually managed to keep it afloat after taking over from the beloved Roger Moore, a Herculean task that very often gets overlooked.

TLD actually was a big success. That LTK comparatively flopped was not Dalton´s fault. And just like Moore with TSPLM after the underperforming TMWTGG Dalton could have rebounded with his third film. But the law suit had caused a too long delay so everybody involved thought it best to reboot.

Dalton was a breath of fresh air IMO. He just had the bad luck to be Bond during a most difficult time for the franchise.

Not really. Dalton's problem was that he thought he understood Fleming's Bond back-to-front and inside out, when he fact he was making the same mistake as many a fanfic writer by emo-ing the character up. I believe one critic described Dalton-Bond as "looking like a candidate for the psychiatrist's couch". Outside of YOLT (and there were damn good reasons for that) and the beginning of TMWTGG, was the literary Bond ever like that? Nope, I think Craig does Fleming far better.

The same thing can be said for Bronsan's bond as well. However I think he studied Connery and Moore's performance more than he studied Fleming.

And I agree with your statement about Daniel being Fleming's Bond. Now if only we could have a Scottish actor who could combine Fleming, Dalton, and Craig, that would be a fantastic Bond.

[Agent Sidewinder]

Also, Dalton did not destroy the series. He actually managed to keep it afloat after taking over from the beloved Roger Moore, a Herculean task that very often gets overlooked.

TLD actually was a big success. That LTK comparatively flopped was not Dalton´s fault. And just like Moore with TSPLM after the underperforming TMWTGG Dalton could have rebounded with his third film. But the law suit had caused a too long delay so everybody involved thought it best to reboot.

Dalton was a breath of fresh air IMO. He just had the bad luck to be Bond during a most difficult time for the franchise.

Not really. Dalton's problem was that he thought he understood Fleming's Bond back-to-front and inside out, when he fact he was making the same mistake as many a fanfic writer by emo-ing the character up. I believe one critic described Dalton-Bond as "looking like a candidate for the psychiatrist's couch". Outside of YOLT (and there were damn good reasons for that) and the beginning of TMWTGG, was the literary Bond ever like that? Nope, I think Craig does Fleming far better.

The same thing can be said for Bronsan's bond as well. However I think he studied Connery and Moore's performance more than he studied Fleming.

And I agree with your statement about Daniel being Fleming's Bond. Now if only we could have a Scottish actor who could combine Fleming, Dalton, and Craig, that would be a fantastic Bond.

I hardly think we need a Scottish actor to play a half-Scots, half-Swiss who was born in Germany and grew up in England.

[TheREAL008]

It's been way too long since we've had a Scottish actor for Bond, and an unknown one at that. lol

[iBond]

GoldenEye was very popular when it came out. At least here in Southern California. James Bond was becoming a main subject in my school and everyone was talking about the new movie and how awesome it was. This even came from people who weren't James Bond fans or at least fans in my class. For me, and the rest of my grade, this was our first glimpse of James Bond 007. Yes, I was born a year before The Living Daylights came out, so I guess you could say that I am technically a Dalton baby, but I was only 3 when his last film came out, so I guess that doesn't really count. So, growing up with Pierce Brosnan is why he is my favorite 007. And to each their own. I mean, I have some friends I grew up with who say that Craig is their favorite, but Brosnan will always be mine. And no not just because I grew up with him, but because I thought his interpretation of the Bond role was great! Dalton being a close second with Connery a third.

Hah, I even remember my friend telling me that when he saw Licence to Kill, he thought it was Brosnan in the role.

[Capsule in Space]

He should be celebrated as being one of best James Bonds that we've had.

Except that he wasn't. At all.

Don't romanticize him.

Dude, I'm sure whomever your favorite 007 is, you would be saying the exact same thing.

No doubt, and the thing is that Brosnan isn't even my favorite. It's not romanticizing him, but rather acknowledging his success as Bond.

Mr. Blofeld seems to get upset with some of my posts, iBond, and this is just another instance.

Brosnan should be celebrated for what he did for the franchise regardless of whether or not you liked his interpretation of the role.

I think Bond right now is in a better position than it has been since the height of Bondmania with THUNDERBALL.

Out of curiosity can you explain how this is the case?

[jaguar007]

I think Bond right now is in a better position than it has been since the height of Bondmania with THUNDERBALL.

Out of curiosity can you explain how this is the case?

I'm not sure if SecretAgentFan means artistically or commercially. If he means commercially I disagree. I think Bond was at his biggest height post Thunderball with TSWLM. In my lifetime I saw Bondmania at it's heights in 77-79 (unfortunately it dropped by 1980). GE would be the next big boost only to be topped with the release of CR. Artistically SAF might just be correct, fanboys aside, CR did what I never thought was possible. It knocked GF off the #1 Bond film spot for most film critics. It was the first Bond film to ever recieve a Best Picture nomination (BAFTA) as well as a nomination for lead actor as James Bond (BAFTA). Many people speculate that if in 07 The Oscars had 10 BP nomination fields like they do now, CR could have been nominated in the US as well.

Many criticize the Brosnan films by being very formula somewhat generic James Bond films, however that is what the series really needed at the time. The Bond series was basically dead prior to GE and people needed to feel James Bond is Back, not a new James Bond. That is one reason the Brosnan films play like a greatest his album. However after going a bit too formula and reestablishing the series, the producers felt the time was right to try to be a bit more bold, and it payed off in spades.

[iBond]

Many criticize the Brosnan films by being very formula somewhat generic James Bond films, however that is what the series really needed at the time. The Bond series was basically dead prior to GE and people needed to feel James Bond is Back, not a new James Bond...

I can certainly see this. It felt like continuing a tradition. I mean, for several reasons due to the fact that he got a new car in each and every one of his films; while Connery, Moore and Dalton were only introduced to a car in one of their films. But at the same time, Pierce's interpretation was stood out in my opinion at the same time with his own interpretation on the part. But yeah, what makes him so different from Dalton is that Dalton wanted to base the characters straight from the books, Moore wanted a lighter Bond compared to Connery, and Connery, well he made the role. So, yeah, it was a little bit of everything with Brosnan.

[jaguar007]

it was a little bit of everything with Brosnan.

I tend to be a bit harder on Brosnan now than I did when he was playing the role. While he was never my favorite, I felt that as the 5th Bond, it had all been done. There was not really anything new to do with the character. During his tenure I felt he was the only Bond to never make a great Bond film (I still feel that way. I rate TLD FAR better than I rate GE although many may disagree). I felt the series would never make a film as good as they were in the 60s and that was that and I accepted it, I enjoyed each Bond film as a new Bond film. Then came CR and proved to me that yes, something new can be done with Bond and they could make a Bond movie as good as they did in the 60s

[SecretAgentFan]

I think Bond right now is in a better position than it has been since the height of Bondmania with THUNDERBALL.

Out of curiosity can you explain how this is the case?

I'm not sure if SecretAgentFan means artistically or commercially. If he means commercially I disagree. I think Bond was at his biggest height post Thunderball with TSWLM. In my lifetime I saw Bondmania at it's heights in 77-79 (unfortunately it dropped by 1980). GE would be the next big boost only to be topped with the release of CR. Artistically SAF might just be correct, fanboys aside, CR did what I never thought was possible. It knocked GF off the #1 Bond film spot for most film critics. It was the first Bond film to ever recieve a Best Picture nomination (BAFTA) as well as a nomination for lead actor as James Bond (BAFTA). Many people speculate that if in 07 The Oscars had 10 BP nomination fields like they do now, CR could have been nominated in the US as well.

Many criticize the Brosnan films by being very formula somewhat generic James Bond films, however that is what the series really needed at the time. The Bond series was basically dead prior to GE and people needed to feel James Bond is Back, not a new James Bond. That is one reason the Brosnan films play like a greatest his album. However after going a bit too formula and reestablishing the series, the producers felt the time was right to try to be a bit more bold, and it payed off in spades.

I meant to say that with Craig and CR/QOS Bond films have moved on from being traditional fun but routine movies to a higher profile. Yes, they are still installments in a series of films for pure entertainment factor. But they are ready and eager to stray from the pure formula, more adapt at re-inventing themselves and trying to shed new light on its main character, attracting critical interest and directors who would never have touched Bond before.

Thus, a new excitement for the films have emerged. After THUNDERBALL this interest had decreased, and even the Brosnan era could not match this.

[TheREAL008]

I agree. We're experiencing a renewed effort in Bond that can rival the zeitgeist of the 60's. It might even be possible to say that CR ranks above Goldfinger as the best Bond film. I remember on the old MKKBB forums on how people wished for a return to the style of FRWL and we got that with 'Royale.

II was in my late teens when GE came out and I enjoyed it as a Bond film that tried to update Bond for the post Cold War era. I think the 95-02 era should have been handled differently considering how GE set the mold for having Bond deal with enemies outside of the former Soviet Union. If the plots for TND, TWINE, and even DAD were more grounded in reality and depending less on CGI, tech, and terrible one liners; then that particular era would have received less critique.,

[iBond]

If the plots for TND, TWINE, and even DAD were more grounded in reality and depending less on CGI, tech, and terrible one liners; then that particular era would have received less critique.,

You didn't even like:

"I have been known to keep my tip up?" lol

[Capsule in Space]

I think Bond right now is in a better position than it has been since the height of Bondmania with THUNDERBALL.

Out of curiosity can you explain how this is the case?

I'm not sure if SecretAgentFan means artistically or commercially. If he means commercially I disagree. I think Bond was at his biggest height post Thunderball with TSWLM. In my lifetime I saw Bondmania at it's heights in 77-79 (unfortunately it dropped by 1980). GE would be the next big boost only to be topped with the release of CR. Artistically SAF might just be correct, fanboys aside, CR did what I never thought was possible. It knocked GF off the #1 Bond film spot for most film critics. It was the first Bond film to ever recieve a Best Picture nomination (BAFTA) as well as a nomination for lead actor as James Bond (BAFTA). Many people speculate that if in 07 The Oscars had 10 BP nomination fields like they do now, CR could have been nominated in the US as well.

Many criticize the Brosnan films by being very formula somewhat generic James Bond films, however that is what the series really needed at the time. The Bond series was basically dead prior to GE and people needed to feel James Bond is Back, not a new James Bond. That is one reason the Brosnan films play like a greatest his album. However after going a bit too formula and reestablishing the series, the producers felt the time was right to try to be a bit more bold, and it payed off in spades.

Jaguar, I am trying to find a way to upload some neat newspaper articles I researched that are from 1966 to the EONomics thread that show how huge Thunderball was. No Bond film has been able to match the worldwide admissions that Thunderball received, but you are right that The Spy Who Loved Me, and Moonraker were very big, and actually I think Live and Let Die got great admissions as well.