biggest mistake of the brosnan era: getting rid of janus after goldeneye
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 3,155
    Agent007391 said:

    Getafix said:

    I think Janus was the least of the problems during the Brosnan era. Dreadful scripts, stories, casts, music and production design would top my list.



    Now, I'm gonna go ahead and give the cast credit by trying to take the crap they were given and turn it into something manageable, which they were somewhat able to do in TWINE, but not DAD.


    Twine was better than DUD, but still boring. Awful Bond girl and laughable villains.
  • Samuel001Samuel001
    Posts: 9,849
    A recurring threat would not have improved Brosnan's films, just like that. The scripts needed to be sorted out first.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007
    Posts: 4,831
    Agent007391 said:

    Getafix said:

    I think Janus was the least of the problems during the Brosnan era. Dreadful scripts, stories, casts, music and production design would top my list.



    Now, I'm gonna go ahead and give the cast credit by trying to take the crap they were given and turn it into something manageable, which they were somewhat able to do in TWINE, but not DAD.


    IMO DAD was a huge middle-finger directed to TWINE. They dropped the overly melodramatic and complex plot and take on Bond, and went for a throwback to the good old fun outings. DAD was much better, more fun, more Bond, more entertaining than TWINE. TWINE ranks 20th in my ranking, while DAD is about 8th or 9th. Also Brosnan in DAD had a very Flemingesque performance... more relaxed, like he finally understood the Bond character. IMO DAD is a very good film, very Bond, very fun, very cool... much better than the real DUD that TWINE was.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 3,155
    Brosnan's films in order or least badness:
    TND, TWINE, GE, DUD

    While the first three included occasional moments that stand out, DUD is clearly the unchallenged all-time worst movie in the series. How do you define 'entertaining'? DUD was an excruciating watch from start to finish - pure cinema torture.
  • Agent007391Agent007391
    Posts: 3,529
    DaltonCraig007 said:

    This is where we differ. When I watch DAF or TMWTGG, it's like I read a Fleming novel... And IMO when I read the Fleming novels, I picture Moore from TMWTGG, and the DAF atmosphere and humour. IMO the Fleming novels were much more humourous than the Craig films, and are more in line with the '74 Moore and '71 Connery outings.



    I'm glad you can see it that way, but I don't, and neither does a good deal of the world (it seems). The humor I read in Fleming comes at us dry, and dark; not the over-the-top antics of Moore.
  • Samuel001Samuel001
    Posts: 9,849
    It was a Cold War thriller, then Iceland disaster, then it wasn't even over! We still had the plane scenes to endure. You know, it could have been quite good. It wanted to be everything to everyone and flat out failed.
  • Agent007391Agent007391
    Posts: 3,529
    Getafix said:

    Brosnan's films in order or least badness:
    TND, TWINE, GE, DUD

    While the first three included occasional moments that stand out, DUD is clearly the unchallenged all-time worst movie in the series. How do you define 'entertaining'? DUD was an excruciating watch from start to finish - pure cinema torture.



    I kind of agree with that. Swap GE and TWINE and you've got it just right.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 4,749
    I'm very fond of GE and it's easily the Bond film I've seen most.

    I know some of the sets look a bit fakey but the characters, score and dialogue make up for that.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 4,749
    I'm very fond of GE and it's easily the Bond film I've seen most.

    I know some of the sets look a bit fakey but the characters, score and dialogue make up for that.
  • SJK91SJK91
    Posts: 943
    Die Another Day represented an eruption of just about everything that was wrong with Pierce Brosnan's tenure as Bond; an over-reliance on machine guns, gadgets, special effects and one liners.

    The biggest mistake of the Brosnan era is turning Bond into a giant stereotype. Brosnan's films got progressively worse as his tenure went on...and that's really too bad because his later performances (TND, DAD) were far better than his initial performance in GoldenEye. (TWINE is a glaring anomaly, of course!)
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,003
    thelivingroyale said:

    DoubleOhhSeven said:

    I agree it would've given a sense of continuity to the Brosnan films and given him a larger threat to deal with but it would've ruined Trevelyn's character, as an above poster mentioned. His whole motive was that of revenge and working as a lacky to some greater villan like a Blofeld type would've seemed like an unlikely choice for him. The nature of his character meant he had to be the lone and final force behind Janus.



    He wouldn't be. For the last time, he would've survived at the end of goldeneye, then in TND carver would've been a janus member with Trevelyn being used in a blofeld-FRWL type way, then in DAD he would've been the main villian, with the whole "for england james" scene taking place at the end of the plane sequence, ending the brosnan era with the story it started with and janus never returning. Trevelyn still would've been head of janus.


    If that were the case I think it would've been overkill. Trevelyn's motives, unlike Blofeld's, were very personal and character specific. After failing to cripple London, him taking part in some other generic scheme that wasn't his main goal in the first place would've felt like a step down.

    And I agree with the other posters, the Brosnan films needed alot more to save them.
  • Agent007391Agent007391
    Posts: 3,529
    Yeah, I don't think Trevelyn would want to cause World War III, limit oil supplies in the Middle East to one pipeline, or rekindle the conflict between North and South Korea.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 4,749
    Agent007391 said:

    DaltonCraig007 said:

    This is where we differ. When I watch DAF or TMWTGG, it's like I read a Fleming novel... And IMO when I read the Fleming novels, I picture Moore from TMWTGG, and the DAF atmosphere and humour. IMO the Fleming novels were much more humourous than the Craig films, and are more in line with the '74 Moore and '71 Connery outings.



    I'm glad you can see it that way, but I don't, and neither does a good deal of the world (it seems). The humor I read in Fleming comes at us dry, and dark; not the over-the-top antics of Moore.


    I think DC is mistaking 'camp' for 'quirky'. Flemings books were often quite imaginitive and 'quirky' but I don't think they were what you would call camp. Take for instance Bond going to the Castle of Death in YOLT. That's clearly OTT but it's all told with a relitively straight, somewhat ironic manner. It's not too comic like some of the films were.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,003
    I haven't read too much Fleming but from what I have read the books are nothing like DAF or TMWTGG. That's more United Artist's James Bond. Fleming's Bond and stories are closer in tune to FRWL, DN, and CR.

    At what point in DAF the novel is there a giant laser cannon in space? I must've missed it.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007
    Posts: 4,831
    DoubleOhhSeven said:

    I haven't read too much Fleming but from what I have read the books are nothing like DAF or TMWTGG. That's more United Artist's James Bond. Fleming's Bond and stories are closer in tune to FRWL, DN, and CR.

    At what point in DAF the novel is there a giant laser cannon in space? I must've missed it.



    The humour, maccabre atmosphere, memorable bunch of colourful oddball secondary characters, and the benign bizarre makes the DAF and TMWTGG films much closer to Fleming than CR. IMO CR had close to no similarities with Fleming, if only for the original plot which they butchered. FRWL yes is close to Fleming, but IMO DAF and TMWTGG are very close to Fleming. DAD had more similarities with Fleming's Bond, if only for the very Flemingesque performance from Brosnan. Whenever I read Fleming I instantly picture the humour, atmosphere and benign bizarre from DAF and TMWTGG... and I always picture Moore from 'Golden Gun' when reading a Fleming novel.
  • Agent007391Agent007391
    Posts: 3,529
    DaltonCraig007 said:

    The humour, maccabre atmosphere, memorable bunch of colourful oddball secondary characters, and the benign bizarre makes the DAF and TMWTGG films much closer to Fleming than CR. IMO CR had close to no similarities with Fleming, if only for the original plot which they butchered. FRWL yes is close to Fleming, but IMO DAF and TMWTGG are very close to Fleming. DAD had more similarities with Fleming's Bond, if only for the very Flemingesque performance from Brosnan. Whenever I read Fleming I instantly picture the humour, atmosphere and benign bizarre from DAF and TMWTGG... and I always picture Moore from 'Golden Gun' when reading a Fleming novel.



    Except that even Fleming focused on plot, and kept the humor, atmosphere and secondary characters (where there are none so stupid as Nick Nack in any of his novels) where they needed to be, not sprinkled throughout just to make it longer. What you're asking is that MGM do just that: create moments where these people can be interesting, and then put filler in-between. Nothing works that way, and I point to Men in Black 2 as the example. Or, well, any sitcom that TV Land puts out, because the only good things about those shows are the commercials for upcoming episodes.
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan
    Posts: 1,744
    DaltonCraig007 said:

    They dropped the overly melodramatic and complex plot and take on Bond, and went for a throwback to the good old fun outings. DAD was much better, more fun, more Bond, more entertaining than TWINE. Also Brosnan in DAD had a very Flemingesque performance... more relaxed, like he finally understood the Bond character. IMO DAD is a very good film, very Bond, very fun, very cool... much better than the real DUD that TWINE was.



    Agreed. DAD for all its over-CGI and Jinxish faults was still an improvement over the dull OHMSS/CR wannabe a/k/a TWINE.

    As for the biggest mistake of the Brosnan era? I'd say promoting Barbara Broccoli to chief co-producer, a mistake continuing into the Craig era.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 7,783
    Samuel001 said:

    A recurring threat would not have improved Brosnan's films, just like that. The scripts needed to be sorted out first.



    it would've helped though, and made it more intresting. Sean bean would've improved DAD alot.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 7,783
    PrinceKamalKhan said:

    DaltonCraig007 said:

    They dropped the overly melodramatic and complex plot and take on Bond, and went for a throwback to the good old fun outings. DAD was much better, more fun, more Bond, more entertaining than TWINE. Also Brosnan in DAD had a very Flemingesque performance... more relaxed, like he finally understood the Bond character. IMO DAD is a very good film, very Bond, very fun, very cool... much better than the real DUD that TWINE was.



    Agreed. DAD for all its over-CGI and Jinxish faults was still an improvement over the dull OHMSS/CR wannabe a/k/a TWINE.

    As for the biggest mistake of the Brosnan era? I'd say promoting Barbara Broccoli to chief co-producer, a mistake continuing into the Craig era.


    once again its up to super-thelivingroyale to fly in and defend TWINE. It's not a CR/OHMSS wannabe, its different. Yes it has a more emotional and complex bond but it also has classic bond elements, like one liners, Q n moneypenny, etc. Its also great because it has a memorable villian and a good villianess. This film is probably the best brosnan acted in the series. It's almost the perfect bond film and would be the best one, but flaws like denise richards stop it from reaching no 1 and keep it at no 2 (imo)
  • Agent007391Agent007391
    Posts: 3,529
    Well, super-thelivingroyale, I will be your Craig-tonite (Kryptonite). Bond in the film isn't exactly complex. Just like Renard, he's far too easily seduced by Electra. His motivations are very explicit: stop the bad guy (as it is in most Bond films, but in CR/OHMSS, he had more motivations than that). Electra wasn't a very good villainess, nor was Renard that good of a villain (good actor, stupid character, and that god-awful thing about feeling no pain is just... no).

    I can agree with you about the best Brosnan acting, though.

    And, Denise Richards is a big problem in that movie. As is Zukovsky dying (I liked Robbie Coltrane in that movie, he gets my favorite line: "I'm looking for a submarine. It's big and black and the driver is a very good friend of mine").
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,003
    My biggest problem, among many, with TWINE is that it makes Bond look so stupid. Electra plays him like a fiddle, the villains have little to no problems going on about their plot for most of the movie, and Bond only gets to save M after he himself is kidnapped. Are we supposed to believe that this is the same resourceful sharp-as-a-tac agent Sean Conney played?
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan
    Posts: 1,744
    DoubleOhhSeven said:

    Are we supposed to believe that this is the same resourceful sharp-as-a-tac agent Sean Conney played?



    Indeed. Just look at how Connery's Bond handled Luciana Paluzzi's Fiona Volpe in TB. Compare that with how Brosnan's Bond handled Elektra in TWINE. Connery's Bond (of course) wins, absolutely no contest. Brosnan's Bond handles Miranda's treachery in DAD a lot better IMHO.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,003
    PrinceKamalKhan said:

    DoubleOhhSeven said:

    Are we supposed to believe that this is the same resourceful sharp-as-a-tac agent Sean Conney played?



    Indeed. Just look at how Connery's Bond handled Luciana Paluzzi's Fiona Volpe in TB. Compare that with how Brosnan's Bond handled Elektra in TWINE. Connery's Bond (of course) wins, absolutely no contest. Brosnan's Bond handles Miranda's treachery in DAD a lot better IMHO.


    Good point. Just because they set out to make a more emotional Bond film doesn't mean they had to make Bond into a love-blinded fool. Brosnan doesn't even seem to be playing the same character he did in GE and TND.
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan
    Posts: 1,744
    DoubleOhhSeven said:

    PrinceKamalKhan said:

    DoubleOhhSeven said:

    Are we supposed to believe that this is the same resourceful sharp-as-a-tac agent Sean Conney played?



    Indeed. Just look at how Connery's Bond handled Luciana Paluzzi's Fiona Volpe in TB. Compare that with how Brosnan's Bond handled Elektra in TWINE. Connery's Bond (of course) wins, absolutely no contest. Brosnan's Bond handles Miranda's treachery in DAD a lot better IMHO.


    Good point. Just because they set out to make a more emotional Bond film doesn't mean they had to make Bond into a love-blinded fool. Brosnan doesn't even seem to be playing the same character he did in GE and TND.


    Indeed. Or DAD. I particularly detested Bond's getting all sentimental over Elektra by seeing her cry on a video monitor. Bond in OHMSS didn't let Tracy get truly close to him emotionally until after he'd known her about 3 months and she had helped him escape from Fraulein Bunt & company. TWINE's Bond gets all misty-eyed over Elektra before he's even spoken to her once. Of course this isn't Brosnan's fault but the writers.
  • Agent007391Agent007391
    Posts: 3,529
    Couple that with Denise Richards, and it's so obvious why that movie was a problem.
  • X3MSonicXX3MSonicX
    Posts: 2,547
    Agent007391 said:

    Couple that with Denise Richards, and it's so obvious why that movie was a problem.



    Why? You got a problem with Denise? (just asking)
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 7,783
    @Agent007391 richards is a problem, I've said that, but the rest of the film balances the problem out. I think renard was a cool villian, and electra wasn't bad (miranda frost was better). I think bond being won over by electra shows a more human side to 007, it proves he can be fooled and that he makes mistakes. The film has the best PTS in the series, and its long and relates to the story. TWINE takes all these great bond traditions like gadgets, girls, one liners, exotic locations, great action and combines it with realisticness and emotion that isn't so different to craigs films. But thats just the way I see it, you have your own opinion and im not gonna argue with it.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 7,783
    double post, sorry
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 7,783
    Agent007391 said:

    DaltonCraig007 said:

    This is where we differ. When I watch DAF or TMWTGG, it's like I read a Fleming novel... And IMO when I read the Fleming novels, I picture Moore from TMWTGG, and the DAF atmosphere and humour. IMO the Fleming novels were much more humourous than the Craig films, and are more in line with the '74 Moore and '71 Connery outings.



    I'm glad you can see it that way, but I don't, and neither does a good deal of the world (it seems). The humor I read in Fleming comes at us dry, and dark; not the over-the-top antics of Moore.


    moore is like flemmings bond at times but alot of the time he's doing his own thing as bond, which I enjoy. You have to admit he really made the part his own.
  • Agent007391Agent007391
    Posts: 3,529
    thelivingroyale said:

    Agent007391 said:

    DaltonCraig007 said:

    This is where we differ. When I watch DAF or TMWTGG, it's like I read a Fleming novel... And IMO when I read the Fleming novels, I picture Moore from TMWTGG, and the DAF atmosphere and humour. IMO the Fleming novels were much more humourous than the Craig films, and are more in line with the '74 Moore and '71 Connery outings.



    I'm glad you can see it that way, but I don't, and neither does a good deal of the world (it seems). The humor I read in Fleming comes at us dry, and dark; not the over-the-top antics of Moore.


    moore is like flemmings bond at times but alot of the time he's doing his own thing as bond, which I enjoy. You have to admit he really made the part his own.


    Every Bond is like Fleming's Bond at times. But, you're right: Moore made the part his own, and his films were enjoyable. But, I'm also right, and his antics were very over-the-top.
Add a Comment