Is Pierce Brosnan really all that bad ??

1282931333460

Comments

  • edited January 2015 Posts: 11,189
    No, thats probably Casino Royale. Spy is still a high ranker though.

    I think that fight's pretty poorly staged; the punches blatantly don't make contact, the goon overacts like mad when Moore grabs him and Moore's movements are clumsy and stiff.

    Oh and I forgot Moore's little grunts, a prelude to Brosnan's perhaps ;)
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,571
    Roger loved to give us the occasional 'Oowff!'
  • edited January 2015 Posts: 11,189
    I actually noticed Roger's "Oowff's" sometime before I noticed Brosnan's.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333
    No he's not. 8-|
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    Brosnan was great. He deserved better, though.
  • Posts: 2,341
    Was Brosnan that bad?
    In a word:
    He sucked
    No thats two words... :))
  • icsics
    Posts: 33
    Short :"Is Pierce Brosnan really all that bad ??" YESSSSSSSSS
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333
    First Moore now Pierce, Nice to see people getting their negative quota in for the season. ;)
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Murdock wrote: »
    First Moore now Pierce, Nice to see people getting their negative quota in for the season. ;)

    The pseudo-intellectuals have to maintain at least one sacrificial lamb.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333
    RC7 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    First Moore now Pierce, Nice to see people getting their negative quota in for the season. ;)

    The pseudo-intellectuals have to maintain at least one sacrificial lamb.

    Too bad their shooting the Messenger. :))
  • edited January 2015 Posts: 11,189
    Moore's era certainly had some pretty horrific moments that have made me cringe maybe even more than anything in Brosnan's era:

    at least Brosnan didn't push a poor Thai boy into a canal, or sleep with Grace Jones, or rely on a parrot for information, or yell like Tarzan, or constantly wink at villains in cars next to him or presumably give a woman a heart attack causing her to go into intensive care.
  • Posts: 7,653
    Well after DAD which had a great first half only, mostly we got the reinvigorated Craig with CR. That was fun.

    But after QoB & SF I long back to Brosnan, I prefer his spy adventure thrillers over pretentious extremely unlogical editing in QOB and story in SF.

    With the November man Brosnan showed once more that a spy story can be decent without costingas much as a Marvel movie.
  • Posts: 14,840
    Getafix wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote:
    Are there anyone like me who do not find Brosnan's tenure bad, but on the whole disappointing?



    Disappointment is bad in the context of a Bond movie. At least for me. All the Brosnan films 'disappointed' me. Ergo, they are also 'bad' Bond films.

    But it is not quite the same thing. Apart from DAD, I don't consider any of the Brosnan Bond movies bad. But on the whole, his tenure was disappointing.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    Lol, kinda funny we have this thread now
  • Posts: 11,189
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote:
    Are there anyone like me who do not find Brosnan's tenure bad, but on the whole disappointing?



    Disappointment is bad in the context of a Bond movie. At least for me. All the Brosnan films 'disappointed' me. Ergo, they are also 'bad' Bond films.

    But it is not quite the same thing. Apart from DAD, I don't consider any of the Brosnan Bond movies bad. But on the whole, his tenure was disappointing.

    Personally I enjoy them but I don't think most of them hold up all that well in 2015.

    Then again I suppose you could say the same about several of the Moore films. NOW they feel very dated and at times shoddy.
  • Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote:
    Are there anyone like me who do not find Brosnan's tenure bad, but on the whole disappointing?



    Disappointment is bad in the context of a Bond movie. At least for me. All the Brosnan films 'disappointed' me. Ergo, they are also 'bad' Bond films.

    But it is not quite the same thing. Apart from DAD, I don't consider any of the Brosnan Bond movies bad. But on the whole, his tenure was disappointing.

    Personally I enjoy them but I don't think most of them hold up all that well in 2015.

    Then again I suppose you could say the same about several of the Moore films. NOW they feel very dated and at times shoddy.

    The Moore films have charm for me in a way the Brosnan era ones don't. But I now rank DAD above TWINE. DAD is awful but somehow much more watchable than TWINE.
  • Posts: 11,189
    The Moore era actually has some of my most loathed moments in the series. It had some good scenes but some REALLY bad ones. When the second half of MWTGG comes on I want to throw my remote at the TV. If that's charming then god forbid.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333
    Getafix wrote: »

    The Moore films have charm for me in a way the Brosnan era ones don't.
    To you maybe. To others they certainly do have charm. Like me for instance.
  • Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    The Moore era actually has some of my most loathed moments in the series. It had some good scenes but some REALLY bad ones. When the second half of MWTGG comes on I want to throw my remote at the TV. If that's charming then god forbid.

    Really? I thought it surprisingly good when I saw it the other day. Better than I'd remembered.
  • edited January 2015 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    The Moore era actually has some of my most loathed moments in the series. It had some good scenes but some REALLY bad ones. When the second half of MWTGG comes on I want to throw my remote at the TV. If that's charming then god forbid.

    Really? I thought it surprisingly good when I saw it the other day. Better than I'd remembered.

    The first half of the film is...alright. A decent enough 40 minutes or so with Bond going detective. Nothing special but OK. A few good lines of dialogue and of course Christopher Lee.

    By the time the car chase comes in and we have more reliance on inept sidekicks, young schoolgirls and fat redneck sheriffs the film becomes an insulting farce (Pepper talking to Goodnight thinking she's headquarters? Wow..just wow. What ingeniously clever comedy) By far the best scene in the second half is the meeting at the dinner table between Bond and Scaramanga.

    It plods along and, like the other two proceeding Guy Hamilton films, doesn't have the thrill or suspense it should have.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    Murdock wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    The Moore films have charm for me in a way the Brosnan era ones don't.
    To you maybe. To others they certainly do have charm. Like me for instance.
    And me.
    The Brosnan bashing is back in full swing. Gosh, suddenly I miss dod and his pastry fixation.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited January 2015 Posts: 16,333
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    The Moore films have charm for me in a way the Brosnan era ones don't.
    To you maybe. To others they certainly do have charm. Like me for instance.
    And me.
    The Brosnan bashing is back in full swing. Gosh, suddenly I miss dod and his pastry fixation.
    I don't. I can get why others wouldn't like him but to say his movies were the worst ever made is outrageous. Just because someone didn't like his films doesn't make them bad. That's their opinion. Brosnan shouldn't be the one at fault for a few bad decisions. So what if he didn't bring anything new to Bond? Why would he? He grew up on Bond, it was a life long dream of his to play him. He got his chance to play his childhood hero. I don't see him as the type to question the suits in charge. Sure he might have wanted deeper and darker Bond films but he isn't the type to bite the hand that feeds him.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    This thread has been around a while. And nothing changes really.
    Nor does my opinion. I love Brosnan's Bond. He had some great moments and two great Bond films: GE and TND. He was a fine Bond.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    Love tomorrow never dies. He has a lot of great moments in that movie
  • Posts: 12,506
    I like Pierce a lot and have enjoyed him in other films as well as his Bond movies.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited January 2015 Posts: 17,691
    Get ready...
    What I don't freakin' get is why people can watch TSWLM and think it's great, but rag on TND because 'it's a box-ticking mess with an actor that doesn't make Bond his own.'
    Does Pierce drop a fish out of his car window (even in DAD)?? Do his movies use music ques from other movies for hilarious effect? Has he ever Tarzan-yelled during a pain face?
    There were some very genuinely stupid moments in Bond movies circa 1967 - 1985, yet all (or much) of that pales next to, uh... when Pierce straightens his tie underwater??? :-O
    Please boys.
    b-(
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited January 2015 Posts: 16,333
    I think someone's just a little upset at Pierce because Dalton didn't get enough Bond films. ;)
  • Posts: 7,653
    Murdock wrote: »
    I think someone's just a little upset at Pierce because Dalton didn't get enough Bond films. ;)

    Blame the other fella for it. [McGlory I mean :D )
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    Murdock wrote: »
    I think someone's just a little upset at Pierce because Dalton didn't get enough Bond films. ;)
    Yeah, and I agree with him that Dalton should have gotten at least 4 as well, but HTF is that Pierce's fault??
  • Posts: 3,279
    I just watched GE again today for the first time in ages, and although the film does have some decent moments, overall I can see now where the problem lies with Brozza as Bond, when compared to the more recent Craig movies.

    Brosnan just doesn't cut it as a tough figure who could brutally murder someone. This is partly down to his looks, partly down to his feminine voice, partly down to an overall metrosexual persona, and partly down to his rather slim build. In fact, out of all the Bond's, he looks the least likely to be able to handle himself in a fight.

    He definitely looked cool, no doubt about that, and he looked very handsome, no problem there, but he is in the romantic lead mould, not a tough action guy mould.

    When you compare his movies to Craig's films, it becomes fairly obvious the differences. Craig as Bond looks believable. You really buy into the idea that he can kick ass. With Brosnan, you are never really that convinced.



Sign In or Register to comment.