›

The Brosnan era was actually more fun for Bond fans

1…1213151718…29

Comments

  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited March 2020 Posts: 5,131
    Remington wrote: »
    1. Jeffrey Wright
    2. Jack Lord
    3. David Hedison
    4. Rik Van Nutter
    GAP
    5. Cec Linder
    6. Norman Burton
    7. John Terry

    The Best to the worst.....
    Lord
    Van Nutter
    Hedison
    Terry
    Casey - NSNA
    Linder
    Wright
    Burton



  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Funny that a Brosnan era thread, about the only era (not counting OHMSS) that doesn t feature Leiter, has turned into a Leiter ranking thread.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Funny that a Brosnan era thread, about the only era (not counting OHMSS) that doesn t feature Leiter, has turned into a Leiter ranking thread.

    One of the many crimes of that era. Wade = Ffs!
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Funny that a Brosnan era thread, about the only era (not counting OHMSS) that doesn t feature Leiter, has turned into a Leiter ranking thread.

    ytxwnha.gif
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,894
    I am apalled at all the John Terry-phobia. You all need to check your Felix Leiter privalege.

    #JohnTerryMatters
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    He’s middle of the road. Average.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    He was ok. Not extraordinary, not awful.
  • RyanRyan Canada
    Posts: 692
    He just wasn't really given anything to do and had little in the way of screen charisma. Not entirely his fault at all, just not noteworthy or memorable. Wright and Hedison both have the multiple film advantage of giving us time to get to know them a little bit.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited March 2020 Posts: 8,025
    Someone from the KTBEU years actually attended a Q&A that featured John Terry and posted about it here. He was asked about his Bond appearance and to put it mildly Terry was not happy when working on the set, disliking the lines he was given and ultimately he had nothing to do but hang around on a boat.

    I actually wish he got to reprise for LTK because at least he’d been doing SOMETHING, and he’s a fine actor from all the other work I’ve seen of his. I like Hedison, but I always found him unconvincing as Dalton’s counterpart. He was perfect for Moore’s Bond, but Dalton should have had a partner who was more of a comparable age.
  • OctopussyOctopussy Piz Gloria, Schilthorn, Switzerland.
    Posts: 1,081
    Yeah, this thread has really gotten off topic. The Brosnan era wasn't more fun for Bond fans, because Bond fans are the most critical. I think the more relevant question is was the Brosnan era more fun for the general public?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    I’d say it definitely was. People come in, have a fun time at the theaters, and then move on with their lives while us fans keep analyzing every minutia of a new film until it settles down once we move onto overanalyzing yet another film.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,034
    Yes, people generally had a good time at the cinema for Brosnan's films.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Because of Brosnan's era, the "general audience" thought that all Bondmovies were like that or should be like that.
  • shamanimalshamanimal
    Posts: 623
    I re-watched Casino Royale last night, and it struck me that no two consecutive Bond films were so tonally opposed as DAD and CR.

  • GetafixGetafix
    edited March 2020 Posts: 11,425
    MR and FYEO would be closest probably.

    OHMSS and DAF?

    LTK and GE
  • OctopussyOctopussy Piz Gloria, Schilthorn, Switzerland.
    Posts: 1,081
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Because of Brosnan's era, the "general audience" thought that all Bondmovies were like that or should be like that.

    Brosnan Bond films were Bond by numbers. They were box tickers in terms of the "Bond formula" and from that perspective, I'd argue that the general public loved them. They got all the stereotypical Bond trimmings like the gadgetry and gimmicks and put a smile on the audiences faces. However, it's this style over substance approach that to me hindered the Brosnan era with poor storytelling that were more akin to an run-of-the-mill action film then a classic Bond film, IMO. Yes, I know that they tried to add depth to the character again in The World Is Not Enough but that was such a fail, that I personally prefer every Bond film to it, including Die Another Day which features Brosnan's most self-assured performance, IMO.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Octopussy wrote: »
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Because of Brosnan's era, the "general audience" thought that all Bondmovies were like that or should be like that.

    Brosnan Bond films were Bond by numbers. They were box tickers in terms of the "Bond formula" and from that perspective, I'd argue that the general public loved them. They got all the stereotypical Bond trimmings like the gadgetry and gimmicks and put a smile on the audiences faces. However, it's this style over substance approach that to me hindered the Brosnan era with poor storytelling that were more akin to an run-of-the-mill action film then a classic Bond film, IMO. Yes, I know that they tried to add depth to the character again in The World Is Not Enough but that was such a fail, that I personally prefer every Bond film to it, including Die Another Day which features Brosnan's most self-assured performance, IMO.

    Am I the only one who ranks his Bonds as such?

    GE
    TWINE
    TND
    DAD

    :-?
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    TND
    DaD
    GE
    TWINE
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    GE
    DAD
    TND
    TWINE
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,034
    Order of release, for me.
    GE
    TND
    TWINE
    DAD
  • BonSimonLeBon_1BonSimonLeBon_1
    Posts: 2,436
    CraigMooreOHMSS wrote: »
    Order of release, for me.
    GE
    TND
    TWINE
    DAD

    Same for me.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Octopussy wrote: »
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Because of Brosnan's era, the "general audience" thought that all Bondmovies were like that or should be like that.

    Brosnan Bond films were Bond by numbers. They were box tickers in terms of the "Bond formula" and from that perspective, I'd argue that the general public loved them. They got all the stereotypical Bond trimmings like the gadgetry and gimmicks and put a smile on the audiences faces. However, it's this style over substance approach that to me hindered the Brosnan era with poor storytelling that were more akin to an run-of-the-mill action film then a classic Bond film, IMO. Yes, I know that they tried to add depth to the character again in The World Is Not Enough but that was such a fail, that I personally prefer every Bond film to it, including Die Another Day which features Brosnan's most self-assured performance, IMO.

    Good post. Albeit I much prefer Brosnans performance in GE and the first hour of TND.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    edited March 2020 Posts: 3,497
    Getafix wrote: »
    TND
    DaD
    GE
    TWINE

    I meant the movies. In terms of performance:

    DAD
    TWINE
    GE
    TND
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    Octopussy wrote: »
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Because of Brosnan's era, the "general audience" thought that all Bondmovies were like that or should be like that.

    Brosnan Bond films were Bond by numbers. They were box tickers in terms of the "Bond formula" and from that perspective, I'd argue that the general public loved them. They got all the stereotypical Bond trimmings like the gadgetry and gimmicks and put a smile on the audiences faces. However, it's this style over substance approach that to me hindered the Brosnan era with poor storytelling that were more akin to an run-of-the-mill action film then a classic Bond film, IMO. Yes, I know that they tried to add depth to the character again in The World Is Not Enough but that was such a fail, that I personally prefer every Bond film to it, including Die Another Day which features Brosnan's most self-assured performance, IMO.

    Octopussy gets it.

    That said, I enjoy GE as a solid entry and parts of DAD for its zaniness. TND and TWINE though are just dull slogs.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,034
    TND is by the numbers, but it certainly isn't a dull slog.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    It was for me at 11, still is today!
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,034
    That's a shame. I enjoyed it very much at 8, and still enjoy it very much today.

    I enjoyed TWINE at 10, too. But comparatively, that opinion isn't as blind as it once was.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited March 2020 Posts: 13,894
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    It was for me at 11, still is today!

    I feel the same about GF. Never appealed to me. TND has been a favourite of mine since seeing it on the big screen. How much of that is down to it being my first big screen Bond? I couldn't say.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    CraigMooreOHMSS wrote: »
    TND is by the numbers, but it certainly isn't a dull slog.

    It's a silly movie but dull it ain't.

  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    Agreed, TND is far from dull
Sign In or Register to comment.