› ›

The PIERCE BROSNAN Appreciation thread - Discuss His Life, His Career, His Bond Films

1…3940424445…136

Comments

  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited February 2016 Posts: 7,983
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    One can only hope. I wonder which novel in the series will they adapt next. Man, I'd so love to see Martin Campbell directing The November Man 2.

    This would be awesome. Although I'd rather see Campbell direct Daniel in a final Bond. It would be a great way to bookend his tenure.

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Why not both?
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Why not both?
    ^This.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited February 2016 Posts: 4,449
    Insteed of making a sequel with Brosnan, MGM and WARNER going to make another remake of The Thomas Crown Afair.

    http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/41545/-creed-star-leads-thomas-crown-remake
    Creed" Star Leads "Thomas Crown" Remake

    By Garth Franklin Wednesday February 24th 2016 10:03AM
    "Creed" Star Leads "Thomas Crown" Remake

    In arguably the most unexpected news of the year so far, "Creed" star Michael B. Jordan has scored the title role in an upcoming second remake of the heist drama "The Thomas Crown Affair" at MGM and Warner Bros. Pictures.

    Norman Jewison helmed the 1968 original which followed a rich playboy (Steve McQueen) who orchestrates a Boston bank robbery. A female insurance investigator (Faye Dunaway) is contracted to investigate the heist and she quickly deduces his guilt and goes after him. So begins an often romantic game of cat and mouse between the two, with she having to make a decision about what she intends to do.

    The project was remade in 1999 by John McTiernan and starred Pierce Brosnan and Rene Russo. That switched the heist to the art world and both upped the chemistry and cleverness of the heists, ultimately becoming one of the few remakes that's often considered better than its original.

    No producer, writer or director is yet attached. Jordan's "Creed" has so far earned $172 million worldwide for the studio.

    Source: Variety

    Earlier MGM making the Hobbit movies with Warner, but made me curious of this also mean
    MGM found new partner in Warner in taking over from Sony (and Fox).
  • SzonanaSzonana Mexico
    Posts: 1,130
    M_Balje wrote: »
    Insteed of making a sequel with Brosnan, MGM and WARNER going to make another remake of The Thomas Crown Afair.

    http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/41545/-creed-star-leads-thomas-crown-remake
    Creed" Star Leads "Thomas Crown" Remake

    By Garth Franklin Wednesday February 24th 2016 10:03AM
    "Creed" Star Leads "Thomas Crown" Remake

    In arguably the most unexpected news of the year so far, "Creed" star Michael B. Jordan has scored the title role in an upcoming second remake of the heist drama "The Thomas Crown Affair" at MGM and Warner Bros. Pictures.

    Norman Jewison helmed the 1968 original which followed a rich playboy (Steve McQueen) who orchestrates a Boston bank robbery. A female insurance investigator (Faye Dunaway) is contracted to investigate the heist and she quickly deduces his guilt and goes after him. So begins an often romantic game of cat and mouse between the two, with she having to make a decision about what she intends to do.

    The project was remade in 1999 by John McTiernan and starred Pierce Brosnan and Rene Russo. That switched the heist to the art world and both upped the chemistry and cleverness of the heists, ultimately becoming one of the few remakes that's often considered better than its original.

    No producer, writer or director is yet attached. Jordan's "Creed" has so far earned $172 million worldwide for the studio.

    Source: Variety

    Earlier MGM making the Hobbit movies with Warner, but made me curious of this also mean
    MGM found new partner in Warner in taking over from Sony (and Fox).


    Ok I refuse to see this guy as Thomas Crown, as good as he was in Creed he is not Leading man material and will ruin this story.
    If the plans are a remake then id cast Chris Hemsworth as Thomas Crown and Rachel McAdams as Katherine.

    Please change the actor I don't mind a second remake and andw take on this stiry but this kid is no Thomas Crown.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I agree that seems like a travesty in the making.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333
    Flop in the making.
  • SzonanaSzonana Mexico
    Posts: 1,130
    bondjames wrote: »
    I agree that seems like a travesty in the making.

    I agree

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Another remake? or what do the society call it these days? "Reboot"?

    Please, don't. Perhaps with old standards and putting Henry Cavill in the shoes of Thomas Crown, I can hope for something. But, you know I have little to no faith in remakes. Only very few of them end up being good ones.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,588
    So, it's essentially a remake of a remake?
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    I'm more disgruntled by the claim that the 1999 remake was better than the original. McQueen has more charisma than Brosnan any day of the week - and the scenes on the beach, class.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2016 Posts: 23,883
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    I'm more disgruntled by the claim that the 1999 remake was better than the original. McQueen has more charisma than Brosnan any day of the week - and the scenes on the beach, class.
    I have yet to watch this film in its entirety. I have debated buying it on many occasions.

    I saw a few clips of it on tv once that weren't all that impressive (some dated 'Hulk' or 'Billie Jean' style split screen and a long chess game with some spaced out stares between Faye Dunaway and McQueen). So you recommend this? I'll buy it if it's decent.
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    Yeah @bondjames I recommend it. Admittedly it's not the best film in the world. But definitely better than the remake with Brosnan.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Great. Thanks @tanaka123. I'm going to buy it today along with Deadfall and the Ledge (two films with Charlie Hunnam). I want to see what's the big deal about this bloke and whether he is Bond material.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited February 2016 Posts: 11,189
    I prefer Pierce Brosnan overall to Steve McQueen. To be honest I haven't seen enough of Steve McQueen to really draw an opinion. Only seen him in The Great Escape and The Towering Inferno (yep, I haven't seen Bullet).
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    The 1999 remake actually was more entertaining than McQueen's original. The original had a downplayed plot and didn't even have enough character development. It had more style, yes. The setting was a lot more beautiful. McQueen's swagger is definitely present and the chess scene is lovely. But, these few elements don't make it stand out better than a whole film with a very good narrative. Say what you like about Brosnan, he was spectacular and a better Thomas Crown than McQueen.
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    I disagree with you @ClarkDevlin of course. I don't think Brosnan was bad in it he's just not Steve McQueen - the Cooler King you know. To be fair I think they're fairly close, but the original just pips it for me.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Ordered it. Will let you know my thoughts once it arrives and I take a look. I've been on and off about this for a long time. Dunaway looks delicious in some of the clips/photos I've seen, in that old school classy way.
  • SzonanaSzonana Mexico
    Posts: 1,130
    Of Thomas Crown i prefer the remake.

    Both couples were great Pierce/Rne and Steve McQueen/ Faye Dunaway, both had great indivudal performance the leads and the chemistry was perfect in both versions but what makes the remake better is the peace of the film and how that makes it much more fun to watch, the tone is lighter and it feels since the first scene till the end.

    I get why the original had the ending they went for but i think this story was better with the Hollywood ending.




  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    They're remaking this again? Why? Why can't studios leave shit alone and come up with new material. It's just lazy. No one's asking for this and if we want to see this story, there are 2 excellent versions of it. Crikey.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    They want to remake Remington Steele as a whole series, too, which fairly to say, had an homage to The Thomas Crown Affair in an episode.

    Then again, it's the age of remakes and "reboots" (a word that's so misused sometimes it nettles me seeing it in an average internet article) where originality no longer is a thing. Just rushed cash-in products capitalizing on the success of the old films. If Scarface can get a remake, anything can get a remake.

    I do admit though, there are a few that are quite lovely within the "remake" categories. The Italian Job, for instance. I like the remake a lot better than the original which did have an annoying soundtrack from Quincy Jones (who's normally an utterly fascinating composer).

    "We're the self-preservation society!"
    Lord, can anyone shoot me now? :))

    Now, back to Brosnan, I would still want them to go ahead with Thomas Crown and The Missing Lioness (a script written by John McTiernan when he was serving time a few years ago). But, when I was having a word with an inside man, I've been told that it's a dead end. Sad to say.
  • RC7RC7
    edited March 2016 Posts: 10,512
    Ignore me.
  • Scaramanga12Scaramanga12
    Posts: 562
    bondjames wrote: »
    @Szonana I'm afraid I disagree with you on TWINE. Given this is an appreciation thread, I'm going to bite my tongue, but it is firmly planted at #24 out of 24 for me and there are specific reasons for that from my perspective. However, I can appreciate that others have a different view. After all, I like TMWTGG, and it is highly reviled in this forum. To each their own.

    I would be interested to know why you rank TWINE at the very bottom? Is it just the constant innuendoes? The more I watch Brosnan's bond, the more he seems a sleazy bore. However, I thought Marceau was superb and carried the film out of the 'relegation zone'.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    And here I thought this was an appreciation thread.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I've never met Pierce Brosnan,but I know a guy who did, and he said he was the perfect
    Gentleman. Willing to chat for a while and a photo.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Brosnan and Moore ALWAYS come accross as very gentleman like in interviews with self irony and charming humour
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I honestly believe that with the Brosnan years, the Producers and team I general. Were
    Finding their feet with his films. There had been a long gap in the movies. So I'm sure
    They were seeing what old stuff they could reinvent, what new aspects they could
    Introduce.
    Hence why you can get bits of broad almost 70s style humour ( See I'm not blaming
    Sir Rog ) mixing with a contemporary, gritty feel.
    Through all his movies Brosnan gave 100%. Sadly he didn't get the best scripts, but
    He always looked keen and genuinely ( like Sir Roger) seemed to love playing the role.
    In a very early interview, he stated how he wanted to show the darker side of Bond, the
    Man fighting his demons. Sadly he didn't get the chance, but it is how the Daniel Craig
    Films have shown Bond. Just as the Books, as an imperfect hero.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I always get baffled when people in general do say Brosnan didn't get good scripts. I mean, obviously they weren't trying to make an Oscar-worthy emotional story which by the general audience these days is qualified as "good script" whereas escapism and fun-driven entertainment is said to be "suffering from bad script". Brosnan's Bond films did have very good scripts, apart from the average The World Is Not Enough. They had three constructions: The world is threatened, the villain has a violent war-provoking scheme, and you have one hero to rely on to prevent the chaos. Bond. That's what Brosnan's Bond films were all about, and the Bond films pre-Casino Royale in general. As I said before, the audience wanted that back then, and the average cinemagoer would enjoy that kind of stuff in a world where grit and verisimilitude weren't much of appreciated aspects until The Bourne Identity came out. Same as why people wanted escapsim in the 1960s and more realism in the 1970s when the entertainment market got out of hand and overdone with the total comic-book-like perfect heroes, and so on...

    Now, we'll say Brosnan's Bond was bad and he had pointless films until another era comes and reuses the Moore/Brosnan escapism with rather "perfect" heroes. Then, we'll say Brosnan was ahead of his time.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    @ClarkDevlin

    Spot on >:D<
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    That's the great thing about the movies, we all hold so many different opinions. :)
    You guys have yours and I have the right ones. :D
Sign In or Register to comment.