Brosnan's on-screen chemistry

135

Comments

  • Posts: 11,189
    Samuel001 wrote:

    I believe you :)
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited August 2012 Posts: 13,350
    I never said you didn't. I was just posting the good little write up someone has done.
  • edited August 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Samuel001 wrote:
    I never said you didn't. I was just posting the good little write up someone has done.

    Ok, what matters is that she was fit and her and Brosnan had "chemistry" ;)

    Good for her agreeing to do the love scene herself too as opposed to hiring a body double.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited August 2012 Posts: 8,038
    [Edited]
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited August 2012 Posts: 8,038
    @SirHenryLeeChaChing

    Well as the title suggests, it's pretty much a blend of the American tone and the British tone. It's no more off putting than Connery's accent if you ask me.

  • Posts: 11,425
    Brozza was more convincing with M Yeoh IMO.
  • @SirHenryLeeChaChing

    Well as the title suggests, it's pretty much a blend of the American tone and the British tone. It's no more off putting than Connery's accent if you ask me.

    Except that Connery is British, of course. I think the gap between their respective accents is otherwise significant. Besides, Connery IS Bond ;)
  • edited August 2012 Posts: 11,189
    @SirHenryLeeChaChing

    Well as the title suggests, it's pretty much a blend of the American tone and the British tone. It's no more off putting than Connery's accent if you ask me.

    Except that Connery is British, of course. I think the gap between their respective accents is otherwise significant. Besides, Connery IS Bond ;)

    Not in NSNA, he's an ageing horny middle aged man who sounds like Sean Connery ;)
  • BAIN123 wrote:
    @SirHenryLeeChaChing

    Well as the title suggests, it's pretty much a blend of the American tone and the British tone. It's no more off putting than Connery's accent if you ask me.

    Except that Connery is British, of course. I think the gap between their respective accents is otherwise significant. Besides, Connery IS Bond ;)

    Not in NSNA, he's an aging horny middle aged man who sounds like Sean Connery ;)

    :)) How true! I do try to forget that abomination.
  • edited August 2012 Posts: 11,189
    BAIN123 wrote:
    @SirHenryLeeChaChing

    Well as the title suggests, it's pretty much a blend of the American tone and the British tone. It's no more off putting than Connery's accent if you ask me.

    Except that Connery is British, of course. I think the gap between their respective accents is otherwise significant. Besides, Connery IS Bond ;)

    Not in NSNA, he's an aging horny middle aged man who sounds like Sean Connery ;)

    :)) How true! I do try to forget that abomination.

    Terrible film. I'd watch DAD over that (I'm deadly serious).
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,038
    @SirHenryLeeChaChing

    Well as the title suggests, it's pretty much a blend of the American tone and the British tone. It's no more off putting than Connery's accent if you ask me.

    Except that Connery is British, of course. I think the gap between their respective accents is otherwise significant. Besides, Connery IS Bond ;)

    I don't think it matters whether he's British or not. Actors can pull things off regardless of where they're from, as long as they're not too far off the track. The fact is, Brosnan may have sounded different to the others, but he still sounded pretty close to what he should sound like. Although, one could say there is no definition to what Bond should sound like. Hence why Lazenby can have such a weird accent (Part Aussie, part....er, something else) and still pull it off.

    Brosnan's accent was fine. He hid the unequal parts of his voice quite well.

    Connery was Bond up until YOLT, anything after that is just not what Bond should be like.
  • BAIN123 wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    @SirHenryLeeChaChing

    Well as the title suggests, it's pretty much a blend of the American tone and the British tone. It's no more off putting than Connery's accent if you ask me.

    Except that Connery is British, of course. I think the gap between their respective accents is otherwise significant. Besides, Connery IS Bond ;)

    Not in NSNA, he's an aging horny middle aged man who sounds like Sean Connery ;)

    :)) How true! I do try to forget that abomination.

    Terrible film. I'd watch DAD over that (I'm deadly serious).

    Ditto that! It's difficult enough to see what became of my hero in DAF, if I have to have a last memory of him as Bond I'll take DAF. More entertainment value too.

    @ CM- To Cubby and his successors at EON, and many fans I've encountered over the years, it's very important that Bond is British. He's an British icon as clearly evidenced by the Olympics. It just wouldn't be the right thing to do. The ideal Bond should come from Britannia, or England, Scotland, or Wales in my definition. It's a little dicey for me outside of that, no offense intended.





  • edited August 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Ireland is near enough to Britain - I'm fine with that. I really don't think Brozza's accent is all THAT strong (be it his Irish or American one). Sometimes it comes out but not really enough to distract me from the story.
  • Neeson is a fantastic actor, I like him a lot and feel he's far superior to Brosnan as a whole. Would I want him as Bond? I'd have to think about that, but truthfully not very hard because it isn't likely to happen. That ship sailed long ago.

    Why I found Lazenby's voice and tone more believable as Bond is because he left the Aussie accent at the door. The upper class Brit accent doesn't bother me a bit. His performance in general is what does. But that's another story for the appropriate thread.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,038
    @SirHenry, well I think that's fair enough for your own personal opinion, the fact that Cubby was the one who wanted Brosnan in the role must mean something, mustn't it?
  • Posts: 5,634
    I felt there was zero chemistry with Denise Richards, it worked briefly with Hatcher, as a former love interest, but she wasn't a character that lived long in the memory. The Scorupco character went a bit to and fro, but they did have some quality scenes together. I thought working with Wai Lin worked very well, one of the best chemistry and working relationships of his tenure, but it seemed to fall flat on it's face with the awful Berry character, possibly the worst chemistry of the whole four films, but then again that was a character I genuinely disliked
  • edited August 2012 Posts: 11,189
    @SirHenry, well I think that's fair enough for your own personal opinion, the fact that Cubby was the one who wanted Brosnan in the role must mean something, mustn't it?

    I think it's known that Broz was Cubbys second choice - not his first.
  • Posts: 11,425
    I felt there was zero chemistry with Denise Richards, it worked briefly with Hatcher, as a former love interest, but she wasn't a character that lived long in the memory. The Scorupco character went a bit to and fro, but they did have some quality scenes together. I thought working with Wai Lin worked very well, one of the best chemistry and working relationships of his tenure, but it seemed to fall flat on it's face with the awful Berry character, possibly the worst chemistry of the whole four films, but then again that was a character I genuinely disliked

    TND is Brozza's "best" film. And Wai Lin is one reason for that.
  • As much as I like GE I always found one huge flaw with it - when Bond and Natalya first "get together". It comes out of nowhere and seemed to happen only because the script demanded it. Take a look at this clip starting at 7:30 - the actors switch from just "being there" to acting flirtatious. I think that it's more a case of the directing than the actors; there was no lead-up to this previously in the film. Did Bond and Natalya flirt at all before this scene?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoycCt0gkXA
  • edited August 2012 Posts: 11,189
    As much as I like GE I always found one huge flaw with it - when Bond and Natalya first "get together". It comes out of nowhere and seemed to happen only because the script demanded it. Take a look at this clip starting at 7:30 - the actors switch from just "being there" to acting flirtatious. I think that it's more a case of the directing than the actors; there was no lead-up to this previously in the film. Did Bond and Natalya flirt at all before this scene?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoycCt0gkXA

    You could say she was turned on by the exilirtation of the scene. I suppose the same applied to Dalton and Lowell in LTK.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,038
    BAIN123 wrote:
    @SirHenry, well I think that's fair enough for your own personal opinion, the fact that Cubby was the one who wanted Brosnan in the role must mean something, mustn't it?

    I think it's known that Broz was Cubbys second choice - not his first.

    I know that. Cubby had wanted Dalton for years, but he had also given Brosnan his blessing. "If he's available when we need him, he's our man." So either way, first choice or second, Cubby gave Brosnan his blessing in the role.
  • BAIN123 wrote:
    As much as I like GE I always found one huge flaw with it - when Bond and Natalya first "get together". It comes out of nowhere and seemed to happen only because the script demanded it. Take a look at this clip starting at 7:30 - the actors switch from just "being there" to acting flirtatious. I think that it's more a case of the directing than the actors; there was no lead-up to this previously in the film. Did Bond and Natalya flirt at all before this scene?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoycCt0gkXA

    You could say she was turned on by the exilirtation of the scene. I suppose the same applied to Dalton and Lowell in LTK.

    I understand your point, but saying that she was turned on is not the same as seeing it...

  • Posts: 11,189
    [
    BAIN123 wrote:
    As much as I like GE I always found one huge flaw with it - when Bond and Natalya first "get together". It comes out of nowhere and seemed to happen only because the script demanded it. Take a look at this clip starting at 7:30 - the actors switch from just "being there" to acting flirtatious. I think that it's more a case of the directing than the actors; there was no lead-up to this previously in the film. Did Bond and Natalya flirt at all before this scene?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoycCt0gkXA

    You could say she was turned on by the exilirtation of the scene. I suppose the same applied to Dalton and Lowell in LTK.

    I understand your point, but saying that she was turned on is not the same as seeing it...

    The little smile she gives to Brosnan certainly turns me on ;)
  • @SirHenry, well I think that's fair enough for your own personal opinion, the fact that Cubby was the one who wanted Brosnan in the role must mean something, mustn't it?

    Of course Cubby's opinion meant something, what the boss says goes.

    Business-wise, I don't dispute Cubby's decision at all regarding the hiring of Brosnan. It was the right move after a 6 year hiatus to have a known quantity in the role and he had the classic look about him, from which they hadn't strayed at that point. They needed a strong effort to prove that Bond could survive the end of the Cold War and have a place in the new world order, and I would have made the same decision in his place. The general audience liked him and the movies made a good to great deal of money, I believe GE was the 4th highest grosser for that period.

    It's artistically where I would have preferred they stayed with Dalton. And it's fact that Cubby wanted him to continue. He had plenty more left to give and I'll always regret that he only got 2 movies because he certainly deserved to have more. In that context, Brosnan was indeed the 2nd choice for both Cubby and myself. The rest of my opinion regarding the artistic merit of the Brosnan era has been stated.



  • Posts: 11,425
    Dalts should have made at least one more. He himself was dissatisfied with LTK and wanted more humour to be brought back in. GE could have been a half decent movie with Dalts in it.

    However, I do to some extent accept the argument that Brozza was more popular with the punters and kept the show on the road.

    But this argument rests on the idea that Dalts was the miserable Bond - I still maintain that had Dalts done a third we would have had a more balanced picture and he would be seen as simply a classic Bond in the tradition of Sean and Rog.
  • edited August 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    Dalts should have made at least one more. He himself was dissatisfied with LTK and wanted more humour to be brought back in. GE could have been a half decent movie with Dalts in it.

    However, I do to some extent accept the argument that Brozza was more popular with the punters and kept the show on the road.

    But this argument rests on the idea that Dalts was the miserable Bond - I still maintain that had Dalts done a third we would have had a more balanced picture and he would be seen as simply a classic Bond in the tradition of Sean and Rog.

    I agree Dalts should have done one more but it's just a fact that audiences liked Brosnan more. For my money GE is still a decent film. It's the only film I can quote about 95% of the dialogue on command ;)

    Personally I think it's very telling that between 1987 and 1994 (when he officially "quit" Bond) he didn't star in any attention grabbing films. I just don't get the impression directors were lining up to work with him - though I could be wrong of course!

    Dalton can be a fun actor in the right role, he had some great moments as Bond and I feel kind of sorry for him but I've always enjoyed him most as Mr Skinner in Hot Fuzz. He seems to be having more fun there than he ever did in Bond.
  • edited August 2012 Posts: 11,425
    I agree Dalts the man was a bit uptight and took himself too seriously but that has nothing to do with his performance on screen. Also what Roger films would you watch outside of Bond? Not many I am guessing, and yet he was a classic Bond.
  • Posts: 11,189
    A lot of people still don't like Rog. I've had arguments with people in the past who couldn't stand him as Bond.

    I've seen Rog in a few films/shows outside of Bond. Some good and some not so good. But he did have a more fullfilling film career during his Bond run (he even worked with former Bond director Peter Hunt).
  • Posts: 5,634
    I like Moore movies outside of Bond, Shout at the Devil, The Sea Wolves and North Sea Hijack to name but a few. Gets unfairly castigated as Bond sometimes, even though this thread in for the purpose of Brosnan but it's true, did some very good Bond releases among one or two poor efforts. Another Bond though who didn't have the best of chemistry with his leading Bond girls I always found
  • Posts: 14,839
    I don't think Brosnan's fault, but rather the writing's and and the actresses, especially Richards's and Berry's.

    Many Bond girls in the Brosnan era were seriously miscast. I would add to the list Teri Hatcher, in a role that should have been crucial.

Sign In or Register to comment.