It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
It's interesting to see the evaluations and re-evaluations of the different Bonds through lens of history. I'm young and new at the Bond thing, so correct me if I have anything wrong.
It seems that Connery was beloved at the time and never got his backlash because he's Sean Connery and the films were the innovators of the series & genre and the biggest thing in movies at the time. The closest thing there is currently to a backlash is that Goldfinger has been getting shafted in favor of From Russia With Love and even Thunderball in Craig's era.
Lazenby never had a chance, and On Her Majesty's Secret Service was left to languish at the bottom of Bond listings until very recently. Lazenby was a punchline and shorthand for "unsuccessful successor". Recently, On Her Majesty's Secret Service has been rightly roundly recognized as a classic, and even Lazenby's performance is being reevaluated, probably because Craig has a similar human touch.
Moore got his backlash while he was Bond, as there was no backlash for Connery, and there was no initial positive reception for Lazenby. This was only exacerbated by Never Say Never Again. By Brosnan's era, he was seen as one of the two archetypes for Bond, and in Craig's era he's been able to settle into his place as the lighthearted one who went on a bit too long.
Dalton was initially received somewhat positively, but when Licence to Kill's relative failure was compounded by legal issues (with which I am not familiar, somebody please explain this to me), he was viewed as having almost killed the series. Since Craig's take on the character is similarly dark, he is seen as ahead of his time.
Brosnan was introduced to be the between the two archetypes, Connery and Moore, and provide financial stability and rebirth to a series that had just escaped a brush with death. He was very popular and was hailed as the 2nd best Bond. Then Die Another Day and Daniel Craig happened. Now that Craig is Bond, the backlash is in full swing, and the criticisms range from the sensible to the frankly absurd (like saying he was a worse actor than Lazenby. I mean, come on. Have you watched their movies? Have you seen Lazenby try act cool, smooth, or generally Bondian? Sorry. Rant over)
Craig is currently Bond and most everyone loves him. Two of his films are in the "instant classic" sphere, one is in the awful-average sphere. He has two more films left to cement/tarnish his legacy.
Bottom line here is that Brosnan was GREAT, not as great as Dalton, and IMO Craig is close, being almost as true to the character as Dalton, yet not as cool or fun to watch as Brosnan. Although Connery rocked in DN through YOLT...
Final thought: Dalton is King, Broz, Connery & Craig are Princes, and Moore & Lazenby are Princes-in-waiting. :))
Brosnan enthusiasts won't be pleased to hear it, but can never really change that thinking
You hate Tarantino's movies because of a possible casting decision that never happened? Wow, tough crowd.
Right back at you, @BigGayIsland. If this is the best you can produce, maybe you need to learn some discussion skills. But then your username is enough to indicate that your only intention is to provoke.
"Oh, right I get you now, it's because he's Irish is it?" Taken from a Northern Ireland sketch show and spouted by a little male character dressed as a leprechaun (though of course he said "...because I'm Irish..."), but very true, as all good comedy ultimately is in the end.
In all seriousness, I do think Pierce Brosnan WAS James Bond - the man was born to play the part, for sure. At times, he was a little strangely off as an actor (he was otherwise great) I did feel - especially in some of his confrontational scenes with Elektra King, though I rate TWINE very highly as a Bond film and general precursor to what they did in CR. There, I said it and will defend it to my last man.
Good to know. Thanks, Chris!
Funny, I too consider TWINE a precursor of CR, however flawed it was. It was like the series was at a cross road, being utterly undecided where to go, and then took the wrong route with DAD.
Time... for... a station break.
Unfortunately he was badly let down by the writers when it came to DAD. I suspect he originally read the first few pages of the script he must have been cock-a-hoop at the notion of Bond being captured and tortured for fourteen months, only to turn the next page to find the writers had bottled it entirely and had settled on a by-the-numbers Bond bonanza with zero character arc and formulaic plotting.
I expect he's looked at DC with great envy given the scripts he's had to work with so far.
Agreed on this, too, especially on the DAD cop-out. Now, that was criminal! I think that there is much expedient Brosnan-bashing and sheer revisionism that does not accurately tally with the facts by the bigger of the Craig nuts. I suppose something similar happened to Tim Dalton once Brosnan became Bond, but I for one can't remember it. Don't get me wrong, I think Craig is great too, but does this greatness have to be at the expense of another actor in the role, namely Pierce Brosnan? I think not, but others have their views as I know from a tour of all the main Bond forums, and I must say I find it all a little bit showy and bandwagon clambering in intent and style.
I have always meant to write a lengthy defence of Pierce Brosnan and in so doing tell the story of his loss of the role in 2004-2005 and I may indeed do that yet.
I thank you for your agreement and support. I think it is an outstanding film, possibly even Brosnan's best but it gets little love on Bond forums for some reason. There is definitely a "connect" with CR there, but just whisper it for the minute while I hold off the wolves.
Sorry fellas, but I can't agree with TWINE (a bottom fiver for me) and would like to hear what the connect is with CR past another round of corpse kissing. And please don't try to convince me that the ham fisted melodrama that was Bond's romance with Elektra even began to approach what we saw in CR. I honestly laughed so hard yesterday that my gut still hurts.
TWINE I will always remember for the beautiful Sophie (her in that red casino dress is the stuff of erotic dreams for men of all ages), the return of Robbie Coltrane as Zukovsky, and sadly the last film for the beloved Desmond Llewellyn as Q. Good PTS that got the movie off to a great start. That's about all that stood out as above average. I thought Pierce reached his pinnacle in TND and from there it was all mostly forgettable until CR for me became easily the best film released since the Dalton era.
Did I mention "He knew exactly where to huuuuuurt me" and similar lines so terribly delivered? Oh, I'm not referring to the infamous Brosnan pain faces; they truly are the least of my concerns. I'm instead referring to things like "Tanner!". He makes such an angry face, it feels like he got a test back with an F written on it. The other fellas could play angry with ease. And even Brosnan managed... in other films. TWINE didn't exactly bring out the best in Brosnan I reckon. It's got a messy script and it failed to elicit great performances from its actors.
In terms of PB's acting, I'm not adverse to it here but he is considerably better in The Thomas Crown Affair, released in the same year as TWINE. Apart from the one scene when he and Rene Russo are in the back of a limousine and he puts on this very odd laugh.
And I've previously made mention of his peculiar accent in DAD "the same person who set me up then has just set me up again. So I'm going after him". It's impossible to know what sort of accent it is.
TWINE is not my favorite. Goldeneye is my second fav of Brosnan's. He came into his own with TND and really was a great Bond in that one.
Americanisms or scripts ... these things get in the way, sure. But Brosnan didn't let me down as Bond, not at all. I still to this day enjoy his Bond, very much so.
And yes, The Thomas Crown Affair was superb! I love that movie.
His accent, what accent, what way of speaking - never stood out to me as a negative or something that took away from the lines. I am always surprised how many people pick up on those things.
Anyway, that's my contribution today stating that again I have no qualms about Pierce Brosnan as Bond and I enjoyed his Bond very much. TWINE, after the splendid PTS, unwound not in a good way for me. And DAD was a dud, although I enjoy the first half much better than the second and I think Brosnan was fine in all of it. I sincerely wish (as I think he surely must, too) that he had gone out on a fifth film that was of high quality, not the doom of DAD.
TCA is one of Brosnan's best roles, I only wish he'd played Bond more like Thomas Crown.
Ironically he won the EMPIRE Best Actor award for TWINE when really he should have won for Thomas Crown.