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
Comments
You initially claimed you were 'offended' by the thread title, which it turns out I copied and pasted from the MI6 news page.
Then you started an unconvincing argument that Brosnan's shortcomings had nothing to do with his own performance but were entirely down the machinations of those evil geniuses at EON who were just hell bent on undermining their lead actor (which let's face it, isn't really very convincing is it?)
And finally you've resorted to hurling insults.
Now kindly point out where exactly in this thread have I been 'insulting' to any one, including Brosnan?
So what exactly is your point and why do you insist on returning here? You clearly have nothing to say other than to persist in your wind up routine.
So basically, we cannot change each others' opinions probably most of the time, and sometimes we are not trying to do that, we just like to state our opinion - even when it is the same opinion again and again. I will continue to write positively about Brosnan, you will continually to write negatively about him. But you do put a spin on him that is at times (not always), unfair - which is what Beatles has been pointing out.
The first page consists almost entirely of me and BAIN talking about what a great guy Brosnan seems to be!
I don't mind people disagreeing with me, but I won't just be shouted down by someone who thinks they have the right to dictate what is and is not open for discussion.
Yes, I added the single word 'bear'. I already told you this. This makes me a 'liar'? Once again, have you even read the article? Sorry to assume your tone of patronising condescension, but are you really as miopic as you make out?
The 'spin' as you put it, or to use a less loaded term, 'angle', is in the article itself, which as I already pointed has the title: Pierce Brosnan: 'I was never good enough as Bond'. Would that have been less offensive to you?
And why do you insist in taking personal offence at my frankly mild observations on an interview with Brosnan in which he himself raises doubts about his own performance? What are these alleged gratuitous insults you keep on accusing me of?
Put simply, what on earth are you going on about?
Just reading through previous posts and this rather nails it, I think.
Getafix, there is only so much to say about such an article. You seem intent on looking at Brosnan's comments as "frank," "enlightening" and are putting heavy meaning into these particular statements. You are treating it like a serious confession, a man full of regret. Many of us do not share your interpretation of his statements. Even for those of us who feel he may honestly believe that he did not "nail" the role, his feeling that does not diminish our appreciation of his Bond. Many artists do not like to watch their finished work. And I do not feel that he is losing sleep over this, so full of regrets about his acting performance as Bond. I just do not think it carries that much weight.
I think - not that I can read minds at all - that Beatles may have gotten fed up with your specific highly dramatic and negative tone, the spin you are putting in this particular thread. I don't feel this needs its own thread even, but okay, here it is. You just seem to be rather overly dramatic about these, what ... "serious confessions" or something like that, by Brosnan. A lot of us simply do not feel that way, do not think this is a huge "reveal" by Brosnan of his shortcomings or the like. You are jumping on it like you just found the Ark of the Covenant. It just feels very ... I don't know ... tabloid, the way you are treating it. And that kind treatment can feel insulting, especially after you have made your point many times already.
Pierce looks older so i would think it might be around the time of CR ?
Good find @Germanlady !!
Dan: "Gotcha, Pierce. Won't forget that piece of advice in a hurry."
;)
"No...for me".
Sorry, Getafix. I couldn't resist with that nice photo and BAIN123's suggestion. ;)
Absolutely no need to apologise - it was a relief to see no more attack posts from Earmuffs. Far from hijacking it, GL has returned the thread more to the light hearted tone in which it started off, with @BAIN123 and I discussing what a great guy Pierce is! This is exactly the spirit in which the thread started out before Earmuffs turned it into a bun fight (read the early posts, if you don't believe me). Don't assume I enjoy these tedious 'arguments' with people like Earmuffs any more than you do. They're just utterly unnecesary.
And for once I'm glad to see GL! Nice photo - as usual
No news for me.
Ask the same question to Craig and you get a similar answer. If not he would be a bit of a dick.
Yeah he is. He trained as an actor and he acts for a living. If you think he's a bad actor fair enough, your opinion and all that, but he is an actor.
This.
I'm no fan of his as Bond, but Brosnan has improved immensely in the last ten years or so. He's turned in some terrific performances (The Matator and All You Need Is Love being the highlights).
I also thought he was great in The Thomas Crown Affair, which he made during his Bond tenure.
He might not have been classically trained but he's still an actor, I think it's fair to say. You can argue about whether how good he is, but that's a different issue.
Tailor of Panama is one of his best performances - I think it came out in or around the time of TND. He's not bad in the Ghost Writer either.
The Ghost Writer (still not sure why it was just called The Ghost here in the UK) is a very fine film indeed.
A really good movie. Just a shame about Polanski's dodgy past. One half of me thinks what a loss it would be if he couldn't work and the other thinks he should have been locked up years ago. Or at least faced trial and some kind of retribution. Pretty hideous when you actually think about it.
Feel the same about Woody Allen, although perhaps not quite on the same level of awfulness in terms of what he's accused of.
Always reminds me of Steve Martin's Oscar joke a few years ago:
"Roman Polanski is here tonight.......get him!"
I know I shouldn't really laugh but it was funny.