What is your least favourite Brosnan flick ?

145791013

Comments

  • Posts: 1,492
    Shardlake wrote:
    [q, sorry never bought the clothes peg as 007 and his films just look like 90's action films, not James Bond films.

    .

    I have to say if LTK is a 'TV movie' then the Brozzer era are just generic nineties action films. I think it is the constant changing of baffled directors.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    What do you think of Bond behind the wheel of a Bulldozer @Getafix? (that was in CR)

    dire. i didn't like it at all. the chase overall was impressive and nicely choroegoraphed but not particularly Bond IMO. but it should have been the baddy chasing Bond with the bulldozer.

    i've said it before but they often get the power dynamic wrong these days - bond should be the one in peril, outnumbered and against the odds. craig often feels like mr invincible with Mummy M and MI6 HQ constantly checking he's okay.

    in CR i felt sorry for the villains, particularly le chiffre, who seems to have endless bad luck. Bond comes across as a bit Flashman.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 12,837
    Shardlake wrote:
    That and the tanker chase were the last time we got a real punch in the air Bond moment, I personally don't see those moments in any of Brosnan's films. I know what you are going to say, the bungee jump, the tanker chase blah blah blah, sorry never bought the clothes peg as 007 and his films just look like 90's action films, not James Bond films.

    I'm hoping Skyfall gives us that type of moments, the trailer hints at this, Skyfall will hopefully make those deluded people who think GE is the best Bond film some food for thought.

    THESE are the posts that bother me. No jokes, no tongue in cheek, just a rant about how Brosnan sucks.

    Why don't you like the tank chase or the bungee jump, or even the TWINE boat chase? You didn't give any reason, you just said "no those suck, Brosnan is a clothes peg" blah blah blah. @Getafix bashes Brosnan tons but at least he gives reasons. And sorry but if any film is more like an action film than a Bond film it's QOS.

    How is the action in Brosnans films any different from the action in the SF trailer? And of course, somebody has an opinion so they must be deluded! It makes perfect sense!
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,189
    actonsteve wrote:
    Shardlake wrote:
    [q, sorry never bought the clothes peg as 007 and his films just look like 90's action films, not James Bond films.

    .

    I have to say if LTK is a 'TV movie' then the Brozzer era are just generic nineties action films. I think it is the constant changing of baffled directors.

    CR got the mix right. It was a 'serious' Bond film with a meaty story originating in Fleming but with style, humour and panache. It looked beautiful. It was cinematic with a capital C...and it was directed by a Brozza vetran ;)
  • Posts: 11,425
    cr was a big step forward but did not IMO feel especially Bondian. i respect it more than like it. overlong and not particularly enjoyable IMO. i actually prefer QoS.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    cr was a big step forward but did not IMO feel especially Bondian. i respect it more than like it. overlong and not particularly enjoyable IMO. i actually prefer QoS.

    Royale is one of the best films in the series (its number 4 in my rankings at the moment behind FRWL, OHMSS and GF). I was a bit unsure when I first saw it but liked it more and more on subsequent viewings. I just love the photography, I love Vesper and I love Solange (ummm....Solange).

    Anyway back to Brozza .
  • BAIN123 wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    Shardlake wrote:
    [q, sorry never bought the clothes peg as 007 and his films just look like 90's action films, not James Bond films.

    .

    I have to say if LTK is a 'TV movie' then the Brozzer era are just generic nineties action films. I think it is the constant changing of baffled directors.

    CR got the mix right. It was a 'serious' Bond film with a meaty story originating in Fleming but with style, humour and panache. It looked beautiful

    There are two problems I have with CR.

    1) Some of the Bond/Vesper dialouge.

    2) There was no need for it to be a reboot/origin story. The book wasn't one. Just make it another Bond film with Craig as the new Bond. Q should still be there, maybe he just gives Bond a new gun if they don't want gadgets, Moneypenny should still be there, the gunbarrel should be at the start, etc. I think at times, the reboot stopped it feeling like a Bond film.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,425
    if you want great cinematography go and watch Tarkofsky or someone. it's not my main concern when watching Bond. and nice girls should be a given. that said, Vesper is one of the better Bond girls.

    any way, there must be more than nice pictures and girls to make it rank no.4 in your list?! surely...
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,189
    BAIN123 wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    Shardlake wrote:
    [q, sorry never bought the clothes peg as 007 and his films just look like 90's action films, not James Bond films.

    .

    I have to say if LTK is a 'TV movie' then the Brozzer era are just generic nineties action films. I think it is the constant changing of baffled directors.

    CR got the mix right. It was a 'serious' Bond film with a meaty story originating in Fleming but with style, humour and panache. It looked beautiful

    There are two problems I have with CR.

    1) Some of the Bond/Vesper dialouge.

    2) There was no need for it to be a reboot/origin story. The book wasn't one. Just make it another Bond film with Craig as the new Bond. Q should still be there, maybe he just gives Bond a new gun if they don't want gadgets, Moneypenny should still be there, the gunbarrel should be at the start, etc. I think at times, the reboot stopped it feeling like a Bond film.

    1). Agreed with some of the Bond/Vesper dialogue - especially in the scenes later on (though a lot of the early stuff is funny)

    2). I think Batman played a big part in that decision. Plus CR was meant to be the 'first' Bond story - true it wasn't an 'origin' story but the original book did introduce Bond to the world. I can sort of see where they are coming from.
    Getafix wrote:
    if you want great cinematography go and watch Tarkofsky or someone. it's not my main concern when watching Bond. and nice girls should be a given. that said, Vesper is one of the better Bond girls.

    any way, there must be more than nice pictures and girls to make it rank no.4 in your list?! surely...

    Oh yeah...err...Craig, the action, the suspence during the card game, the black and white PTS, the first encounter between Bond and Vesper, the torture scene and the car flip.

    Those are a few things :p
  • Even if they were dead set on making it an origin story (and I agree Batman played a part in that), they still should've introduced Q and Moneypenny.

    Now they have to waste time in films now introducing them, Q has only just popped up and MP might not even be in the new one, so I'm wondering how long they're going to drag this out, introducing all the characters, etc.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Shardlake wrote:
    That and the tanker chase were the last time we got a real punch in the air Bond moment, I personally don't see those moments in any of Brosnan's films. I know what you are going to say, the bungee jump, the tanker chase blah blah blah, sorry never bought the clothes peg as 007 and his films just look like 90's action films, not James Bond films.

    I'm hoping Skyfall gives us that type of moments, the trailer hints at this, Skyfall will hopefully make those deluded people who think GE is the best Bond film some food for thought.

    THESE are the posts that bother me. No jokes, no tongue in cheek, just a rant about how Brosnan sucks.

    Why don't you like the tank chase or the bungee jump, or even the TWINE boat chase? You didn't give any reason, you just said "no those suck, Brosnan is a clothes peg" blah blah blah. @Getafix bashes Brosnan tons but at least he gives reasons. And sorry but if any film is more like an action film than a Bond film it's QOS.

    How is the action in Brosnans films any different from the action in the SF trailer? And of course, somebody has an opinion so they must be deluded! It makes perfect sense!

    I don't buy him as Bond and never will, look I hated him in the role back in 1995 probably before some people on this forum were barely out their nappies, his films to me are not enjoyable they are groan educing, nauseatingly bad, I know some people buy his time in the role like yourself and can't bear to see him criticised but I found 1995-2002 a very lonely place, I though I was the only person that didn't worship his Bond and somehow what James Bond stood for was completely different to what I believed.

    Brosnan's Bond represents everything that is wrong with the character and does not say James Bond to me, I though Lazenby in is so called wooden performance was Bond far more convincingly than the Transatlantic drawling Irish man could ever dream to be.

    The films action sequences were over blown went on for too long, the TWINE boat chase you mention is far too long, you might think this says Bond, I don't live with it.

    I never found anything amusing about his era apart from the massive joke that some people actually though his greatest hits routine was the best Bond since Connery. Sorry I can't use a little smiley face or some witty remark to lighten thing but that's just me.

    As for the action sequences in the SF trailer, seriously you think these look like the ones in the Brosnan era? now that is funny.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,189
    I'd say he's still the third most popular Bond (behind Connery and Craig). Only today I saw a mag in the shop with his face on it.

    The TWINE boat chase was easily one of the better parts of his era. Decent action set piece which isn't as long as the one from LALD.

    The last bit I'm going to say on this. Perhaps not the best Bond but I enjoyed him. I think we can now view his films with a bit of perspective and say OK they were cheesey, they were at times quite badly written but they did have some small pleasures. They weren't ALL bad. Brosnan had charisma which is important when you play Bond. He also worked well alongside acting legend Dench and it was clear the two liked eachother in real life (I suspect Dame Judi still misses him).

    While not the greatest actor the guy does have charm...that's why he's had a sucessful career. I accept his (sometimes big) flaws but I enjoyed him. Sue me!!

    I'm off to bed.
  • @Shardlake I don't think they look any better or worse. EG- The train fight looks cool, but how is it any better than the tank chase? You say his action scenes were too long, we don't know how long the action scenes will be in SF. There are longer action scenes than some of the Brosnan ones.

    You say Lazenby was better and he was terrible, etc, but you still don't say why.

    The current Bond is pretty much always popular nowadays I think. When Brosnan was Bond, he was the best since Connery, now that's Craig. If you didn't like Bronsan when he was Bond then whatever, I'm sorry but this has nothing to do with it.

    And he's still popular with most people. It's only on this site I've read about how everyone hates him.
  • Posts: 4,762
    actonsteve wrote:
    At the moment its Goldeneye and its "its says here" dialogue.

    Have to disagree. That speech in the graveyard by Alec Trevelyan is simply inspired and absolutely remarkable.
  • Posts: 11,189
    00Beast wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    At the moment its Goldeneye and its "its says here" dialogue.

    Have to disagree. That speech in the graveyard by Alec Trevelyan is simply inspired and absolutely remarkable.

    @actonsteve is winding us up :p
  • Not even close........Tomorrow Never Dies. Got a little too silly after that.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 1,146
    Funny how this thread popped up.

    I just watched Quantum of Solace and was thinking that despite its faults, I'd rather watch that then any Brosnan film that is not Goldeneye.

    The fight at the end of Goldeneye is, in my opinion, one of the highlights of the entire series. It's a good, solid story with a well-motivated Bond.

    After GE, the films just got worse and worse. I think there are a few too many shots in the plane chase/jump at the beginning of GE that kinda spoil that stunt a bit for me, but it's loads better than the tsunami parasailing in DAD. That film literally falls apart the second Hale Berry jumps backwards into the ocean in a ridiculous, poorly staged shot. And the ending of DAD is just boring, predictable and horrible.


    Tomorrow never dies is full of...Moore-ish stuff that annoys me, like the girl waving at Bond as she rapels (sic) down the wall, the silly tearing of the propaganda poster down the side of the building stunt and the lame ending.

    Oh, there's also TWINE, which is...just kinda mediocre. I remember being in a theater for TWINE and during the scene where 'Bond' holds a pistol to the bad guy's head for an eternity, the audience was screaming, "Shoot him!"

    I liked Goldeneye a lot and was hoping for better days, but it turned out to be the highlight.
  • Posts: 1,492
    BAIN123 wrote:
    00Beast wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    At the moment its Goldeneye and its "its says here" dialogue.

    Have to disagree. That speech in the graveyard by Alec Trevelyan is simply inspired and absolutely remarkable.

    @actonsteve is winding us up :p

    Not on this occasion. I think the dialogue in the graveyard scene is terrible. No one talks like that. It was like Alec was reading from a script. It kicked me right out of the film ie "it says here"

  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,189
    actonsteve wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    00Beast wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    At the moment its Goldeneye and its "its says here" dialogue.

    Have to disagree. That speech in the graveyard by Alec Trevelyan is simply inspired and absolutely remarkable.

    @actonsteve is winding us up :p

    Not on this occasion. I think the dialogue in the graveyard scene is terrible. No one talks like that. It was like Alec was reading from a script. It kicked me right out of the film ie "it says here"

    I was referring to you saying GE was your least favourite Brosnan flick. I should have made that clearer.

    As for the graveyard scene, I thought it worked well. Never really had a problem with it to be honest. It was atmostspheric, I like the somber music, Bean delivered it well and Brosnan reacted well.

    I can imagine the scene when Bond walks through the errie park before meeting Alec coming out of a Fleming book.

    With a quick movement of the elbow Bond silenced the bitch and watched as she slumped over the steering wheel. "Sweet dreams" he said calmly as he got out the car and silently took in his surroundings. He could see these huge grey mounds all around him. The land seemed huge and stretched far into the distance. Somewhere here Janus lurked waiting for him - it certainly was an ideal location for this mysterious criminal. Hesitantly Bond started to walk through the park. He could hear the sound of birds whisteling through the night sky and in the distance the moonlight shone onto these dreadful yet oddly impressive lifeless statues. Bond continued moving. 'What was this place? Bond thought. 'It's something of a historic dumping ground'. All these dispicable figures lying here in this virtual graveyard.
    Suddenly he heard a noise behind him. He drew his gun and turned round. Nothing. But Bond felt uncomfortable as he looked round at all the stone faces. He was convinced they were staring at him, mocking him as they looked down at his figure.
    Bond continued on. When he reached a clearing a low, flat voice suddenly said calmly "Hello James".


    Fleming would have done it far better than me though :p
  • BAIN123 wrote:

    I was referring to you saying GE was your least favourite Brosnan flick. I should have made that clearer.

    As for the graveyard scene, I thought it worked well. Never really had a problem with it to be honest. It was atmostspheric, I like the somber music, Bean delivered it well and Brosnan reacted well.

    I can imagine the scene when Bond walks through the errie park before meeting Alec coming out of a Fleming book.

    GE is my favourite Brosnan film and definitely in my top ten Bond films. I rewatched it recently, the first time since it had originally come out! I watched it with three friends - one who is a HUGE Bond fan and then two others who had seen bits and pieces of Bond films over the years but became fans after seeing CR in the theatre.

    It was interesting to see GE again - it certainly has some weaker moments (the PTS was awesome until the Road Runner cartoon style catching up to the plane) but there are many scenes that now seem classic. The "Soviet graveyard" scene is one of them. Some of the dialogue in the film may be a little too on-the-nose but the atmosphere and character moments were great.

    I also rate Brosnan's performance in GE as his best. He nicely underplays the role (for the most part) which makes his Bond come across as tougher and with hidden depth. I find that as Brosnan progressed through the films he became more smug and smarmy largely because he tried too hard with his performance - in GE he comes across as more natural.

    It was interesting to see the reactions of my two friends who had never seen it before - there were many groans at some of the more ridiculous parts of the film, and although their verdict afterwards was that it was not as good as the "new" ones it was still enjoyable if lightweight. I still think that it's a great bridge between the "classic" Bond films (I loved the disappearing satellite dish base - very old-school) and the modern ones.

  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,425
    GE has all the classic qualities of a slap in the face with a wet fish.

    It is a joyless trudge through an unimaginative checklist of tired Bond cliches. Awful punning surnames, tick; bad, unconvincing stunts, tick; yawn inducing dialogue, tick; awful casting, tick; bland and forgettable Bond girl, tick; migraine-inducing music, tick; German hairdresser's car, tick; TV's Alan 'annoying' Cummings, tick; TV's Sean 'ooh scary' Bean, tick; TV's Robbie not so funny now Coltrane, tick; cheap and nasty production design, tick.

    Oh and I almost forgot the 'best Bond since Connery'. Tick!

    It's all there. The complete package. A total classic.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,189
    It has its flaws (like most Bond movies) but GE is a decent film. Martin Campbell must have done something right if EON re-hired him 11 years later.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 1,492
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I can imagine the scene when Bond walks through the errie park before meeting Alec coming out of a Fleming book.

    With a quick movement of the elbow Bond silenced the bitch and watched as she slumped over the steering wheel. "Sweet dreams" he said calmly as he got out the car and silently took in his surroundings. He could see these huge grey mounds all around him. The land seemed huge and stretched far into the distance. Somewhere here Janus lurked waiting for him - it certainly was an ideal location for this mysterious criminal. Hesitantly Bond started to walk through the park. He could hear the sound of birds whisteling through the night sky and in the distance the moonlight shone onto these dreadful yet oddly impressive lifeless statues. Bond continued moving. 'What was this place? Bond thought. 'It's something of a historic dumping ground'. All these dispicable figures lying here in this virtual graveyard.
    Suddenly he heard a noise behind him. He drew his gun and turned round. Nothing. But Bond felt uncomfortable as he looked round at all the stone faces. He was convinced they were staring at him, mocking him as they looked down at his figure.
    Bond continued on. When he reached a clearing a low, flat voice suddenly said calmly "Hello James".


    Fleming would have done it far better than me though :p

    I hear they are hiring you to do the sequel to 'Fifty Shades of Grey' Bain.

    :-))
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,189
    actonsteve wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I can imagine the scene when Bond walks through the errie park before meeting Alec coming out of a Fleming book.

    With a quick movement of the elbow Bond silenced the bitch and watched as she slumped over the steering wheel. "Sweet dreams" he said calmly as he got out the car and silently took in his surroundings. He could see these huge grey mounds all around him. The land seemed huge and stretched far into the distance. Somewhere here Janus lurked waiting for him - it certainly was an ideal location for this mysterious criminal. Hesitantly Bond started to walk through the park. He could hear the sound of birds whisteling through the night sky and in the distance the moonlight shone onto these dreadful yet oddly impressive lifeless statues. Bond continued moving. 'What was this place? Bond thought. 'It's something of a historic dumping ground'. All these dispicable figures lying here in this virtual graveyard.
    Suddenly he heard a noise behind him. He drew his gun and turned round. Nothing. But Bond felt uncomfortable as he looked round at all the stone faces. He was convinced they were staring at him, mocking him as they looked down at his figure.
    Bond continued on. When he reached a clearing a low, flat voice suddenly said calmly "Hello James".


    Fleming would have done it far better than me though :p

    I hear they are hiring you to do the sequel to 'Fifty Shades of Grey' Bain.

    :-))

    Urgh. Fifty Shades of Grey :p

    I never said I was the world's best writer but hopefully you get my point. I could see Fleming having fun with the descriptions/historical references. That's one of GE's good points, it certainly has atmosphere.

    What about this one?

    Bond could suddenly hear a dreadful screaming sound in his mind. It was possibly the worst noise he had ever heard in his life. A high pitched female yell. He opened his eyes and woke up. The noise was real and coming from directly behind him. "WAKE UP PLEASE" the voice ordered "WE'RE GOING TO DIE. "I'm here!!" Bond said stirnly his mind still groggy from the tranquilizer. Quickly Bond pulled himself together and tried to figure out where he was, but he couldn't move. He was strapped firmly to a seat and the control panel infront of him began to beep.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 12,837
    Getafix wrote:
    Oh and I almost forgot the 'best Bond since Connery'

    Nah that's Craig now apparently :P

    I just ignore the best Bond since Connery comments because going by Craig and Brosnan every new Bond will be called the best since Connery if he's any good.

    I think "best since Dalton" is a better title. For now that's Brosnan ;)
  • Posts: 11,425
    Getafix wrote:
    Oh and I almost forgot the 'best Bond since Connery'

    Nah that's Craig now apparently :P

    I just ignore the best Bond since Connery comments because going by Craig and Brosnan every new Bond will be called the best since Connery if he's any good.

    I think "best since Dalton" is a better title. For now that's Brosnan ;)

    What about a prize for the "Best Since Brosnan"?
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    @Shardlake I don't think they look any better or worse. EG- The train fight looks cool, but how is it any better than the tank chase? You say his action scenes were too long, we don't know how long the action scenes will be in SF. There are longer action scenes than some of the Brosnan ones.

    You say Lazenby was better and he was terrible, etc, but you still don't say why.

    The current Bond is pretty much always popular nowadays I think. When Brosnan was Bond, he was the best since Connery, now that's Craig. If you didn't like Bronsan when he was Bond then whatever, I'm sorry but this has nothing to do with it.

    And he's still popular with most people. It's only on this site I've read about how everyone hates him.

    I find Lazenby more convincing and he wasn't terrible in my eyes, to think he wasn't really an actor yet for me he was convincing in the fight sequences, he handled the emotional material far more convincing than Brosnan ever could. He wasn't perfect but he ranks in the role higher than both Moore and Brosnan for me.

    I don't buy those comments he was terrible because OHMSS is regarded so much and if he was that bad he would sink the entire film, he doesn't, Brosnan I believe is envious he never got such a film. If Lazenby had been given the chance to make another entry he would have grown into a more than capable Bond, Brosnan for all his experience is not at one time convincing, smug maybe but to take him serious as James Bond 007 I don't think so.

    Anyone who rates him near the top I find very hard to take seriously as knowing the character at all, Dalton bought the character back to Fleming and started to lend Bond some credibility but Pierce just made the character descend back into the ludicrous Moore escapades and with not an ounce of charm that defined Sir Rog's Bond.

    I'm sorry but I hear far more recognition for Craig and actual fans recognising him the best since Connery most of that Brosnan blather was the tabloid newspapers and people who up and till that point weren't even interested in Bond, Brosnan did make Bond popular again granted but he played Bond with no clear definition of what he thought the character was, just scared of the legacy and the shadow of the series.
  • Posts: 140
    God, you are still at it.
  • @Shardlake I like Lazenby.

    Define actual fans. Me and plenty of others on this forum are fans and we like Brosnan, am I not an "actual fan" then? This forum is pretty anti Brosnan overall but he is still popular, like it or not.

    Stop writing your opinion like it's a fact.

    I don't think every Bond has to be close to Fleming. Imo, that would be boring, I like how every Bond has bought something new.

    How do you know he was scared of the legacy? Did he ever say that? I think he knew what the character was and did well.
  • edited October 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Brozza had his moments when it came to the fight scenes. I always quite liked his scuffle on the yaucht mountacore. It's well staged, quick and effective. The speed at which Brosnan flicks round is good.

    That's one area I'd put Brosnan above Moore. He WAS more agile when it came to the physical stuff.

    Whether you like Brosnan or not the guy does have charisma. You can tell the likes of Judi Dench, Desmond Llewelyn and Samantha Bond enjoyed working with him. He's had a pretty successful career outside of Bond too. The bloke DOES have charm.

    Is Craig better? Yes IMO but surely people can still like Brosnan if they want to.
    I think in GE you could certainly tell that the pressure was hanging over him. In fairness who could blame him for being nervous - EVERYONE expected him to do well so the pressure was on his shoulders. At least with Daniel Craig he had nothing to lose and everything to gain. He could relax a bit more.
Sign In or Register to comment.