Is Pierce Brosnan really all that bad ??

1141517192060

Comments

  • edited October 2013 Posts: 97
    chrisisall wrote:
    Brosnan's looked like a poor man's Mission Impossible; again, I find it too 90s-generic consistent with Brosnan's overall performance as Bond.
    Yes, Brosnan's was a little closer to what might be in a Fleming novel, and we wouldn't want that.
    :))



    And sure words like "strictly plutonic" and " I thought Christmas only comes once a year." are Fleminesque. If a Brosnan film would be Fleminesque, I hope it'll be more consistent regarding all the scenes, not just the the bank escape. That was part of my point; Brosnan's last 3 looked like a pastiche of Bond by a 6th grade student in an art class. :P
  • edited October 2013 Posts: 63
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Wint wrote:
    In TB we get Bond fighting a tranny
    He is not a "tranny"; he's a man in drag. Read the book.
    He's not in the book!
    I mean the treatment the book is based on, obviously.

    Guess I should have just IFM'd @thelivingroyale's use of the word "tranny", to avoid all this "spammy".

    We live and we learn (and let die).
  • As you can identify from my username and avatar, I like Pierce. He brings to the movie a positive attitude a lust for life that I try to imitate in my own life. ANY, ALL questions... just Google him... I found his webiste where he has some good life views which helped.

    http://www.piercebrosnan.com/menu.php?mm=8&sm=17&pn=2[url][/url]

    Q:
    What your favorite food and do you cook?
    A:
    Don’t cook! I used to… My wife Keely is a great cook. I love pasta & good salads, fresh baguettes, good wine.

    Love the man! Keep in touch with his fans. Not sure this can be the same for other Bonds.
  • Maybe if you puzzled by Bond's jetpack being on the castle roof in TB then perhaps the world of James Bond is simple not for you. It is the "Begin Bizarre" that another poster mentioned a bit ago in another post here on the boards. Leave logic at the doorstep and keep a positive attitude and have fun with the movies here now! Do you also demand logic from your dreams? Come on mates let's take a step back and enjoy Bond's world.
  • Maybe if you puzzled by Bond's jetpack being on the castle roof in TB then perhaps the world of James Bond is simple not for you. It is the "Begin Bizarre" that another poster mentioned a bit ago in another post here on the boards. Leave logic at the doorstep and keep a positive attitude and have fun with the movies here now! Do you also demand logic from your dreams? Come on mates let's take a step back and enjoy Bond's world.

    Exactly, The improbable, slight fantasy in Connery's tenure added to the allure of Bond in the 60s. Brosnan's films just don't have that "allure."
  • Smoloko123Smoloko123 Banned
    edited October 2013 Posts: 18
    The problem wasn't Pierce Brosnan during his tenure as 007. The problem was and still is Barbara Brocolli and the strangehold she has over the franchise. She, like her father did, uses cheap gimmicks,constant action and fairy-tale like plots to capture the hearts of casual movie goers. James Bond is a gun-for-hire, a man with a job to kill people the government deems undesirable. Thats all he is, and in reality, James Bond wouldn't be somebody to exactly look up to. He would most likely be killing people that posed a threat to the reputations of high-level political and financial figures...not somebody who is always on the run chasing down a villain that is threatening to blow up the world , again and again and again and again....Casino Royale was a breath of fresh air because it offered more realism than previous films, and showed how Bond could be a violent,dark and lonely figure with a stressful job. Also I want to add the only reason CR was made more seriously is because DAD looked like a joke compared to the newly released Bourne Series at the time, so the Brocolli's knew that they couldn't pump out another watered down action flick with Bond doing the same routine gimmicks, so they had to step up their game in 2006 and they released a quality film. Competition is a good thing, and I'm thankful for the Bourne Series, because if it hadn't been created, then most likely CR 2006 would have been just another routine childs-play bond movie dedicated to the casual audiences yet again, as Skyfall was...

    You want proof that Barbara Brocolli is too controlling and doesn't want to make Bond more serious and realistic. Just read this interview with Michael Apted from about a year ago.

    "Although his action experience was limited and he has admitted in the past that he relied particularly heavily on the advice and guidance of his second unit director and stunt coordinator, Apted did have something specific to offer the Bond franchise. Despite his fresh approach he felt constrained by the traditions and realms of 007, explaining, "I'd suggest something grittier and they'd say, 'Bond wouldn't do that.' 'Well, why not?' 'He wouldn't.' They'd done 19 so I figured they knew better than I. But it does change and that's what's allowed it be as successful as it is".

    http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond_23_apted_on_bond.php3

    There you go, Pierce Brosnan wasn't the problem. Pierce had the looks,the acting ability and everything els to make a awesome,smooth,slick,manipulating,sneaky and conniving Bond. If he would have been used correctly, he could have been the best. Let's face it, Brosnan doesn't have the physical build to be a blunt/action type figure, but he is well capable of acting sneaky,stealthily and would have been a very unique Bond if directed right and provided with the rightly mold scripts.

    Director Michael Apted wanted to make Bond more serious, and he wasn't allowed as that article clearly states. If Apted would have gotten his way with TWINE, then we probably wouldn't have had to sit through a lousy pipeline scene with Bond sitting on a traveling bomb with D.Richards or the corny scenes of Bond fixing his tie while under-water, or scenes of him running away from flying razor-bladed helicopters...need I say more ?

    Conclusion - With the release of Skyfall and its apparent route to take Bond back in the child-like fantasy adventure scenarios, I have no hope or desire to even see the next film. Ian Fleming's Bond has been raped and shi* on by Barabara Broccoli and EON productions. With the constant marketing campaigns and advertisements, big-budget action scenes/constant 3d effects ...(the scene with Bond fighting the comodo dragon might have been the stupidest scene of that entire movie) and the politically correrct nature the franchise has taken, such as Naomi Harris playing Miss MoneyPenny, (A PURE POLITICALLY CORRECT MOVE) and the reports of her becoming a more action oriented figure in Bond 24 only has me shaking my head.



  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited October 2013 Posts: 16,336
    Smoloko123 wrote:
    You want proof that Barbara Brocolli is too controlling and doesn't want to make Bond more serious and realistic. Just read this interview with Michael Apted from about a year ago.

    Conclusion - With the release of Skyfall and its apparent route to take Bond back in the child-like fantasy adventure scenarios, I have no hope or desire to even see the next film. Ian Fleming's Bond has been raped and shi* on by Barabara Broccoli and EON productions. With the constant marketing campaigns and advertisements, big-budget action scenes/constant 3d effects ...(the scene with Bond fighting the comodo dragon might have been the stupidest scene of that entire movie) and the politically correrct nature the franchise has taken, such as Naomi Harris playing Miss MoneyPenny, (A PURE POLITICALLY CORRECT MOVE) and the reports of her becoming a more action oriented figure in Bond 24 only has me shaking my head.

    This sounds all too familiar already. :-w
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,665
    @Murdock, one post in with content like that, I couldn't agree more.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,921
    I have a feeling @Perdogg has a new student!
  • I agree, something all too familiar there but can't quite put my finger on who this reminds me of.

    @Draggers- isn't your "pal" enough of a headache?
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,921
    I agree, something all too familiar there but can't quite put my finger on who this reminds me of.

    @Draggers- isn't your "pal" enough of a headache?

    Well I do defend @Perdogg as like me he has an alternative take on Bondology, though not all or even much of it I happen to agree with. He's not a troll, just an individual member. I think such memberrs can exist here in the democratic body that is MI6 Community, right?
  • edited October 2013 Posts: 12,837
    Maybe if you puzzled by Bond's jetpack being on the castle roof in TB then perhaps the world of James Bond is simple not for you. It is the "Begin Bizarre" that another poster mentioned a bit ago in another post here on the boards. Leave logic at the doorstep and keep a positive attitude and have fun with the movies here now! Do you also demand logic from your dreams? Come on mates let's take a step back and enjoy Bond's world.

    Exactly, The improbable, slight fantasy in Connery's tenure added to the allure of Bond in the 60s. Brosnan's films just don't have that "allure."

    So it's fine for other Bond films to get slagged off for plot holes and gaps in logic but a 60s film has one and it's part of the films "allure"?

    Even if you forgive the conviniently placed jetpack there's still a fight which is essentially stuff getting broken, shoddy back projection and the baddies getting taken out with water.

    But nope, it was made in the 60s so it's fine.
  • edited October 2013 Posts: 6,396
    I thought whilst reading that long winded post that I was suffering deja vu.

    @smoloko123 you join up to this forum, don't introduce yourself to the rest of the community and immediately with your first post start whining on and on about the "oh so terrible state" the franchise finds itself in and it's all Babs fault. Do me a favour!

    I greatly suspect this is not your first venture to this forum...
  • Posts: 1,965
    Wasn't the reason Barbara didnt make Bond serious during the Brosnan era was because the failure that was the Timothy Dalton, fans didnt want Bond to have a serious tone so she was afraid to go that route again like they did with Dalton so she went to more family oriented Bond films for the Brosnan era and in way she was right because the Brosnan era was very successful
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,921
    fjdinardo wrote:
    Wasn't the reason Barbara didnt make Bond serious during the Brosnan era was because the failure that was the Timothy Dalton, fans didnt want Bond to have a serious tone so she was afraid to go that route again like they did with Dalton so she went to more family oriented Bond films for the Brosnan era and in way she was right because the Brosnan era was very successful

    @fjinardo did in fact say that. It remains true.

  • Maybe if you puzzled by Bond's jetpack being on the castle roof in TB then perhaps the world of James Bond is simple not for you. It is the "Begin Bizarre" that another poster mentioned a bit ago in another post here on the boards. Leave logic at the doorstep and keep a positive attitude and have fun with the movies here now! Do you also demand logic from your dreams? Come on mates let's take a step back and enjoy Bond's world.

    Exactly, The improbable, slight fantasy in Connery's tenure added to the allure of Bond in the 60s. Brosnan's films just don't have that "allure."

    So it's fine for other Bond films to get slagged off for plot holes and gaps in logic but a 60s film has one and it's part of the films "allure"?

    Even if you forgive the conviniently placed jetpack there's still a fight which is essentially stuff getting broken, shoddy back projection and the baddies getting taken out with water.

    But nope, it was made in the 60s so it's fine.

    Yes it's in the 60s so it's fine ;)

    I don't expect the first attempt at cinematic Bond to be perfect notwithstanding Connery's tenure is a huge success.

    But after 3 decades and you did a bad pastiche of the old Bond films........ Where you have an actor who has a laughable pain face...
  • edited October 2013 Posts: 63
    Where you have an actor who has a laughable pain face...
    This "pain face" is nothing more than a nasty rumor. What do you say to Craig's painful laugh-face?
  • Wint wrote:
    Where you have an actor who has a laughable pain face...
    This "pain face" is nothing more than a nasty rumor. What do you say to Craig's painful laugh-face?

    For a nasty rumor, it has a Youtube video dedicated to it:



  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,698
    For a nasty rumor, it has a Youtube video dedicated to it:

    The words punk & douche come to mind... :))
  • edited October 2013 Posts: 63
    chrisisall wrote:
    The words punk & douche come to mind... :))
    Now what is that supposed to mean?

    As for the video, well; it's nothing more than editing tricks.
  • Whatever was said before, Brosnan was not a "bad" Bond - there has never been a bad Bond - but he was never going to be a great Bond. Have him in fifth place above Lazenby, and even then, it's down to George only doing the one release. Brosnan is a fine actor outside of Bond, I.E. The Lawnmower Man, The Fourth Protocol, Evelyn etc, but as for the part of Fleming's Iconic character - it just never worked out from this perspective
  • Whatever was said before, Brosnan was not a "bad" Bond - there has never been a bad Bond - but he was never going to be a great Bond. Have him in fifth place above Lazenby, and even then, it's down to George only doing the one release. Brosnan is a fine actor outside of Bond, I.E. The Lawnmower Man, The Fourth Protocol, Evelyn etc, but as for the part of Fleming's Iconic character - it just never worked out from this perspective

    Exactly. I never understand those who see Brosnan as the best Bond or 2nd-best behind Connery. Still, I have to admit he's a decent actor, but his Bond films are mediocre; the last 3 pulled down the overall score of all 4 movies in my book.
    chrisisall wrote:
    For a nasty rumor, it has a Youtube video dedicated to it:

    The words punk & douche come to mind... :))

    Also, what were you trying to say?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    actonsteve wrote:
    Does anyone think that part of the problem for poor old Brozzer is that he was actually overrated whilst he was in the role? All the critics and magazines etc were saying he's the best since Connery and really bigging him up and now the dust has settled people are making their own minds up.

    ?

    Absolutely. Some were clamouring for him in the role as far back as his Remington Steele days. The media sort of chose him and bigged up their man. No matter how weak the films were he didn't get kicked and at the time he was called the best Bond ever by whatever Fleet Street reptile which had stumbled out the winebar.

    Some of us wern't fooled from the beginning though.

    You and me both, and we have those reptiles here as well.
  • Posts: 1,965
    One of the reasons I like Pirece is because 1 TWINE is my favorite Bond film, and 2nd he just gets really into the role when he plays it. He didnt look bored in any of his films
  • Posts: 1,146
    I think Goldeneye proved that Pierce could be a smooth, kinetic Bond if he's put in a good story, but all that disappeared after that because of the script and directorial issues with those next three pictures. I've gotta question EON's choice of directors for those next three films. He became a rather static character after that, comparatively, with bad stories and mediocre action set pieces.

    In my opinion, the Bond that succeed are half gentleman/half thug because the audience does not know what he's gonna do next. The gentleman Bonds are just too predictable for my taste.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    Pierce was a very good James Bond indeed.
    Excellent in his debut, Goldeneye, and really shone in TND.
    TWINE is a mixed bad and DAD is terrible, but Brosnan was not bad in it.

    Pierce Brosnan was a very good Bond. Not news to most Bond fans. It is rather interesting to read how scathing people can be about him on this forum. I, of course, disagree completely. Don't see what you do, or find merit to any of your arguments.

    You know, it's a big old world - so we should be able to enjoy Bond and have differing opinions. But for some who take so much pleasure in being nasty, overboard, and bashing (which closely resembles hate and jealousy) - whether it be Brosnan, Craig, or Dalton - I suppose the world is not enough. Don't read much bashing of Moore any more. And Sean gets slammed for 2 of his films but otherwise not.

    Just wanted to pop into this thread once in a while, to balance out the bloodshed, tears and ongoing whining.

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,665
    @4EverBonded, it's usually needed. Overall, are we not all big fans of James Bond? It's why we joined this forum, I would assume - it's why I did, anyway. I don't care which film is my favorite or least favorite, because when it all boils down, I love each installment in the series and never regret watching any of them. Even DAD, which is one of the most abhorred entries in the series, still has some entertaining, shining moments that make it a worthy watch in my eyes. I just could never bring myself to write off a certain film of the series and not watch it.
  • Posts: 63
    Creasy47 wrote:
    I just could never bring myself to write off a certain film of the series and not watch it.
    And which film would that be?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,665
    @Wint, I'm guessing you misinterpreted what I said. I stated that I could never despise a film in the series and refuse to watch it ever again.
  • edited October 2013 Posts: 63
    For but a breath I believed you were insulting the dark horse of the franchise, Die Another Day.

    I have reread your comment; I understand completely. Reading glasses, riding high.
Sign In or Register to comment.