›

Is Pierce Brosnan really all that bad ??

1…2223252728…60

Comments

  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,824
    GE had its silly moments, surely, but so do most Bond. The gardening line can be expected from the kind of man Jack Wade is. Trevelyan surviving his fall is a very rare thing, but it does happen in real life, let alone in a movie. And it's not like he was unscathered. He would not have survived for very long had the antenna not fell over him.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited April 2014 Posts: 12,459
    Brosnan rocks.
    And he has had the best post Bond career of them all: I think even better than Sean. Sean had some good films (and an Oscar, yes I remember). Pierce has been blessed with lots of varied, good films since Bond. I'm happy for him in that regard, and I am really excited about November Man!
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,875
    Pierce does get unfairly bashed around these parts, and even by myself from time to time. We often forget the service he gave to our favourite secret agent. During his seven year tenure in the role (1995-2002) he was one of the most successful and popular Bonds the series has had. His four films were box office smashes, and he could've easily played Bond a fifth time. However as we know that was not to be. (And that argument has been discussed and discussed, and we will never all agree on the outcome. So we're not going to go over it again.)
    I've recently started watching the Pierce Bonds, and I must say, I did like Pierce. He was like a second coming of the Moore style of Bond. Debonair, charming, hugely likable, tongue in cheek, great at action and dependable. But I have noticed in watching the films how much he aged in the role.
    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-yx2P8T6A_ug/UU3goQz7BWI/AAAAAAAAMko/3vI237owGpU/s1600/Pierce+Brosnan+Goldeneye.PNG
    GoldenEye

    http://www.wearysloth.com/Gallery/ActorsB/2171-23786.jpg
    Tomorrow Never Dies

    http://www.wearysloth.com/Gallery/ActorsB/2171-23786.jpg
    The World Is Not Enough

    http://thesuitsofjamesbond.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Charcoal-Pinstripe-Suit-Grey-Tie.jpg
    Die Another Day

    I think the most noticeable change occurs between GE and TWINE.
    Of course he always looks good enough to play the role. But I've never really noticed that he did age quite a lot in the seven years he was Bond.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    What's your latest verdict on the films Benny?
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited April 2014 Posts: 11,425
    identigraph wrote:
    CrabKey wrote:
    It often seems as if one's favorite Bond is their first Bond. You often hear, "When I was a kid......" As an original Bond fan, Connery was my Bond, but now I'm over it. I also like Lazenby, Dalton, and Craig. Those three along with Connery bring a toughness to Bond that Moore and Brosnan did not or could not project. I would not use the term feminine to characterize either, but both--Moore more so--play a more dandified Bond. Both are too much the polished, unruffled gentleman who never quite convinces us that beneath that cool exterior is a savage.

    I wouldn't say Bond was a savage, if by that you are referring to Fleming's Bond, he was a suave, sophisicated man who killed when he had to and would do anything to survive and complete the mission.

    I agree about most people liking their first Bond. I grew up watching Roger and then Sean on TV, and then seeing Dalton on the big screen all within a very short period of time. Love all three of them, and even enjoyed Laz's performance in OHMSS.
    AstonLotus wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    When does more mean better? TND had too much action and not enough investigation/spying, something GE had plenty of. TND also had a weaker villain (and I like Carver, he was funny, but not the most menacing), relying far more on gadgetry, the script was at times very messy and borderline bipolar (Bond grieves a quasi-loved one, then ta-da, he's joking minutes later playing with a remote car) and lacked the inventivity of the GE script. TND, basically, is YOLT/TSWLM/MR's plots all over again, on a slightly smaller scale. That does not make it bad, mind you, just not as good. And GE does recycle things, yes, but not nearly as much or as blatantly.

    Now, when it comes for impact, while TND was a success, GE borderline saved Bond. it certainly made him relevant again.

    GE has its share of silly moments and inane one liners.

    007 skydiving after the plane ( thanks to terrible rear projection ) looked absolutley ridiculous.

    '' I had to ventilate someone '' - Really Xenia? was that supposed to be funny?

    '' YES! I AM INVINCIBLE! '' - Really Boris? was that supposed to be funny? Especially when you are frozen into a popsicle cartoon style at the end?

    '' Hey Bond, do you do gardening? '' WHAT?

    Trevelyan survives a high fall at the end that would kill any man stone dead.

    Trevelyan locks Bond and Natalya in a helicopter rigged to be destroyed by its own missiles without actually thinking Bond might, just might use the ejector seat button thats RIGHT NEXT TO HIM.

    Bond massacres innocent russian soldiers in the Kremlin who were not in on Ouromovs treachery.This should have caused a major international incident.

    Bond trashes half of Moscow but we are not given any indication that the russian government had any problem with it.

    Bond looks like a rookie idiot when he is easily taken prisoner inside Zukovskys bar.

    Eric Serras score is the worst of the entire series.Thank god David Arnold was hired for TND.

    TND is the better film.By far.

    AstonLotus, you are reminding me of many of the reasons I was so disappointed with this film when it came out. I really remember watching Bond machine gun all those Russian soldiers and thinking - hang on a sec' - that's not something my Bond would do. In all the decades that Bond was actually involved in the real cold war, the Russians were rarely, if ever, the actual real adversaries. Bond never went round just machine gunning Russians for the hell of it. Some people will claim this is unimportant or a mere detail - I think that suggests they don't get the tone and feel of the pre-Brosnan films. Seeing Bond smashing his way through St Petersburg - one of the most beautiful cities in the world - just made me think Bond had become another British hooligan abroad. The whole scenario was absurd and his actions seem totally out of character. TND was actually a much better film, and much more in line with the screen Bond of old.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited April 2014 Posts: 11,189
    For me the problem with TND is that the final shootout on the ship becomes tedious. At least in GE the shootout itself is fairly short.

    Natalya too is also a better character than any of the other Bond girls in the Brosnan era (the closest rival is Wai Lin).
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Agreed.

    Whenever the final shoot-out begins in TND on the stealth boat,i usually just fast forward through parts of it.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited April 2014 Posts: 11,189
    There's no actual suspense in the TND shootout either. Its just boom boom boom. I've always felt the archive sequence/tank chase was quite exciting and I can forgive the high body count/reckless disregard for public safety. It's not as if Bond hasn't endangered innocent lives in the films before anyway.

    By the end of the Moore era the car chases/sight gags were feeling pretty old and tired. I think the tank chase is fun and a good spin on the old formula.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    One thing we can all agree on - there were too many machine guns in the Brosnan era!
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Yeah there were.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Absolutely !!
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Although I am a fan of blazing through the archives with an AK in GE64.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    edited April 2014 Posts: 12,837
    I think the only Brosnan film with too many machine guns is TND (BAIN summed up that final shootout pretty well). I can't even remember him using one at all in TWINE and I didn't mind the use of them in GE and DAD.

    What I don't get about Brosnan bashing is that some people seem to think that he was too similar and too different to Connery and Moore. The machine gun is an example of this actually.

    "Brosnan bought nothing new, he was just a piss poor retread of Connery and Moore!"

    "Well for one thing he was more of an action hero than any of the other-"

    "A MACHINE GUN? What is this Rambo?!?!?! (a member on here actually said that once, because of course, Rambo is the only action film to ever feature a machine gun), they may as well just piss on Fleming's grave and be done with it!"
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited April 2014 Posts: 11,189
    This maybe controversial in itself but, while there is some merit in the whole "Connery/Moore hybrid without the class" claim, I think I would take Brosnan over Connery and Moore at their weakest.
  • BwallBwall
    Posts: 11
    He's a fine actor. But, even the best actor can't help a bad script.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Bwall wrote:
    He's a fine actor. But, even the best actor can't help a bad script.

    True. And the best script cannot help a bad actor, so the Brosnan era is screwed either way.
  • AstonLotusAstonLotus
    Posts: 1,394
    The GE shootout may be short but it doesnt excuse Bond killing all those innocent russian soldiers who were just doing their job in trying to prevent a british spy from escaping custody.Bond may have a license to kill but it still leaves a bad taste to see him killing regular soldiers.They could have had him shoot to wound and still have a very exciting escape sequence.

    At least in the TND shootouts he is killing Carvers evil henchmen.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited April 2014 Posts: 11,189
    Even so, I think the direction of the Goldeneye shootout is more exciting.

    The Russian soldiers were still ordered to kill Bond by Oromov so I don't suppose Bond had all that much choice, especially with so many men.

    I suppose they could have just cut down on the number of people.
  • AstonLotusAstonLotus
    Posts: 1,394
    I think the Saigon bike chase in TND is much better than the tank chase in GE.I love the tank chase but think the stuntwork in the bike chase is so much more impressive because it had two people driving it.I really liked how Bond and Wai Linn had to work together and be creative to survive.I think during the tank chase Bond is rather overpowered and never feel he is in any danger! Still fun though.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited April 2014 Posts: 11,189
    I adore the tank chase but I do see your point. The motorbike chase is fun and there's some good second unit stunt-work, but I think Brosnan has a few too many one-liners in it. Also, the fact its one of several big set pieces in the film's second half kind of dilutes the fun a little for me. At least in Goldeneye the shoot-out/tank chase were the highlight action scenes of the film.

    With Dies we get a car chase, a bike chase, a martial arts fight and a big shootout on a boat all in the space of an hour.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,824
    Getafix wrote:
    One thing we can all agree on - there were too many machine guns in the Brosnan era!

    Oh yes, far too many!
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,824
    BAIN123 wrote:

    The Russian soldiers were still ordered to kill Bond by Oromov so I don't suppose Bond had all that much choice, especially with so many men.

    That's why it doesn't bother me too much, it was him or them. It's not like he could have stopped and say: "This is all a bit misunderstanding, I did not kill anyone... without good reasons. Anyway, I didn't murder your minister and your General is a traitor. Sure, he is!"

    That said, I do see the point of Getafix concerning the whole St Petersburg's action sequence.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    I do too but I find that tank sequence genuinely spectacular and exciting so I can forgive it.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,875
    BAIN123 wrote:
    What's your latest verdict on the films Benny?

    I'll let you know when I'm finished with DAD.
    So far they're enjoyable. Pierce is a likable fellow.

  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,824
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I do too but I find that tank sequence genuinely spectacular and exciting so I can forgive it.

    Yes, I forgive it too, for the same reason. I certainly cannot fault him for killing Russian soldiers, given the circumstances. They were, after all, obeying an order to kill him.
  • AstonLotusAstonLotus
    Posts: 1,394
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I do too but I find that tank sequence genuinely spectacular and exciting so I can forgive it.

    Yes, I forgive it too, for the same reason. I certainly cannot fault him for killing Russian soldiers, given the circumstances. They were, after all, obeying an order to kill him.

    I dont remember an order to kill him.All Orumov said was '' GUARDS ! '' ....then Bond started shooting everyone in sight!

    I can just see the headlines the next day... BRITISH SPY MASSACRES RUSSIAN SOLDIERS IN THE KREMLIN! MOSCOW IN RUINS!
  • AstonLotusAstonLotus
    Posts: 1,394
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I adore the tank chase but I do see your point. The motorbike chase is fun and there's some good second unit stunt-work, but I think Brosnan has a few too many one-liners in it. Also, the fact its one of several big set pieces in the film's second half kind of dilutes the fun a little for me. At least in Goldeneye the shoot-out/tank chase were the highlight action scenes of the film.

    With Dies we get a car chase, a bike chase, a martial arts fight and a big shootout on a boat all in the space of an hour.

    You say that as if it were a bad thing.

  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,824
    AstonLotus wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I do too but I find that tank sequence genuinely spectacular and exciting so I can forgive it.

    Yes, I forgive it too, for the same reason. I certainly cannot fault him for killing Russian soldiers, given the circumstances. They were, after all, obeying an order to kill him.

    I dont remember an order to kill him.All Orumov said was '' GUARDS ! '' ....then Bond started shooting everyone in sight!

    I can just see the headlines the next day... BRITISH SPY MASSACRES RUSSIAN SOLDIERS IN THE KREMLIN! MOSCOW IN RUINS!

    I guess the soldiers knew what he meant. Orumov didn't seem to be the kind of man who'd want to keep prisoners for questioning. In any case, I would not have risked it. Bond was de facto in enemy territory.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited April 2014 Posts: 11,189
    The dialogue from Oromov goes:

    "Defence Minister...Dimitri Mishkin...murdered by British agent...James Bond" (tosses Bond the gun). Himself shot while trying..to..escape...GUARDS!!!

    Somehow I don't think the idea was for the guards to take Bond and question him about the incident any further.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    edited April 2014 Posts: 14,824
    BAIN123 wrote:
    The dialogue from Oromov goes:

    "Defence Minister...Dimitri Mishkin...murdered by British agent...James Bond" (tosses Bond the gun). Himself shot while trying..to..escape...GUARDS!!!

    Somehow I don't think the idea was for the guards to take Bond and question him about the incident any further.

    Me neither. I certainly would not have taken the chance...
Sign In or Register to comment.