Is Pierce Brosnan really all that bad ??

1454648505160

Comments

  • TND is an annoying one for me because the first half is really good. Yeah it's not really innovative but it follows the classic Bond template almost as well as the likes of GF and TSWLM and there are a lot of great scenes. It's a lot of fun and at the time it seemed like it was a pretty worthy successor to Goldeneye. Then after the HALO jump (a great stunt) it all goes off the rails. It just becomes mindless generic action (there's the odd moment of inventiveness like the jump off the building with the poster, and the bike over the helicopter was a great stunt, but other than that the action is really generic) and really drags imo. I was bored watching it in the cinema and overall I thought it was decent but a big disappointment after Goldeneye. My thoughts since haven't really changed.

    TWINE on the other hand I thought was great and I still really like it, fair enough a lot of what it did/attempted to do has been done better by the Craig Bond films but it still holds up well and I think it doesn't get the credit it deserves for fleshing out Bond's character. Great action too, plenty of really entertaining setpieces. I think TWINE is the prototype for the Craig era in many ways. The problem is it's just that: a prototype. They weren't quite there yet, so it's flawed and is a bit melodramatic at times. I still think it's really good though. One of my favourites, top ten for sure.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    @thelivingroyale, my thoughts exactly. :-bd
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I remember TND was the first time I fell asleep at the cinema. It was the last day of term or half term and my school friends and I went to the cinema to watch it. I fell asleep before Bond got to China.
  • Posts: 11,189
    How could you fall asleep with all those loud explosions?
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    How could you fall asleep with all those loud explosions?

    Or the lovely use of Bond theme? :P
  • @Murdock Glad you agree :)

    Something I forgot to add about the positive stuff in TND is that I really like Carver. He's not really an amazing villain but Pryce seems to be having a lot of fun playing the OTT panto bad guy and he has some great lines.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    I love Carver's theatricality. He's bad and he just doesn't care. :D
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I have no idea. I was about 12 or 13 at the time so I was arsing around the whole day at school which clearly left me exhausted.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Murdock wrote: »
    Perhaps, but letting a 20 year old viewing determine my view of an actor or film for the rest of time is rather...laughable. As a teen I hated Licence To Kill and Dalton but in 2011 I watched LTK again and it's gone up considerably. It hasn't gone well in this viewing but at least I gave it another chance.

    If someone has such a hate for an actor and his movies it won't change much to re-watch it, the mind is set up with prejudice, that cannot be overcome.
    Then it's better let them be with their opinion. As long as they don't want to impose their hate for it on you of course, which for some, is rather difficult it seems (not talking about anyone in particular).

    As for LTK, wow...you and I have the same story (almost). When I saw it in 1989 as a teen I hated it too, especially after TLD which was a life-changing experience for me.
    Later ca. 1999 I was able to re-watch it again without getting all emotional about it, being an adult I could cope with the brutality of the movie. Especially the Felix story had me shaken quite a bit back in 1989. But I still didn't really like it in 1999.
    After 2002 I started to do the Bondathons every two to three years. LTK is the one movie that has climbed up the latter of my Bond ranking with each viewing.
    Today it is at No 8 imagine that! Only last year I had it at No 12.
    There is one other Bond movie that I have changed my opinion about that drastically.
    Thunderball. But the other way around. For a long time that one was in my Top 5.
    Nowadays I have it at No 17.
  • edited August 2015 Posts: 11,425
    Okay, @Murdock, I'll give it a go sometime soon. Can't promise I won't fast forward bits of it though.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    Hopefully it will suck less to you. ;)
  • edited August 2015 Posts: 11,425
    May be. Although GE was always the Brosnan film I found most jarring because of the change of tone after Dalton. Having accepted Brosnan was in the role I found TND much more enjoyable. I still think its the best of his four, although the second half is a bit boring.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,471
    @Getafix, I'm about to reach it in my Bondathon. You should watch it alongside me and write your review when I do, because I'm sure there will never be two more polar opposite film reviews ever written again!
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    doubleoego wrote: »
    I remember TND was the first time I fell asleep at the cinema. It was the last day of term or half term and my school friends and I went to the cinema to watch it. I fell asleep before Bond got to China.

    You must've been tired. Bond never goes to China.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    My bad. Vietnam.
  • edited August 2015 Posts: 11,425
    Murdock wrote: »
    Perhaps, but letting a 20 year old viewing determine my view of an actor or film for the rest of time is rather...laughable. As a teen I hated Licence To Kill and Dalton but in 2011 I watched LTK again and it's gone up considerably. It hasn't gone well in this viewing but at least I gave it another chance.

    If someone has such a hate for an actor and his movies it won't change much to re-watch it, the mind is set up with prejudice, that cannot be overcome.
    Then it's better let them be with their opinion. As long as they don't want to impose their hate for it on you of course, which for some, is rather difficult it seems (not talking about anyone in particular).

    As for LTK, wow...you and I have the same story (almost). When I saw it in 1989 as a teen I hated it too, especially after TLD which was a life-changing experience for me.
    Later ca. 1999 I was able to re-watch it again without getting all emotional about it, being an adult I could cope with the brutality of the movie. Especially the Felix story had me shaken quite a bit back in 1989. But I still didn't really like it in 1999.
    After 2002 I started to do the Bondathons every two to three years. LTK is the one movie that has climbed up the latter of my Bond ranking with each viewing.
    Today it is at No 8 imagine that! Only last year I had it at No 12.
    There is one other Bond movie that I have changed my opinion about that drastically.
    Thunderball. But the other way around. For a long time that one was in my Top 5.
    Nowadays I have it at No 17.

    Even as a Dalton fan, I did not immediately like LTK. But I now quite like it. I see it as more traditional than I originally thought.

    I feel the same about TB as u well. When I first saw it I was blown away by the underwater battle. Now it sends me to sleep. It has great characters and scenes but overall I actually prefer DAF.

    Oh and for the record (just incase your comments were aimed at me) I don't hate Brosnan. I was really massively disappointed by his performance in GE but not long after I saw him in the Taylor of Panama and thought "wow, is this actually the same actor"?

    I don't know how to explain Brosnan's performance as Bond, and clearly I'm not the only one these days who raises doubts about his 'take'. Even @BAIN123 seems to have fallen out of love with it a bit- just clinging onto childhood memories of GE.

    My conclusion is that what I regard as his failure is down to nerves (he was overwhelmed by the pressure and the legacy of Moore and Connery), a certain amount of complacency (he blamed the scripts for having no characterisation but then never bothered reading the novels) and finally a lack of a good director to knock him into shape.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    doubleoego wrote: »
    My bad. Vietnam.

    Ha ha. I was joking. I knew you knew.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    @Getafix

    I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I meant you. I really didn't.
    What you and others said about Brosnan got me thinking, that's why I made that statement.
    I totally respect your views.

    Your comment about TB:
    "When I first saw it I was blown away by the underwater battle. Now it sends me to sleep."
    =)) I had to laugh out loud, and it is so true!!
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    @Getafix, glad I'm not the only one to prefer DAF to TB.
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 11,425
    Interesting article I hadn't seen before.

    "Lackadaisical and smug"

    "Rewatching the films, even Brosnan fans must surely accept that he was never the new Connery, but rather a sort-of strangely flat Roger Moore – without even the charm, screen presence and natural gift for comedy that old raised eyebrow delivered in spades."

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/apr/14/james-bond-pierce-brosnan-007-goldeneye
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    I never saw him as a new Connery or Moore. (granted I didn't know about their films yet.) I just saw him as Brosnan. :)
  • Posts: 1,092
    Wow, what an epic thread! Some main points I'll repeat because I agree:

    Brosnan was too in love with the fact he was Bond to truly portray the role in an authentic way. Not all the problems with his run were/are his. He had a different director each film, poor scripts that relied too much on Bond formula and action cliches, and a production behind him that played it too safe. But at the end of the day he was simply too excited to be Bond he forgot to act well, if he even could have. Based on the films he has done since I suspect he must have a good script/director or he is not good.

    After almost getting the role in '86 he built it up in his mind for nearly a decade and the pressure was too much. He came off as smarmy at times, arrogant and had this look on his face that said, "Hey, I'm Bond! Look at me!" It was all superficial and thin. Again, not all his fault since the scripts were the same, thin and shallow.

    Still, there are some entertaining elements and a breeziness to the films that's enjoyable to his era and I feel bad Brosnan says he never nailed it. At least he's honest about it. =P~
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 1,965
    Brosnan was a great Bond. He really should have done 1 more.
  • Posts: 1,965
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    People have said GE has a "made-for-tv" quality to it. Maybe it does but I think LTK has more of a TV feel (most of the actors in it, as in GE, were known mainly for television). At least in GE a lot of the actors went on to become big names in film.

    To be honest, many of the Bond films post 60s have a bit of a "television" feel to them. This could be down to budget issues.
    LTK was defiantly the Bond film that feels very TV like. Its pretty much a made for TV movie for Miami Vice. Without it actually being Miami Vice.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    I own the box set of Miami Vice, I've watched every episode and love it. LTK is nothing like Miami Vice. Much of the story is Fleming inspired.
  • Posts: 7,653
    suavejmf wrote: »
    I own the box set of Miami Vice, I've watched every episode and love it. LTK is nothing like Miami Vice. Much of the story is Fleming inspired.

    I own the Miami Vice sets too and the show is better written, visually original and the lead characters have more charisma.

    LTK was Miami Vice light, a compromise on a Chinese drugs tale which would have made the movie more interesting than the South America link which had been done to death by the Miami Vice. Nice to see the warehouse scene from LALD. Dalton lacked the leadingmans skill to carry the movie and the story is easily one of the poorest in the whole franchise.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    The story is one of the most engaging of the series. Dalts is Fleming's Bond. Apart from the drugs and a little 80!s fashion...I can't see the similarly. We just obviously disagree.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    edited November 2015 Posts: 1,727
    Brosnan was nice to look at and vanilla + benign enough so that he'd be accepted by the masses immediately. That's what got him the part when Eon could not afford any risks in '94.

    To use a rock analogy - Brosnan is Coldplay, Dalton for instance was more Pink Floyd....
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 372
    I love Pierce and I will always love Pierce. He was just the right person to play Bond at that moment in time. He even managed to carry the lesser installments during his run well, in my opinion, and I don't care about all the little ways in which he didn't succeed according to some people.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    I was a fan of Miami Vice. Crockett and Tubbs ruled during the mid 80's. LTK certainly had a Miami Vice feel to it and a TV show feel to it, particularly due to the locations that were used. There was something definitely cheap about it for a Bond film in the 80's.

    As I've said elsewhere, now it's a top 10 Bond film for me, but at the time, I thought it was just drab (I was just hitting my teens then though). Funny how one's opinion can change with time. LTK is like fine wine.
    AceHole wrote: »
    Brosnan was nice to look at and vanilla + benign enough so that he'd be accepted by the masses immediately. That's what got him the part when Eon could not afford any risks in '94.

    To use a rock analogy - Brosnan is Coldplay, Dalton for instance was more Pink Floyd....
    I agree on Brosnan being the man for the time in 1995. However, I think, despite his popularity in the US in particular, that his moment actually passed shortly after GE, which is why that film is his most highly rated by many.
Sign In or Register to comment.