›

Is Pierce Brosnan really all that bad ??

1…5051535556…60

Comments

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    BMW_with_missiles wrote: »
    "Is Pierce Brosnan really all that bad?" Watch this;

    And when you put all those scenes into context it's a very different story. Still, that was an incredibly well put together package of Brosnan scenes.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    doubleoego wrote: »
    BMW_with_missiles wrote: »
    "Is Pierce Brosnan really all that bad?" Watch this;

    And when you put all those scenes into context it's a very different story. Still, that was an incredibly well put together package of Brosnan scenes.

    Yeah. Definitely out of context at times, but I still love Brosnan.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I see a lot of running around, shooting with machine guns and explosions all over the place. Looks cool though. One thing I noticed from this montage is he doesn't throw a punch very convincingly - he needs to put his back into it more.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    edited December 2015 Posts: 14,834
    I rewatched the Bilbao scene in the PTS of TWINE. I surprisingly enjoyed it. And this reminded me how disappointed I got in the film later (years later actually). Brosnan was not all that bad, he was disappointing as Bond. Like his movies. And maybe that is why his tenure angers a lot of people, myself included sometimes.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    edited December 2015 Posts: 6,790
    I love the Bilbao scene.

    "If you can't trust a Swiss banker, what has the world come to?"

    Love that line.

    TWINE has some quality moments, unfortunately it has too much terrible ones as well.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,834
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    I love the Bilbao scene.

    "If you can't trust a Swiss banker, what has the world come to?"

    Love that line.

    TWINE has some quality moments, it also has way too much terrible ones too. Unfortunately.

    Maybe the most representative movie of the Brosnan era? Some quality moments then horrible ones spoiling the whole thing.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    My favourite 90's movie must be Nikita. Great little French Cinéma du look thriller. But overall the decade is the least interesting to me as a film fan.

    The action genre was never as obnoxious or tasteless either: "Today we celebrate our independence day!" My goodness. %-( :-O

    Anyway, there are some occasional bright lights: Nikita, Goodfellas, Cape Fear, JFK, Batman Returns, Reservoir Dogs, C'est arrivé près de chez vous, The Nightmare Before Christmas, The Remains of the Day, Schindler's List, Pulp Fiction, Léon, Al di là delle nuvole, La Haine, The Usual Suspects, Se7en, GoldenEye, Heat, Insomnia, L.A. Confidential, The Mask of Zorro, Crna mačka, beli mačor, Eyes Wide Shut, The Talented Mr. Ripley, Todo sobre mi madre.

    Those spring immediately to my mind, but I've forgotten some nice contributions for sure.

    Nevertheless, for every JFK there are at least five Armageddons.

    doubleoego wrote: »
    BMW_with_missiles wrote: »
    "Is Pierce Brosnan really all that bad?" Watch this;

    And when you put all those scenes into context it's a very different story. Still, that was an incredibly well put together package of Brosnan scenes.

    My favourite bit is the zoom into Brosnan's face from GE at around 1.35.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,331
    BMW_with_missiles wrote: »
    "Is Pierce Brosnan really all that bad?" Watch this;

    That's why he's the best. :D
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,834
    IMO the machine gun is mere overcompensation. Brosnan looked far more dangerous in the aforementioned Bilbao scene.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    Unless they accidentally get another nut like lazenby then we can just bash him

    I don't agree. Lazenby got bashed because he wasn't Connery. The situation is different now. The new one is always "the best since Connery" and his predecessor usually gets a bad rap.

    By the general public that is. Fans and the more wiser critics will always acknowledge how every actor brought something different to the role.

    Lazenby got bashed because he acted like an idiot
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Ludovico wrote: »
    IMO the machine gun is mere overcompensation. Brosnan looked far more dangerous in the aforementioned Bilbao scene.

    Even I liked the Bilbao scene.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I must be one of the few who didn't like Bilbao. Severe overacting and horrendous line delivery in that section as far as I'm concerned.

    Brosnan's best scene for me was in the preceding film, with Kaufman, despite it also being the beginning of the infamous dead girl smooch.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    His line deliveries in the Bilbao scene were perfectly rounded ;)
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,834
    bondjames wrote: »
    I must be one of the few who didn't like Bilbao. Severe overacting and horrendous line delivery in that section as far as I'm concerned.

    Brosnan's best scene for me was in the preceding film, with Kaufman, despite it also being the beginning of the infamous dead girl smooch.

    It's the river Thames chace that is popular. Which I never understood.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    My favourite bit of the Bilbao sequence is probably the nod he gives to those two ladies outside the office. That always makes me smile a little.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    Unless they accidentally get another nut like lazenby then we can just bash him

    I don't agree. Lazenby got bashed because he wasn't Connery. The situation is different now. The new one is always "the best since Connery" and his predecessor usually gets a bad rap.

    By the general public that is. Fans and the more wiser critics will always acknowledge how every actor brought something different to the role.

    Lazenby got bashed because he acted like an idiot

    Who cares? He was a great Bond in the best Bond film, that's all that matters.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    bondjames wrote: »
    One thing I noticed from this montage is he doesn't throw a punch very convincingly - he needs to put his back into it more.

    I remember reading a story on MSN when "November Man" came out, where it talked about Brosnan saying that he wished he was as cool as Bond. He went on to say something about how if he was ever in a bar fight he would do very poorly because he couldn't connect a punch. :))
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    Murdock wrote: »
    BMW_with_missiles wrote: »
    "Is Pierce Brosnan really all that bad?" Watch this;

    That's why he's the best. :D

    Yep!
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited December 2015 Posts: 17,691
    BMW_with_missiles wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    BMW_with_missiles wrote: »
    "Is Pierce Brosnan really all that bad?" Watch this;

    That's why he's the best. :D

    Yep!

    In the top two anyway... =D>

  • SoundofthesinnersSoundofthesinners
    Posts: 3,236
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    LICENCE TO KILL works for me. Aside from the extended truck chase, most of the action works is on the side of believability and makes sense within the story. (Mostly) Bond takes out the enemy through stealth, picking them off in smaller numbers or turning them against each other.
    IMO, as much as I like some of the Bond films after, LTK was the end of an era. Brosnan was very 'Nineties' & Craig is very post 9-11. It'll never be the same again...

    I can see why you'd pick LTK, but TLD seems like a better fit for me. It was the last to feature the Russians and the Cold War and the last before the series developed its obsession with always declaring "THIS TIME IT'S PERSONAL!"

    That's not to say there haven't been great Bonds since then (GE, CR, SF), but it truly was the end of an era.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote: »
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    Unless they accidentally get another nut like lazenby then we can just bash him

    I don't agree. Lazenby got bashed because he wasn't Connery. The situation is different now. The new one is always "the best since Connery" and his predecessor usually gets a bad rap.

    By the general public that is. Fans and the more wiser critics will always acknowledge how every actor brought something different to the role.

    Lazenby got bashed because he acted like an idiot

    Who cares? He was a great Bond in the best Bond film, that's all that matters.

    That's terrific you have your opinion. I also have mine. Deal with it
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    It's been said that if the movie or the actor makes you want to be Bond, then they aren't doing it right. Brosnan's Bond was perfect there. Yeah, he had fun, and he got girls, but his Bond had a suppressed dark & somber streak. It was evident even in some lighter moments. No, I wouldn't really want to BE him, but I can sympathize with his character. Brosnan was among the best.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote: »
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    Unless they accidentally get another nut like lazenby then we can just bash him

    I don't agree. Lazenby got bashed because he wasn't Connery. The situation is different now. The new one is always "the best since Connery" and his predecessor usually gets a bad rap.

    By the general public that is. Fans and the more wiser critics will always acknowledge how every actor brought something different to the role.

    Lazenby got bashed because he acted like an idiot

    Who cares? He was a great Bond in the best Bond film, that's all that matters.

    That's terrific you have your opinion. I also have mine. Deal with it

    You weren't stating your opinion, though. How Lazenby acted on set shouldn't have any bearing regarding his performance, which I thought was solid.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    The product is all that matters; most actors are nuts anyway.
  • SzonanaSzonana Mexico
    Posts: 1,130
    Pierce was a wonderful Bond my favorite along witn Sean Connery and Daniel Craig.


  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    Birdleson wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    The product is all that matters; most actors are nuts anyway.

    That's where we're turned around. I prefer the actor to the product when it comes to the Brosnan Era.
    To ME, the actor IS the product. It's why I can watch dreck like DAD and still take some measure of enjoyment from it; Pierce was delivering.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote: »
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote: »
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    Unless they accidentally get another nut like lazenby then we can just bash him

    I don't agree. Lazenby got bashed because he wasn't Connery. The situation is different now. The new one is always "the best since Connery" and his predecessor usually gets a bad rap.

    By the general public that is. Fans and the more wiser critics will always acknowledge how every actor brought something different to the role.

    Lazenby got bashed because he acted like an idiot

    Who cares? He was a great Bond in the best Bond film, that's all that matters.

    That's terrific you have your opinion. I also have mine. Deal with it

    You weren't stating your opinion, though. How Lazenby acted on set shouldn't have any bearing regarding his performance, which I thought was solid.

    I know when I'm stating my opinion. I don't need you to tell me when I'm stating my opinion.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,882
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote: »
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote: »
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    Unless they accidentally get another nut like lazenby then we can just bash him

    I don't agree. Lazenby got bashed because he wasn't Connery. The situation is different now. The new one is always "the best since Connery" and his predecessor usually gets a bad rap.

    By the general public that is. Fans and the more wiser critics will always acknowledge how every actor brought something different to the role.

    Lazenby got bashed because he acted like an idiot

    Who cares? He was a great Bond in the best Bond film, that's all that matters.

    That's terrific you have your opinion. I also have mine. Deal with it

    You weren't stating your opinion, though. How Lazenby acted on set shouldn't have any bearing regarding his performance, which I thought was solid.

    I know when I'm stating my opinion. I don't need you to tell me when I'm stating my opinion.

    Give it a rest please. Baiting each other is adding nothing to this thread. Thanks.

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I watched TWINE this morning, something I've not done for quite a bit, and thoroughly enjoyed it. There's some great stuff in there.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    RC7 wrote: »
    I watched TWINE this morning, something I've not done for quite a bit, and thoroughly enjoyed it. There's some great stuff in there.
    TWINE is much like SF in that way....
    But I like TWINE better!
    <:-P
Sign In or Register to comment.