What was everyone's thoughts on Paris Carver

IndyRS

I just watched Tomorrow Never Dies for the umpteenth time last night, and I like Teri in general.
But was curious as to what are opinions on her short brief appearance as Paris?

Number24

I agree with Pierce Brosnan: Monica Bellucci should have gotten the role.
What about the widow Sciarra, you say?
Maud Adams played two different characters in two movies, why not Monica?
For some reason American TV or movie stars don't do well in modern Bond girls.

caractacus potts

I think the saga of Paris Carver was one of the best plot concepts of the Brosnan era, but it was so poorly executed if you blink you might miss it's there.
For starters they could have changed some of the emphasis of the film, trimming the never-ending action sequences to make Paris' story more central to the film's structure. If her death had come closer to the end, we would have all cared more. Maybe even drop Wai Linn altogether, because other than those action sequences she didn't add much.
Also M and Moneypenny's dialog setting up that plot thread was distractingly bad, and out of character for both of them. Makes the very concept of the old flame seem unconvincing before we even meet the woman they're all talking about.

And..., the whole idea would have been so much more meaningful if it was actually a genuine character from an old film returning. Like when we watched Felix getting fed to the sharks. But this was only Brosnan's second film, so unless it was Natalya Simonova, who else could it have been? They pretty much had to introduce a new character and retcon her into Bonds life story.

I have no problems with Teri Hatcher. Its the script and direction that undermine the character's potential. I cant remember, was she a decent Lois Lane?
One thing I do know, she delivered the most legendary Seinfeld closing line ever.

Dryden

As JBR rightly pointed out the Brosnan films seemed to be working through FHM's hottest 100 women list when they cast the Bond girls.

Monica Bellucci would have been amazing but, that said, I don't mind Hatcher; she looked great (she certainly rocks a set of suspenders) and played the role pretty well I thought.

superado

I thought she was really attractive in Lois and Clark and Seinfeld, so I was pleased with her casting and having a glammed up version of her. IMO, hers was one of the successful among actresses who transitioned from notable prior roles. For example, those whom I think became slightly lackluster as Bond girls were Tanya Roberts, Lea Seydoux, Sophie Marceau and Eva Green, the latter two whom I felt were more ethereal in earlier roles (Braveheart and Kingdom of Heaven). I even thought that Lea Seydoux was more attractive in Mission: Impossible though she was a villain. I love Teri Hatcher’s line in Seinfeld, "They're real, and they're spectacular." )

Sean0071

First off, I thought it was cool to have a former lover of Bond's tied into the plot. I found their interaction to be believable, but would have liked some more of her- but overall, good stuff. Oh yeah, plus she's gorgeous.

PPK 7.65mm

I agree with the points raised by Sean0071, and caractacus potts. Had the script used her better Paris Carver could have a stronger character. @ Number 24, I agree with both you and Mr. Brosnan in that Monica Bellucci could have pulled off the role had she been cast.

Dirty Punker

You know, considering the conflicts on set, her never actually appearing in a previous movie and the inappropriate jokes (which I love dearly about her character) what we did get was murder for a perfectly good concept.
Hers was the only truly wasted potential in Tomorrow Never Dies.
It's a real shame cuz I really enjoy any screen-time Hatcher gets in this film but she's used so poorly.
And her dialogue screamed cookie-cutter to me, when I first watched her scenes
"Tell me James, do you still sleep with a gun under your pillow?"
She's the only one who was supposed to have gotten to Bond since Tracy and that's all she gives us?
Why were they so afraid to try out new things for Bond in the 90s?
I'm against flashbacks but seeing missions, perhaps from 89-95, and what happened between the released films, would've only added to the consistency of the Bond films, to me considering this was their golden opportunity to do just that.

caractacus potts

Dirty Punker wrote:

She's the only one who was supposed to have gotten to Bond since Tracy and that's all she gives us?

this is a good point. All the female leads in between Bond pretty much treated as recreation, a reward for himself once the mission was done (to paraphrase the Casino Royale novel). A character like this deserved a better story than what we got.

Between Alec and Paris, BrosnanBond got a lot of retconned backstory that was supposed to add significance to the films' plots, but because we never saw the supposed original events, it was hard to care about these characters from an imaginary past returning. At least we got the Goldeneye pre-credits sequence to sort of experience Alec in the good old days.

DavidJones

Didn't I read somewhere that Brosnan and Hatcher didn't get on?

Remington

DavidJones wrote:

Didn't I read somewhere that Brosnan and Hatcher didn't get on?

I think she was late to the set or something because she was pregnant, which Brosnan didn't know at the time.
-{

DavidJones

Remington wrote:

DavidJones wrote:

Didn't I read somewhere that Brosnan and Hatcher didn't get on?

I think she was late to the set or something because she was pregnant, which Brosnan didn't know at the time.
-{

Thanks for the info.

I think of her as the token American female, which seemed to be a thing in the Brosnan era (Famke Jannson, though Dutch, has lived in the US since the mid-80s and is most known there, while Denise Richards and Halle Berry are the others).

Were Eon that insecure after LTK underperformed in America that they felt they had to parachute in American actors? (See also Joe Don Baker and Michael Madsen).