"Well. like, I though it started well with CASINO ROYALE. Felt we nailed it with that. But the others? I just never felt the writing was right, that we knew what direction we were going with it. What I was trying to do. I've seen Henry's one, and he's really, really got it."
Have always been interested to see how Tarantino's Version of CR would of played out. With Bond on his final Mission at Royale-les-Eaux before he Retires.
1.On Her Majesties Secret Service 2.The Living Daylights 3.license To Kill 4.The Spy Who Loved Me 5.Goldfinger
Pierce Should have embraced the humor more & at least appeared like he was having fun in the role. He has really good comic timing but seemed to have abandoned the idea with Bond and played it too straight..which can make you look foolish when really ridiculous things are happening around you. Moore had a good handle on being absurd and serious when called for. I always thought Pierce was the perfect choice between his Remington Steele & Fourth Protocol work...but he seemed to take a middle ground and played it safe...which left me kinda indifferent to his portrayal. Even though I didn't care for Goldeneye, his confidence really shone through. All the Bonds had a great confident 1st movie portrayal.
I read some of those quotes from Brosnan last night and somehow had a dream about meeting him or him as Bond. I can't be sure. I remember going to his home and trying to figure out what to give him. But what do you give Bond I thought? I was thinking of giving him the same pocket knife I carry. But I thought this is Bond, he'll have better than this.
Yeah, but his portrayal of Bond was also his decision, as the article suggests.
Sometimes I wonder though. There was a point when Brosnan said that the book Bond was too violent and a monster or something to that nature. Perhaps this was just part of the press circuit talk and the producer's influence. Because in later years he talked about wanting something with edge. And even wanted to do Casino Royale with Tarantino.
Audiences weren't ready for the gritty more serious Bond yet and they needed a segway between that and the more jokey over the top era. Brosnan was perfect for the time and well received. All of his films did well at the box office and even DAD wasn't seen as a critical failure until a few years after it's release.
Yes. I do feel Brosnan was kind of wasted in his films. I don't think
he's a brilliant actor but he was better than the poor scripts allowed him
To be. I also feel after the lack luster response to LTK, The producers
decided to fall back on what had worked in the past, hence Brosnan had to
play a watered down Moore with a hint ( at times ) of Connery, and why his
Films have so many elements of the older movies sprinkled throughout.
I too think The Living Daylights and Licence to Kill put people (the average movie audience) off after the light Roger Moore movies. I still love those two Dalton Bond movies. I always wanted Brosnan to make a perfect Bond movie. I think he never got his chance. Probably never would have either. The producers at times acted like Brosnan was at fault for Die Another Day. That he couldn't come close to what Daniel Craig did in Casino Royale. I think they are wrong. A good actor with good support from directors and producers can come up with astonishing performances.
It's a shame that Brosnan never made his own Bond movie and at best is a best of both worlds Bond. But honestly, as a Bond movie I'll take The World is not Enough over any of Daniel Craig's Bond movies so far.
"Better late than never."
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
It's interesting what Bond actors have to say about their role, interpretation, restrospection on the series, survey of past actors' portrayals, etc, and these observations and comments seem to change at different points of time. Yes, I remember Brosnan saying while he was Bond how his interpretation was "flinty," close to the books, etc., etc. But now, I think as a professional, he's had to face the critical aclaim of Craig's Bond and I imagine it's similar to how Carter felt about Reagan's public reception, or George W's to Obama. As for Brosnan, I think it's classy for him to concede to his "poor performance" and unless I didn't pay close attention, he didn't directly shift blame on the scripts or the producers.
It's a pity that the stars did not align for Brosnan during his time as Bond, in creative terms since I believe that physically, he closely matches the literary Bond and he's not a poor actor. IMO, a Bond delivery of fantastical thespian proportions doesn't necessarily make out to become the best Bond.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
Pierce Should have embraced the humor more & at least appeared like he was having fun in the role. He has really good comic timing but seemed to have abandoned the idea with Bond and played it too straight..which can make you look foolish when really ridiculous things are happening around you. Moore had a good handle on being absurd and serious when called for. I always thought Pierce was the perfect choice between his Remington Steele & Fourth Protocol work...but he seemed to take a middle ground and played it safe...which left me kinda indifferent to his portrayal. Even though I didn't care for Goldeneye, his confidence really shone through. All the Bonds had a great confident 1st movie portrayal.
That was the biggest problem -- Brosnan has an impeccable, natural comic quality about him that would have made his Bond in this regard as seemingly effortless as Connery's or Moore's. Yet, instead, they worked against that, trying hard to make him darker and more edgy, and that just felt forced. Brosnan was the closest thing to Cary Grant in those days, but Grant could pull off dark while still somehow being charming and still effortless. Brosnan labored at it.
It's a pity that the stars did not align for Brosnan during his time as Bond, in creative terms since I believe that physically, he closely matches the literary Bond and he's not a poor actor. IMO, a Bond delivery of fantastical thespian proportions doesn't necessarily make out to become the best Bond.
When they announced his name, I thought they had found someone who would be as inseparable from the Bond role as Connery . . . but the people involved just didn't seem to have a clue about how to work best with the talent they had.
I always liked Brosnan. Sadly for him D Craig is just so good.
Craig is no doubt a great actor, but to me Skyfall was the first movie in which I found him convincing as Bond. Even then, I can't wait to see who the replacement will be, and unless the producers make a terrible mistake, whoever is chosen is likely to eclipse Craig's Bond very quickly. Not necessarily by being a better actor.
I doubt anyone will get the same rep as Connery, rightly or wrongly.
Also suspect Craigy will get the restrospective critical beating for his unique take on Bond after he's gone just as Brosnan has (though obviously his take was less unique).
I'd also point out that Roger Moore changed the role completely from Sean Connery.
Putting his own mark firmly on the series. Some might not have liked it but it was his
Own. )
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
) Yes many years ago when I smoked I did change to cigars even had
a cigar case like Moore had in the Persuaders. ) damn I thought I was
Cool. Even took the trouble to light it with a match and not having it in my
Mouth when I did light it. )
( I'll point out my cigars were much cheaper than Sir Rogers )
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
whoever is chosen is likely to eclipse Craig's Bond very quickly.
What makes you think that's so "likely" or that it will happen "quickly"? I think what Craig has done with the role has been pretty remarkable and I believe it will be a real challenge for the next actor to totally eclipse Craig. Of course, I could be completely wrong, but I don't see it.
I agree after Connery, I think Craig has had the biggest influence on the
Films more than any actor and I can't see who ever takes over eclipsing
him any time soon.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
I agree after Connery, I think Craig has had the biggest influence on the
Films more than any actor and I can't see who ever takes over eclipsing
him any time soon.
I think Roger Moore's influence on the series can't be underestimated. Connery was first and he'll probably never be topped. But Roger Moore made as many if not more Bond movies than Connery (if you don't count Never Say Never Again). He had all those humor elements which attempt to make their way into Bond movies since Moore's days and always fall flat. Even if Daniel Craig manages to make as many films as Connery and Moore. His first three films already aren't as strong as those of Connery and Moore. And I don't think the producers are up for or willing to make the big Bond movie anymore.
I'm not knocking Moore ( I grew up with him as Bond ) and some have
Pointed out that he certainly put his mark on the series. -{ Although
Times change, and so do the Bond films.
Craig's Bond films have made a fortune ( Skyfall, the biggest Bond ever )
So the great general cinema audience like what the Producers are doing.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
I agree after Connery, I think Craig has had the biggest influence on the
Films more than any actor and I can't see who ever takes over eclipsing
him any time soon.
I think Roger Moore's influence on the series can't be underestimated. Connery was first and he'll probably never be topped. But Roger Moore made as many if not more Bond movies than Connery (if you don't count Never Say Never Again). He had all those humor elements which attempt to make their way into Bond movies since Moore's days and always fall flat. Even if Daniel Craig manages to make as many films as Connery and Moore. His first three films already aren't as strong as those of Connery and Moore. And I don't think the producers are up for or willing to make the big Bond movie anymore.
There is no doubt that Moore had a significant impact on the Bond film legacy. However, he certainly wasn't the first to introduce the element of humor into the series (that would be Connery, although his humor is more sardonic and, in my opinion, wittier than Moore's). Also, I'd say that Craig's three Bond films are stronger than most of Moore's, but of course that is more a matter of taste than anything else. One thing for sure, Craig's films certainly held up their end at the box office.
I agree after Connery, I think Craig has had the biggest influence on the
Films more than any actor and I can't see who ever takes over eclipsing
him any time soon.
I can understand that some of us like Craig's Bond, but I am sure that as soon as he is replaced by the next actor they will realise that apart from being a blond Bond Craig has not left much of a mark.
I think the humour in Craig's films is just about right. There are some great deadpan one liners ("Your interior decorating tips were always very much appreciated, 007" and " I don't think he smoked"), some very sardonic humour ("To the right! to the right!" and "That's because you know what I can do with my little finger") perfectly delivered by Craig, and some humorous situations such as Mendel's arrival when Bond is recuperating, Bond and Fields checking into the second hotel in Bolivia, etc.
Humour is a fine balance in the Bond films and it would be easy to cross the line into parody, which the producers have so far successfully avoided.
Comments
That was for me, wasn't it, you sly dog?!!!
Daniel Craig. 2019.
Oscar for it, they still see mistakes etc.
Sometimes I wonder though. There was a point when Brosnan said that the book Bond was too violent and a monster or something to that nature. Perhaps this was just part of the press circuit talk and the producer's influence. Because in later years he talked about wanting something with edge. And even wanted to do Casino Royale with Tarantino.
I too think The Living Daylights and Licence to Kill put people (the average movie audience) off after the light Roger Moore movies. I still love those two Dalton Bond movies. I always wanted Brosnan to make a perfect Bond movie. I think he never got his chance. Probably never would have either. The producers at times acted like Brosnan was at fault for Die Another Day. That he couldn't come close to what Daniel Craig did in Casino Royale. I think they are wrong. A good actor with good support from directors and producers can come up with astonishing performances.
It's a shame that Brosnan never made his own Bond movie and at best is a best of both worlds Bond. But honestly, as a Bond movie I'll take The World is not Enough over any of Daniel Craig's Bond movies so far.
It's a pity that the stars did not align for Brosnan during his time as Bond, in creative terms since I believe that physically, he closely matches the literary Bond and he's not a poor actor. IMO, a Bond delivery of fantastical thespian proportions doesn't necessarily make out to become the best Bond.
Craig is no doubt a great actor, but to me Skyfall was the first movie in which I found him convincing as Bond. Even then, I can't wait to see who the replacement will be, and unless the producers make a terrible mistake, whoever is chosen is likely to eclipse Craig's Bond very quickly. Not necessarily by being a better actor.
Actors will be compared to him.
Also suspect Craigy will get the restrospective critical beating for his unique take on Bond after he's gone just as Brosnan has (though obviously his take was less unique).
Putting his own mark firmly on the series. Some might not have liked it but it was his
Own.
a cigar case like Moore had in the Persuaders.
Cool. Even took the trouble to light it with a match and not having it in my
Mouth when I did light it.
( I'll point out my cigars were much cheaper than Sir Rogers )
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
What makes you think that's so "likely" or that it will happen "quickly"? I think what Craig has done with the role has been pretty remarkable and I believe it will be a real challenge for the next actor to totally eclipse Craig. Of course, I could be completely wrong, but I don't see it.
I agree after Connery, I think Craig has had the biggest influence on the
Films more than any actor and I can't see who ever takes over eclipsing
him any time soon.
I think Roger Moore's influence on the series can't be underestimated. Connery was first and he'll probably never be topped. But Roger Moore made as many if not more Bond movies than Connery (if you don't count Never Say Never Again). He had all those humor elements which attempt to make their way into Bond movies since Moore's days and always fall flat. Even if Daniel Craig manages to make as many films as Connery and Moore. His first three films already aren't as strong as those of Connery and Moore. And I don't think the producers are up for or willing to make the big Bond movie anymore.
Pointed out that he certainly put his mark on the series. -{ Although
Times change, and so do the Bond films.
Craig's Bond films have made a fortune ( Skyfall, the biggest Bond ever )
So the great general cinema audience like what the Producers are doing.
There is no doubt that Moore had a significant impact on the Bond film legacy. However, he certainly wasn't the first to introduce the element of humor into the series (that would be Connery, although his humor is more sardonic and, in my opinion, wittier than Moore's). Also, I'd say that Craig's three Bond films are stronger than most of Moore's, but of course that is more a matter of taste than anything else. One thing for sure, Craig's films certainly held up their end at the box office.
I can understand that some of us like Craig's Bond, but I am sure that as soon as he is replaced by the next actor they will realise that apart from being a blond Bond Craig has not left much of a mark.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
I think you are absolutely correct! -{
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/skyfall-bluray-doesnt-match
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Humour is a fine balance in the Bond films and it would be easy to cross the line into parody, which the producers have so far successfully avoided.