Who Misses Pierce Brosnan As 007?

[Jolie_Desastre]

before casino royale..yes i did..

after..brosnan who?

exactly ^^

 

[Frodo]

I saw CR and I gotta say , I still prefer Brosnan. However , I thought Craig did well. I hope that they will give Craig more leeway to make the role his own. I felt that he was stiff at the beginning but once Vesper came into the picture, he began to shine . Actually, what made CR for me was Eva Green. She brought such a humanity to the film . She had such a tenderness to her which I've never felt in any of the previous Bond women . It's her performance that I've taken away from the film .

 

[Bishop2]

Actually, what made CR for me was Eva Green. She brought such a humanity to the film . She had such a tenderness to her which I've never felt in any of the previous Bond women . It's her performance that I've taken away from the film .

Totally agreed.

Craig was just too generic to me... even when he's giving the "I have no armor left" speed, he can't even muster a different facial expression from his previous "I kill you now" scenes. Even when he's being tortured or dying, he just looks MOIST and talks LOUDER, but his face barely seems to crack as he yells. It's bizarre. But Eva Green was fantastic.

But yeah, I miss Brosnan's ability to emote. The way he seemed so hurt by the death of Teri Hatcher or the way Elektra King's betrayal actually bothered him. The giddy grin in the backseat of the BMW while he used the remote control car. The way he would react to experience real, physical pain. He had more range. But this new version of Bond isn't really supposed to have range - he's supposed to be cold, hard and remote. And Craig IS very cold and remote, but it's a hard transition.

 

[DorkyFresh]

Even when he's being tortured or dying, he just looks MOIST and talks LOUDER, but his face barely seems to crack as he yells.

are you blind or somethin' dude? that's some bias if i've ever read any. i liked Pierce when he was in the role, but give credit where credit is due man...

...that torture scene ALONE was more acting that anything Pierce ever did in any of his Bond movies (sans Goldeneye).

 

[Bishop2]

are you blind or somethin' dude? that's some bias if i've ever read any. i liked Pierce when he was in the role, but give credit where credit is due man...

...that torture scene ALONE was more acting that anything Pierce ever did in any of his Bond movies (sans Goldeneye).

Okay, you're right, I'm not being fair. While I was watching that scene, I kept thinking that Brosnan conveyed more pain and anguish when he was being tortured in TWINE - hell, even when someone would hit him in his bad shoulder, he seemed to be hurting worse. However, I think part of what was really bugging me was the fact that, clearly, Daniel Craig has never been hit in the balls.

Sounds silly I know, but did you ever see On Deadly Ground? For your sake, I hope not. It's a Steven Seagal movie, which tells you right away that it's awful, but it was also written and directed by Seagal, which makes it HILARIOUSLY bad. There's a scene where he kicks a couple of guys in the crotch in a bar, and they scream "MY NUTS!" or "MY BALLS!" at their top of their lungs when it happens...

It's hilarious, and I never quite understood why until reading a review of the movie online years later. It's something everyone who's ever had the misfortune to be hit in the balls knows - the first thing you lose is all the air out of your lungs, almost before you feel the pain shooting through you and up your back. You're left gasping and unable to vocalize. SCREAMING? It's just silly as hell. Really, Craig should've been gasping, shaking, then whispering his dialogue. That would've been effective.

I know what you're thinking - that seems pretty damn picky, but man, you'd think no filmmakers on this Earth had ever been hit in the balls or somethin'.

 

[BloodyWolverine]

Are you guys forgetting the Die Another Day opening credits were arund a torture scene. That was Brosnans best performance for Bond.

 

[Bishop2]

Are you guys forgetting the Die Another Day opening credits were arund a torture scene. That was Brosnans best performance for Bond.

Did we really see him much during those credits? It seemed like the credits were more concerned with the girls torturing him and the scorpions.

 

[Speedball]

Who's Pierce Brosnan and why is he mentioned in a James Bond thread? LOL! No...He's now the third best. His best performance for me was in Everything or Nothing.

 

[KenK]

Who's Pierce Brosnan and why is he mentioned in a James Bond thread? LOL! No...He's now the third best. His best performance for me was in Everything or Nothing.

That game rocks exponentially! Good graphics, and GREAT gameplay! I was addicted to it for months!!

Are you guys forgetting the Die Another Day opening credits were arund a torture scene. That was Brosnans best performance for Bond.

I think a lot of people's disappointment towards DAD comes from the fact that this scene gave you the impression that it was gonna treat the rest of the film radically different from other Bond films. Usually, Bond makes his escape with a smile, and cue the opening. So it was a nice change to see Bond NOT get away. But after about ten minutes, it's business as usual, and it's like it didn't even matter than he had been in a North Korean prison for 18 months.

 

[regwec]

...matters weren't helped by Brosnan sucking the gut in, either.

 

[Bishop2]

...matters weren't helped by Brosnan sucking the gut in, either.

I think that's just in your mind.

 

[DorkyFresh]

It's something everyone who's ever had the misfortune to be hit in the balls knows - the first thing you lose is all the air out of your lungs, almost before you feel the pain shooting through you and up your back. You're left gasping and unable to vocalize. SCREAMING? It's just silly as hell.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZnfwQkAUHz8

http://youtube.com/watch?v=vUWVm7DLSLQ

you were saying?

I think that's just in your mind.

go watch DAD again. you can see him with his gut tucked in and his chest out when he walks into the lobby in just his pants and unkept hair.

 

[SolidSnakeMGS]

Brosnan is my 2nd fav after Connery but yeah, he was the "heaviest" of his Bond career in DAD.

 

[Lazlo Panaflex]

Daniel Craig while not a handsome dude sure pulled off the James Bond character, and it was fun actually seeing real fist fights instead of fancy gadgets.

 

[BloodyWolverine]

Why can't you have gadgets and physical encounters. I can't help it but i like the gadget's and the Q aspect of the Bond films. Thats one of those classic things i liked about these Bond spy movies. The car was a bit over blown in DAD with the weapons but the invisble car was cool. I liked the smaller gadgets per say. I am simply meaning to have lower keyd gadgets not per say a flying car for Bond 22nd.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

I truly feel those who say Craig wasn't a brilliant actor in this has no idea what they're talking about. Bond, as a whole, while being tortured by having his balls beaten mustered up courage and attitude to show no matter what he wasn't going to break.

He screamed, he winced, shuddered, and passed out after the torture.

In real life a male would've passed out after the first or second hit.

In closing? I think it's mostly nitpicking and they want to be in the crowd by saying "Craig sucked and I miss Brosnan".

Craig> Brosnan. Craig is Bond, get over it.

 

[jimmylace]

I may be alone on this but does anyone miss Pierce Brosnan as James Bond for i really thaught he was the ideal Bond. But no the producers had to piss Pierce off. He may come back like Sean did but i doubt it.

I will give Craig a chance and i am glad to see the Goldeye director back doing Bond. But no Moneypenny or Q really stinks. Unless Bond was there before them but i doubt it. Maybe he had to do this mission to get to the gadget room.

Many don't think Dench should be M but thats not a big problem but for a prequel i could see Anthony Hopkins, John Hurt, Sam Neil or Patrick Stewart as M. My dream M would have been Sean Connery but anyway Dench has made her own M and i can live with it.

My ideal Bond with no Pierce would have been. Christian Bale, Hugh Jackman or Clive Owen. I may be wrong but even Julian McMahon would have been a better Bond. I will give Craig like i said a chance but he is not my top choice.

no youre not the only one....pierce brosnan is the guy that got me into bond....and dare I say, with the exception of a few other bond movies, his are the only one I find myself watching.

Why? not because I'm ignorant of flemings original vision....just because pierce struck a great balance between being ruthless and...still managing to be likeable.

When I was watching CR, I didnt miss brosnan *tryin to keep an open-mind* but when the curtains came up I REALLY felt crappy that Ill never see another brosnan bond. I sorta thought..."craig CAN act really well...but this guy just isnt bond"

and tbh I cant figure out why craig didnt feel like bond to me....oh well, I'm pretty much finished with bond now I guess.

 

[nocomics]

heh,
I still prefer Roger Moore..I don't think i saw but one or two 007 movies with bronsan,as I just couldnt get into it. They just seemed so carbon copied from eachother. Typical,hollywood glorified action movie....but thats me..
I haven't seen CR yet,not sure if I will. If ya take away the 007 name-tag its ur A-typical action movie...

 

[Van Petrol]

Craig is a super Bond, but he's still not my James Bond.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

heh,
I still prefer Roger Moore..I don't think i saw but one or two 007 movies with bronsan,as I just couldnt get into it. They just seemed so carbon copied from eachother. Typical,hollywood glorified action movie....but thats me..
I haven't seen CR yet,not sure if I will. If ya take away the 007 name-tag its ur A-typical action movie...

Maybe you need to watch Casino Royale before dismissing it.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

no youre not the only one....pierce brosnan is the guy that got me into bond....and dare I say, with the exception of a few other bond movies, his are the only one I find myself watching.

Why? not because I'm ignorant of flemings original vision....just because pierce struck a great balance between being ruthless and...still managing to be likeable.

When I was watching CR, I didnt miss brosnan *tryin to keep an open-mind* but when the curtains came up I REALLY felt crappy that Ill never see another brosnan bond. I sorta thought..."craig CAN act really well...but this guy just isnt bond"

and tbh I cant figure out why craig didnt feel like bond to me....oh well, I'm pretty much finished with bond now I guess.

Typical Brosnan fanboy response. Sean Connery and Craig were the only ones to capture the essence of Bond. Pierce was excellent in Goldeneye which was the last great Bond film before Casino Royale.

In Pierce's defense it's not his fault the material got more cliche and more ******ed with the sequels.

But it's time to move on. Brosnan ISN'T coming back. If you're finished with Bond then be finished with it and stop whining about Pierce being gone already.

 

[jimmylace]

Typical Brosnan fanboy response. Sean Connery and Craig were the only ones to capture the essence of Bond. Pierce was excellent in Goldeneye which was the last great Bond film before Casino Royale.

In Pierce's defense it's not his fault the material got more cliche and more ******ed with the sequels.

But it's time to move on. Brosnan ISN'T coming back. If you're finished with Bond then be finished with it and stop whining about Pierce being gone already.

whilst brosnan is my fave, the reason why I wasnt impressed with Casino Royale is that it didnt go FAR enough in shaking things up!

I found Casino Royale to be an underwhelming film that promised so much and delivered a mediocre movie at best. With the exception of DAD, all of the brosnan movies were better than this lukewarm turd.

CR had some strong moments, but the majority of the movie boasted some pretty god-awful dialogue.

CR shined when it "broke" the rules...

Bond being poisoned. Torture scene. Bond girl. The valet scene. Le Chiffre

...but then it would sink into the depths with crappy quips (that dont suit craig as bond) clunky romance scenes..crapply inserted action, boring direction, and pretty much everything else.

If youre going to strip bond of his gadgets and give him a character driven movie, then great!

...but youve got to back it up with decent writing, and I think the biggest mistake that the producers made was keeping purvis and wade on board. They changed the only thing that was still working!

and because of this, the majority of the movie was like watching the "serious" parts of a brosnan, but without any of the fun or the charisma, when it should have been edgier

Daniel Craig is a fine actor, CR has a very interesting multi-layered lead...but it's not the "Bond. James Bond" that most of the people on this planet know and love.

I gave the guy a chance but all throughout the movie I felt that he was miscast. And I'm sure I'm not the only one who felt like that when the curtains rolled...I doubt the sequel will perform as well, and think that the franchise will slip into obscurity again.

Many people may be lining up to praise CR now, but give it five years and it won't be so fondly remembered.

CR will be seen as a half-baked attempt of an unnecessary restart that only managed to take a few baby-steps in the desired direction.

You either go one way or the other. Theres no inbetween.

And I reserved judgement. I went in to CR with an open-mind but now informed I still felt CR would have been better with brosnan in the role- even if that's just for the "wow brosnan got a vaguely decent bond story for once"

Anyhow that's my opinion- CR should have gone further, but held back too much. By far the best bond girl of recent though.