Future Bond Endings: Bond with the Girl vs. Bond Receives His Next Mission

It's too bad that when Brosnan was growing into a better actor his lead Bond girls were only going downhill. I really like him in DAD, but the "banter" between him and Halle Berry is a train wreck.

Makeshift Python wrote:

It's too bad that when Brosnan was growing into a better actor his lead Bond girls were only going downhill. I really like him in DAD, but the "banter" between him and Halle Berry is a train wreck.

I don't know why Brosnan's tenure was so bad. His acting in the first three films is poor and unconfident yet he was acceptable in The Fourth Protocol and The Tailor of Panama, which were made around the same time. Pierce seemed to relax into the role in DAD, as you say, so it's a shame so much else is wrong with that film.

Given that Pierce is on record as struggling with his sexuality, it was vital that the films featured women he liked and had some chemistry with. Unfortunately, the producers didn't bother to do that and Pierce proved incapable of faking it. That's a bit of a problem for an actor given that's the job description. That horrible fixed grin at the end of GoldenEye (see clip above) illustrates the problem perfectly.

If Pierce liked Monica Bellucci as much as he claimed then Eon should have cast her regardless of UA's objections because Bond's relationship with women is as vital to the character as his combat skills. Sadly, I found Brosnan unconvincing in both departments.

Erica Ambler wrote:

Makeshift Python wrote:

It's too bad that when Brosnan was growing into a better actor his lead Bond girls were only going downhill. I really like him in DAD, but the "banter" between him and Halle Berry is a train wreck.

I don't know why Brosnan's tenure was so bad. His acting in the first three films is poor and unconfident yet he was acceptable in The Fourth Protocol and The Tailor of Panama, which were made around the same time.

THE FOURTH PROTOCOL was made in '87. Perhaps you mean the remake of the THOMAS CROWN AFFAIR?

Erica Ambler wrote:

Given that Pierce is on record as struggling with his sexuality, it was vital that the films featured women he liked and had some chemistry with.

He stated in his autobio that he questioned his sexuality at 16, but there's no mention of it being an ongoing struggle or latent bisexuality.

Fourth protocol and Panama are the only other brozza films in which I've seen him play a spy.

Perhaps I should've said he had doubts about his sexuality. Don't think it really matters. Point is that he seems ill at ease with women, to me at least.

Have you seen THE MATADOR? In it Brozza plays an assassin, which is close enough (at least according to EON's CASINO ROYALE).

It has some marvelous lines, such as.

"I'm as serious as an erection problem."

"I hate Catholic countries. All blushy, blushy. No sucky fucky."

"I look like a Bangkok hooker on a Sunday morning, after the navy's left town."

"Wouldn't do that for all the teenage twat in Thailand."

Erica Ambler wrote:

Perhaps I should've said he had doubts about his sexuality. Don't think it really matters. Point is that he seems ill at ease with women, to me at least.

Maybe he's just not that good of an actor. Plenty of straight actors have convincingly played gay, and vice versa, so I don't buy the idea that because he might've questioned his sexuality during his teenage years while being in ballet means that it messed him up mentally down the road. And at 44 years of age, he should've have a fairly good idea of whether he liked the pole, the hole (or both) when he accepted the role.

If being paired up with someone he was at ease with was the criteria, then they should have hired Keely-Shaye Smith to be his love interest in all those films.

At the time I thought he was good in every film, but in retrospect, I think I was just glad the films were back, they were popular, they were pretty good, and they seemed to have corrected the mistakes that were made between AVTAK and LTK. Essentially, Brosnan was a bookmark; a placeholder. He just happened to be in some good movies where James Bond was the lead character.

I thought he had chemistry with Scorupco, Janssen, Marceau, and Berry. Hard to say much about Rosamund Pike since her character was meant to hate Bond; Richards was too young for her role, and Hatcher's role was horrible from the first draft.

There's definitely some uneasiness in GE that makes him come off flat when trying to lighten up and act charming. I think he's got his moments in that flick, but there are times when he appears too conscious of the camera that he unintentionally comes off as Patrick Bateman than Bond. In TND he coasted, probably feeling easy about GE being a success. What certainly didn't help was Hatcher, as apparently they didn't get along that well and it really shows. He's atrocious in TWINE, but so is everyone else in that flick, so I lay the blame on the director.

Brosnan's sexuality would be irrelevant if he were a better actor and I feel bad for bringing it up here. After all, my favourite for Bond after Connery was Jeremy Brett, who was as gay as they come. The point I'm trying to make is that if you're not a good actor then you must rely on chemistry and Brosnan didn't have any, not in the first few films at least.

Not entirely Brosnans fault. It's one of the continuing failings of the series that Eon repeatedly cast an athlete or clothes horse as Bond on the assumption that they could get away with it by surrounding him with competent actors, loud sets and explosions. Given that, Connery turned out to be better than anyone could've expected (maybe because of Terence Young, who directed the best films), but Lazenby and Brosnan were dead losses.

Dalton is still the best actor to play Bond. Not only intelligent  - unusual in people that rely on others to write their lines - but he looked the part too. Now Dan Craig may be an excellent actor, but he's never going to be how I see 007. Still, it's interesting that pairing Craig with Sam Mendes,  a director better known for stage rather than film work, gave us a decent film again. Maybe it's that undefinable chemistry.

Erica Ambler wrote:

Brosnan's sexuality would be irrelevant if he were a better actor and I feel bad for bringing it up here.

Your comments are homeopathic and have no place in a forum of enlightened discourse. But since it was Brosnan that brought it up first, I'm willing to give you a past.

Quote :

Not entirely Brosnans fault. It's one of the continuing failings of the series that Eon repeatedly cast an athlete or clothes horse as Bond on the assumption that they could get away with it by surrounding him with competent actors, loud sets and explosions.

Which goes back to my point earlier that Brosnan was essentially a placeholder; a bookmark. An actor who happened to wander onto a film that just happened to be a Bond film. Then again, MGM was so desperate for the series to be successful again that Brosnan was the safe pick. I've been digging through some of my old GOLDENEYE, BONDAGE, and 007MAGAZINE issues, and it's very interesting to read the quotes about where the series stood (or was headed) back in the late 80's and early 90's. I'll have to create a thread to discuss it elsewhere, but it's suffice to say that MGM never really had much confidence in bringing Dalton back for a 3rd film, and the quotes from Cubby, Michael, and people-in-the-know where quite lawyerly and diplomatic when discussing Dalton's return. But anyone who is fluent in reading between the lines could tell they were being nice, and that Dalton had no shot at a third film. It was Brosnan's to lose.

Quote :

Now Dan Craig may be an excellent actor,  but he's never going to be how I see 007.

Must be really difficult for Craig, since he's bisexual. I guess that means he's potentially attracted to both the Bond Girls and.....Q??? Probably best that they don't hire a handsome, good-looking actor to play opposite him in BOND24; someone like Andreas Wisniewski, Toby Stephens, or Lotte Lenya, because then it's quite possible that the ending would be more different than we could possibly imagine.

Erica Ambler wrote:

Not only intelligent  - unusual in people that rely on others to write their lines

Lol what?

FieldsMan wrote:

Erica Ambler wrote:

Not only intelligent  - unusual in people that rely on others to write their lines

Lol what?

Precisely.

Anyway, Bond 24 ends with M buggering Bond over his desk. No change there, then - 007's been taking it in the arse ever since The Dench arrived.

Erica Ambler wrote:

FieldsMan wrote:

Erica Ambler wrote:

Not only intelligent  - unusual in people that rely on others to write their lines

Lol what?

Precisely.

Not quite. Clearly you're just as ignorant as most, probably stemming from jealousy because actors who have tenacity to stick at their dreams and succeed at it instead of being in some dead end job that they hate must of course mean that they're not intelligent. Not to mention they're actively curiously and always learning which isn't usually akin to someone who works their 9-5 gig. Sounds like you frequent the youtube comments quite often.

This discussion reminds me of how Cubby sent a hooker to Lazenby's room to check if he was straight (being a male model n' all). Lazenby dutifully fucked her and only found out she was a prossie a few years later.

CJB wrote:

This discussion reminds me of how Cubby sent a hooker to Lazenby's room to check if he was straight (being a male model n' all). Lazenby dutifully fucked her and only found out she was a prossie a few years later.

Lazenby never once made me think he was gay.
Seems like an odd hang-up for a person working in the movie industry to have.
After all, Randolph Scott played countless "tough cowboy" roles whilst being in a long-term relationship with Cary Grant.
And both Brando's and Monty Clift's gates swung both ways (though in the case of Clift there is a suggestion he was merely a gay man in denial).
My issues with Brosnan have little to do with his sexuality and more to do with his acting style and the quality of the material he had to work with.

I want the classic ending and am rather sick of pandering to PC and overtly emo sensibilities, two adults consenting to and enjoying each other is not something to be ashamed of or something that demeans either sex.

I did like the ending for Skyfall but it should remain the exception rather than the rule (and sincerely hope it isn't the lie that CR's ending proved to be).

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Erica Ambler wrote:

Brosnan's sexuality would be irrelevant if he were a better actor and I feel bad for bringing it up here.

Your comments are homeopathic and have no place in a forum of enlightened discourse. But since it was Brosnan that brought it up first, I'm willing to give you a past.

That's the problem with Spellcheck: it will tell you whether the word you've selected is correctly spelled, but not if it's the word you actually want.

AMC Hornet wrote:

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Erica Ambler wrote:

Brosnan's sexuality would be irrelevant if he were a better actor and I feel bad for bringing it up here.

Your comments are homeopathic and have no place in a forum of enlightened discourse. But since it was Brosnan that brought it up first, I'm willing to give you a past.

That's the problem with Spellcheck: it will tell you whether the word you've selected is correctly spelled, but not if it's the word you actually want.

Hornet, you've known me for too long to make such a rookie assumption. What makes you think it was an accidental error with Spell Check?  Maybe I meant to write it that way. Hint: look at the entire post again carefully and I guarantee you that you will find another intentional(?) error.