• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Why is Pierce Brosnan's Bond era so heavily disliked?

Status
Not open for further replies.
What? I'm pretty sure TND had more action than Goldeneye. They tried to outdo Goldeneye by adding in more action scenes, but the movie was just a bit more ridiculous because of it. Maybe I'm remembering wrong.
I may be confusing it with another one it has been a long time since I've seen it.
 
Because it contains 1 mediocre entry, one of the 10 worst in series history, and the worst Bond film ever made.

GoldenEye can only carry you so far.

The 90s have not aged well.
Honestly even GoldenEye hasn't aged THAT well technically but the set pieces are still really great.
 

Tagyhag

Member
He only had one good movie and even then it wasn't that great of a film.

That said, I think Pierce is the best Bond in looks and sexiness.
 

Javaman

Member
It's because he has a HUGE mouth.


8MSP9yZ.jpg
 
I do wish they would have let him play the character like he wanted, which was in a lot of ways a prototype for Craig's bond instead of a callback to Roger Moore, but I dislike Moore in general which I know is an unpopular opinion.

....

Disliking Moore's Bond is an unpopular opinion? It shouldn't be.
 
I think he was the best bond. The World is Not Enough is also my favourite bond film. Elektra King is the shit. The plot was so good a Batman movie copied it.
 
Yeah, GoldenEye is still top 10 Bond, but it's on the lower end of the scale.

Again - the 90s have not aged well.
Most of Moore's suffer the same problem, but his failures are also coupled with the fact that, after the first two, he was just too old and out of shape to be playing Bond anymore.

Connery's age the best, imo, because they rely the least on stupid tech.
 
It's basically the same as Daniel Craig's run quality-wise. Martin Campbell directed the first film for both, and they are amazing, and everything after is barely worth watching.
 

Yarbskoo

Member
Goldeneye was pretty good, but the rest were mediocre.

He's kinda like Moore if he started with the The Spy Who Loved Me and ended with The Man with the Golden Gun.
 

Sanjuro

Member
Goldeneye is a top ten Bond. As a Bond fan, that means DICK.

James Bond is basically a guiltier pleasure than the Rocky films.
 

Goro Majima

Kitty Genovese Member
They're just not as good as the newer high budget films with Daniel Craig and haven't aged very well.

That said, Brosnan has got the best Bond "look" since Sean Connery. They're really 1a and 1b in terms of having the Bond charisma.
 
Most of Moore's suffer the same problem, but his failures are also coupled with the fact that, after the first two, he was just too old and out of shape to be playing Bond anymore.

Connery's age the best, imo, because they rely the least on stupid tech.

Moore was able to notice and address that shit though! I loved how intentionally cheesy his bond films got!
 
It's basically the same as Daniel Craig's run quality-wise. Martin Campbell directed the first film for both, and they are amazing, and everything after is barely worth watching.
I mean just on a technical level, Skyfall is better than any of Brosnan's post GoldenEye output.
 
To my understanding, Goldeneye was the only good Brosnan film, and everything else was "meh", and Die Another Day is one of the worst. I still want to check them out (except DAD anyway).
 

Megatron

Member
His video games were better than his movies. Goldeneye of course, and the very under-rated Everything or nothing.
 
Pierce Brosnan was a good Bond. I liked him a lot more than Roger Moore. But his movies got significantly worse with each new one. Goldeneye was great, Tomorrow Never Dies is average, The World is Not Enough is bad and Die Another Day is the worst Bond movie ever.

Daniel Craig has had an inconsistent run in comparison, but all of his movies are head and shoulders above those of Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan by a country mile. Yes, even Goldeneye.

Best wishes.
 

thefro

Member
I do wish they would have let him play the character like he wanted, which was in a lot of ways a prototype for Craig's bond instead of a callback to Roger Moore, but I dislike Moore in general which I know is an unpopular opinion.

Timothy Dalton's Bond was the prototype for Craig's Bond.
 

BigDug13

Member
I loved the Martin Campbell films with the last two Bond actors and that's about it.

Goldeneye and Casino Royale were both his and I think they're the two best Bond movies since the return of Bond with Brosnan.
 
....

Disliking Moore's Bond is an unpopular opinion? It shouldn't be.

I've gotten the sense most people recognize Moore's era was the low point of the series, despite his having the longest run. His Bond fit his era pretty perfectly. It was shameless, corny, and ugly as shit. Fit the '70s/early '80s like a fucking isotoner glove.

(I really, really like Spy Who Loved Me, though. The best possible version of that Bond. Still corny and cheesy and stupid as hell, but it's not self-parody yet, either)

Connery's age the best, imo, because they rely the least on stupid tech.

I think the two that Dalton did play really well. Licence to Kill seems to work a lot better now than people gave it credit for back then. Then, it was a waaaaaay too late attempt to coast off Miami Vice's coattails (that show was dead meat already). But now, it's some dirty, mean-spirited rogue spy shit. The fact that it's coated in that sweaty '80s paranoia only helps it now.
 

tuxfool

Banned
Timothy Dalton's Bond was the prototype for Craig's Bond.

Yup, this. Timothy Dalton was unappreciated, probably ahead of his time.

I've gotten the sense most people recognize Moore's era was the low point of the series, despite his having the longest run. His Bond fit his era pretty perfectly. It was shameless, corny, and ugly as shit. Fit the '70s/early '80s like a fucking isotoner glove.
I certainly appreciate them as products of their time. Don't like the films intrinsically.
 
Most of Moore's suffer the same problem, but his failures are also coupled with the fact that, after the first two, he was just too old and out of shape to be playing Bond anymore.

Connery's age the best, imo, because they rely the least on stupid tech.

Dalton's still hold up imo. License to kill more than The Living Daylights, which is controversial apparently.
 

GreekWolf

Member
Goldeneye is the best Bond movie tho.

That's a mighty peculiar way of spelling License to Kill.

How can you possibly top a Bond movie where

- People get mauled by Great White Sharks
- Villains get eaten alive by maggots
- Villains get decompresed until their head explodes
- Benecio Del Toro is chewed up into bloody chunks

It's glorious 80's torture porn
 
I'm not sure I dislike them... they're just kinda there. Goldeneye is the only one that's "good", and even then I can't watch it without constantly thinking how much better it would have been with Dalton. TND and TWINE are fine, but forgettable. DAD is the only one that ventures into Moore-era levels of hilarious awfulness... which is kind of a shame because the first 15 minutes or whatever really trick you into thinking it's going to be something great.
 
Dalton is the best run you won't get any argument from me. I don't like License that much because yeah, Miami vice ripoff five years too late, but Living Daylighta is astoundingly good. It absolutely holds up and will continue to hold up. Especially coming off IMO the worst in the entire series in View to a Kill.
 
I know it's technically not a question of comparing their films, Bond and not, but I also feel that Brosnan not only had better style than Craig, but is also a better actor in general. Might get some hate for that view, but fuck it.
 
I know it's technically not a question of comparing their films, Bond and not, but I also feel that Brosnan not only had better style than Craig, but is also a better actor in general. Might get some hate for that view, but fuck it.
Oh he's absolutely a better actor you can't even debate that.

I just dislike the direction they had his character go after GoldenEye. He became a cartoon character.
 
Oh he's absolutely a better actor you can't even debate that.

I just dislike the direction they had his character go after GoldenEye. He became a cartoon character.

They should have let Campbell handle the entire Brosnan era. Never understood why it took so long to get him back in the directors chair for a bond film.
 
I thought he was just waste potential.. he absolutely looked the part and Goldeneye was top tier Bond. To this day I still don't get how they could fuck it up so royally with him as Bond
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom