| Interesting article on Brosnan, Bond, and "The Matador" [message #303420] |
Mi, 19 Juli 2006 01:19 |
|
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=w060717&s=orr071806
Key sentence: Brosnan was "the best Bond since Connery, which makes it
all the more a pity that the scripts were getting too lame to deserve
him."
Couldn't agree more. As long as Purvis and Wade are allowed to write
their dismal scripts, I don't see us having a truly great Bond film.
AK
|
|
|
| Re: Interesting article on Brosnan, Bond, and "The Matador" [message #303447 ] |
Mi, 19 Juli 2006 08:52 |
|
Oh well, maybe they'll get fired before "Risico"...
But you can't judge CR until you see it.
<akaiser77 [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1153264792.268411.160850 [at] 75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=w060717&s=orr071806
>
> Key sentence: Brosnan was "the best Bond since Connery, which makes it
> all the more a pity that the scripts were getting too lame to deserve
> him."
>
> Couldn't agree more. As long as Purvis and Wade are allowed to write
> their dismal scripts, I don't see us having a truly great Bond film.
>
> AK
>
|
|
|
| Re: Interesting article on Brosnan, Bond, and "The Matador" [message #303453 ] |
Mi, 19 Juli 2006 10:31 |
|
akaiser77 [at] hotmail.com wrote:
> http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=w060717&s=orr071806
>
> Key sentence: Brosnan was "the best Bond since Connery, which makes it
> all the more a pity that the scripts were getting too lame to deserve
> him."
I've got to admit I wonder whether eventually we'll all be wondering a
bit about 'emperor's new clothes' syndrome with Brosnan. Connery was
gritty but humorous, Moore went for the humour bit showed a little hard
edge in his first couple of films, Dalton went too far with the grit
for some people's tastes and we'll see what Craig does with the part -
but I can't honestly think of anything that distinguishes Brosnan apart
from looking good in the part.
When we've had a few years' distance to evaluate it properly I wonder
whether, when people ask why we like Brosnan so much, we'll be
answering 'Well, he was, er...' and then floundering a bit.
Regards
Guy
|
|
|
| Re: Interesting article on Brosnan, Bond, and "The Matador" [message #303491 ] |
Mi, 19 Juli 2006 17:09 |
|
Hi Guy,
I agree that Brosnan may be overrated. I prefer Lazenby and Dalton
myself. That said, I think his era would have been much more
distinguished had, say, Michael G. Wilson been writing the films rather
than Purvis and Wade, whom I consider second-rate hacks who have done
much to cheapen the franchise.
AK
|
|
|
| Re: Interesting article on Brosnan, Bond, and "The Matador" [message #303554 ] |
Do, 20 Juli 2006 01:52 |
|
Guy wrote:
> I've got to admit I wonder whether eventually we'll all be wondering a
> bit about 'emperor's new clothes' syndrome with Brosnan. Connery was
> gritty but humorous, Moore went for the humour bit showed a little hard
> edge in his first couple of films, Dalton went too far with the grit
> for some people's tastes and we'll see what Craig does with the part -
> but I can't honestly think of anything that distinguishes Brosnan apart
> from looking good in the part.
>
> When we've had a few years' distance to evaluate it properly I wonder
> whether, when people ask why we like Brosnan so much, we'll be
> answering 'Well, he was, er...' and then floundering a bit.
I think he was the 'all of the above' Bond - there are bits in his
films where you could compare him to each of the others, and he covered
all the bases you mention above. Trying to pick out an individual
characteristic which marks him apart from the others is very difficult,
but I don't think that's necessarily something to hold against him. He
was certainly the right man for his era, in that he managed to touch on
almost every aspect which audiences and many fans alike had come to
expect from Bond after Dalton's Bond had apparently (and to my mind
sadly) proved *too* serious for many.
Best
Phil
|
|
|
| Re: Interesting article on Brosnan, Bond, and "The Matador" [message #303569 ] |
Do, 20 Juli 2006 05:24 |
|
The shooting script's pretty good.
I think it's impossible to make a great film 20-some sequels in, but
they're going about it the right way by not being too dependent on
2-dozen previous films.
|
|
|
