Sprinkler Systems Uhaul move Lawn care Roses and trees Ford Parts Chrysler Parts Lake Powell New IPod Touch Apps New IPhone Apps IPhone Apps IPad Information IPad Apps Android APPS Android Games APPS Android Systems Android Tablets APPS and Beyond Smartphone Apps Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools Tablet PC Car Sharing Car Leasing Tabler Pc Fly Fishing Toyota Cars Vacation Rentals Stock market NYSE SSE Stock Freight & Shipping News Gluten Lactose Gout My Coupon Life Campgrounds Check Outdoor Kitchen Design and Redoo Bath Remodeling Palm Springs Las Vegas Vacation Tipps Lake Powell Boating Homes for lease Electric and green Car Blog Pearls and diamonds Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
Reader


[Suche]  [Administrator]  [Hinweise zum Reader]  [Startseite]
Miscellaneous / Verschiedenes » alt.fan.james-bond » Update on Pierce Brosnan's "The Matador"
Update on Pierce Brosnan's "The Matador" [message #219161] Mo, 13 Februar 2006 04:14
FTseng2749  
Well, it's hard to do well in the box office when your movie is shown
in only 900 theaters, but Pierce Brosnan's "The Matador" has grossed
just $10.5 million after a month and a half of release (although with
just 3 weekends of wide release), and will probably end up with about
$13-14 million in the kitty by the end of its run, which will be about
half of what his last movie flop (After the Sunset) made and will even
fall short of his romantic-comedy flop "Laws of Attraction." But in
terms of average-per-theater, it didn't do that badly, and the movie
only cost $12.5 million to make (according to BoxOfficeMojo.com), so
the studio will be in the black regardless, and the movie got very
positive reviews overall. Plus, Pierce got a Golden Globe nomination
for his performance, so he should get more interesting, non-Bond-like
roles from this, which is what I think he wanted. Unfortunately, it
hasn't generated into post-Bond box-office success as of yet, a la Sean
Connery.

As an aside, GE's Sean Bean (who played James Bond/Pierce Brosnan's
nemesis Alec Trevelyan/006) has made a great career as a supporting
character, getting to star in one huge box-office success after
another. Besides GE, he's been in the first Lord of the Rings movie,
Troy, National Treasure, Flightplan, and several other big movies.
Makes me wonder if Brosnan should step back to be a supporting player
temporarily, after all, his supporting role in the mega-hit "Mrs.
Doubtfire" put him back on the map and probably helped him get the Bond
role way back when. Maybe lightning can strike a second time.

-Frank

P.S. A link to box office performance of "The Matador:"
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=weekend&id=mat ador.htm
ex-Bonds in supporting roles (was Re: Update on Pierce Brosnan's "The Matador") [message #219166 ] Mo, 13 Februar 2006 09:25
dgates  
On 12 Feb 2006 19:14:16 -0800, "FTseng2749" <ftseng2749 [at] aol.com>
wrote:

>As an aside, GE's Sean Bean (who played James Bond/Pierce Brosnan's
>nemesis Alec Trevelyan/006) has made a great career as a supporting
>character, getting to star in one huge box-office success after
>another. Besides GE, he's been in the first Lord of the Rings movie,
>Troy, National Treasure, Flightplan, and several other big movies.
>Makes me wonder if Brosnan should step back to be a supporting player
>temporarily, after all, his supporting role in the mega-hit "Mrs.
>Doubtfire" put him back on the map and probably helped him get the Bond
>role way back when. Maybe lightning can strike a second time.


I'm thinking that maybe ex-Bond actors are too "larger than life" to
become the leads in movies. Too iconic maybe, or quirky, or
recognizable or something.

They do seem, however, to do well in supporting roles.

You pop Sean Connery into Red October and you instantly have an
authoritative submarine captain. Pop Timothly Dalton into the
Rocketeer and you instantly have a famous Hollywood star.

I'm not sure what the future holds with Pierce. The Matador worked
because of the way it offset the realistic Greg Kinnear character
against the larger-than-life, quirky, iconic Brosnan character. But,
in the end, it was Kinnear who made the final narrative decisions; he
was the one that we were supposed to identify with and project
ourselves into.

On the other hand, there was The Thomas Crown Affair (which I loved).
He was clearly the one and only leading man in that, even if his
character was one we couldn't fully understand, much less identify
with.


I don't think there'd be much shame if Brosnan ended up in roles like
the ones Connery took in Time Bandits and The Untouchables.
Re: ex-Bonds in supporting roles (was Re: Update on Pierce Brosnan's "The Matador") [message #219170 ] Mo, 13 Februar 2006 09:25
JHause  
dgates wrote:
> I don't think there'd be much shame if Brosnan ended up in roles like
> the ones Connery took in Time Bandits and The Untouchables.

Just avoid ZARDOZ 2: ELECTRIC BOOGALOO.

Nice post, BTW. Well-presented. I think you're right about the Bond
role being too iconic.

Look at the Craig discussions in this NG. People complain they can't
see Bond in his performances in LAYER CAKE and ROAD TO PERDITION, never
quite getting that if you could see Bond in either of those
performances, then they would be BAD performances. ("The guy playing
the insane American mobster's son seemed so much like James Bond to
me!")
Re: ex-Bonds in supporting roles (was Re: Update on Pierce Brosnan's "The Matador") [message #224821 ] Mo, 13 Februar 2006 18:04
Will Traynor  
"dgates" <dgates [at] spamlinkline.com> wrote in message
news:b1g0v11vo2m28rk8n463hg9rtcrbn43qt8 [at] 4ax.com...
> On 12 Feb 2006 19:14:16 -0800, "FTseng2749" <ftseng2749 [at] aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>>As an aside, GE's Sean Bean (who played James Bond/Pierce Brosnan's
>>nemesis Alec Trevelyan/006) has made a great career as a supporting
>>character, getting to star in one huge box-office success after
>>another. Besides GE, he's been in the first Lord of the Rings movie,
>>Troy, National Treasure, Flightplan, and several other big movies.
>>Makes me wonder if Brosnan should step back to be a supporting player
>>temporarily, after all, his supporting role in the mega-hit "Mrs.
>>Doubtfire" put him back on the map and probably helped him get the Bond
>>role way back when. Maybe lightning can strike a second time.
>
>
> I'm thinking that maybe ex-Bond actors are too "larger than life" to
> become the leads in movies. Too iconic maybe, or quirky, or
> recognizable or something.
>
> They do seem, however, to do well in supporting roles.
>
> You pop Sean Connery into Red October and you instantly have an
> authoritative submarine captain. Pop Timothly Dalton into the
> Rocketeer and you instantly have a famous Hollywood star.
>
> I'm not sure what the future holds with Pierce. The Matador worked
> because of the way it offset the realistic Greg Kinnear character
> against the larger-than-life, quirky, iconic Brosnan character. But,
> in the end, it was Kinnear who made the final narrative decisions; he
> was the one that we were supposed to identify with and project
> ourselves into.
>
> On the other hand, there was The Thomas Crown Affair (which I loved).
> He was clearly the one and only leading man in that, even if his
> character was one we couldn't fully understand, much less identify
> with.
>
>
> I don't think there'd be much shame if Brosnan ended up in roles like
> the ones Connery took in Time Bandits and The Untouchables.

Connery has had some success as a leading man, although he does seem to
shine in supporting roles. Robin and Marian, Outland, The Man Who Would Be
King and The Russia House come to mind as leading roles.
Re: ex-Bonds in supporting roles (was Re: Update on Pierce Brosnan's "The Matador") [message #224837 ] Di, 14 Februar 2006 03:02
dgates  
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 12:04:37 -0500, "Will" <willt65 [at] comcast.net>
wrote:

>
>"dgates" <dgates [at] spamlinkline.com> wrote in message
>news:b1g0v11vo2m28rk8n463hg9rtcrbn43qt8 [at] 4ax.com...
>> On 12 Feb 2006 19:14:16 -0800, "FTseng2749" <ftseng2749 [at] aol.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>As an aside, GE's Sean Bean (who played James Bond/Pierce Brosnan's
>>>nemesis Alec Trevelyan/006) has made a great career as a supporting
>>>character, getting to star in one huge box-office success after
>>>another. Besides GE, he's been in the first Lord of the Rings movie,
>>>Troy, National Treasure, Flightplan, and several other big movies.
>>>Makes me wonder if Brosnan should step back to be a supporting player
>>>temporarily, after all, his supporting role in the mega-hit "Mrs.
>>>Doubtfire" put him back on the map and probably helped him get the Bond
>>>role way back when. Maybe lightning can strike a second time.
>>
>>
>> I'm thinking that maybe ex-Bond actors are too "larger than life" to
>> become the leads in movies. Too iconic maybe, or quirky, or
>> recognizable or something.
>>
>> They do seem, however, to do well in supporting roles.
>>
>> You pop Sean Connery into Red October and you instantly have an
>> authoritative submarine captain. Pop Timothly Dalton into the
>> Rocketeer and you instantly have a famous Hollywood star.
>>
>> I'm not sure what the future holds with Pierce. The Matador worked
>> because of the way it offset the realistic Greg Kinnear character
>> against the larger-than-life, quirky, iconic Brosnan character. But,
>> in the end, it was Kinnear who made the final narrative decisions; he
>> was the one that we were supposed to identify with and project
>> ourselves into.
>>
>> On the other hand, there was The Thomas Crown Affair (which I loved).
>> He was clearly the one and only leading man in that, even if his
>> character was one we couldn't fully understand, much less identify
>> with.
>>
>>
>> I don't think there'd be much shame if Brosnan ended up in roles like
>> the ones Connery took in Time Bandits and The Untouchables.
>
>Connery has had some success as a leading man, although he does seem to
>shine in supporting roles. Robin and Marian, Outland, The Man Who Would Be
>King and The Russia House come to mind as leading roles.


It's funny. I'm pretty sure I've seen Outland and The Russia House,
but I can't remember anything about watching them.

I would lump "The Man Who Would Be King" in with these other films
(according to one criteria, listed below):

The Thomas Crown Affair (remake)
Matador
Entrapment
Zardoz
The Hunt for Red October
Time Bandits
(not sure if I should throw in The Rocketeer)

They're wildly different movies, but they all fit one criteria: The
Bond actor plays a character who is largely unknowable. Each film
relies on a character with whom we can more easily identify trying to
figure out what to do with the unknowable character. Is he brilliant?
Is he mad? Can I trust him? etc.
Re: ex-Bonds in supporting roles (was Re: Update on Pierce Brosnan's "The Matador") [message #224846 ] Di, 14 Februar 2006 05:53
Will Traynor  
"dgates" <dgates [at] spamlinkline.com> wrote in message
news:25e2v1l20msj5rataogqc5gi4rbktl8bq6 [at] 4ax.com...
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 12:04:37 -0500, "Will" <willt65 [at] comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"dgates" <dgates [at] spamlinkline.com> wrote in message
>>news:b1g0v11vo2m28rk8n463hg9rtcrbn43qt8 [at] 4ax.com...
>>> On 12 Feb 2006 19:14:16 -0800, "FTseng2749" <ftseng2749 [at] aol.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>As an aside, GE's Sean Bean (who played James Bond/Pierce Brosnan's
>>>>nemesis Alec Trevelyan/006) has made a great career as a supporting
>>>>character, getting to star in one huge box-office success after
>>>>another. Besides GE, he's been in the first Lord of the Rings movie,
>>>>Troy, National Treasure, Flightplan, and several other big movies.
>>>>Makes me wonder if Brosnan should step back to be a supporting player
>>>>temporarily, after all, his supporting role in the mega-hit "Mrs.
>>>>Doubtfire" put him back on the map and probably helped him get the Bond
>>>>role way back when. Maybe lightning can strike a second time.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm thinking that maybe ex-Bond actors are too "larger than life" to
>>> become the leads in movies. Too iconic maybe, or quirky, or
>>> recognizable or something.
>>>
>>> They do seem, however, to do well in supporting roles.
>>>
>>> You pop Sean Connery into Red October and you instantly have an
>>> authoritative submarine captain. Pop Timothly Dalton into the
>>> Rocketeer and you instantly have a famous Hollywood star.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what the future holds with Pierce. The Matador worked
>>> because of the way it offset the realistic Greg Kinnear character
>>> against the larger-than-life, quirky, iconic Brosnan character. But,
>>> in the end, it was Kinnear who made the final narrative decisions; he
>>> was the one that we were supposed to identify with and project
>>> ourselves into.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, there was The Thomas Crown Affair (which I loved).
>>> He was clearly the one and only leading man in that, even if his
>>> character was one we couldn't fully understand, much less identify
>>> with.
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think there'd be much shame if Brosnan ended up in roles like
>>> the ones Connery took in Time Bandits and The Untouchables.
>>
>>Connery has had some success as a leading man, although he does seem to
>>shine in supporting roles. Robin and Marian, Outland, The Man Who Would Be
>>King and The Russia House come to mind as leading roles.
>
>
> It's funny. I'm pretty sure I've seen Outland and The Russia House,
> but I can't remember anything about watching them.
>

Outland was 'High Noon' in space, a very good movie. The Russia House is a
bit slow but the acting is first rate. Klaus Maria Brandeur is in that one,
too

> I would lump "The Man Who Would Be King" in with these other films
> (according to one criteria, listed below):
>
> The Thomas Crown Affair (remake)
> Matador
> Entrapment
> Zardoz
> The Hunt for Red October
> Time Bandits
> (not sure if I should throw in The Rocketeer)
>
> They're wildly different movies, but they all fit one criteria: The
> Bond actor plays a character who is largely unknowable. Each film
> relies on a character with whom we can more easily identify trying to
> figure out what to do with the unknowable character. Is he brilliant?
> Is he mad? Can I trust him? etc.
>
Re: ex-Bonds in supporting roles (was Re: Update on Pierce Brosnan's "The Matador") [message #224928 ] Mi, 15 Februar 2006 23:53
Jabei  
There is absolutely no comparison....

As a leading man in "prestige acting" movies - MARNIE - MOLLY MAGUIRES - THE
HILL - THE OFFENCE - WIND & THE LION - MAN WHO WOULD BE KING - ROBIN &
MARIAN - FIVE DAYS ONE SUMMER - NAME OF THE ROSE - FAMILY BUSINESS - RUSSIA
HOUSE - FINDING FORRESTER

As a leading man in medium - high grossing movies (i.e. higher than almost
any other ex-Bond's movies)
RED OCTOBER - RISING SUN - PRESIDIO - ANDERSON TAPES - MEDICINE MAN - JUST
CAUSE - THE ROCK - LXG - ENTRAPMENT

Supporting actor in high grossers - UNTOUCHABLES - LAST CRUSADE -
HIGHLANDER - ORIENT EXPRESS.

To say Connery has never outgrown Bond is a joke......There are load more
films that he did that were'nt commercially succesful but that still have
merit.

The reason that Moore/Daltn/Brosnan haven't flourished ouside & after Bond
is because
THEY AREN'T VERY GOOD !!!!!



"Will" <willt65 [at] comcast.net> wrote in message
news:cOGdnYdhj6Wt_2zeRVn-sw [at] comcast.com...
>
> "dgates" <dgates [at] spamlinkline.com> wrote in message
> news:25e2v1l20msj5rataogqc5gi4rbktl8bq6 [at] 4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 12:04:37 -0500, "Will" <willt65 [at] comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"dgates" <dgates [at] spamlinkline.com> wrote in message
>>>news:b1g0v11vo2m28rk8n463hg9rtcrbn43qt8 [at] 4ax.com...
>>>> On 12 Feb 2006 19:14:16 -0800, "FTseng2749" <ftseng2749 [at] aol.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>As an aside, GE's Sean Bean (who played James Bond/Pierce Brosnan's
>>>>>nemesis Alec Trevelyan/006) has made a great career as a supporting
>>>>>character, getting to star in one huge box-office success after
>>>>>another. Besides GE, he's been in the first Lord of the Rings movie,
>>>>>Troy, National Treasure, Flightplan, and several other big movies.
>>>>>Makes me wonder if Brosnan should step back to be a supporting player
>>>>>temporarily, after all, his supporting role in the mega-hit "Mrs.
>>>>>Doubtfire" put him back on the map and probably helped him get the Bond
>>>>>role way back when. Maybe lightning can strike a second time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm thinking that maybe ex-Bond actors are too "larger than life" to
>>>> become the leads in movies. Too iconic maybe, or quirky, or
>>>> recognizable or something.
>>>>
>>>> They do seem, however, to do well in supporting roles.
>>>>
>>>> You pop Sean Connery into Red October and you instantly have an
>>>> authoritative submarine captain. Pop Timothly Dalton into the
>>>> Rocketeer and you instantly have a famous Hollywood star.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure what the future holds with Pierce. The Matador worked
>>>> because of the way it offset the realistic Greg Kinnear character
>>>> against the larger-than-life, quirky, iconic Brosnan character. But,
>>>> in the end, it was Kinnear who made the final narrative decisions; he
>>>> was the one that we were supposed to identify with and project
>>>> ourselves into.
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand, there was The Thomas Crown Affair (which I loved).
>>>> He was clearly the one and only leading man in that, even if his
>>>> character was one we couldn't fully understand, much less identify
>>>> with.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't think there'd be much shame if Brosnan ended up in roles like
>>>> the ones Connery took in Time Bandits and The Untouchables.
>>>
>>>Connery has had some success as a leading man, although he does seem to
>>>shine in supporting roles. Robin and Marian, Outland, The Man Who Would
>>>Be
>>>King and The Russia House come to mind as leading roles.
>>
>>
>> It's funny. I'm pretty sure I've seen Outland and The Russia House,
>> but I can't remember anything about watching them.
>>
>
> Outland was 'High Noon' in space, a very good movie. The Russia House is a
> bit slow but the acting is first rate. Klaus Maria Brandeur is in that
> one, too
>
>> I would lump "The Man Who Would Be King" in with these other films
>> (according to one criteria, listed below):
>>
>> The Thomas Crown Affair (remake)
>> Matador
>> Entrapment
>> Zardoz
>> The Hunt for Red October
>> Time Bandits
>> (not sure if I should throw in The Rocketeer)
>>
>> They're wildly different movies, but they all fit one criteria: The
>> Bond actor plays a character who is largely unknowable. Each film
>> relies on a character with whom we can more easily identify trying to
>> figure out what to do with the unknowable character. Is he brilliant?
>> Is he mad? Can I trust him? etc.
>>
>
>
Re: ex-Bonds in supporting roles (was Re: Update on Pierce Brosnan's "The Matador") [message #224929 ] Do, 16 Februar 2006 01:07
phil.gerrard1  
Jabei wrote:

> The reason that Moore/Daltn/Brosnan haven't flourished ouside & after Bond
> is because
> THEY AREN'T VERY GOOD !!!!!

Absolute, complete rubbish. Moore was well past his sell-by date as a
leading man and settled happily into semi-retirement, Dalton's Bond
films hadn't done terribly well at the American box-office (through
absolutely no fault of his own) meaning that he wasn't at the top of
Hollywood's want list, and Brosnan has barely even started his
post-Bond career so it's way too early to judge.

Why are you on a list like this if you think everything since Connery
has been crap? He left the role over thirty years ago. I'd suggest
getting another hobby rather than spending the rest of your life
carping about how there hasn't been a good Bond since 1965.

Phil

(Now sick to death of the 'everything since the sixties has sucked'
attitude displayed by a few on this list. It's not
alt.EX-fan.james-bond.)
Re: ex-Bonds in supporting roles (was Re: Update on Pierce Brosnan's "The Matador") [message #224930 ] Do, 16 Februar 2006 01:20
phil.gerrard1  
> (Now sick to death of the 'everything since the sixties has sucked'
> attitude displayed by a few on this list. It's not
> alt.EX-fan.james-bond.)

This, incidentally, is not directed at anybody who manages to make a
point without resorting to misogyny, casual racism, or criticism on the
level of 'x sucks' or 'y is no bloody good'. If anybody wants to raise
and debate even the most controversial-sounding points, that's fine, as
long as you can back up your opinion with rational argument. For me,
dumb-ass abuse and insult-hurling on the level I've described above is
the quick way into a killfile. I don't give a flying monkey's which
Bonds or Bond films anybody prefers, but I give up reading if all
they've got to back up their opinions are the cheapest of insults.

Best

Phil
Re: ex-Bonds in supporting roles (was Re: Update on Pierce Brosnan's "The Matador") [message #224947 ] Do, 16 Februar 2006 04:31
Will Traynor  
"phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com" <phil.gerrard1 [at] ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:1140049253.654573.259570 [at] f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> (Now sick to death of the 'everything since the sixties has sucked'
>> attitude displayed by a few on this list. It's not
>> alt.EX-fan.james-bond.)
>
> This, incidentally, is not directed at anybody who manages to make a
> point without resorting to misogyny, casual racism, or criticism on the
> level of 'x sucks' or 'y is no bloody good'. If anybody wants to raise
> and debate even the most controversial-sounding points, that's fine, as
> long as you can back up your opinion with rational argument. For me,
> dumb-ass abuse and insult-hurling on the level I've described above is
> the quick way into a killfile. I don't give a flying monkey's which
> Bonds or Bond films anybody prefers, but I give up reading if all
> they've got to back up their opinions are the cheapest of insults.
>
> Best
>
> Phil
>


Good points, but unfortunately that doesn't stop them ;-) I also subscribe
to the Battlestar Galactica (new version) newsgroup and read about how the
show is terrible, it's past its prime, it's falling apart and it can't
possibly be as good as in the past. If you ask someone why they continue to
post if they hate it so much, their response is, "How dare you question
whether I have the right to post a negative review !" LOL - Many posters
there just post a "the episode sucks" without any rational argument or
supporting evidence. If I killfiled everyone who did that you would be
hearing crickets. It's pretty sad. I always thought you posted to a newgroup
because you admired the subject matter or were interested in it. Why post if
you hate the subject?
Re: ex-Bonds in supporting roles (was Re: Update on Pierce Brosnan's"The Matador") [message #224994 ] Do, 16 Februar 2006 21:20
Paul Clarke  
Will wrote:
> Why post if you hate the subject?

Good question. Because it makes the posters feel self-important and/or
superior? Because our culture perceives it as cool to sneer at
something? Discuss among yourselves.
Re: ex-Bonds in supporting roles (was Re: Update on Pierce Brosnan's "The Matador") [message #227260 ] Mo, 20 Februar 2006 01:20
dgates  
By the way, I don't know if anyone's debating anyone here, or about
what, but that's a nice list below.

I do think that, if we only look at the post-Bond films in which
Connery has starred, we still find that many of them fall into the
category of "more recognizable human being character meeting the
large, iconic ex-Bond"... (whether the ex-Bond is powerful, mad,
etc.)

Going over your list, and unfortunately skipping those I don't know or
don't remember, I see many examples.

In "The Man Who Would Be King," it's Michael Caine trying to figure
out what to do with Sean.

Isn't "Finding Forrester" about someone from a college trying to track
down the mysterious, brilliant Sean character?

"Red October" is clearly the nervous Alec Baldwin facing the
mysterious Sean.

"Rising Sun?" Does our young cop hero have to kind of track down and
recruit Sean... (Can't remember and yet I both read it and saw it!)

Medicine Man has the woman tracking down powerful Sean.

The Rock has "ordinary" Nicolas Cage tracking down Sean.

Isn't it the same relationship between CZJ and Sean in Entrapment?

I suppose I can't list "The Untouchables." Sean may be older than the
hero, but he's hardly all-powerful, or mysterious, or someone who has
to be tracked down and figured out, etc.


Anyway, I personally wasn't knocking anyone in this thread. Just
theorizing that maybe once someone has played a larger-than-life
character like Bond for a while, they have trouble shaking off that
larger-than-life vibe when they want to settle down and try a non-Bond
film.




On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 22:53:16 +0000 (UTC), "Jabei"
<jabei [at] btinternet.com> wrote:

>There is absolutely no comparison....
>
>As a leading man in "prestige acting" movies - MARNIE - MOLLY MAGUIRES - THE
>HILL - THE OFFENCE - WIND & THE LION - MAN WHO WOULD BE KING - ROBIN &
>MARIAN - FIVE DAYS ONE SUMMER - NAME OF THE ROSE - FAMILY BUSINESS - RUSSIA
>HOUSE - FINDING FORRESTER
>
>As a leading man in medium - high grossing movies (i.e. higher than almost
>any other ex-Bond's movies)
>RED OCTOBER - RISING SUN - PRESIDIO - ANDERSON TAPES - MEDICINE MAN - JUST
>CAUSE - THE ROCK - LXG - ENTRAPMENT
>
>Supporting actor in high grossers - UNTOUCHABLES - LAST CRUSADE -
>HIGHLANDER - ORIENT EXPRESS.
>
>To say Connery has never outgrown Bond is a joke......There are load more
>films that he did that were'nt commercially succesful but that still have
>merit.
>
>The reason that Moore/Daltn/Brosnan haven't flourished ouside & after Bond
>is because
>THEY AREN'T VERY GOOD !!!!!
>
>
>
>"Will" <willt65 [at] comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:cOGdnYdhj6Wt_2zeRVn-sw [at] comcast.com...
>>
>> "dgates" <dgates [at] spamlinkline.com> wrote in message
>> news:25e2v1l20msj5rataogqc5gi4rbktl8bq6 [at] 4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 12:04:37 -0500, "Will" <willt65 [at] comcast.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"dgates" <dgates [at] spamlinkline.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:b1g0v11vo2m28rk8n463hg9rtcrbn43qt8 [at] 4ax.com...
>>>>> On 12 Feb 2006 19:14:16 -0800, "FTseng2749" <ftseng2749 [at] aol.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>As an aside, GE's Sean Bean (who played James Bond/Pierce Brosnan's
>>>>>>nemesis Alec Trevelyan/006) has made a great career as a supporting
>>>>>>character, getting to star in one huge box-office success after
>>>>>>another. Besides GE, he's been in the first Lord of the Rings movie,
>>>>>>Troy, National Treasure, Flightplan, and several other big movies.
>>>>>>Makes me wonder if Brosnan should step back to be a supporting player
>>>>>>temporarily, after all, his supporting role in the mega-hit "Mrs.
>>>>>>Doubtfire" put him back on the map and probably helped him get the Bond
>>>>>>role way back when. Maybe lightning can strike a second time.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm thinking that maybe ex-Bond actors are too "larger than life" to
>>>>> become the leads in movies. Too iconic maybe, or quirky, or
>>>>> recognizable or something.
>>>>>
>>>>> They do seem, however, to do well in supporting roles.
>>>>>
>>>>> You pop Sean Connery into Red October and you instantly have an
>>>>> authoritative submarine captain. Pop Timothly Dalton into the
>>>>> Rocketeer and you instantly have a famous Hollywood star.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure what the future holds with Pierce. The Matador worked
>>>>> because of the way it offset the realistic Greg Kinnear character
>>>>> against the larger-than-life, quirky, iconic Brosnan character. But,
>>>>> in the end, it was Kinnear who made the final narrative decisions; he
>>>>> was the one that we were supposed to identify with and project
>>>>> ourselves into.
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand, there was The Thomas Crown Affair (which I loved).
>>>>> He was clearly the one and only leading man in that, even if his
>>>>> character was one we couldn't fully understand, much less identify
>>>>> with.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think there'd be much shame if Brosnan ended up in roles like
>>>>> the ones Connery took in Time Bandits and The Untouchables.
>>>>
>>>>Connery has had some success as a leading man, although he does seem to
>>>>shine in supporting roles. Robin and Marian, Outland, The Man Who Would
>>>>Be
>>>>King and The Russia House come to mind as leading roles.
>>>
>>>
>>> It's funny. I'm pretty sure I've seen Outland and The Russia House,
>>> but I can't remember anything about watching them.
>>>
>>
>> Outland was 'High Noon' in space, a very good movie. The Russia House is a
>> bit slow but the acting is first rate. Klaus Maria Brandeur is in that
>> one, too
>>
>>> I would lump "The Man Who Would Be King" in with these other films
>>> (according to one criteria, listed below):
>>>
>>> The Thomas Crown Affair (remake)
>>> Matador
>>> Entrapment
>>> Zardoz
>>> The Hunt for Red October
>>> Time Bandits
>>> (not sure if I should throw in The Rocketeer)
>>>
>>> They're wildly different movies, but they all fit one criteria: The
>>> Bond actor plays a character who is largely unknowable. Each film
>>> relies on a character with whom we can more easily identify trying to
>>> figure out what to do with the unknowable character. Is he brilliant?
>>> Is he mad? Can I trust him? etc.
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: ex-Bonds in supporting roles (was Re: Update on Pierce Brosnan's "The Matador") [message #227262 ] Mo, 20 Februar 2006 01:32
phil.gerrard1  
dgates wrote:

> Just
> theorizing that maybe once someone has played a larger-than-life
> character like Bond for a while, they have trouble shaking off that
> larger-than-life vibe when they want to settle down and try a non-Bond
> film.

Connery's got an incredible on-screen presence which doesn't seem to
fit characters who aren't somewhat larger-than-life or semi-legendary.
To me, he's what the French describe as a 'king actor': not necessarily
the best actor nor the guy who always plays the king, but an actor who
carries an amazing air of authority about him. (To me the polar
opposite would be somebody like William H Macy: easily Connery's equal
as a screen actor, but utterly unsuited to authoritative parts.)

I always loved that line from an early draft of Terry Gilliam's 'Time
Bandits', which reads something like 'Agammemnon removes his helmet to
reveal Sean Connery, or a cheaper actor of equal stature'.

Best

Phil
Vorheriges Thema:Another rival franchise bites the dust...
Nächstes Thema:IGN: Script Review of Casino Royale (SPOILERS)
Gehe zu:
  


aktuelle Zeit: Do Mai 24 21:34:40 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,06247 Sekunden
.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.

Powered