Is Pierce the forgotten Bond?
The Red Kind
EnglandPosts: 3,126MI6 Agent
Sean will always have his legendary status. Is more often than not voted as the best Bond. Lazenby having appeared in (arguably) the best and closest to the novel film. Roger through his reign as the (currently) longest serving Bond, his popularity with cinema audiences and affection for many growing up in his era. Tim as the closest interpretation of Fleming's Bond and demanding respect from all but the most critical of objectors (Higgy Darling). DC (like Roger) very popular amongst his generation of Bond fans and bringing a new, grittier, 'emotionally detached' (except when he becomes emotionally attached) take on the role and having appeared in many people's top 5 Bond film CR and the box office, loved by the general public SF. All makes me think, is Pierce the most forgotten and disregarded Bond of all? Perhaps we don't have many born in the late 80's forum members on here but there just doesn't seem much emotional affection for him. Generally, everyone's favourite Bond is the one they grew up with isn't it? Being born in the early Seventies for me it's Roger but where is the Pierce Brigade? Personally, I'm a big fan of Pierce, as Bond and in other roles and I think he incorporates every other Bond actor's interpretation of the character. But perhaps that is the issue? Was he just too cinematic and bland? Or was it just the scripts, stories and casting of other characters that really let him down..? Just got me thinking.
"Any of the opposition around..?"
Comments
Pierce is not the forgotten Bond. He will rise to Moore status as soon as Craig is the "former" Bond. Then it will be Craig who steps into the difficult spot.
Pierce is widely loved still, all four films of him were generally well received by critics and the audience at the time. That doesn't go away, no matter how DAD may be received today. Remember Craig has two films that instantly got received with mixed reviews at best and QOS is the biggest disappointment since LTK when it comes to audience or critic reaction.
Brosnan films are between 22 and 15 years old, that is always the time when films age and are in between of being "aging" and "becoming classics".
The same will happen to Craig and probably faster than with Brosnan once a new actor, finally, will take over the role.
Until I actually went and watched CR and the fires were relit. So as much as I do love Brosnan and his first films it was on his watch that dad was made, he'll never be forgotten with that film
brozzer has a strong following, he was excellent and still is.
Because there's...
that will ever happen. You dislike Craig so much that you forget that he reinvented the role. That's something that will be talked about for years...maybe decades after he leaves the role.
Wishful thinking, he'll be forgotten pretty fast once a new actor has taken over. He'll have his hardcore fans as all the Bond actors have.
I don't dislike Craig, I just find him ridiculously overrated and he is. I can't see how he reinvented anything by the way. Except having no MP and Q at first and not caring for shaken not stirred...
Unless you call doing the Bourne reinvention
You are surely confused Jason! How can Bond do Bourne when Bourne is a reiteration of Bond? Ludlum used a template made by Fleming, he even used Kenneth Ross's character as Bournes main protagonist, a government agent with amnesia? Hmmm that sounds familiar. Craig starred as Bond in the reinvention and reboot of Bond, the fact he has brought many new fans into the bond fold and done good business is a good thing irrelevant of how highly you rate him.
Craig has brought in new fans as has any of his predecessors and will his successor. And only SF (and then SP) was more successful ticket sales wise than any of Brosnan's films.
As I said, many here overrate the whole era quite a bit, probably blinded by the billion dollar BO that happened six years after Craig was in CR.
Craig is just another Bond like anyone that came after Connery, expect the one actor that really did reinvent the character, Sir Rog. Craig has done nothing even comparable in scope.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Jason, regardless of your opinion of Craig (I'm not a fan either) he won't be forgotten. He's done enough films with two very well received ones.
"Better make that two."
“I felt so insecure while I was making The Bourne Identity that I was making a poor man’s spy movie. There was someone on the set who had the Mission: Impossible ring tone on his phone, and every time his phone rang it drove me nuts because I was afraid my movie was never going to be as good as Mission: Impossible. It was never going to be as good as James Bond. So it was really surreal afterwards to go and see the next James Bond film, and be like, ‘Oh, I did make a James Bond film, because now the James Bond film looks like The Bourne Identity.’ So given the emotional insecurity I bring to my craft, that was really surreal. I would still love to direct a James Bond film, but I’m not sure if I have or haven’t.”
Here is the whole article:
http://screenrant.com/doug-liman-james-bond-movie-direct/
Bond stopped being original by 2006 which is a shame. Brosnan's run will be viewed upon very favourably compared to this era in 20 years from now.
Also, please stop having illusions of objectivity on Craig. Since you love Brozzer so much, please have the decency to...
Name most topics (apart from Off-Topic) that you've posted in and I am willing to bet that you've brought up a distasteful (according to me, anyway) critique on the era at least once.
Name it.
You know, as much as I like some of the other things you've said, your stance on the Craig era is even more unforgiving as Higgy-babe's view on the Dalton era (if that is even possible).
CR was a masterpiece in the 007 universe.
As much as I like Brosnan for his personality and his phantastic look (how I envy him for his hair...), I find his 4 movies mediocre with not much substance to become future classics. In the Brosnan era this started and I cringe everytime when I see 007 firing a machine pistol and mowing down dozens of baddies.
CR on the contrary has the substance to become a Classic imo.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Hey, I see what you are doing here :v
You compare my substantial and well- laid out and - founded Dalton dislike with some random Craig hater ;%
That won't fly, young man! 8-)
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I apologise.
(Also, you failed to point it out, so I will do the honours. The name is Higgins X-( X-( X-()
AND THIS!!!!! X-( X-( X-(
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
+1
Currently, they are considered uncool due to the "gritty" Craig era, but fans will miss the classic/modern feel of the Brosnan films with all 007 trademarks in place.
Plus he will always be loved by the Goldeneye 64 generation.
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
"You forgot the first rule of Mass Media Elliot! Give the people what they want!!!"
"I never miss..."
"Time to face gravity!"
Love TWINE, love Brosnan in it and adore the suits. He's Bond in this film -{
"Better make that two."
Read it and posted it yesterday afternoon.
Everybody knows my opinion about Sir Roger, but imo no Bond ever looked better the part than Brosnen in TND and TWINE {[]
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I seem to remember when Pierce was playing 007, most fans
And film critics loved him ? Only after ( the amittedly fantastic
CR ) did the grumbling start.
Pierce was the right man for his time, just as Daniel is now and the
next guy will also be the right choice -{