TF Issue 204: Is It Just Me? Pierce Brosnan...

[Lizhawkins]

On page 147 of TF issue 204, Neil Smith asks:

"Is it just me... or is Pierce Brosnan the Bond to beat them all?"



Back IN TF158, Richard Matthews made a decent claim for Timothy Dalton as the best Bond so far. But he ignored the fact the Welshman was always just a transitional stop-gap for the 007 franchise: a last-minute replacement after Eon’s first choice was suddenly made unavailable for reasons neither party could control. And who was this first choice of whom we speak? Why, Pierce Brendan Brosnan of course: an actor not just ideal for Bond, but the only one you can honestly say was born to play him.

Sean Connery had his doubters. Roger Moore had his. From the moment Brosnan was confirmed for GoldenEye, however, not one naysayer queried his casting. He looked right. He felt right. And he had the perfect backstory, not just having missed out the first time around, but also having lost his very own Bond girl (For Your Eyes Only’s Cassandra Harris) in the tragic interim.

According to Matthews, Pierce “aped Connery with a trace of Moore-ism smarm”. That seems a little reductive to me. Yes, Brosnan knew how to deliver a ’70s-era quip and a pun-laden innuendo. And he had no trouble either gear-shifting into lady-killing seducer, be he in a hotel suite, an ice palace or the driving seat of a DB5. What he had that Roger didn’t, though, was a core of steel – an implacable resolve that made him a ruthless killing machine when the occasion required it. When Moore or Connery took a life, there was usually a joke to make it palatable (“He got the point”, “Play it again, Sam” and so on). Yet when Pierce kills he does it in cold blood, without hesitation or (usually) a throwaway remark. Not only that, but he’s perfectly prepared to do it even when his own life is not directly threatened.

“Wait – I’m just a professional doing a job!” pleads Vincent Schiavelli’s Dr Kaufman in Tomorrow Never Dies. “Me too,” answers Brosnan as he puts a bullet in his brain. It’s an exchange that gets to the heart of Pierce’s Bond: a dedicated operative ready to do anything for the sake of the mission, with a work ethic that overrides any personal considerations. Nothing peeves him more than being told he’s not up for a task, as he is in both The World Is Not Enough and Die Another Day. Nor is he a guy to crack under pressure, 14 months of torture in a North Korean prison constituting little more than a slight sartorial inconvenience.

True, Brosnan was let down by Die Another Day, with its CGI kite-surfing and invisible car. Were it not for his virile charm and effortless elegance, however, the Bond series could well have withered on the vine long before that 2002 low point.

GoldenEye – no less than Skyfall – reminded us how much we needed Bond and how much we miss him when he isn’t around. And it was Brosnan – smooth, deadly, unbeatable Brosnan – that gave him the all-important kiss of life. Or is it just me?

Or is it just me?

Issue 204 of Total Film is on sale 15 February 2013.

Agree? Disagree? Have your say below - a selection will be printed in the next issue...

[CitizenSnips]

I think Pierce Brosnan was great as Bond. I don't know if he's better than Connery or Craig but he's certainly in my pick of the top three with them.

The trouble is, he was saddled with some pretty bad films. Goldeneye was fantastic, but the next two were pretty forgettable which isn't want you want with a Bond film. And obviously, the less said about Die Another Day, the better.

[MillerCrosses]

He was too obvious, he didn't have to try and the writers didn't know how to right him. Also it's a myth that he was the first choice for The Living Daylights, Dalton was too busy when he was first asked.

[dojj singh]

Said it before, I'll say it again, Brosnan as Bond has always struck me as being cast in the same way as Val Kilmer as Batman.
No one could risk Adam West as Bond and, for that time period, he was the best Bond they could have hoped for.

[EddieBerge]

Probably the best bond, but never felt he got his movie... He never got his "Casino Royale".

[jaykays hat]

He was a better Bond than Dalton but he was just Remington Steel with a double O status. Too much of an obvious choice.

[Kiba.]

I agree with Jay. The obvious choice is not always the best one.

[Jeffbiscuits]

To be honest, Dalton is my second favourite bond. Brosnan had films. Memorable ones. Or memorable one. Against Connerys films they're both crap.

[Skyfall]

He simply never bought anything new to the role of Bond to make him stand out . He had a little Connery,Moore and Dalton but nothing of Brosnan was ever there. I also think the films don't stand up well apart from Goldeneye (although its no Casino Royale).

While Daniel Craig bought a new side of Bond we've never saw a Vulnerable,Flawed man who could kick ass. Plus two of the Best Bond films since Connery's Peak in Casino Royale and Skyfall which have made Bond cool again.

[McBride]

Neil Smith states that Timothy Dalton was a transitional stop-gap/last minute replacement for Eon's first choice actor but he clearly ignored some of the facts himself.
Timothy Dalton was approached before Pierce Brosnan in 1986 but was unable to test for Bond due to filming commitments on the film Brenda Starr, plus the fact that he had been scouted for the role of 007 several times before the first being in 1968 for OHMSS.
Seems to me that Brosnan was far more of a stop-gap than Dalton ever was!
Rant over with now, would just like to end my message by saying a huge well done to Daniel Craig who has almost single-handedly helped bring 007 back to life.