The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[bjmdds]

Brosnan 'should be' acknowledged in a positive manner Stocks. Look at what he did for the collective USA's Bond fan pyche comparing 1989 to 1995. Brosnan did not pass the torch to Craig, it was taken from him by Broccoli. http://boxofficemojo.com/franchises/cha ... esbond.htm

[stockslivevan]

Brosnan 'should be' acknowledged in a positive manner Stocks. Look at what he did for the collective USA's Bond fan pyche comparing 1989 to 1995. Brosnan did not pass the torch to Craig, it was taken from him by Broccoli. http://boxofficemojo.com/franchises/cha ... esbond.htm

BJ, his films may have made a lot of money but it doesn't mean that Brosnan was good in their eyes. I acknowledge his films were successful in the 90s, but that doesn't mean I find him to be an ideal Bond. Besides, it should be him thanking EON for reviving his career, he would have been nowhere today without Bond. And how does he repay them when they decide to find a new actor after his contract was finished? By calling them "****ers" and making a hissyfit, forgetting that he'd be nowhere without them. And you say Craig has no class?

Now would have Bond been revived without Brosnan? Possibly. Afterall, you people do insist that the James Bond name is much bigger than the actor and that's why Craig's film did well anyway. What, that didn't apply to the others? If any actor made Bond successful, it would be Sean Connery, and no actor has ever reached his popularity by a bit.

And if you forgot, Brosnan did pass the torch to Craig at the GQ party by giving his blessing, fully supporting him during the media bashing, and then finally giving him praise by calling him the best Bond seeing his performance. Or do you still not consider that passing the torch?

And if I recall, Brosnan at one point during his promotion for Seraphim Falls said to Craig "don't let the bas***ds get you". Gee, I wonder who he was referring to?

[Skywalker]

Your generally well regarded on their if you dislike Sir Rog, Hate DAD and consider PB to be the worst Bond.

I find that a false generalization of MI6. People who like Moore and Brosnan are well accepted as long as they don't pull a Thrice. That's a factor on why many internet fights ensue. People like Thrice keeps trying to put down Craig with poor taste while at the same time contradicts himself. He'll say "Craig sucks because his first scenes were in the restoom" while his favorite Bond, Brosnan, ALSO had his first scenes in the restroom and completely loses the argument, hence why everyone calls him stupid. And Brosnan007 displays ignorance by saying "I only saw the Brosnan Bonds because everything else before sucks."

Because these members get so much attention and cause a lot of flame wars, the generalization of every MI6 member not welcoming Brosnan fans has become generalized. That's the way it is, but you should open your eyes and realize that it's only five or less members, not every Brosnan fan.

MOO7RE and Chandler Bong have expressed their opinions on Moore and Brosnan being their favorites, and they don't get treated unfairly. Hell, Bong considers DAD his absolute favorite and no one gives him crap, and when they do, it's usually on a friendly note such as "Oh you and your crappy movies, we still like you though Bong".

Thrice is an idiot (End of discussion).

As for Bong... well he's not exactly mentally stable and is humoured rather than respected.

I do however feel my previous statement to be correct. I won't deny there are exceptions to this (There often are) but generally speaking, this is the case.

[The Sweeney]

Out of that website came this, so it did serve it's purpose.

True, but that was not the point I was making. Vesper was referring to the old craignotbond site when calling the anti-Craigers - and I would hardly call that a dig at this forum now.

Do you consider the MI6 website a 'friendly' forum Sweeney

Most of the time, actually yes. Sometimes no, but that has usually been down to flame wars started by silly Thrice-type garbage, although not always. There are rules to the exception, and there still is a level of hostility towards anti-Craigers. There is no denying that.

However, I still think this has been a knock-on effect from the original mass of hysterical, unecessary, anti-Craig fuelled hatred that resided on the forums a couple of years ago. I guess many in the pro camp feel that Craig proved a point with CR, as did the BO figures, so are always armed and ready to lash back now with a `we were right all along, told you so' kind of attitude, after the original doom-and-gloom prophecy that Bond was finished when the announcement was made back in 2005.

[stockslivevan]

Out of that website came this, so it did serve it's purpose.

True, but that was not the point I was making. Vesper was referring to the old craignotbond site when calling the anti-Craigers - and I would hardly call that a dig at this forum now.

Do you consider the MI6 website a 'friendly' forum Sweeney

Most of the time, actually yes. Sometimes no, but that has usually been down to flame wars started by silly Thrice-type garbage, although not always. There are rules to the exception, and there still is a level of hostility towards anti-Craigers. There is no denying that.

However, I still think this has been a knock-on effect from the original mass of hysterical, unecessary, anti-Craig fuelled hatred that resided on the forums a couple of years ago. I guess many in the pro camp feel that Craig proved a point with CR, as did the BO figures, so are always armed and ready to lash back now with a `we were right all along, told you so' kind of attitude, after the original doom-and-gloom prophecy that Bond was finished when the announcement was made back in 2005.

I agree.

[bjmdds]

The facts are that Dalton just did not connect with Bond fans in 1987 and 1989 as they did with Brosnan from 1995-2002, worldwide. The question is why, for in the looks department, they both were deemed acceptable.

[The Sweeney]

The facts are that Dalton just did not connect with Bond fans in 1987 and 1989 as they did with Brosnan from 1995-2002, worldwide. The question is why, for in the looks department, they both were deemed acceptable.

Good question, bj.

I think there are a few reasons -

1) Audiences had been relentlessly fed Bond films every 2 years since the 60's, with hardly a pause for breath, then suddenly no Bond film for 6 years. Audiences were ready for Bond again.

2) The 80's audiences were different to 90's audiences, different expectations, different trends, etc.

3) EON took a risk with Dalton in 89 which didn't pay off, for whatever reason. Maybe the film lacked too many Bond elements, and was too violent. In the 90's they played it safe and returned to the trust-and-tested Moore formula, with ocassions of serious Bond thrown into the mix.

It's interesting, because the risk EON took with Dalton is not that different to what they have done with Craig, yet now audiences are accepting Bond in this style now. I dare say, had LTK been made almost 20 years later, it may have been much more successful.

[stockslivevan]

The facts are that Dalton just did not connect with Bond fans in 1987 and 1989 as they did with Brosnan from 1995-2002, worldwide. The question is why, for in the looks department, they both were deemed acceptable.

It was just bad timing for Dalton. His films weren't the only Bond films audiences didn't connect to. Starting with FYEO the series took a nosedive with the exception of The Living Daylights. Not even a Bond film featuring what audiences call "the most popular of all Bonds" Sean Connery couldn't bump up ticket sales.

By 1987, the damage was done, people already lost interest in Bond overkill and embraced new heroes they would find in the Indiana Jones series, Die Hards, Lethal Weapons and Batman films. It didn't help that Licence to Kill's marketing campaign was so screwed up that awareness of a new Bond film wasn't built up enough.

Bond simply was no longer that popular during the 80s, no matter what actor. You could argue if Brosnan took it in 1987 that the series might have gotten popular, but doesn't that defeat the whole point you all made about Bond being more popular than the actor that plays it? The same argument you like to use so you could justify why Craig's film was a surprising success?

I think the Bond series popularity depends on the timing and need. Six years did a lot of favors for the series because it built a thirst for new Bonds and assured the series would survive. Had Dalton made a comeback in GoldenEye, it probably would have been successful thanks to the build up of anticipation for another Bond film.

[Skywalker]

The facts are that Dalton just did not connect with Bond fans in 1987 and 1989 as they did with Brosnan from 1995-2002, worldwide. The question is why, for in the looks department, they both were deemed acceptable.

It was just bad timing for Dalton. His films weren't the only Bond films audiences didn't connect to. Starting with FYEO the series took a nosedive with the exception of The Living Daylights. Not even a Bond film featuring what audiences call "the most popular of all Bonds" Sean Connery couldn't bump up ticket sales.

By 1987, the damage was done, people already lost interest in Bond overkill and embraced new heroes they would find in the Indiana Jones series, Die Hards, Lethal Weapons and Batman films. It didn't help that Licence to Kill's marketing campaign was so screwed up that awareness of a new Bond film wasn't built up enough.

Bond simply was no longer that popular during the 80s, no matter what actor. You could argue if Brosnan took it in 1987 that the series might have gotten popular, but doesn't that defeat the whole point you all made about Bond being more popular than the actor that plays it? The same argument you like to use so you could justify why Craig's film was a surprising success?

I think the Bond series popularity depends on the timing and need. Six years did a lot of favors for the series because it built a thirst for new Bonds and assured the series would survive. Had Dalton made a comeback in GoldenEye, it probably would have been successful thanks to the build up of anticipation for another Bond film.

Good post.

I think there has always been more violent/seriously toned films out at the same time as Bond. The 80's in particular could have actually assisted Dalton, yet it did seem to hinder the popularity of his two films. Maybe audiences weren't ready for his style of Bond film. I do agree that had Dalton been the face of Bond in the 90's he could well have been more popular. The 6 year gap did refresh people's desire for Bond and I think Brosnan was the ideal man for that. Brosnan had nothing to lose, where as Dalton had to try and follow a 'legend' much the same way as Lazenby. The cards were stacked against Tim as the series was not as popular as in it's heyday.

As for DC, I feel his selection as Bond was so controversial that it stirred a media craze that was a publicity dream for EON. With the technological improvements in advertising and marketing, EON backed their man to the hilt and the frenzy built up at the opening screenings was something to behold.

Although general audiences have taken to film characters like Jack Bauer and Jason Bourne, I feel it is not that we want this style of film particularly any more than recent decades, more that Bond is popular again due to the Brosnan films and would have been regardless of chosen actor.

[stockslivevan]

I think there has always been more violent/seriously toned films out at the same time as Bond. The 80's in particular could have actually assisted Dalton, yet it did seem to hinder the popularity of his two films. Maybe audiences weren't ready for his style of Bond film. I do agree that had Dalton been the face of Bond in the 90's he could well have been more popular. The 6 year gap did refresh people's desire for Bond and I think Brosnan was the ideal man for that. Brosnan had nothing to lose, where as Dalton had to try and follow a 'legend' much the same way as Lazenby. The cards were stacked against Tim as the series was not as popular as in it's heyday.

Agreed. I think another contributing factor was Roger Moore's overstaying in the series. Let's face it, a 58 year old actor trying to pull off as an action hero next to a fresh and young Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones was doing no good favors for the series. The Bond films have always adapted so they could survive the times, Cubby was 7 years too late IMO to realize that and by the late 80s the series was at its lowest popularity. Had Dalton debuted for FYEO when the series was still considerably popular at that point, it might have remained steady to the 90s.

I also think FYEO would have been a great start for Dalton. Cubby wanted to bring the series back to its source by using the Fleming short stories, and with Dalton being an enthusiastic Fleming fan, he would have been perfect for this start of a direction. Dalton would have began his tenure as the James Bond of the 80s like how Moore was for the 70s and Connery for the 60s.

The Bond films needed something fresh to keep it alive, and by 1987 the damage was already done and people were no longer interested in seeing a Bond film until the series went on hiatus and they realized "dang... I miss those films, I hope they make more soon."

The Dalton era IMO is the biggest missed opportunity of the series. It showed so much promise yet was cut short because of legal ramblings between the bean counters.

[Skywalker]

Agreed. I think another contributing factor was Roger Moore's overstaying in the series. Let's face it, a 58 year old actor trying to pull off as an action hero next to a fresh and young Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones was doing no good favors for the series. The Bond films have always adapted so they could survive the times, Cubby was 7 years too late IMO to realize that and by the late 80s the series was at its lowest popularity. Had Dalton debuted for FYEO when the series was still considerably popular at that point, it might have remained steady to the 90s.

I also think FYEO would have been a great start for Dalton. Cubby wanted to bring the series back to its source by using the Fleming short stories, and with Dalton being an enthusiastic Fleming fan, he would have been perfect for this start of a direction. Dalton would have began his tenure as the James Bond of the 80s like how Moore was for the 70s and Connery for the 60s.

The Bond films needed something fresh to keep it alive, and by 1987 the damage was already done and people were no longer interested in seeing a Bond film until the series went on hiatus and they realized "dang... I miss those films, I hope they make more soon."

The Dalton era IMO is the biggest missed opportunity of the series. It showed so much promise yet was cut short because of legal ramblings between the bean counters.

I find myself agreeing with you again.

As much as I love Sir Rog, I do feel 58 is a tad too old for the role. That said he was in great shape and I feel he gave superb performances in FYEO, OP and AVTAK.

Dalton would have been very good in FYEO as the style of film would have suited him. To be honest he would have been perfect for OP and AVTAK also, as both those films had a more grittier edge to them (Daft bits excluded).

[bjmdds]

It seems whenever the was greater than a three year interim between Bond films, the box office took off, be it from 1974-1977, 1989-2005, or 2002-2006. All three films following the 'layoff' improved tremendously over their preceeding films. Maybe the public needs to 'miss' Bond a little?

[Kristatos]

Dalton would have been very good in FYEO as the style of film would have suited him. To be honest he would have been perfect for OP and AVTAK also, as both those films had a more grittier edge to them (Daft bits excluded).

I suspect we wouldn't have got the "daft bits" with Dalton in the role. EON try to play to the strengths of the actor playing Bond, and Tim worked better in a more serious style of Bond film. They probably would have been more like TLD in tone - basically serious but with some remnants of Moore-style humour.

[stockslivevan]

Dalton would have been very good in FYEO as the style of film would have suited him. To be honest he would have been perfect for OP and AVTAK also, as both those films had a more grittier edge to them (Daft bits excluded).

I suspect we wouldn't have got the "daft bits" with Dalton in the role. EON try to play to the strengths of the actor playing Bond, and Tim worked better in a more serious style of Bond film. They probably would have been more like TLD in tone - basically serious but with some remnants of Moore-style humour.

Yes. Because of Roger Moore's interpretation, there were additions of camp scattered around so it wouldn't seem like a complete 180 from Moonraker (Thatcher scene). Had Dalton came in, the camp would have been toned down (no Thatcher, no Bibi, no Blofeld) and you would have had the most straightforward Bond film since OHMSS.

I could see Dalton handling the scenes where Bond was trying to comfort Melina better. Moore was good, but suddenly coming from Moonraker and trying to play the role a bit seriously wasn't one of his strengths. Dalton was the man for the job. His interaction with Kara as the gentleman comforting the woman is a good example. When Dalton admits to Kara about not being who he was and that he used her to find Koskov he displays regret and uneasiness. He's the kind of actor who acts with his body as much as the tone of his voice. It's a shame the public missed out on his era.

[bjmdds]

Speaking of Moore's debut in June 1973 as Bond, there was even a more anticipated debut that same summer, in August 1973, with Bruce Lee in his first, and unfortunately last, starring role in an American Kung Fu film, Enter The Dragon. It grossed $25 million in the USA as a R rated film, whereas LALD grossed $35 million in the USA. Both were successful. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070034/tra ... E21111-310

[stockslivevan]

Speaking of Moore's debut in June 1973 as Bond, there was even a more anticipated debut that same summer, in August 1973, with Bruce Lee in his first, and unfortunately last, starring role in an American Kung Fu film, Enter The Dragon. It grossed $25 million in the USA as a R rated film, whereas LALD grossed $35 million in the USA. Both were successful. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070034/tra ... E21111-310

Not only was Enter the Dragon popular and sparked the "Kung Fu Boom" with television shows like "Kung Fu", it influenced EON to incorporate Kung Fu elements in TMWTGG.

[bjmdds]

For Pierce's fans: http://www.imdb.com/video/trailer/me60430468/

[bjmdds]

Speaking of Moore's debut in June 1973 as Bond, there was even a more anticipated debut that same summer, in August 1973, with Bruce Lee in his first, and unfortunately last, starring role in an American Kung Fu film, Enter The Dragon. It grossed $25 million in the USA as a R rated film, whereas LALD grossed $35 million in the USA. Both were successful. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070034/tra ... E21111-310

Not only was Enter the Dragon popular and sparked the "Kung Fu Boom" with television shows like "Kung Fu", it influenced EON to incorporate Kung Fu elements in TMWTGG.

I only wish Bruce Lee had not died so young for he was on the verge of stardom in the USA as an oriental secret agent type actor, and who knows what Cubby would have done then with Bond,as his competition?

[stockslivevan]

Speaking of Moore's debut in June 1973 as Bond, there was even a more anticipated debut that same summer, in August 1973, with Bruce Lee in his first, and unfortunately last, starring role in an American Kung Fu film, Enter The Dragon. It grossed $25 million in the USA as a R rated film, whereas LALD grossed $35 million in the USA. Both were successful. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070034/tra ... E21111-310

Not only was Enter the Dragon popular and sparked the "Kung Fu Boom" with television shows like "Kung Fu", it influenced EON to incorporate Kung Fu elements in TMWTGG.

I only wish Bruce Lee had not died so young for he was on the verge of stardom in the USA as an oriental secret agent type actor, and who knows what Cubby would have done then with Bond,as his competition?

Well using the Kung Fu elements sure didn't help the film one bit. At the time TMWTGG was the lowest selling in ticket sales in the series. That I think is the reason they went with a different direction with TSWLM. Of course Cubby would be temped by the almighty dollar again in 1977 when Star Wars came out.

[bjmdds]

The only thing I did not like about TMWTGG was Nick-Nack. For some reason, this film did not connect with viewers.