He was starting to look his age and I think that's why they got rid of him. He didn't seem to exude the charm and style he had in the others. In Tomorrow Never Dies he looked every bit the debonair spy. This one he looks like some rich twat or banker.
I don't look at this one and think I want to be him, and if you kill that escapism for young men, it's game over.
yeah being 50 and sleeping with a 23 year old came across as a bit sleazy,,
shareBrosnan looked youthful during his tenure as Bond - Craig, on the other hand, looks older in SF than what Brosnan did in DAD.
www.bondandbeyond.forummotion.com
I agree Brosnan always looked youthful and boyish as Bond. Craig always looked a bit more older and rugged as Bond.
I do remember back in 2002 thinking it was weird that the 49 year old Brosnan was sharing a movie love scene with a 23 year old. I mean I'm 39 today and people give me some grief for dating a 26 year old, I get called a dirty old man.
So how the hell did a 50 year old guy get away with being with a 23 year old?
Brosnan looked very fit in his many shirtless scenes and cleaned up very nicely after escaping captivity. Together with his apparent wealth (dapper dress, good grooming, luxe living), quick wit and charm, I have no trouble thinking his character would appeal to many young, beautiful women.
I only find it cringe-inducing when the older man paired with a much younger woman looks like Harvey Weinstein (i.e., fat, ugly and disheveled).
I only find it cringe-inducing when the older man paired with a much younger woman looks like Harvey Weinstein (i.e., fat, ugly and disheveled).
He didn't look like he was almost 50. I'm watching him now and I think Craig actually looks older than Pierce in the 90's.
shareI disagree i think he looked at his most Bondian in Die Another day.
in Goldeneye he was still a little too young but still great and very handsome
I thought it was gross at the end when he was kissing that young girl... gross from her perspective. It must have felt like kissing her dad.
share[deleted]
I think Brosnan himself wanted Die Another Die to be his last Bond b/c of age. He didn't want to hang on forever like Roger Moore, where Moore was in his LATE 50s and still playing Bond with people making jokes about it all the time. Moore was close to 60 when he did A View To a Kill, he stayed way beyond his welcome.
shareI think roger Moore should have left the bond franchise after a view to a kid, since his age in octopusssy was slowing starting to show, I do wish pierce would have been given one last bond film but at least he did the to,ex one last time in everything or nothing which is a decent send off of sorts. While pierce age was starting to become noticeable but he could still pull off the role.
shareCraig plays a very different Bond, more visceral and defined by his actions. Brosnan was more defined by how he looked and smirked and dropped one liners. Meaning Brosnan could never go on for long whereas Craig can possibly continue longer if he can keep his physique up to the standard it has been.
Film Reverie: http://filmreverie.blogspot.com.au/
My film diary: http://letterboxd.com/filmreverie/
[deleted]
No, Craig completely sucks. Brosnan is not a great actor, but you underestimate him.
shareConsider that Brosnan was about the same age in Die Another Day as Connery was in Never Say Never Again...
shareI think the character evolved to be more action based, and physical action, so the character needed to be younger. I think Rodger Moore looked particularly old as Bond.
shareConnery had a very heavy paper round.
What is astounding is that I believe Moore was actually older than Sean Connery when he took up the role. If you think about how Sean looks Diamonds Are Forever in comparison to Moore in Live And Let Die that seems hard to believe.
Also Craig looks incredible knackered compared to Brosnan despite presumably being a very similar age when he shot the much delayed No Time To Die.
[deleted]
I read it was because Brosnan´s asking price was too much for the next film so they showered him.
share