Pierce Brosnan didn’t like ‘Spectre’: ‘It was too long, the story was kind of weak’


I remember when Daniel Craig was first announced as the new James Bond back in 2005. The previous Bond, Pierce Brosnan, was sort of pissy about it. Not that he didn’t like or respect Daniel, it was just that Pierce sort of hoped he would play Bond in at least one more film. It’s always felt like Pierce had a small chip on his shoulder about it over the years, a ‘tude which occasionally came out in a handful of interviews. Well, HitFix asked Pierce about Daniel’s latest outing, Spectre, and what Pierce thought about it. Pierce was kind of harsh.. but fair. Like, he doesn’t really go after Daniel too hard.

His thoughts on Spectre: “I was looking forward to it enormously. I thought it was too long. The story was kind of weak — it could have been condensed. It kind of went on too long. It really did….[‘Spectre’] is neither fish nor fowl. It’s neither Bond nor Bourne. Am I in a Bond movie? Not in a Bond movie? But Daniel, in the fourth go-round, has ownership of it. He had a nice looseness to him. He’s a mighty warrior, and I think he found a great sense of himself in this one with the one-liners and a nice playfulness there. Just get a tighter story, and he’ll have another classic.”

His thoughts on Daniel’s claim that he’d rather “slash his wrists” than do another one: “I think the guy was just fairly banjaxed by playing it. By the time you finish making a Bond movie, you don’t want to hear the name, see the name or have anything to do with it because you just want to go to ground… Give him another year off here, and he’ll be ready to rock and roll for sure.”

[From HitFix]

Having seen Spectre last weekend, I kind of think Pierce missed his calling as a film critic. He’s totally right – Daniel seemed looser and more comfortable in the role, and in this one, Bond actually had a few moments of levity (I’m still chuckling over James Bond holding a gun to mouse and asking “Who sent you?”). But overall, the film was not good. The story was “weak” and it was much too long. The plot didn’t make any sense. The dialogue was uniformly awful. I also think Spectre probably will be Daniel’s last one.

So, was Pierce really bitchy, or just honest? I think it’s a little from column A, a little from column B.


Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

32 Responses to “Pierce Brosnan didn’t like ‘Spectre’: ‘It was too long, the story was kind of weak’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Elisabeth says:

    that’s hilarious considering the last couple of Bond films Brosnan were in were campy and the Bond franchise was dying before Craig took over.

    • pepper says:


      • atiaofthejulii1 says:

        It’s not that Pierce’s films were bad, he was given weak material. (2 were good, 2 were so-so) I loved Pierce as Bond. I would’ve liked 1 more movie from him. Daniel Craig has been a good choice but QofS and Spectre were so-so too. Maybe this is the way to get rid of a Bond and find a new one???

    • LMB says:

      With the exception of Goldeneye, the movies with Pierce Brosnan were horrible! As Elisabeth says, the franchise was dying and DG revived it.

  2. V4Real says:

    “I was looking forward to it enormously. I thought it was too long. The story was kind of weak — it could have been condensed”

    Quite a few people have made similar sentiments. I think Craig is a good looking man but I don’t think he makes a good Bond. Brosnan was smooth as hell.

  3. Jayna says:

    Everyone is complaining about Spectre being weak, so he’s spot on.

  4. Lilacflowers says:

    Banjaxed! Word of the day. My 86 year old aunt pretty much gave it the same review as she was trying to steal a giant poster of Craig off the theater wall

  5. SloaneY says:

    My favorite Bond and forever dong does not lie. It was at least a half hour too long, story was weak but Daniel Craig finally grew on me as Bond. Also, they should have switched the love interests. He had WAY more chemistry with Monica Belucci and I’m sorry, but the other girl was not remotely believable as an Oxford educated doctor, nor believable as those 2 being so in love he’s quitting being a 00. Due mostly to the script, but still. She looked and acted like a 16 year old with daddy issues. But that is often the case with Bond.

    • pepper says:

      Eva Green was the best. nobody after that came even remotely close to what she brought to the table. I could buy Bond leaving it all for Vesper the way she played it but not for this weak Madeline Swan . No chemistry between Daniel and Lea at all.

    • Sophia Phawkins says:

      I didn’t think he had any chemistry with Monica at all, so Idk what that says about the Lea chemistry lol. Both of those hook-ups seemed really forced and awkward. Craig’s Bond has more erotic chemistry with Ralph Fiennes and Ben Whishaw than he does with 99% of the women in these movies.

      • Nina says:

        Totally! No chemistry with the women. I miss that Eva green chemistry. I was disappointed because I loved casino royal and didn’t see sky fall. Pierce summed it up perfectly. The first part was ok/ promising but by the end I felt like I’d been on a ten hour flight around the world and was so ready to get off. Daniel Craig did seem loose and light in the role though.

      • Ama says:

        Nina, do watch Skyfall. Its’ my favourite so far, interesting (new) characters ! (from Nina to Nina 😉

  6. Naya says:

    All the Bond actors are snide about each other. When they talk about each others films its all, ” i love him, its just that ….” . If they were women, there would be a thousand blog posts dissecting the stuff they say (or dont say) about each other. We would have hundred of think pieces about why women just cant stand the younger woman.

  7. Dtab says:

    I agree with him also, the story was weak and too long. My main criticism of the movie is about Monica Bellucci, I was so excited for her to be in it and she was only there for about 2mins. It was a complete waste of someone who would have been an amazing Bond woman (not girl).

    I think Daniel was a great bond but not as smooth as past Bonds (which was needed at the time). I am interested to see who will be the next one.

    • Wren says:

      Her part made very little sense and could have been completely eliminated and nothing would have been lost, which made me sad. I was hoping for so much more. The other chick was boring and just kind of there, like many Bond girls, and she got all the screen time.

      • Dtab says:

        I completely agree, I was so hoping she would come back as the Villain or something, she is much more interesting than the other one.

      • sofia says:

        They also created a lot of expectations, because her character wasn’t sold as a short participation she was sold as a proper Bond girl and in the end… she wasn’t at all.

    • sofia says:

      I cringed with the dialogue between her character and Bond. It was just so bad! And while I think Craig is good in action scenes I never felt seduced by him, he isn’t “suave” or smooth. He tries, but I don’t buy it, I don’t see why women get weak in the knees bc of him. *Idris, Idris, Idris…* hehehe

  8. The Original Mia says:

    I detect no lies. I mean it got to the point where I was going…”is this thing still not done yet?” I like Daniel as Bond. But seriously…what exactly was the point of this movie? Skyfall set a bar that this film just couldn’t reach. And Eva Green remains the best Bond girl of this series. I didn’t like Lea. Monica was criminally underused. And more should be done with Naomi.

  9. Jenns says:

    He is right. It was really disappointing. And had a boring villian.

    • Wren says:

      When it was over, I was like “…whut?” Instead of wanting World Domination for the sake of Power like a proper villain, everything revolved around his daddy issues. Wait, so you tried to take over the world with your secret evil organization full of secrecy and evil because you’re still butthurt that you father took in some kid and tried to make him feel part of the family? Woooooooow, okaaaaay.

      • I Choose Me says:

        Hahaha. My thoughts exactly. I was like daddy issues? Go to therapy dude, like everyone else.

        I swear Christoph phoned in that role. I know he’s a reserved man but even during its promotion. His whole attitude was like meh.

  10. neutral says:

    Thought it was better than Skyfall, although the plot did have more holes than a colander – but that’s a Bond movie for you – they never run out of money, clean clothes, or bullets.

    But Brosnan was one smooooooooooooooooooth Bond.

  11. I Choose Me says:

    He’s not wrong.

    I left the theater feeling distinctly underwhelmed. Monica Belluci’s character was a blip on screen and although I think Lea Seydoux has good screen presence, I just didn’t feel the chemistry between her character and Bond.

    Bond and Moneypenny on the other hand, I ship those two so hard. *Off to read fanfic*

    • SusanneToo says:

      You’re right about it all. And Naomie’s role should have been much bigger. She’s got presence(plus she’s gorgeous).

  12. Sway says:

    Yes and yes.

  13. Lrm says:

    Yea and most movies today are too long. I make a decision to go to a movie in part based on length. Few movies need to be or should be two hours let alone two and a freaking half hours long. Same with how they split movies into two or three parts for a story that could be nicely told in one movie. Less is usually more.

  14. Don't kill me I'm French says:

    Pierce has right and Craig will do another Bond movie ( he had signed for 2 other movies after Skyfall) .He just wants to renegotiate his salary

  15. Pandy says:

    I LOVE the Bond franchise -but I just can’t sit in a theatre for 2.5 hours. Will probably catch it on demand – at home – so I can pause it for snacks/bathroom breaks lol.

  16. Sophia Phawkins says:

    ITA that Brosnan missed his calling as a film critic. He summed up this one well.

  17. Nudie says:

    “The plot didn’t make any sense.”

    As with any Bond film in recent years.

    “It’s neither Bond nor Bourne. Am I in a Bond movie? Not in a Bond movie? ”

    They need to forget about making it a “Bond movie” or not. Hanging on to the old genre has limited the franchise like crazy. Reboot and reimagine Bond as a techy smart spy, please. Boring.