I think he looked perfect in this and is the memory ppl have when ranking him high as Bond
But from the next film on he looked to have aged quite a bit but the main thing that annoys me is his hair. It was great length dark and shiny in this film from TND onwards he had the shorter back and sides with the grey coming through on the sides.
Surely this could have been a simple fix it seems another example of the laziness that followed
I saw him in Survivor (2014) the other day. He looked really good. Early 60s, I'd guess, with no obvious cosmetic surgery. He played a great bad guy, too.
shareNo don't understand me wrong i am in no way calling Pierce Brosnon ugly. What i am saying is in Goldeneye he looked absolute smooth as hell, pure Bond looking pure perfection.
But my the next film only 2 years later the shines gone he's starting to look a little drier. More like latter day Moore or Diamonds Connery.
People get older i know but Connery looked great in 4 and the spark was fading in the last 2. Moore looked great in first 3 and then faded latter 3 but Brosnon only 'Had it' in Goldeneye i feel
He should been Bond in the 1980's instead of Timothy Dalton, which he was going to be if not for his TV show, Remington Steele.
shareYeah i know. I get the feeling he was so psyched up that he blew it all on Goldeneye but then went through the motions afterward.
Agree though if he had it earlier that could have been a great run