No Time to Die production thread (MINOR SPOILERS ALLOWED)

1593594596598599658

Comments

  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 378
    Univex wrote: »
    I hate teams. Bond is about a lone wolf against a maniacal figure or a group or even the entire world. Bond is not about tag teams, MI teams, buddy ensembles, scooby gangs, ...

    But...ok, the story will speak for itself, maybe it'll make sense, maybe that's what Bond is all about now, earpieces, team work, team Mi6, ...blah blah.

    Nah, I just don't like it. The only time it really served a narrative purpose that I could get behind of, was in TLD, in the beginning. And maybe in GE. But whenever Bond gets together with a fellow agent, I just skip it.

    And yes, of course if Nomi were a man, I'd be saying the exact same thing. Even more so, in fact. Because her being a Bond girl (sorry, eh eh, woman), saves it a bit. But this several 00s in the game just doesn't fit within the mythos. They were supposed to be unseen and only heard about. That was part of the mystique.

    My two cents nagging, this, that's all.

    +2

    Nothing is more exciting than one person against the odds, with only their experience and wits to save the day
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 3,446
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    I hate teams. Bond is about a lone wolf against a maniacal figure or a group or even the entire world. Bond is not about tag teams, MI teams, buddy ensembles, scooby gangs, ...

    But...ok, the story will speak for itself, maybe it'll make sense, maybe that's what Bond is all about now, earpieces, team work, team Mi6, ...blah blah.

    Nah, I just don't like it. The only time it really served a narrative purpose that I could get behind of, was in TLD, in the beginning. And maybe in GE. But whenever Bond gets together with a fellow agent, I just skip it.

    And yes, of course if Nomi were a man, I'd be saying the exact same thing. Even more so, in fact. Because her being a Bond girl (sorry, eh eh, woman), saves it a bit. But this several 00s in the game just doesn't fit within the mythos. They were supposed to be unseen and only heard about. That was part of the mystique.

    My two cents nagging, this, that's all.

    +2

    Nothing is more exciting than one person against the odds, with only their experience and wits to save the day

    Bond has been "teamed" before, in different variations, most recently with Camille Montes in QoS. In each case, Bond does end up working solo, to some degree. With NTTD, we get that sense in some of the shots and footage from the trailer.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 378
    @TripAces yeah that is a good point mate.
    I just wish they didn't keep showing us him teamed up with people throughout the film, which seems to be the case at the moment, Madeline, Felix, Moneypenny and him go to see Q together, then Nomi and Bond raid Safin's lair. It just feels very team orientated at the moment.
    But listen that's only a slight concern and ultimately it'll be judged on the finished product, not the promo pictures.

    That set design looks fantastic, I can't wait to see that in the cinema and Daniel looks cool in tactical gear
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,388
    Much ado about nothing.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 1,689
    That set looks fantastic. Can't wait to see it.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger On Her Secret Majesty s Service
    Posts: 35,473
    79542538_1032483787113621_1710220222853039952_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.cdninstagram.com&_nc_cat=109&_nc_ohc=LPeoRqAhs94AX8L9mi9&oh=ca39dff14aa04e5de0e9b2cbdc996b46&oe=5EA76EF7
    With this big standee up in the foyer of my local cinema, I suddenly got the feeling it is right around the corner now.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 3,446
    79542538_1032483787113621_1710220222853039952_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.cdninstagram.com&_nc_cat=109&_nc_ohc=LPeoRqAhs94AX8L9mi9&oh=ca39dff14aa04e5de0e9b2cbdc996b46&oe=5EA76EF7
    With this big standee up in the foyer of my local cinema, I suddenly got the feeling it is right around the corner now.

    When I see this standee, I can't help but think the concerns over Nomi being 007 are completely overblown. THIS MAN IS 007.
  • Posts: 3,895
    I'm no expert but with the dark clothing and the holster etc, there is an SAS feel about this Bond,
  • Posts: 4,250
    That's as cool as they come.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 378
    79542538_1032483787113621_1710220222853039952_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.cdninstagram.com&_nc_cat=109&_nc_ohc=LPeoRqAhs94AX8L9mi9&oh=ca39dff14aa04e5de0e9b2cbdc996b46&oe=5EA76EF7
    With this big standee up in the foyer of my local cinema, I suddenly got the feeling it is right around the corner now.

    That looks amazing. Feels like it's round the corner now
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 4,158
    79542538_1032483787113621_1710220222853039952_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.cdninstagram.com&_nc_cat=109&_nc_ohc=LPeoRqAhs94AX8L9mi9&oh=ca39dff14aa04e5de0e9b2cbdc996b46&oe=5EA76EF7
    With this big standee up in the foyer of my local cinema, I suddenly got the feeling it is right around the corner now.

    I had the same feeling last week. A sudden burst of excitement that almost lost me my place in the queue.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 1,758
    antovolk wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    There is some very clever imagery going on here in that last shot, a blue collar , "John McClane", sleeves rolled up image that pushes the boundaries a little re the Bond image.

    In terms of him "going it alone",
    , assuming it's the same scene (fair as he is dressed the same , with the same gun, location etc ), then he has lost his jumper and he has lost 007. IMHO, this possibly confirms my guess that she is shot, out of action/dead and he uses the jumper to help stop the bleeding (and give a better view of the watch :-) ) Either that or its "lets split up, you go that way, give me a second, boy, it's hot in here, Ill just take my jumper off"



    Yeah, though I am pretty sure that
    007/Nomi is ultimately alive. In the trailer we get that shot of Bond in the same outfit but a trench coat, as Nomi rolls up to him in her Aston. Seems like near the end of the film if I'm honest.

    I guess we can figure out where this is going order wise - Nomi and Bond infiltrate the base, then Bond splits with her and meets Safin, at some point there loses the jumper and escapes the lair, meets up with Madeleine (possibly captured?) leading to the big Toyota/Land Rover chase

    I'm pretty confident the Toyota chase happens before the confrontation with Safin in his base. Bond fails to protect Swann and the kid from the baddies and they're kidnapped (shot of Bond looking worried at the helicopter seems a strong indication). Nomi comes by (glasses scene in the Superleggera) and they team up to break in Safin's base. Bond wears a sand cardigan in the forest chase. He then puts on the navy jumper and then loses it after the confrontation with Safin seen in the trailer. I believe Nomi goes for Madeleine and the kid and Bond goes for Safin. In all honesty I don't believe Nomi will die and perhaps she will successfully save the two of them (scenes shot at the black beach in Maratea). Swann seemed out of her mind in those scenes, she tries to speak with a transmitter, maybe they believe Bond is dead after blowing up the base.
  • mtmmtm
    edited January 24 Posts: 1,561
    Univex wrote: »
    I hate teams. Bond is about a lone wolf against a maniacal figure or a group or even the entire world. Bond is not about tag teams, MI teams, buddy ensembles, scooby gangs, ...

    Isn't that how the end of YOLT, Thunderball, TSWLM, MR etc. etc. work? All of those big battle endings have him teaming up with loads of people.
    patb wrote: »
    I'm no expert but with the dark clothing and the holster etc, there is an SAS feel about this Bond,

    Well he was apparently in the SBS :)
  • I recently caught Thunderball, and realized that Connery's Bond is not quite the lone wolf as the character is usually interpreted. In fact, looking at his films, he becomes more jovial in his interactions and has a great rapport and chemistry with almost everyone he works with (the various Felixes, Kerim, Paula, Tanaka, Aki, Willard Whyte, even Klaus from G Section). There was quite a lot of teamwork in those early films, albeit without M and Moneypenny being in the field.
  • Posts: 4,250
    I recently caught Thunderball, and realized that Connery's Bond is not quite the lone wolf as the character is usually interpreted. In fact, looking at his films, he becomes more jovial in his interactions and has a great rapport and chemistry with almost everyone he works with (the various Felixes, Kerim, Paula, Tanaka, Aki, Willard Whyte, even Klaus from G Section). There was quite a lot of teamwork in those early films, albeit without M and Moneypenny being in the field.

    Team work with his contacts, of course, that’s what espionage is all about. Team Mi6 is another matter. In fact, most people that work with Bond end up dead one way pr another. A good babysitter he is not. Nor the most attentive team player.
  • mtmmtm
    Posts: 1,561
    I don't really get the difference, I must admit. Team working with Felix/team working with Nomi... seems much the same to me.
  • edited January 24 Posts: 4,250
    mtm wrote: »
    I don't really get the difference, I must admit. Team working with Felix/team working with Nomi... seems much the same to me.

    Well if eating at home is the same as eating in a restaurant, you’re right, there’s no difference.

    M must be the entity that fully trusts his agent to conduct his work, Q, the major, is the armourer and quartermaster, who gives Bond what he needs for his job. Moneypenny is M’s secretary. Felix Leiter is a CIA operative, a senior agent of a foreign intelligence service. How do you reckon Bonds interaction with all of these is the same? But I know better to discuss these things with you, dear @mtm . You’ll find a way to prove me wrong ;)

    Thing is, that Nolan trend of revealing someone to be someone else known to cannon, robin being the most parallel example to Moneypenny, put us in a situation where the staff takes front row and works with Bond via earpieces, and that does not convey the sense of danger and escapism. I know we live in times of connection and communication, but isn’t the point of these adventures to go on an adventure to a remote place with no communications and none but Bond against all the odds? Did present times and globalisation kill that sense of adventure? Good questions, I reckon.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Nigeria
    Posts: 471
    Yeah, I think something like Bond being briefed by Mi6....and we don't see Mi6 again till the film's end, which would have worked better, if Craig's Bond were standalone films....Mission-based adventures, like Craig's Bond trailing an international assassin that leads him to a big & ultra-poweful international criminal organisation....and he's isolated, but has his wits & a few Gadgets to cope with proper femme fatales, Henchmen and the Villian. But the Craig films are all about linking or connecting this or that from his previous movies....so I don't know how Craig's Bond can be a sort of loner, when he has to connect with something from his past. Of course his Bonds films are international, but at times, they don't feel it, coz he's always in contact with Mi6....unlike the Bonds before him.
  • mtmmtm
    edited January 24 Posts: 1,561
    Univex wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I don't really get the difference, I must admit. Team working with Felix/team working with Nomi... seems much the same to me.

    Well if eating at home is the same as eating in a restaurant, you’re right, there’s no difference.

    M must be the entity that fully trusts his agent to conduct his work, Q, the major, is the armourer and quartermaster, who gives Bond what he needs for his job. Moneypenny is M’s secretary. Felix Leiter is a CIA operative, a senior agent of a foreign intelligence service. How do you reckon Bonds interaction with all of these is the same? But I know better to discuss these things with you, dear @mtm . You’ll find a way to prove me wrong ;)

    Not interested in getting personal, sorry. If the issue is which organisation they work for then sure, it is different: one is MI6 one isn’t. I don’t really notice it having an impact on anything myself- it’s just detail. Being a ‘lone wolf’ to me implies he works alone: not that he works alone except with people who aren’t in a particular organisation- it’s kind of small print. Even in Dr No he had MI6 (well, MI7! :) ) contacts and got equipment delivered in the field: it doesn’t matter to me.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Nigeria
    edited January 24 Posts: 471
    Bond 26 needs to be Standalone though.
  • 00Dalton700Dalton7 Portsmouth
    Posts: 66
    Univex wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I don't really get the difference, I must admit. Team working with Felix/team working with Nomi... seems much the same to me.

    Well if eating at home is the same as eating in a restaurant, you’re right, there’s no difference.

    M must be the entity that fully trusts his agent to conduct his work, Q, the major, is the armourer and quartermaster, who gives Bond what he needs for his job. Moneypenny is M’s secretary. Felix Leiter is a CIA operative, a senior agent of a foreign intelligence service. How do you reckon Bonds interaction with all of these is the same? But I know better to discuss these things with you, dear @mtm . You’ll find a way to prove me wrong ;)

    Thing is, that Nolan trend of revealing someone to be someone else known to cannon, robin being the most parallel example to Moneypenny, put us in a situation where the staff takes front row and works with Bond via earpieces, and that does not convey the sense of danger and escapism. I know we live in times of connection and communication, but isn’t the point of these adventures to go on an adventure to a remote place with no communications and none but Bond against all the odds? Did present times and globalisation kill that sense of adventure? Good questions, I reckon.

    And precisely the reason why QOS is the best Craig film for that aspect of the character, the escapism, the exotic locations being far away from “home base”. Bond relying solely on his wits and instincts.

  • mtmmtm
    edited January 24 Posts: 1,561
    00Dalton7 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I don't really get the difference, I must admit. Team working with Felix/team working with Nomi... seems much the same to me.

    Well if eating at home is the same as eating in a restaurant, you’re right, there’s no difference.

    M must be the entity that fully trusts his agent to conduct his work, Q, the major, is the armourer and quartermaster, who gives Bond what he needs for his job. Moneypenny is M’s secretary. Felix Leiter is a CIA operative, a senior agent of a foreign intelligence service. How do you reckon Bonds interaction with all of these is the same? But I know better to discuss these things with you, dear . You’ll find a way to prove me wrong ;)

    Thing is, that Nolan trend of revealing someone to be someone else known to cannon, robin being the most parallel example to Moneypenny, put us in a situation where the staff takes front row and works with Bond via earpieces, and that does not convey the sense of danger and escapism. I know we live in times of connection and communication, but isn’t the point of these adventures to go on an adventure to a remote place with no communications and none but Bond against all the odds? Did present times and globalisation kill that sense of adventure? Good questions, I reckon.

    And precisely the reason why QOS is the best Craig film for that aspect of the character, the escapism, the exotic locations being far away from “home base”. Bond relying solely on his wits and instincts.

    I thought that they did that rather well in CR by moving it to Montenegro. They made it feel like a dodgy and dangerous place very effectively. If it had stayed northern France it wouldn’t have worked! :)

    But then wasn’t Mathis MI6 in the movie? I can’t remember. I guess if he was then it would be bad..?
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 1,652
    Draft
    Univex wrote: »
    I hate teams. Bond is about a lone wolf against a maniacal figure or a group or even the entire world. Bond is not about tag teams, MI teams, buddy ensembles, scooby gangs, ...

    But...ok, the story will speak for itself, maybe it'll make sense, maybe that's what Bond is all about now, earpieces, team work, team Mi6, ...blah blah.

    Nah, I just don't like it. The only time it really served a narrative purpose that I could get behind of, was in TLD, in the beginning. And maybe in GE. But whenever Bond gets together with a fellow agent, I just skip it.

    And yes, of course if Nomi were a man, I'd be saying the exact same thing. Even more so, in fact. Because her being a Bond girl (sorry, eh eh, woman), saves it a bit. But this several 00s in the game just doesn't fit within the mythos. They were supposed to be unseen and only heard about. That was part of the mystique.

    My two cents nagging, this, that's all.

    For Your Eyes Only? On Her Majesty’s Secret Service? Thunderball?
  • mtmmtm
    Posts: 1,561
    Isn’t Kerim Bay head of station for MI6? And Captain Nash of course (had he survived! :) ).
  • Posts: 4,250
    00Dalton7 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I don't really get the difference, I must admit. Team working with Felix/team working with Nomi... seems much the same to me.

    Well if eating at home is the same as eating in a restaurant, you’re right, there’s no difference.

    M must be the entity that fully trusts his agent to conduct his work, Q, the major, is the armourer and quartermaster, who gives Bond what he needs for his job. Moneypenny is M’s secretary. Felix Leiter is a CIA operative, a senior agent of a foreign intelligence service. How do you reckon Bonds interaction with all of these is the same? But I know better to discuss these things with you, dear @mtm . You’ll find a way to prove me wrong ;)

    Thing is, that Nolan trend of revealing someone to be someone else known to cannon, robin being the most parallel example to Moneypenny, put us in a situation where the staff takes front row and works with Bond via earpieces, and that does not convey the sense of danger and escapism. I know we live in times of connection and communication, but isn’t the point of these adventures to go on an adventure to a remote place with no communications and none but Bond against all the odds? Did present times and globalisation kill that sense of adventure? Good questions, I reckon.

    And precisely the reason why QOS is the best Craig film for that aspect of the character, the escapism, the exotic locations being far away from “home base”. Bond relying solely on his wits and instincts.

    Precisely. Now I know why I love it so much ;)
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 1,652
    mtm wrote: »
    00Dalton7 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I don't really get the difference, I must admit. Team working with Felix/team working with Nomi... seems much the same to me.

    Well if eating at home is the same as eating in a restaurant, you’re right, there’s no difference.

    M must be the entity that fully trusts his agent to conduct his work, Q, the major, is the armourer and quartermaster, who gives Bond what he needs for his job. Moneypenny is M’s secretary. Felix Leiter is a CIA operative, a senior agent of a foreign intelligence service. How do you reckon Bonds interaction with all of these is the same? But I know better to discuss these things with you, dear . You’ll find a way to prove me wrong ;)

    Thing is, that Nolan trend of revealing someone to be someone else known to cannon, robin being the most parallel example to Moneypenny, put us in a situation where the staff takes front row and works with Bond via earpieces, and that does not convey the sense of danger and escapism. I know we live in times of connection and communication, but isn’t the point of these adventures to go on an adventure to a remote place with no communications and none but Bond against all the odds? Did present times and globalisation kill that sense of adventure? Good questions, I reckon.

    And precisely the reason why QOS is the best Craig film for that aspect of the character, the escapism, the exotic locations being far away from “home base”. Bond relying solely on his wits and instincts.

    I thought that they did that rather well in CR by moving it to Montenegro. They made it feel like a dodgy and dangerous place very effectively. If it had stayed northern France it wouldn’t have worked! :)

    But then wasn’t Mathis MI6 in the movie? I can’t remember. I guess if he was then it would be bad..?

    I assumed he was Deuxième like in the novels, his contact in Montenegro.
  • mtmmtm
    edited January 24 Posts: 1,561
    mtm wrote: »
    00Dalton7 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I don't really get the difference, I must admit. Team working with Felix/team working with Nomi... seems much the same to me.

    Well if eating at home is the same as eating in a restaurant, you’re right, there’s no difference.

    M must be the entity that fully trusts his agent to conduct his work, Q, the major, is the armourer and quartermaster, who gives Bond what he needs for his job. Moneypenny is M’s secretary. Felix Leiter is a CIA operative, a senior agent of a foreign intelligence service. How do you reckon Bonds interaction with all of these is the same? But I know better to discuss these things with you, dear . You’ll find a way to prove me wrong ;)

    Thing is, that Nolan trend of revealing someone to be someone else known to cannon, robin being the most parallel example to Moneypenny, put us in a situation where the staff takes front row and works with Bond via earpieces, and that does not convey the sense of danger and escapism. I know we live in times of connection and communication, but isn’t the point of these adventures to go on an adventure to a remote place with no communications and none but Bond against all the odds? Did present times and globalisation kill that sense of adventure? Good questions, I reckon.

    And precisely the reason why QOS is the best Craig film for that aspect of the character, the escapism, the exotic locations being far away from “home base”. Bond relying solely on his wits and instincts.

    I thought that they did that rather well in CR by moving it to Montenegro. They made it feel like a dodgy and dangerous place very effectively. If it had stayed northern France it wouldn’t have worked! :)

    But then wasn’t Mathis MI6 in the movie? I can’t remember. I guess if he was then it would be bad..?

    I assumed he was Deuxième like in the novels, his contact in Montenegro.

    The novel is set in France though. Looking at the Bond wiki he appears to be MI6. So all scenes with him (and he’s in QoS ;) even if he’d left by then- Fields is MI6 though and she helps Bond) are bad, as is pretty much all of FRWL because Kerim Bay and all of his sons are MI6. Shame, I think FRWL is brilliant.

    Maybe it’s best just to take it as it comes and not to try to have distinct rules about ‘x is bad’ because there are always too many exceptions to make those make any sense. Bond working with Nomi might be great, much like it was with Kerim Bay or Mathis.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited January 24 Posts: 1,758
    Univex wrote: »
    00Dalton7 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I don't really get the difference, I must admit. Team working with Felix/team working with Nomi... seems much the same to me.

    Well if eating at home is the same as eating in a restaurant, you’re right, there’s no difference.

    M must be the entity that fully trusts his agent to conduct his work, Q, the major, is the armourer and quartermaster, who gives Bond what he needs for his job. Moneypenny is M’s secretary. Felix Leiter is a CIA operative, a senior agent of a foreign intelligence service. How do you reckon Bonds interaction with all of these is the same? But I know better to discuss these things with you, dear @mtm . You’ll find a way to prove me wrong ;)

    Thing is, that Nolan trend of revealing someone to be someone else known to cannon, robin being the most parallel example to Moneypenny, put us in a situation where the staff takes front row and works with Bond via earpieces, and that does not convey the sense of danger and escapism. I know we live in times of connection and communication, but isn’t the point of these adventures to go on an adventure to a remote place with no communications and none but Bond against all the odds? Did present times and globalisation kill that sense of adventure? Good questions, I reckon.

    And precisely the reason why QOS is the best Craig film for that aspect of the character, the escapism, the exotic locations being far away from “home base”. Bond relying solely on his wits and instincts.

    Precisely. Now I know why I love it so much ;)

    Anyway even in QoS Bond teamed up. In the end he goes for Greene while Camille goes for Medrano. I believe in NTTD we will see something similar: Bond and Nomi team up breaking together inside Safin’s base and then split up for two different missions: Bond goes for Safin while Nomi rescue Swann and the mysterious kid.

    This is Craig’s last. He will be front and center of his final mission. Nomi will just be a sparring partner and I truly believe they will spend quite a few time actually together in that base.

    If the “problem” is teaming up, here it seems far more Bondian than the last two. Let’s face the truth: in SF Bond teamed up with two old, uhm, retiree. In SP there was even all the Gang in the field.
  • edited January 24 Posts: 1,985
    8068-B69-A-8-CD0-46-FB-B098-EB00456932-B8.jpg
  • marketto007marketto007 Brazil
    Posts: 3,105
    Lisbon, Portugal.

    cWbKuKq.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.