NO TIME TO DIE (2021) - First Reactions vs. Current Reactions

11314161819294

Comments

  • Posts: 6,209
    It'd be fantastic if the next fella shows up by saying:
    The rumours of my death have been greatly exaggerated

    Wouldn't it?

    All fixed!
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    bondywondy wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    bondywondy wrote: »
    There is another scenario. Next year Eon announce they're no longer making Bond films. They sell their stake to Amazon. That way Babs and MG leave the franchise bringing Eon's 25 Bond films to a logical (if very controversial) end... the death of James Bond.

    B Broccoli said the search for the next Bond actor begins next year but you never know, things can change. If this is the end of the 1962 to 2021 Bond era (accepting Craig's era was at the start of Bond's career) the producers may feel the franchise has reached its natural conclusion so selling up, handing the franchise to a new owner, is the only way forward.
    It's an interesting hypothesis, but I have it on good authority that Eon will not be selling their 50% stake and the search for the next 007 begins next year.

    Any idea how Bond survives being atomized? Do you have inclination how Eon will (quite literally) resurrect the franchise? Seems a tricky problem to solve!

    Bond walks into Moneypenny's office:
    "I thought you were dead, James."

    😉

    They’ll just reboot like they always do because Bond 26 won’t be a sequel to NTTD is that so hard to understand? Jesus…
  • Posts: 6,209
    matt_u wrote: »
    bondywondy wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    bondywondy wrote: »
    There is another scenario. Next year Eon announce they're no longer making Bond films. They sell their stake to Amazon. That way Babs and MG leave the franchise bringing Eon's 25 Bond films to a logical (if very controversial) end... the death of James Bond.

    B Broccoli said the search for the next Bond actor begins next year but you never know, things can change. If this is the end of the 1962 to 2021 Bond era (accepting Craig's era was at the start of Bond's career) the producers may feel the franchise has reached its natural conclusion so selling up, handing the franchise to a new owner, is the only way forward.
    It's an interesting hypothesis, but I have it on good authority that Eon will not be selling their 50% stake and the search for the next 007 begins next year.

    Any idea how Bond survives being atomized? Do you have inclination how Eon will (quite literally) resurrect the franchise? Seems a tricky problem to solve!

    Bond walks into Moneypenny's office:
    "I thought you were dead, James."

    😉

    They’ll just reboot like they always do because Bond 26 won’t be a sequel to NTTD is that so hard to understand? Jesus…

    Easy enough, on my part.

    But that line I mentioned would be so damn cool. And would rival Lazenby's :)
  • Posts: 186
    You could argue No Time To Die is the anti toxic masculinity, woke agenda realised. The feminists won. Barbara Broccoli takes over Bond and finally gets to kill off James Bond.

    Just one way of looking at it. ;)
  • Posts: 250

    Found this online. Personally, it's a very well directed sequence and gives some little clues about the plot (e.g. the statue which florishes)

    Glad I can look at it again! Honestly I think it's on par with the CR and SF titles, magnificent imagery and the Brittania iconography certainly comes into play later in the film.
  • StarkStark France
    Posts: 177
    antovolk wrote: »
    Posted in the non spoiler thread but here's a slightly more detailed version...
    Yeah I cried, Fukunaga you madman.

    Is it basically Dark Knight Rises, right with all its messiness relative to the previous high bar (in this case CR and SF)? yes. Firmly in the middle of the pack there of the Craig era.

    Did I still love it? Yes. It's everything I wanted it to be not just from when I walked out of Spectre, but when I saw my first big screen Bond which was - yes - QoS. This and SP being the films where Bond goes after the bastards.

    Was it worth the however many miles away I am for full 1.43 IMAX? YES. EVEN THE GUNBARREL and opening credits!

    As people have said it's emotional, it wears its heart and inspirations very much on its sleeve - almost to a fault (dunno how to feel about that needle drop at the end) - it also is the real "let's throw everything and the kitchen sink at Craig" film - it mixes so much tonally (again much like TDKR, it really really bounces between tones) but somehow all works out in the end, there was a hanging thread I was thinking about as the denouement played out and even that ended up delivering at the end. And did not drag at all pacing wise...just flew by.

    Except that in Rises the villain is very charismatic. Is this the case here too ?
  • Posts: 6,209
    bondywondy wrote: »
    You could argue No Time To Die is the anti toxic masculinity, woke agenda realised. The feminists won. Barbara Broccoli takes over Bond and finally gets to kill off James Bond.

    Just one way of looking at it. ;)

    To paraphrase Daniel Craig's interview at the red carpet:
    No, not at all.

    Most people are saying they didn't see a glimpse of said feminist agenda in the film.
  • edited September 2021 Posts: 308
    Bond fans will have to wrap their heads around the fact that Bond will reboot. I've cited comic book characters in a previous post. Audiences are much more sophisticated about this type of stuff then they were 10 or 15 years ago. That's why we can have three or four Batmen across video games, TV, movies and animation.

    This is not a complicated issue. Hell, Judi Dench was carry over casting from Brosnan's era. But we accepted that she was a "new" M for a new Bond. Roll with the punches sometimes. I'm not saying we should have 3 or 4 different Bond iterations but we kinda do right now: Comics, novels and movies. Soon we'll have a different Bond for video games.

    Craig's era was it's own self contained story. That's it. That's as complicated as it needs to be. He was Bond. Not part of the same "continuity" as his predecessors but still Bond. I mean, it's kind of absurd to think Timothy Dalton's Bond is the same exact one as Sir Roger Moore. They're the same character. There's only one 007. But (here's that "but" again) they're all really different interpretations of the same character.

    Bond's death may actually raise the stakes in future films. Now, audiences don't know that Bond will always make it through. Or maybe he always will. All I know is that Bond's death in the Craig era fit a classic story cycle of "birth" and "death." It fit this Bond's journey.
  • Posts: 6,209
    Actually, I don't mind him dying. What scares me is:
    Daddy Bond watching young daughter eat breakfast. And all that daddy stuff/James Bond's daughter reminds of Daughter of Zorro, or Blue Beard's daughter or stuff like that. And I'm aware of YOLT, but it's not the same thing. Not even close.
  • Posts: 308
    Univex wrote: »
    Actually, I don't mind him dying. What scares me is:
    Daddy Bond watching young daughter eat breakfast. And all that daddy stuff/James Bond's daughter reminds of Daughter of Zorro, or Blue Beard's daughter or stuff like that. And I'm aware of YOLT, but it's not the same thing. Not even close.

    That's not going to happen, which is one reason why Bond's death had to happen. He isn't a "Father" in that mold. It would have been odd if he lived. Bond's gift to his daughter was a chance at life. I think that's why the "Vesper had a daughter" idea was shot down in one of the QOS drafts. When Bond finds out about the daughter he can't just leave her. It's an interesting idea that makes for some awkward conclusions. If you're going the "Bond has a child" route then his sacrifice was the only way to make that work.
  • Posts: 6,209
    Oh, I see. Thanks, @Burgess. That makes sense.

    In a way I'm awfully glad they've used all of those (unused) ideias in this one. Done. Now they can move on with a clean slate and mind :)
  • Posts: 250
    Stark wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    Posted in the non spoiler thread but here's a slightly more detailed version...
    Yeah I cried, Fukunaga you madman.

    Is it basically Dark Knight Rises, right with all its messiness relative to the previous high bar (in this case CR and SF)? yes. Firmly in the middle of the pack there of the Craig era.

    Did I still love it? Yes. It's everything I wanted it to be not just from when I walked out of Spectre, but when I saw my first big screen Bond which was - yes - QoS. This and SP being the films where Bond goes after the bastards.

    Was it worth the however many miles away I am for full 1.43 IMAX? YES. EVEN THE GUNBARREL and opening credits!

    As people have said it's emotional, it wears its heart and inspirations very much on its sleeve - almost to a fault (dunno how to feel about that needle drop at the end) - it also is the real "let's throw everything and the kitchen sink at Craig" film - it mixes so much tonally (again much like TDKR, it really really bounces between tones) but somehow all works out in the end, there was a hanging thread I was thinking about as the denouement played out and even that ended up delivering at the end. And did not drag at all pacing wise...just flew by.

    Except that in Rises the villain is very charismatic. Is this the case here too ?

    Not particularly, but Blofeld imo is a fantastic presence this time around and that offsets the dysfunction around Malek's character (which are really more script issues than anything Malek himself gets wrong).

    I would also contend that NTTD is kind of the opposite of TDKR in a lot of ways. TDKR is about Bruce needing to break his own cycle; NTTD is about Bond being doomed to its confines. It's a significantly meaner film than TDKR, and part of this is tied to the difference between Bruce Wayne and James Bond - one spends his life interrogating the trauma of his childhood and the other spends his life trying to drown it out.
  • Posts: 308
    antovolk wrote: »
    Posted in the non spoiler thread but here's a slightly more detailed version...
    Yeah I cried, Fukunaga you madman.

    Is it basically Dark Knight Rises, right with all its messiness relative to the previous high bar (in this case CR and SF)? yes. Firmly in the middle of the pack there of the Craig era.

    Did I still love it? Yes. It's everything I wanted it to be not just from when I walked out of Spectre, but when I saw my first big screen Bond which was - yes - QoS. This and SP being the films where Bond goes after the bastards.

    Was it worth the however many miles away I am for full 1.43 IMAX? YES. EVEN THE GUNBARREL and opening credits!

    As people have said it's emotional, it wears its heart and inspirations very much on its sleeve - almost to a fault (dunno how to feel about that needle drop at the end) - it also is the real "let's throw everything and the kitchen sink at Craig" film - it mixes so much tonally (again much like TDKR, it really really bounces between tones) but somehow all works out in the end, there was a hanging thread I was thinking about as the denouement played out and even that ended up delivering at the end. And did not drag at all pacing wise...just flew by.

    Glad to hear you liked it!
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 573
    Ok so I've just seen it. I'm typing on my phone so apologies.
    I got spoiled but in the end I persevered and went to see it. I really was in a tizz about it when I heard yesterday so I thought I'd hate it. Maybe its a good thing I went in with low expectations.
    Honestly.... its one of those you have to see to truly see how it fits together. It translates better than people just telling you the plot in text. It sounds barmy but its true.
    That being said. The end. I could have done without it to be fair. It worked. It made sense. But I didn't like it and it didn't feel right coming out of a bond movie crying. I'd have liked a happier ending. A batman esque type ending. But that's my preference. This bond went through a lot of pain.
  • Posts: 15,425
    Here's one question I have that could possibly redeem everything..................
    Does Bond feed the kid , (Jamie Suzuki Swann) or whatever they call her scrambled eggs for breakfast?
  • Posts: 308
    I actually think this film will work among general audiences.
  • Posts: 15,425
    Burgess wrote: »
    I actually think this film will work among general audiences.

    Yeah me too...........I'm kind of thinking it sounds like the.......
    KISS ME DEADLY of Bond films. Before the lost footage was restored showing Mike Hammer escape and survive that is.
  • Posts: 186
    Burgess wrote: »
    Bond fans will have to wrap their heads around the fact that Bond will reboot. I've cited comic book characters in a previous post. Audiences are much more sophisticated about this type of stuff then they were 10 or 15 years ago. That's why we can have three or four Batmen across video games, TV, movies and animation.

    This is not a complicated issue. Hell, Judi Dench was carry over casting from Brosnan's era. But we accepted that she was a "new" M for a new Bond. Roll with the punches sometimes. I'm not saying we should have 3 or 4 different Bond iterations but we kinda do right now: Comics, novels and movies. Soon we'll have a different Bond for video games.

    Craig's era was it's own self contained story. That's it. That's as complicated as it needs to be. He was Bond. Not part of the same "continuity" as his predecessors but still Bond. I mean, it's kind of absurd to think Timothy Dalton's Bond is the same exact one as Sir Roger Moore. They're the same character. There's only one 007. But (here's that "but" again) they're all really different interpretations of the same character.

    Bond's death may actually raise the stakes in future films. Now, audiences don't know that Bond will always make it through. Or maybe he always will. All I know is that Bond's death in the Craig era fit a classic story cycle of "birth" and "death." It fit this Bond's journey.

    You make valid points, however, this is a historic moment in the franchise - killing off the main character. Aside from future Bond film continuity issues (!) there is a moral dimension to this decision. Was it morally right to kill James Bond? Has Barbara Broccoli respected her father's legacy or dismissed it? Has she respected Ian Fleming's creation or disregarded it?

    Is dismantling all that came before respectful or disrespectful?

    Maybe in a few months time these questions should be addressed. Let people see and enjoy (or not enjoy) the film right now, but I guess what I'm saying is I don't think fans should automatically give Eon a free pass on this decision. Nearly all the paid pro film critics and fan YouTube reviewers praising NTTD are ignoring the fact the boss of the franchise killed off the most enduring pop culture hero of the 20th century. And yes, she has the 'get out of jail' card of "James Bond will return..." but she still did the unthinkable... killed off James Bond 007. The franchise can never be the same again and maybe that is a small tragedy.

  • Posts: 6,209
    I guess the CraignotBond crowd will finnaly have a gif they can use ;)
  • DoubleOhKevinDoubleOhKevin Far, far away
    Posts: 2
    What if in 2024 Henry Cavill is Bond and he says to Dame Rachel Weisz's M "I am not sure about this mission, the last one I was on didn't exactly blow me away" and winks at the camera, while sipping a product-placement endorsed Heineken?
  • R1s1ngs0nR1s1ngs0n France
    edited September 2021 Posts: 1,836
    What if in 2024 Henry Cavill is Bond and he says to Dame Rachel Weisz's M "I am not sure about this mission, the last one I was on didn't exactly blow me away" and winks at the camera, while sipping a product-placement endorsed Heineken?
    I am fine with everything you just wrote, except for the ‘Henry Cavill is Bond’ part… anybody but him.
  • Posts: 6,209
    Btw, does Bond drink rum and smoke a cigar in the film?

    Im very afraid the Jamaican scenes last very little as I suppose they’ll be my absolute favourites.
  • foo_yukfoo_yuk Canada
    Posts: 26
    Garth007 wrote: »
    This is apalling. So, let me get this straight. The gunbarrel looks like a 3rd grader edited it. The big dots cut of the little dots. Almost again zero Bond theme, the only decent theme with the motif, is that agent who has 30 seconds of screentime, which she is completely dominate in the scene. I though the bond theme was for Bond and not anyone else. Hans Zimmer did a disservice, scoring a bond film, and not even using the theme LOL. That is utterly pathetic, plus these themes from other bond movies being used within the film that have nothing to do with it is a joke. The film was delayed over a year and this is the best score they came up with. I do not care what the film is about, but to score it like it is a love story is utter crap. You had plenty of time to properly do this. Then this nanobot technology, and bond dies at the end from some missile nonsense. Of course, he has a daughter, we got to continue the bs script of Craigs era, and this is why his movies aren't even bond movies, in my humble opinion. Missing complete parts of the formula. Yet, these young generation seems to be more important to Barbra broccoli, as well as Daniel Craig to appease them versus your entire cliente. This movie, I do not think i will ever see this crap film. I had high hopes but this is unforgivable. Been a fan for 25 years and this is a laughing stock. Just to appease Daniel Craig as a sign off. Not worth it, at all.

    Well I mean that's like your opinion man. The rest of us will enjoy the film wether good or bad. Even the worst of the bond films still have enjoyment to them. This one is no different...

    That is what separates true Bond fans from amateurs.
    bondywondy wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    bondywondy wrote: »
    Got back an hour ago from midnight showing, my good I went in with low expectations but this really was like trying to polish a turd.
    It is so bad, poor wishy washy villain, Craigs Bond flips between angst ridden killing machine to some kind of retarded emotional Mod Edit wit, everybody dies, Felix, Blofeld, all of bloody Spectre, this previously invincable shadow organisation and to top it off Bond is blown to bits......?

    I'm sorry but this is a Bond I'll be glad to see the back of. Loved CR, even quiet liked QoS but started to go wrong as I've said before with SF.

    Some of the action set pieces were good but overall it was a bloody big mess.

    Thanks for your review. I was hoping I was in a bad dream and was imagining the reviews about Bond actually dying! Oh well... it really happens.

    I don't want to see a film where Bond dies but then... guess what.. he's alive in Bond 26! It's silly and in my opinion disrespectful to Barbara's father's legacy.

    If Bond isn't really dead, no body found and missing in action and that is confirmed in Bond 26's teaser trailer, I can buy into that premise. However, if Eon have 100 percent killed off Daniel Craig's James Bond then no thanks. I don't want to invest 2 hours 40 mins waiting to see him die.

    It's also incredible/mind boggling/depressing to know all the positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and on YouTube don't seem to care Bond dies. A 59 year long cinematic hero dies and it's like "who cares?" If you're a genuine Bond fan or even a paid critic you would think you would question the decision to kill off James Bond (albeit in a contrived way as we all know James Bond will return.)

    How do you kill off James Bond but in the end credits state Bond will return? It's a contrived gimmick. Eon are literally having their cake and eating it. They can exploit the emotional impact of Bond's death but also dismiss that impact in three/four years time when they make Bond 26 with the new back from the dead/rebooted Bond.
    Once you watch it you’ll see that they 100% kill him off.

    Then how do you do Bond 26? It's not the original James Bond unless it's set before Dr. No. I doubt Amazon want to make period Bond films set in the 1950s.

    Eon have torn up the reality rulebook. If Bond is dead but comes back, there is no real danger. Bond dies but he lives. Er... okay. Does that make continuity sense? Not really.

    I've no idea how they're going to do Bond 26. My guess is most casual fans won't care and just accept Bond is alive and with a new face.

    I guess a full reboot is the only way forward. Eon have boxed themselves into a corner and will have to reset the franchise from zero.




    Craig was a reboot. It’s physically impossible for him to have been the same Bond as the others… He couldn’t have been galavanting with a Soviet agent in TSWLM as he’d have been a child at the time. This Commander Bond is post Cold War, became a new 00 post 9/11. The previous bonds are inseparable from their Cold War context.
  • edited September 2021 Posts: 3,333
    Sorry, but I disagree @Burgess. Citing comic book characters doesn't immediately translate to James Bond. Besides, I'm not aware of the MCU killing off a superhero to then suddenly bring them back in the next movie played by a different actor. Note the use of "superhero" which James Bond is not. Someone cited Spiderman a few pages back, (I forget who) but the filmmakers didn't kill off Peter Parker at the end of their respective movies.

    Using the adage that "audiences are much more sophisticated about this type of stuff then they were 10 or 15 years ago" is rather lame, especially when there's no proof to back this up. Are you saying that the same audiences that accepted 6 different actors playing James Bond in the past are less sophisticated than those today? Or that audiences 15 years ago didn't accept a different actor playing Obi-Wan Kenobi, or a different actor playing Batman? Is this the same sophisticated audience that still prefers their foreign movies dubbed rather than subtitled, hence why Netflix has to release 2 seperate versions on their platform to attract viewers?

    For me, there's nothing remotely wrong in asking the question how are the producers going to approach the next series of Bond movies after killing their protagonist, and where they intend on taking him now that his destinty seems already preset. But maybe I'm less sophisticated than your current moviegoer?
  • foo_yukfoo_yuk Canada
    Posts: 26
    Univex wrote: »
    Just seen the
    death
    scene and I must say:
    That missile hit the silo in front of him, and honestly, one may believe he was thrown up unto the air and the sea, severely mangled, amnesiac maybe. And that the sheer impact destroyed the nanobots and the smarblood. And that Bond was lost, castaway to the other islands.

    Hey, if you put your back into it, you can imagine all you want :)

    Why don’t you come down here and put your back into it?

    Sorry, had to ;)
  • Posts: 6,209
    foo_yuk wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Just seen the
    death
    scene and I must say:
    That missile hit the silo in front of him, and honestly, one may believe he was thrown up unto the air and the sea, severely mangled, amnesiac maybe. And that the sheer impact destroyed the nanobots and the smarblood. And that Bond was lost, castaway to the other islands.

    Hey, if you put your back into it, you can imagine all you want :)

    Why don’t you come down here and put your back into it?

    Sorry, had to ;)

    Ah, well done ;)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited September 2021 Posts: 39,441
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Burgess wrote: »
    I actually think this film will work among general audiences.

    Yeah me too...........I'm kind of thinking it sounds like the.......
    KISS ME DEADLY of Bond films. Before the lost footage was restored showing Mike Hammer escape and survive that is.

    One of my favorite films!

    I still don't like how the ending sounds but it seems like more and more folks are agreeing that you really have to see how it all unfolds and fits together to understand why it "works." I hope I feel the same way.
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 573
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Burgess wrote: »
    I actually think this film will work among general audiences.

    Yeah me too...........I'm kind of thinking it sounds like the.......
    KISS ME DEADLY of Bond films. Before the lost footage was restored showing Mike Hammer escape and survive that is.

    One of my favorite films!

    I still don't like how the ending sounds but it seems like more and more folks are agreeing that you really have to see how it all unfolds and fits together to understand why it "works." I hope I feel the same way.

    All I'll say is it's done quite.. uhm. Maybe tastefully isn't the word but something like that. I have more thoughts about some specific scenes when I get home.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 39,441
    00Heaven wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Burgess wrote: »
    I actually think this film will work among general audiences.

    Yeah me too...........I'm kind of thinking it sounds like the.......
    KISS ME DEADLY of Bond films. Before the lost footage was restored showing Mike Hammer escape and survive that is.

    One of my favorite films!

    I still don't like how the ending sounds but it seems like more and more folks are agreeing that you really have to see how it all unfolds and fits together to understand why it "works." I hope I feel the same way.

    All I'll say is it's done quite.. uhm. Maybe tastefully isn't the word but something like that. I have more thoughts about some specific scenes when I get home.

    I hope it impacts me greatly and somehow manages to make a big impression.
  • StarkStark France
    Posts: 177
    Is it true that safin's motivations are never explained ? Weird
Sign In or Register to comment.