It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
It's not so much that it's unnatural concept mate, but it's the ending being the death of Bond. Imagine being interviewed to do a Bond film then they say he has to die at the end.
Then you've got to start thinking who, what or how can you kill a character that hasn't died in 6 different incarnations over 60 years. What takes him to that point of no return, how do you make his death believable and then make the ending satisfying for audiences. All this rather than focusing on the plot, which at times did feel secondary to Bond meeting his end.
My biggest concern would have been, how will we get Bond in a dinghy at the end and who will be the Bond girl he's with. Clearly they wouldn't have hired me 😅
Yes, this all makes sense. Boyle has the clout, and the Oscars, to usually get what he wants. But so do BB and MGW, and they have the final say when it comes to Bond. Cubby made sure of that.
Note also that the heavy adaptation of the YOLT novel (some fans love it, some hate it) was also a BB and MGW decision, not P&W.
After all, 'Another child?' isn't really tied up yet.
No Crime To Tie
You know they must have wanted to do that.
It would have led to endless speculation: who will die? Madeleine, Q, Bond? But I think that kind of speculation was inevitable for Craig's last film.
Compare it to the anount we got on the two disc dvd for DAD and the extras for NTTD and SP are extremely disappointing.
I've seen it quite a few times now, and tried to accept it in the spirit which (most!) people do on here, but I'm afraid I can't get past that ending. It's spoiled the whole film, and I can't see me getting the same pleasure out the other Craig films now, because I know how it all ends for him. Shot in the back, poisoned and blown to f*ck.
What a downer!
What? You don't like No Time To Die?? :O
I didn't notice before, as you have hardly written a single post about it. You should really emphasize your points clearer and more often from now on!
It does to me. I didn't screen record a copy when it was released on Apple+ (not condoning piracy here, but...) thinking it would later be available for purchase on iTunes. Whoops.
So now I need it.
It’s getting predictable. I guess it doesn’t take a lot to trigger someone nowadays… Cling to the things that you dislike and repeat it over and over again.
I mean, I saw Tenet in the cinema. I despised that film and it was the first movie I wanted to walk out of.
But I just won’t watch or think about it again, unless the memory of it comes steamrolling into my memory. I accept my feelings on it; I won’t and have never tried to change someone’s opinion on it. I accept I wasted my time and money on a film that I passionately dislike and will never make the mistake of watching or talking about it again (unless to use as an example!).
But for the NTTD haters…. It’s like they see the snow fall and immediately associate that with their hatred for a film.
At first it was a good chuckle to read when the passionate haters flooded the boards, but now the dislike is showing up on various threads and seemingly out of the blue.
It’s time to move on by now, no? If something makes one that triggered they should try and dismiss it and replace it with something more positive in their daily thoughts. They may find they’d be more happy and; that Big Bad Film they hated becomes far more easier to accept as existing but it won’t play havoc in their lives anymore, 😂.
P.S. that’s not to say critics of the film are like this. There have been many intelligent discussions on this site about why one may not like the film, but these critics are far removed from the moaning haters.
How is that a downer?
The main character we have loved and read and watched for 60 years suddenly meets him demise and is dead, leaving behind the woman he loved and his daughter that he had only just discovered.
How is that NOT a downer?
Bond died for something good.
A REAL downer would be if all the good guys die and the villains prevail.
Anyone claiming the ending we got actually depresses them needs to chill out.
Yeah Bond dies but he gets a hero’s death, saves the world, leaves a familial legacy behind, and becomes a legend. In OHMSS the villains get away, his wife and chance for a normal life are brutally cut down in front of him and we leave on Bond as a broken man, clutching the lifeless body of Tracy.
I am totally against having a Bond multiverse or having him resurrected in a different time frame. It defeats the purpose of Bond being a realistic spy series that so many want because there is no coming back from the dead.
Knowing how EON follows trends I will not be surprised if they CGI previous actors and have them assist Bond #7 in his missions.
Craig being the same character as his predecessors makes no sense. His run has been established as a different continuity since 2006. I don’t get why some are in denial of that.
I could give you a list of films I've seen and didn't like, and I've never thought about watching again. And I certainly wouldn't go on an internet forum and moan about them. But the James Bond novels and films have held my interest for most of my life, and like a lot of people here I'm sentimental about them.
And as far as changing people's mind, I've never once tried to tell people that they shouldn't like the movie, and I've never said it shouldn't have been made (like some have).
So I'm sorry if my feelings on here are annoying to people that love the movie. I'll try not to bang on about it from now on. But just because I say I don't like something, that doesn't mean I'm having a pop at people that do.
At any rate, Merry Christmas / happy holidays everyone :).
... except that I'd argue the addition of the Bond theme at the end of OHMSS, almost immediately after the quietly mournful, orchestral rendition of WHATTITW, quickly removes (or maybe sublimates) that bleakness of a "broken man," if only figuratively, and replaces it with the return to the cool purpose of a professional agent largely devoid of an emotional life ... until Craig Bond.
Drives DB5, shoots a Walther, drinks martinis, says Bond James Bond and references to past films. Yea same guy.
Giving Bond a death just opens up multiverse theories and a whole bunch of other stuff not necessary for this series.
I get it MSP, I really do. No denial from me.
Daniel Craig is playing someone called James Bond who is a new character. There was another character called James Bond, but the last movie with him in was Die Another Day, (where he still had his jet-pack, scuba-alligator stored at Q branch etc).
But Casino Royale was a re-boot, and that meant a new James Bond. Not the same character, as you say.
Now the next movie we have will have yet another character, who will also be called James Bond, but it'll be the third James Bond, right?
Unless they decide to carry on with the first one. If they do that, then we'll only have had two James Bonds.
The only thing we definitely know is, we won't get the second James Bond character back, because he's dead.
The first one is still alive though, so they can bring him back if they want.
Yep, I get it. I'm not in denial at all, I completely understand what they've gone and done.
What I am in denial of - is the idea that there's any narrative sense in a series that tells you it's the same character ('Ian Fleming's James Bond' - it's at the start of every film), yet now wants us to accept they're different characters at the same time.