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

1231232234236237298

Comments

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 7,955
    There's also a great difference between continuing to praise a film you like and still being upset over a film you didn't like.

    I didn't like STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS, but I wasn't going on about it for months continuously like a broken record.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,650
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    You're still going on about this? Most of us have moved on. But be my guest, stay angry, call the idea stupid and whatnot. It won't change a thing. And the way I see it, many here are quite pleased with NTTD and wouldn't call any of it stupid or daft. Don't get too annoyed with it. It's only a movie.

    Yes, I should keep my trap shut because my opinion on a movie is in the minority. You're right.

    Dude, I said Skyfall was garbage & got shot down left & right for it. I said SPECTRE was good clean fun & got told how stupid it was over & over. I explained why I'll never watch No Time To Die ever again, and the tidal wave of folks in love with the film washed over me.
    OTOH, I see folks beginning to agree with me (after years) that License To Kill is a pretty great Bond film, and not just a Miami Vice clone for the big screen. That Thunderball is not THE BEST BOND MOVIE ever made. That The Man With The Golden Gun is not utter trash that should be avoided at all costs. That Brosnan was not THE ONLY Bond to ever use a machine gun...
    Give it time, my friend. Five years from now we will no doubt see our takes on these newer movies gain a more general acceptance.
    As a kid I remember thinking On Her Majesty's Secret Service was one hell of a movie. Even with the sad ending. People ended up catching up to me there too.
    We've said all our criticisms of NTTD.
    Let everyone get tired of it.
    Then we can start bringing up our reasons for disliking it again... without feeling like heretics. ;)
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 7,955
    HERETICS!!!
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,650
    HERETICS!!!

    "We're not worthy, we're not worthy..." -Wayne & Garth
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 7,955
    ffb3146b89f2b7bcf0b6538f5962bace.gif
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,650
    ffb3146b89f2b7bcf0b6538f5962bace.gif

    Hey, I got a Marvel comic book from the 80's starring that guy!
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 12,814
    Best let the Mods be Mods.

    Thanks to the Mods for doing a great job during the release. I've been on forums where a wave of anarchy and mischief overwhelms activity, that didn't happen here. And if anything negative comments were protected thought, even shepherded at times over positive reactions is what I saw when I read through the previous pages.

    After a point it becomes about behavior and civility as much as it does offline in the real world. It shouldn't become someone's personal Vietnam.

    inktober_0002_img_1851.jpg?compress=1&resize=400x300


  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited January 2022 Posts: 23,304
    I appreciate that @RichardTheBruce. But most of the peace and calm comes from our members themselves. Yes, things get heated from time to time, but our debate culture is still fairly civilised. Most of you in here make our job easy. ;-)
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,650
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I appreciate that @RichardTheBruce.

    Mods gotta mod.
    Lovers gotta love.
    Haters gotta hate.
    Critical thinkers gotta make the waves. :P
  • NoWisemanNoWiseman Germany
    edited January 2022 Posts: 34
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    You're still going on about this? Most of us have moved on. But be my guest, stay angry, call the idea stupid and whatnot. It won't change a thing. And the way I see it, many here are quite pleased with NTTD and wouldn't call any of it stupid or daft. Don't get too annoyed with it. It's only a movie.

    I write this, not to rant again about the movie. But to express my understanding for members like @jetsetwilly or @ColonelAdamski and why they can't let go so easily.

    When NTTD came out a few month ago, i wrote here to express - and in some way process - my frustration and anger about the movie, the narrative choices and especially its ending. But at one point, i had to withdraw from this forum and others, because i wanted to get rid of all these negative feelings.

    What's left today is the sad fact, that this movie alienated me from a fictional character, that i dearly loved for over forty years of my life. I wasn't prepard for Bonds death, when i witnessed it in the cinema an the shock never left me. It's a deep nagging feeling. Very hard to ignore and not so easily pushed aside. Advices like 'go and watch the other 24 films' never really helped. The image of his demise stays with me.

    Reading the variety article renewed my frustration and my former appreciation for the actor has reached a low point, because now i know, it was mainly Craigs own wish to kill off James Bond.

    And suddenly there's the voice of Judi Dench in my head: "I want you to take your ego out of the equation..."

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 7,938
    @NoWiseman , do you know Daniel Craig personally? What goes on in his head? The choice to kill the character was based on ego? Or was it just a creative decision that you don’t agree with?

  • NoWisemanNoWiseman Germany
    edited January 2022 Posts: 34
    peter wrote: »
    @NoWiseman , do you know Daniel Craig personally? What goes on in his head? The choice to kill the character was based on ego? Or was it just a creative decision that you don’t agree with?

    As i said, it's in my head and therefore an impression, not a fact. See, i don't want to convince you here, i just expressed my actual feelings and my understanding for some other members at this forum.

    And no, i don't like this particular decision one bit. But i wrote that a few times already und as others here said, there's no point in repeating it again and again.
  • I was resolved to keep my trap shut on this too, NoWiseman. But reading that article got me wound like you. Against my better judgment, I made my views known on here again I'm afraid.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,304
    I appreciate that @RichardTheBruce.
    peter wrote: »
    @NoWiseman , do you know Daniel Craig personally? What goes on in his head? The choice to kill the character was based on ego? Or was it just a creative decision that you don’t agree with?

    I guess none of us know the answer to that.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 7,938
    @DarthDimi .. that was my point. When @NoWiseman ended their post with a quote about taking ego out of the equation, the assumption is that Craig wanted this ending to satisfy himself.

    Rather, we have no way of knowing if this is true, but more specifically, we can more confidently assume the poster was just not happy with a creative decision. And that's fine.

    It was redundant to add M's quote, other than to make the lead actor seem like a selfish dolt.
  • I said to Barbara, “How many of these movies do I have to make?” Because I don’t really look at contracts or any of those things. And she said, “Four,” and I went, “Oh, okay. Can I kill him off in the last one?”

    He really didn't know how many movies were in his contract?

    Anyway, he wanted to kill Bond off, he said "it was how I wanted it to go", and he eventually got his way. I'm sure we can all at least agree on that.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 7,938
    No one disputes he wanted to end his tenure this way, @ColonelAdamski ,but to assume it was about his ego, rather than a creative choice that’s never been done in this series is presumptuous and is once again painting a picture of the person’s anger at the film, and lashing out at the lead actor for being an egocentric twit.
  • NoWisemanNoWiseman Germany
    Posts: 34
    peter wrote: »
    It was redundant to add M's quote, other than to make the lead actor seem like a selfish dolt.

    Redundant: Not from my perspective. I've got the impression after reading the article a few days ago.

    selfish: Yes. My opinion.

    dolt: Never said this. I think, Mr. Craig is an highly intelligent man and a good actor.
  • edited January 2022 Posts: 985
    Does it not strike you Peter, as even a teeny-weeny bit presumptuous for an actor to want their own specific end to a film that hadn't even been written yet? Especially as it's a movie in a long series where the character he's playing is well known all over the world for surviving?
    He wanted to subvert the formula, and he certainly did that. But we can't say he specifically wanted Bond dead because it furthered the story. Because there was no story at that point - they had to write the story round his desire for Bond's demise, (as evidenced in the Fukunga interview in Empire).
    So like NoWiseman, I'm less inclined to think Craig was primarily concerned with artistry . . . it seems to me he was more interested in taking the character where no Bond actor had gone before. Which some might see as a bold move, and others could see as egotistical.
    And whether you choose the former or the latter - all depends on whether you liked the ending or not.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 7,938
    Does it not strike you as even a teeny-weeny bit presumptuous for an actor to want their own specific end to a film that hadn't even been written yet? Especially as it's a movie in a long series where the character he's playing is well known all over the world for surviving?
    He wanted to subvert the formula, and he certainly did that. But we can't say he specifically wanted Bond dead because it furthered the story. Because there was no story at that point - they had to write the story round his desire for Bond's demise, (as evidenced in the Fukunga interview in Empire).
    So like NoWiseman, I'm less inclined to think Craig was primarily concerned with artistry . . . it seems to me he was interested in taking the character where no Bond actor had gone before. Which some might see as a bold move, and others could see as egotistical.
    And whether you choose the former or the latter - all depends on whether you liked the ending or not.

    It's called spit-balling.

    I've sat in on many spit-balling sessions for films (whether for a project I've been working on, or projects I've been associated with).

    Ideas like the one we got in NTTD come up all the time, along with a slew of others (one of them, if you remember, Fukunaga shared: Bond wakes up with Blofeld still drilling into his head);

    My point is, very rarely are spit-balling sessions about ego. Instead--

    It's about the creative team finding the story (through a lot of compromises), that they collectively think is the best story that they want to share with their global audience.


    In this case, it was Bond's death, something Craig supposedly aired fifteen years ago. The actor saw this as a clear, direct path of how he envisioned his tenure to go. It was no guarantee that was ever going to happen, but, in the end, it did.

    To assume it's about ego, rather than story-telling and how spit-balling sessions go, you should really sit in on one of these-- they're fascinating @ColonelAdamski and @NoWiseman ...

    It's a shame you didn't care for the direction they took, but in the end, it is what it is.
  • So Craig and Barbara were spit-balling in the back of the car driving from the premiere. The mind boggles!
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,857
    Also, Eon didn't have to hire Craig for a fifth film and could have let him go out on SP.

    To act like the ending of NTTD was totally at Craig's ego/discretion is poppycock.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited January 2022 Posts: 7,938
    @ColonelAdamski, although that wasn't an official spit-balling session, spit-balling is a constant in the film and tv industry!! Everytime you meet a producer and/or director, the question is: okay what's next?, or; where do we go from here?

    I just met with a financier and a producer for lunch a few weeks ago. The entire three hour meeting was an unofficial spit-balling session about one of my projects. It happens and I'm sorry it makes the mind boggle.

    It's clear in my post, and from the history of this film, the creative team had many, many, many, many sessions.

    Once again, it is what it is. Saying that, it's worth repeating: you didn't like the film and that's not being argued. I have just painted an alternative picture where I don't think this decision was necessarily about ego, but a creative team collectively agreeing (after many hours of spit-balling), that this was the best way to tell their story.

    And so far, I can't blame them. Not only was it a film I personally love, but it did pretty damn good business worldwide BECAUSE of repeat viewings (which means NTTD had global appeal-- a very difficult thing to accomplish).

    EDIT: and @echo makes a very clear point: if the creative team disliked Craig's suggestion, they didn't have to hire him back for a fifth film. He was a free agent at the time, he was not under contract.
  • NoWisemanNoWiseman Germany
    Posts: 34
    peter wrote: »
    To assume it's about ego, rather than story-telling and how spit-balling sessions go, you should really sit in on one of these-- they're fascinating @ColonelAdamski and @NoWiseman ...
    Script meetings and brainstormings, even for long running franchises, are actually part of my daily bread. I can only tell you, that from my experience there is much to often ego in the room, when leadactors are involved. And seldom it's for the good of the project.
    peter wrote: »
    It's a shame you didn't care for the direction they took, but in the end, it is what it is.

    That's true.

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 7,938
    @NoWiseman , I've seen a lot of passion, arguments but spit-balling sessions are mainly a creative endeavour... I'm sure there have been actors that throw their weight around (I know one famous actor in particular who likes to beat up on the minions in these sessions), but it's usually the exception to the rule.

    And once again: as @echo stated: if the creative team (which at one point or another, will have included the distributors (Universal, MGM etc), the producers, director, writers; even casting directors get brought in on these conversations, as well as costume and set designers!), they could have walked away from Craig. He wasn't under contract for NTTD.
  • NoWisemanNoWiseman Germany
    edited January 2022 Posts: 34
    peter wrote: »
    I'm sure there have been actors that throw their weight around.

    That's my experience too. Sadly much too often.
    peter wrote: »
    And once again: as @echo stated: if the creative team (which at one point or another, will have included the distributors (Universal, MGM etc), the producers, director, writers; even casting directors get brought in on these conversations, as well as costume and set designers!), they could have walked away from Craig. He wasn't under contract for NTTD.

    All these people had a great interest in Craigs return. By now he is an economic force in the business. And IF he only comes back on the condition, that his character dies on screen, they would never ever call in the next guy and do some risky business instead.


  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 7,938
    NoWiseman wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I'm sure there have been actors that throw their weight around.

    That's my experience too. Sadly much too often.
    peter wrote: »
    And once again: as @echo stated: if the creative team (which at one point or another, will have included the distributors (Universal, MGM etc), the producers, director, writers; even casting directors get brought in on these conversations, as well as costume and set designers!), they could have walked away from Craig. He wasn't under contract for NTTD.

    All these people had a great interest in Craigs return. By now he is an economic force in the business. And IF he only comes back on the condition, that his character dies on screen, they would never ever call in the next guy in and do risky business instead.


    I agree @NoWiseman that Craig has been a very popular Bond. But, as he himself admits, he's not a writer... So if the creative team felt his idea was crazy, I have to believe they'd have made a collective decision to walk, after all;

    It was the perfect time to announce a new James Bond (until he was on Colbert, many assumed Craig was done, so walking away from him at this point would not have caused a ripple in the series. In fact, the opposite would have happened: the declaration that EoN is on the hunt for a new Bond always creates excitement and buzz).

    But instead, the creative team must have thought this was a fitting idea for this Bond. Craig's intuition was correct. And the creative team thought so too.

    And it seems that the correct decision was made; this film appealed to a global audience. As you know: that is indeed a very difficult talent to have, and the work that goes into putting out a global success in an unpredictable environment is an impossible task. They collectively (from the distributors, to producers, writers, director and so on) thought this was the best story they could tell, and they told it.

    In the end, it hit a sore spot with a minority of Bond fans, but hit a bigger mark with the global audience. And that's what show-business is all about-- making money. Cubby knew that too (if the films made a buck, there'd be another...).

    This film didn't hit with you, but NTTD happened for more reasons than one person's supposed inflated opinion of himself (i.e. his ego).
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    edited January 2022 Posts: 641
    "Fleming nearly killed Bond twice" is another way of saying Fleming didn't kill Bond. Technically Bond has been nearly killed in every single book and movie.

    If NTTD had been cancelled and another movie had been made instead, and NTTD's script had been leaked online as an unmade Bond movie, how would we react to it? Would we breathe a sigh of a relief at EON coming to its senses or would we be pissed off at having missed out on a "daring" Bond movie?
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 7,938
    slide_99 wrote: »
    "Fleming nearly killed Bond twice" is another way of saying Fleming didn't kill Bond.

    If NTTD had been cancelled and another movie had been made instead, and NTTD's script had been leaked online as an unmade Bond movie, how would we react to it? Would we breathe a sigh of a relief at EON coming to its senses or would we be pissed off at having missed out on a "daring" Bond movie?

    I wouldn't be "pissed off " at anything @slide_99 ... but in a franchise that I assume will be going on in some form or another, for many more years to come, give me something risky before returning to what's deemed "safe"...

    Although, with the ever-changing landscape that is the blockbuster-world, I can't see Broccoli ever being predictable again; no, I don't see a Craig 2.0 in our future-- she's a smarter producer to know not to do that. But I believe the Craig era showed she could successfully stretch the character and his stories, while still maintaining a strong foot-hold in what it means to be a James Bond film.
  • NoWisemanNoWiseman Germany
    Posts: 34
    @peter:

    NTTD is a big hit worldwide, there is no way of denying it. Most of the audience love it, some like me do not. I'm not arguing about that.

    I'm just reacting to the quotes from the variety piece. It's stated, that the idea of Bonds death was a very early one. Broccoli, Wilson, Purvis and Wade have gone along with it. Of Boyle, we don't know. When Fukunaga came in, it was a done deal.

    But again, my actual impression is, that it was Craig, who got the ball rolling in this direction. His word has some weight. To establish a new actor is always risky, no matter at what time it happens. We all know the MGM-Situation and how expensive these movies are. Craig means money. He wanted his big dramatic bang, he'd got it, many love it, i hate it. More is not to say at the moment.
Sign In or Register to comment.