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

12930323435298

Comments

  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Does anyone else think this is a bigger mistake than Die Another Day?

    I’m really quite angry about the way they see the character as disposable. There’s 60 years of love and investment in him. Thrown away for a mediocre melodrama that passes as emotion.

    In a way, yes. I thought DAD was laughably bad, but I didn't come out of the cinema angry when I saw that mess.

    But last night I came out fuming. I guess the Craig films have led me down a path that I thought we were going down. Back to the Dalton era, going back to the Fleming novels.

    And this is because the promise that was shown with CR, and made me think every film that followed would be like this.

    After last night, boy was I wrong yet again. Only this time I feel far more let down.

    This is the ultimate head scratcher: why did they not make all the other films in the tone of CR? Arguably the best Bond film ever, but at the least, one of the very best. Just seemed like they were all over the place. Could it be that CR set the bar so high, it was lightning in a bottle, and they never could get that back? Seems to me like the film quality in each digressed.

    Agreed.
    This is the ultimate head scratcher: why did they not make all the other films in the tone of CR and QoS. The last 3 just don’t fit against the first two!!!!

    Well, eventually they had make them a bit more uniquely Bondian. CR can get away with its generic action quality because about 20% of the movie is from Fleming. But they couldn't keep going like that.

    I love everything about the Matera sequence.

    I thought the Fleming inspired serious tone of CR and QoS was back.

    But after the title sequence it was back to a lighter tone.
  • JohnBarryJohnBarry Dublin
    Posts: 34
    There is a world of difference between CR and NTTD. CR was new, fresh and innovative (despite adapting a novel from the 50s) but still retained the key feel of a Bond movie.

    NTTD, especially from the London scenes onwards, struggles to fit the Bond character into a generic action movie rather than just being a Bond film in its own right.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,696
    suavejmf wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Does anyone else think this is a bigger mistake than Die Another Day?

    I’m really quite angry about the way they see the character as disposable. There’s 60 years of love and investment in him. Thrown away for a mediocre melodrama that passes as emotion.

    In a way, yes. I thought DAD was laughably bad, but I didn't come out of the cinema angry when I saw that mess.

    But last night I came out fuming. I guess the Craig films have led me down a path that I thought we were going down. Back to the Dalton era, going back to the Fleming novels.

    And this is because the promise that was shown with CR, and made me think every film that followed would be like this.

    After last night, boy was I wrong yet again. Only this time I feel far more let down.

    This is the ultimate head scratcher: why did they not make all the other films in the tone of CR? Arguably the best Bond film ever, but at the least, one of the very best. Just seemed like they were all over the place. Could it be that CR set the bar so high, it was lightning in a bottle, and they never could get that back? Seems to me like the film quality in each digressed.

    Agreed.
    This is the ultimate head scratcher: why did they not make all the other films in the tone of CR and QoS. The last 3 just don’t fit against the first two!!!!

    Well, eventually they had make them a bit more uniquely Bondian. CR can get away with its generic action quality because about 20% of the movie is from Fleming. But they couldn't keep going like that.

    I love everything about the Matera sequence.

    I thought the Fleming inspired serious tone of CR and QoS was back.

    But after the title sequence it was back to a lighter tone.

    Fleming had Bond investigate pirate treasure and fight a giant squid. And turn Japanese and have a statue come to life.
  • Posts: 526
    imranbecks wrote: »
    One wonders what Ian Fleming would've thought about the idea of killing Bond off the way they did for this one if he was still alive today.....

    If it made him money, he’d approve.

    Then why didn’t he ever kill Bond off himself? I’m sure he knew that would have sold a lot of books?$$$. Could it be that he cared about the character too much to do it? That’s my bet.
  • Posts: 3,289
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Does anyone else think this is a bigger mistake than Die Another Day?

    I’m really quite angry about the way they see the character as disposable. There’s 60 years of love and investment in him. Thrown away for a mediocre melodrama that passes as emotion.

    In a way, yes. I thought DAD was laughably bad, but I didn't come out of the cinema angry when I saw that mess.

    But last night I came out fuming. I guess the Craig films have led me down a path that I thought we were going down. Back to the Dalton era, going back to the Fleming novels.

    And this is because the promise that was shown with CR, and made me think every film that followed would be like this.

    After last night, boy was I wrong yet again. Only this time I feel far more let down.

    This is the ultimate head scratcher: why did they not make all the other films in the tone of CR? Arguably the best Bond film ever, but at the least, one of the very best. Just seemed like they were all over the place. Could it be that CR set the bar so high, it was lightning in a bottle, and they never could get that back? Seems to me like the film quality in each digressed.

    Agreed.
    This is the ultimate head scratcher: why did they not make all the other films in the tone of CR and QoS. The last 3 just don’t fit against the first two!!!!

    Well, eventually they had make them a bit more uniquely Bondian. CR can get away with its generic action quality because about 20% of the movie is from Fleming. But they couldn't keep going like that.

    Well, they could if they wanted.
  • Posts: 3,289
    suavejmf wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Does anyone else think this is a bigger mistake than Die Another Day?

    I’m really quite angry about the way they see the character as disposable. There’s 60 years of love and investment in him. Thrown away for a mediocre melodrama that passes as emotion.

    In a way, yes. I thought DAD was laughably bad, but I didn't come out of the cinema angry when I saw that mess.

    But last night I came out fuming. I guess the Craig films have led me down a path that I thought we were going down. Back to the Dalton era, going back to the Fleming novels.

    And this is because the promise that was shown with CR, and made me think every film that followed would be like this.

    After last night, boy was I wrong yet again. Only this time I feel far more let down.

    This is the ultimate head scratcher: why did they not make all the other films in the tone of CR? Arguably the best Bond film ever, but at the least, one of the very best. Just seemed like they were all over the place. Could it be that CR set the bar so high, it was lightning in a bottle, and they never could get that back? Seems to me like the film quality in each digressed.

    Agreed.
    This is the ultimate head scratcher: why did they not make all the other films in the tone of CR and QoS. The last 3 just don’t fit against the first two!!!!

    Well, eventually they had make them a bit more uniquely Bondian. CR can get away with its generic action quality because about 20% of the movie is from Fleming. But they couldn't keep going like that.

    I love everything about the Matera sequence.

    I thought the Fleming inspired serious tone of CR and QoS was back.

    But after the title sequence it was back to a lighter tone.

    Fleming had Bond investigate pirate treasure and fight a giant squid. And turn Japanese and have a statue come to life.

    Is that your only takeaway and summary of the Fleming novels then?
  • Posts: 6,682
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    I was driving, trying to think did they cut the speargun scene from the Jamaica sizzle reel?

    They did!! They did!! The coolest scene in the film, and they cut it. I thought I was the only one mentioning this. They changed it for the gun scene. Again, what a waste! See what I mean they can't do sexy anymore? Sexy or stylish or whatever. Funnily enough, the one scene from the reel that had me deciding I'd love the film, was cut.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    suavejmf wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Does anyone else think this is a bigger mistake than Die Another Day?

    I’m really quite angry about the way they see the character as disposable. There’s 60 years of love and investment in him. Thrown away for a mediocre melodrama that passes as emotion.

    In a way, yes. I thought DAD was laughably bad, but I didn't come out of the cinema angry when I saw that mess.

    But last night I came out fuming. I guess the Craig films have led me down a path that I thought we were going down. Back to the Dalton era, going back to the Fleming novels.

    And this is because the promise that was shown with CR, and made me think every film that followed would be like this.

    After last night, boy was I wrong yet again. Only this time I feel far more let down.

    This is the ultimate head scratcher: why did they not make all the other films in the tone of CR? Arguably the best Bond film ever, but at the least, one of the very best. Just seemed like they were all over the place. Could it be that CR set the bar so high, it was lightning in a bottle, and they never could get that back? Seems to me like the film quality in each digressed.

    Agreed.
    This is the ultimate head scratcher: why did they not make all the other films in the tone of CR and QoS. The last 3 just don’t fit against the first two!!!!

    Well, eventually they had make them a bit more uniquely Bondian. CR can get away with its generic action quality because about 20% of the movie is from Fleming. But they couldn't keep going like that.

    I love everything about the Matera sequence.

    I thought the Fleming inspired serious tone of CR and QoS was back.

    But after the title sequence it was back to a lighter tone.

    Fleming had Bond investigate pirate treasure and fight a giant squid. And turn Japanese and have a statue come to life.

    But none of these plot points were light in tone in the novels.

    My main issue is the uneven tone.
  • imranbecksimranbecks Singapore
    Posts: 972
    What bothered me also is that Bond wasn't alone in his mission in this one. I'm fine with him partnering with Nomi. But he is always in constant contact with Q and M. I miss those days when Bond would go to the villain lair on his own, covertly and not knowing what to expect. Those were always fun to watch. Relying on his charm and wit. Think back to TND when Bond and Wai Lin infiltrated Carver's submarine. It was just them both. No contact with M on the outside.
  • JohnBarryJohnBarry Dublin
    edited October 2021 Posts: 34
    Did anyone else find the moment where Bond says 'Die Blofeld Die' really odd. I know they needed Bond to touch Blofeld in order to infect him, but it seemed very very forced and undid a lot of the great tension leading up to that moment.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 803
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    Did anyone else find the moment where Bond says 'Die Blofeld Die' really odd. I know they needed Bond to touch Blofeld in order to infect him, but it seemed very very forced and undid a lot of the great tension leading up to that moment.

    Yes!
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,696
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    Did anyone else find the moment where Bond says 'Die Blofeld Die' really odd. I know they needed Bond to touch Blofeld in order to infect him, but it seemed very very forced and undid a lot of the great tension leading up to that moment.

    Well, it's another Fleming homage. These films have been full of them. I was shocked and delighted to see that one!
  • I've spent the morning reading through what's been said on here and I've come to a few conclusions, but please this is my opinion and not meant as a critique of any individual so cut me some slack.

    Firstly reviews of NTTD are roughly love or loathe with not a lot inbetween as we British say a bit like Marmite. You could use the same reference for QoS. I think as has been said by others a lot of the issues with the Craig era is that they tried to tie all the movies together with SP & NTTD which is where the creativity went awry, IMHO it's very hard to tie up that many basically unrelated stories which is why a few on here have raised some continuity errors. If you think for a minute, the best of the Craig 5 were CR & SF. Though I have been critical of SF at times, I now appreciate it a lot more. Both these stand up well as stand alones which is why I believe they work well & the last 2 don't.

    I totally agree with the opinion that the reboot needs to be a complete restart, new writers, actors everything & each film needs to be a stand alone it just works better.

  • Posts: 6,682
    I totally agree with the opinion that the reboot needs to be a complete restart, new writers, actors everything & each film needs to be a stand alone it just works better.
    Oh, please yes!
  • JohnBarryJohnBarry Dublin
    Posts: 34
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    Did anyone else find the moment where Bond says 'Die Blofeld Die' really odd. I know they needed Bond to touch Blofeld in order to infect him, but it seemed very very forced and undid a lot of the great tension leading up to that moment.

    Well, it's another Fleming homage. These films have been full of them. I was shocked and delighted to see that one!

    Yes, I did recognise that and I do believe Bond strangles a few people in fits of range in the novels (Goldfinger too if I remember correctly). But there was something about Craig's performance or maybe the direction that just didn't work for me
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,571
    Univex wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    I was driving, trying to think did they cut the speargun scene from the Jamaica sizzle reel?

    They did!! They did!! The coolest scene in the film, and they cut it. I thought I was the only one mentioning this. They changed it for the gun scene. Again, what a waste! See what I mean they can't do sexy anymore? Sexy or stylish or whatever. Funnily enough, the one scene from the reel that had me deciding I'd love the film, was cut.

    Absolutely agree mate, it was one of the moments I was really excited about
    I really hoped there would be more time spent with Bond in Jamaica as a wounded animal. I guess that wouldn't have further the narrative

    @JohnBarry yeah mate I did find it odd. It felt like they popped the balloon. It was as out of place as Bond screaming turn it off in Spectre
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,696
    suavejmf wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Does anyone else think this is a bigger mistake than Die Another Day?

    I’m really quite angry about the way they see the character as disposable. There’s 60 years of love and investment in him. Thrown away for a mediocre melodrama that passes as emotion.

    In a way, yes. I thought DAD was laughably bad, but I didn't come out of the cinema angry when I saw that mess.

    But last night I came out fuming. I guess the Craig films have led me down a path that I thought we were going down. Back to the Dalton era, going back to the Fleming novels.

    And this is because the promise that was shown with CR, and made me think every film that followed would be like this.

    After last night, boy was I wrong yet again. Only this time I feel far more let down.

    This is the ultimate head scratcher: why did they not make all the other films in the tone of CR? Arguably the best Bond film ever, but at the least, one of the very best. Just seemed like they were all over the place. Could it be that CR set the bar so high, it was lightning in a bottle, and they never could get that back? Seems to me like the film quality in each digressed.

    Agreed.
    This is the ultimate head scratcher: why did they not make all the other films in the tone of CR and QoS. The last 3 just don’t fit against the first two!!!!

    Well, eventually they had make them a bit more uniquely Bondian. CR can get away with its generic action quality because about 20% of the movie is from Fleming. But they couldn't keep going like that.

    I love everything about the Matera sequence.

    I thought the Fleming inspired serious tone of CR and QoS was back.

    But after the title sequence it was back to a lighter tone.

    Fleming had Bond investigate pirate treasure and fight a giant squid. And turn Japanese and have a statue come to life.

    Is that your only takeaway and summary of the Fleming novels then?

    Of course not. Fleming novels are a lot of things and have a lot of tones, and NTTD is no further from Fleming than CR06.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Driving home from the film last night my Mrs said something that struck me, she said why is it no one in this film really found Bond attractive other than Madeline?
    She then pointed out it was awkward when Paloma brushed off Bond and even the way Bond awkwardly came onto her was out of character for Craig's Bond. He was so overt
    She then said is it unacceptable for women to fancy attractive men openly in 2021? Is that seen as weak?

    While she was having this deep internal crisis, I was driving, trying to think did they cut the speargun scene from the Jamaica sizzle reel?

    @JohnBarry nailed it in an earlier post of theirs, I came out of NTTD completely deflated instead of elated

    Had a similar conversation with my girlfriend (with a different thrust). We talked previously about how she has a problem with the depiction of women in the Bond films. You know, the usual stuff. We sometimes bicker about it but aren't really going to change each other's mind. It is what it is. Anyway, we leave the cinema and after a bit of top level discussion, I ask her, what she thought about the women and she goes: "Well it wasn't much of a Bond film, right? He doesn't even come on to anyone."
    Now, in a way that just shows what my lovely girlfriend sees as the core of the franchise, but I thought it was an interesting glimpse at what a certain subset of a general public might think about this. But as you have shown, certainly not the view held by every woman.
  • Posts: 6,682
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    I was driving, trying to think did they cut the speargun scene from the Jamaica sizzle reel?

    They did!! They did!! The coolest scene in the film, and they cut it. I thought I was the only one mentioning this. They changed it for the gun scene. Again, what a waste! See what I mean they can't do sexy anymore? Sexy or stylish or whatever. Funnily enough, the one scene from the reel that had me deciding I'd love the film, was cut.

    Absolutely agree mate, it was one of the moments I was really excited about
    I really hoped there would be more time spent with Bond in Jamaica as a wounded animal. I guess that wouldn't have further the narrative

    Also, at least in the Brozza years he would have smoked a cigar on film, and not just between takes.
  • Matt007 wrote: »
    Does anyone else think this is a bigger mistake than Die Another Day?

    I’m really quite angry about the way they see the character as disposable. There’s 60 years of love and investment in him. Thrown away for a mediocre melodrama that passes as emotion.

    In a way, yes. I thought DAD was laughably bad, but I didn't come out of the cinema angry when I saw that mess.

    But last night I came out fuming. I guess the Craig films have led me down a path that I thought we were going down. Back to the Dalton era, going back to the Fleming novels.

    And this is because the promise that was shown with CR, and made me think every film that followed would be like this.

    After last night, boy was I wrong yet again. Only this time I feel far more let down.

    This is the ultimate head scratcher: why did they not make all the other films in the tone of CR? Arguably the best Bond film ever, but at the least, one of the very best. Just seemed like they were all over the place. Could it be that CR set the bar so high, it was lightning in a bottle, and they never could get that back? Seems to me like the film quality in each digressed.

    Because Campbell is the only person affiliated with the films today that actually gets Bond.

    On another note, if ever there was a struggle between Connery and Craig as to who my favourite Bind is, NTTD vehemently confirmed that nobody and I absolutely mean nobody will ever take the top spot from Connery.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    This may be the most depressing thread ever. Jesus Christ…
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,696
    matt_u wrote: »
    This may be the most depressing thread ever. Jesus Christ…

    +1

    Just wait until a journalist joins the forums and we get an article about how us Bond fans are all moaning infants based on the evidence of this thread.... :))
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,571
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Driving home from the film last night my Mrs said something that struck me, she said why is it no one in this film really found Bond attractive other than Madeline?
    She then pointed out it was awkward when Paloma brushed off Bond and even the way Bond awkwardly came onto her was out of character for Craig's Bond. He was so overt
    She then said is it unacceptable for women to fancy attractive men openly in 2021? Is that seen as weak?

    While she was having this deep internal crisis, I was driving, trying to think did they cut the speargun scene from the Jamaica sizzle reel?

    @JohnBarry nailed it in an earlier post of theirs, I came out of NTTD completely deflated instead of elated

    Had a similar conversation with my girlfriend (with a different thrust). We talked previously about how she has a problem with the depiction of women in the Bond films. You know, the usual stuff. We sometimes bicker about it but aren't really going to change each other's mind. It is what it is. Anyway, we leave the cinema and after a bit of top level discussion, I ask her, what she thought about the women and she goes: "Well it wasn't much of a Bond film, right? He doesn't even come on to anyone."
    Now, in a way that just shows what my lovely girlfriend sees as the core of the franchise, but I thought it was an interesting glimpse at what a certain subset of a general public might think about this. But as you have shown, certainly not the view held by every woman.

    You've got a good one there mate 🍸
    I was shocked by my girl's reaction truthfully, I thought she would be punching the air about the representation of females in the film but she thought it was a tad empty
    She said it pandered to her as a woman rather than her as a Bond fan
  • Posts: 87
    I saw NTTD today as part of the SF + SP + NTTD marathon, before the marathon I also watched CR and QoS at home.

    I never thought there would ever be such an embarrassing and absurd Bond movie!

    In DAD, the producers came up against a brick wall with a plethora of special effects, though the first half of the movie is great.

    With the acquisition of CR rights and Craig's engagement, producers gained a unique opportunity to return to Bond Ian Fleming's roots. CR was a great harbinger of this concept. I thought with CR, the Bond series would gain a new breath of fresh air for the next Bond actors for many years to come.

    But from QoS onwards, the psyche and life of Bond and the newly introduced characters were over-exploited, apparently due to a lack of new formula ideas.

    As a result, in the fifth film with Craig, the producers again come up against a brick wall. The senseless exploration of the human psyche and the exploration of Bond's made-up family relationships, led the series into a dead end. But this time, unlike the DAD case, it has crossed the red line of self-destructing the entire franchise.
    The 1967 CR was a Bond parody and is treated with a pinch of salt with such a label, but NTTD as a EON movie is something much worse. It is a betrayal of the legacy and fans.

    Every minute of this movie undermines not only the sense of resetting the formula in CR, but most of all the sense of the entire series, the sense of being a fan ...
    The film lacks panache, grace and softness. NTTD is a cluster of chaotic scenes that the film does not justify or justify in a childish way. The scenes are so fragmented that there is not a single solid sound track in the entire movie. And the references to John Barry's works are not accurate and seem to be an attempt to save the situation cheaply.
    For example, there is a lack of a trademark of Bond movies: a solid uninterrupted action scene illustrated with a coherent piece of a soundtrack. In one of the interviews on the occasion of the filming of SP, Sam Mendes questioned the sense of this concept, although after all Pre Title Sequnece along with Newman's "Grand Bazaar, Istanbul" in SF is an example of the validity of it. Unlike the PTS of SP.

    The actors in NTTD seem to be distracted, as if participating in some kind of chaos.

    I think Daniel Craig contributed too much to the NTTD concept as a filmaker, a self-centered contribution that disrespected previous James Bond actors, the nuances and legacy of the franchise before CR.

    Bond movies have gained popularity because give the opportunity to break away from everyday life for a moment and move to wonderful locations with
    iconic James Bond and beautiful girls to experience fabulous action scenes with wonderful music.

    It is a fact that today the exotic locations of Bond movies from the 60's or 70's are no longer so inaccessible and interesting, but is that why we get a movie in which James Bond peels an apple for a child and wears a plush mascot next to a machine gun? Where have we come?
    I consider the idea of ​​psychological development of characters in recent films to be right. However, at NTTD, this concept has come up against a brick wall. Paradoxically, by reducing the problem to absurdity, this movie admits wisdom of the makers of the older Bonds, to avoid this idea because you risk destroying the icon of James Bond character and the pure pleasure of entertainment.

    A. Broccoli once advised his successors: "Don't screw it up". This concern has fully materialized in the NTTD, I am afraid.
  • I have a real problem with certain people in the media saying Bond is guilty of mysogyny, I have two question (A) Do they know what it really means or (B) Have they ever thought about it in the context of the films.

    Basic meaning hatred or contempt for women, Bond has neither of these traits, he loves women, he trys to protect them unless they're trying to kill him. I believe a lot of this misconception started after some moron thought it would be cool to put it in the GE M speech to Bond.
  • JohnBarry wrote: »
    Did anyone else find the moment where Bond says 'Die Blofeld Die' really odd. I know they needed Bond to touch Blofeld in order to infect him, but it seemed very very forced and undid a lot of the great tension leading up to that moment.

    I actually laughed out loud out of disbelief to what I was watching when this happened. It was horribly executed.
  • Posts: 4,602
    So many questions coming up in my head. If we really are in a time of equality and given Bond's connection with Mads and the kid and given that Mads knew of the danger of the nanobots targetted at her and given the Bond has only just returned to service, why was it just assumed that Nomi would take Mads and the kid away on a dingy? Or, given she seemed quite capable, why could Mads have not controlled the boat herself, leaving two agents to go back and open the silo?
    I think once good will is lost, you nitpick far more. Im happy to admit that I overlook plot holes in other Bond movies but, well, they are better films. (IMHO)
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    matt_u wrote: »
    This may be the most depressing thread ever. Jesus Christ…

    +1

    Just wait until a journalist joins the forums and we get an article about how us Bond fans are all moaning infants based on the evidence of this thread.... :))

    For what is worth my show yesterday was sold out and at the end everybody cheered in excitement. Perhaps the film is garbage only to some hardcore fans.
  • JeffreyJeffrey The Netherlands
    edited October 2021 Posts: 308
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    It’s a pity many of you aren’t open to the idea of giving Bond a death scene. Guess that’s how it is.

    If ..............
    there can be an insert of Sir Roger's iconic OOOOOOOOOHHHHHH sound during Bond's final moments on this planet.....
    ....then I'm all for it.


    Oeh!

    xD
  • JeffreyJeffrey The Netherlands
    Posts: 308
    I have a real problem with certain people in the media saying Bond is guilty of mysogyny, I have two question (A) Do they know what it really means or (B) Have they ever thought about it in the context of the films.

    Basic meaning hatred or contempt for women, Bond has neither of these traits, he loves women, he trys to protect them unless they're trying to kill him. I believe a lot of this misconception started after some moron thought it would be cool to put it in the GE M speech to Bond.

    It's weird indeed. It's all based on way older films (other time), but keeps being mentioned if it is something that is still very much an issue with current films.
Sign In or Register to comment.