NO TIME TO DIE (2021) - Members' Reviews and Discussions (SPOILERS)

1131416181934

Comments

  • Posts: 3,291
    matt_u wrote: »
    I felt sorry for Bond many times reading the books and even watching the films (OHMSS).

    Nowhere near as bad as this.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited October 2021 Posts: 4,343
    matt_u wrote: »
    I felt sorry for Bond many times reading the books and even watching the films (OHMSS).

    Nowhere near as bad as this.

    Well I can see that! :D
  • Posts: 3,291
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    I felt sorry for Bond many times reading the books and even watching the films (OHMSS).

    Nowhere near as bad as this.

    Well I can see that! :D

    I genuinely wish I could get beyond that ending, because for the first hour the film was superb, probably some of the best scenes in the entire franchise.

    But the ending totally ruins it for me, which is why I'm probably more disappointed about it than I should be. Had the rest of the film been absolute total garbage too, it would be a much easier one to simply get over, like DAD for example.
  • patb wrote: »
    No, I dont see a concensus re that issue, its an ongoing discussion with many fans having no issue or happy to "take it on the chin". I think there is concensus or a clear area of critique re the issues I listed.

    Most people I spoke to, I would say the general consensus has been with the ones who didn't hate the movie - they liked the film until the very end (killing off Bond), and Bond's death also seems to be the biggest gripe of all with fans who are not happy with NTTD.

    Just my take on it, for what its worth.
    This!!!

    And if anyone watched Calvin Dyson’s review of the film that is the one thing that he HATED the most. In his opinion it’s the single worst idea in the entire franchise. I think that says something. For me until now it was “Brother-gate” from SP as the single worst thing in the entire series (I haaaaaated this with a passion and still do) but now it may be Bond’s death. It’s a tough call between those two. And I’m actually shocked that I don’t hate Bond being a daddy as much as I probably should. Seems sacrilegious for us fans. But the death of 007, with missiles raining down on him and blowing him to kingdom come, just leaves knots in your stomach. In the worst way.

    The fact that Bond doesn't even try to escape. He just stands there, commits suicide. You end up feeling sorry for Bond, and that's not something I want to get from a Bond movie.
    Exactly! And the rush to destroying the base was forced just to kill Bond. Because there really was no reason to so urgently fire those missiles. Why the rush? What would have happened if they destroyed it 30 minutes later? An hour later? We’re never explained why the urgency. Just that we gotta do it now or there will be nothing left to save! Huh?
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited October 2021 Posts: 4,343
    patb wrote: »
    No, I dont see a concensus re that issue, its an ongoing discussion with many fans having no issue or happy to "take it on the chin". I think there is concensus or a clear area of critique re the issues I listed.

    Most people I spoke to, I would say the general consensus has been with the ones who didn't hate the movie - they liked the film until the very end (killing off Bond), and Bond's death also seems to be the biggest gripe of all with fans who are not happy with NTTD.

    Just my take on it, for what its worth.
    This!!!

    And if anyone watched Calvin Dyson’s review of the film that is the one thing that he HATED the most. In his opinion it’s the single worst idea in the entire franchise. I think that says something. For me until now it was “Brother-gate” from SP as the single worst thing in the entire series (I haaaaaated this with a passion and still do) but now it may be Bond’s death. It’s a tough call between those two. And I’m actually shocked that I don’t hate Bond being a daddy as much as I probably should. Seems sacrilegious for us fans. But the death of 007, with missiles raining down on him and blowing him to kingdom come, just leaves knots in your stomach. In the worst way.

    The fact that Bond doesn't even try to escape. He just stands there, commits suicide. You end up feeling sorry for Bond, and that's not something I want to get from a Bond movie.
    Exactly! And the rush to destroying the base was forced just to kill Bond. Because there really was no reason to so urgently fire those missiles. Why the rush? What would have happened if they destroyed it 30 minutes later? An hour later? We’re never explained why the urgency. Just that we gotta do it now or there will be nothing left to save! Huh?

    The buyers were approaching the island to get Heracles, that would've caused mass murder and global devastation.

    Have you even watched the film?
  • matt_u wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    No, I dont see a concensus re that issue, its an ongoing discussion with many fans having no issue or happy to "take it on the chin". I think there is concensus or a clear area of critique re the issues I listed.

    Most people I spoke to, I would say the general consensus has been with the ones who didn't hate the movie - they liked the film until the very end (killing off Bond), and Bond's death also seems to be the biggest gripe of all with fans who are not happy with NTTD.

    Just my take on it, for what its worth.
    This!!!

    And if anyone watched Calvin Dyson’s review of the film that is the one thing that he HATED the most. In his opinion it’s the single worst idea in the entire franchise. I think that says something. For me until now it was “Brother-gate” from SP as the single worst thing in the entire series (I haaaaaated this with a passion and still do) but now it may be Bond’s death. It’s a tough call between those two. And I’m actually shocked that I don’t hate Bond being a daddy as much as I probably should. Seems sacrilegious for us fans. But the death of 007, with missiles raining down on him and blowing him to kingdom come, just leaves knots in your stomach. In the worst way.

    The fact that Bond doesn't even try to escape. He just stands there, commits suicide. You end up feeling sorry for Bond, and that's not something I want to get from a Bond movie.
    Exactly! And the rush to destroying the base was forced just to kill Bond. Because there really was no reason to so urgently fire those missiles. Why the rush? What would have happened if they destroyed it 30 minutes later? An hour later? We’re never explained why the urgency. Just that we gotta do it now or there will be nothing left to save! Huh?

    The buyers were approaching the island to get Heracles, that would've caused mass murder and global devastation.

    Have you even watched the film?
    What buyers? I didn’t see anyone except the ship that was firing the missiles at the base.

    And if these “buyers” were approaching why not target them instead?
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited October 2021 Posts: 4,343
    matt_u wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    No, I dont see a concensus re that issue, its an ongoing discussion with many fans having no issue or happy to "take it on the chin". I think there is concensus or a clear area of critique re the issues I listed.

    Most people I spoke to, I would say the general consensus has been with the ones who didn't hate the movie - they liked the film until the very end (killing off Bond), and Bond's death also seems to be the biggest gripe of all with fans who are not happy with NTTD.

    Just my take on it, for what its worth.
    This!!!

    And if anyone watched Calvin Dyson’s review of the film that is the one thing that he HATED the most. In his opinion it’s the single worst idea in the entire franchise. I think that says something. For me until now it was “Brother-gate” from SP as the single worst thing in the entire series (I haaaaaated this with a passion and still do) but now it may be Bond’s death. It’s a tough call between those two. And I’m actually shocked that I don’t hate Bond being a daddy as much as I probably should. Seems sacrilegious for us fans. But the death of 007, with missiles raining down on him and blowing him to kingdom come, just leaves knots in your stomach. In the worst way.

    The fact that Bond doesn't even try to escape. He just stands there, commits suicide. You end up feeling sorry for Bond, and that's not something I want to get from a Bond movie.
    Exactly! And the rush to destroying the base was forced just to kill Bond. Because there really was no reason to so urgently fire those missiles. Why the rush? What would have happened if they destroyed it 30 minutes later? An hour later? We’re never explained why the urgency. Just that we gotta do it now or there will be nothing left to save! Huh?

    The buyers were approaching the island to get Heracles, that would've caused mass murder and global devastation.

    Have you even watched the film?
    What buyers? I didn’t see anyone except the ship that was firing the missiles at the base.

    And if these “buyers” were approaching why not target them instead?

    The first buyers that were approaching the island on two boats in order to buy Heracles.
    The MI6 didn't know they were buyers. Once they find out later on those individuals were there for Heracles (thanks to Swann) M is adamant to wait in order to find a way to solve the things diplomatically with the Russians and the Japanese, "we'll see what we can do".
    Moments later, after saying goodbye to Swann, Bond convinces a reluctant M to launch the missiles once he opened the blast doors in order to destroy the island, since that was the only way to prevent Heracles, such a potentially end of the world type of weapon, to leak destroying it once and for all. Let's not forget Bond had 9 minutes to leave the island - so that was a reasonable plan - after the missiles were launched and that destroying ships in Russian/Japanese waters would've generated an uncontrolled worldwide interest (there were Russians MiGs already flying over Q's plane). Burning the island to the ground was the best decision in order to obliterate Heracles forever without giving a chance to other nations to put their fingers on it and even ever know about it.

    Bond knew that and decided to go all in, because you know, he's James Bond.

    You asked about waiting one hour to bomb the island after killing the buyers. How about the risk of Heracles leaking? How about someone else closing the blast doors once Bond would've left. How about Safin escaping with some doses? How about Russian, Japanese and even Americans going there right after the Brits nuked a couple of random boats in Russian waters with no apparent reason?

    You seem to fail to understand the logic because the focus of the mission was to destroy Heracles, not to find a way to do it once Bond was 100% safe...
  • It’s also said that the first buyers would arrive in 20 minutes, I think. That’s before Bond even sends Madeleine and Mathilde off with Nomi. So accounting for the time it took to send them off in the boat, fight to the control room, and then nine minutes for missiles, Bond made the only call he could at the time.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    Yes, and right before Bond makes the "there would be nothing left to save" speech, Q tells him the buyers were 15 minutes away.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 3,291
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    No, I dont see a concensus re that issue, its an ongoing discussion with many fans having no issue or happy to "take it on the chin". I think there is concensus or a clear area of critique re the issues I listed.

    Most people I spoke to, I would say the general consensus has been with the ones who didn't hate the movie - they liked the film until the very end (killing off Bond), and Bond's death also seems to be the biggest gripe of all with fans who are not happy with NTTD.

    Just my take on it, for what its worth.
    This!!!

    And if anyone watched Calvin Dyson’s review of the film that is the one thing that he HATED the most. In his opinion it’s the single worst idea in the entire franchise. I think that says something. For me until now it was “Brother-gate” from SP as the single worst thing in the entire series (I haaaaaated this with a passion and still do) but now it may be Bond’s death. It’s a tough call between those two. And I’m actually shocked that I don’t hate Bond being a daddy as much as I probably should. Seems sacrilegious for us fans. But the death of 007, with missiles raining down on him and blowing him to kingdom come, just leaves knots in your stomach. In the worst way.

    The fact that Bond doesn't even try to escape. He just stands there, commits suicide. You end up feeling sorry for Bond, and that's not something I want to get from a Bond movie.
    Exactly! And the rush to destroying the base was forced just to kill Bond. Because there really was no reason to so urgently fire those missiles. Why the rush? What would have happened if they destroyed it 30 minutes later? An hour later? We’re never explained why the urgency. Just that we gotta do it now or there will be nothing left to save! Huh?

    The buyers were approaching the island to get Heracles, that would've caused mass murder and global devastation.

    Have you even watched the film?
    What buyers? I didn’t see anyone except the ship that was firing the missiles at the base.

    And if these “buyers” were approaching why not target them instead?

    The first buyers that were approaching the island on two boats in order to buy Heracles.
    The MI6 didn't know they were buyers. Once they find out later on those individuals were there for Heracles (thanks to Swann) M is adamant to wait in order to find a way to solve the things diplomatically with the Russians and the Japanese, "we'll see what we can do".
    Moments later, after saying goodbye to Swann, Bond convinces a reluctant M to launch the missiles once he opened the blast doors in order to destroy the island, since that was the only way to prevent Heracles, such a potentially end of the world type of weapon, to leak destroying it once and for all. Let's not forget Bond had 9 minutes to leave the island - so that was a reasonable plan - after the missiles were launched and that destroying ships in Russian/Japanese waters would've generated an uncontrolled worldwide interest (there were Russians MiGs already flying over Q's plane). Burning the island to the ground was the best decision in order to obliterate Heracles forever without giving a chance to other nations to put their fingers on it and even ever know about it.

    Bond knew that and decided to go all in, because you know, he's James Bond.

    All those moments there highlight how naff the script was at this stage in the film. It basically fell off a cliff.

    We've all argued the merits of whether something works stronger in the books, or stronger what was adapted to screen. GF for example, works better on what they adapted to film than Fleming's novel, as does the brutal train fight scene in FRWL which wasn't in the novel either.

    But NTTD, which starts clearly down a path of adapting the end of YOLT, detours at the last minute and gives us something far sillier instead. No real need for the garden (just a token gesture), Safin instead of Blofeld, Madeline, child and teddy running about the place, and Bond standing still while missiles rain down on him so he can kill himself.

    This is definitely one time the original material was far stronger than what was adapted. It also wouldn't have polarised the fanbase either.
  • Posts: 526
    Our local cinema has 6 screens. NTTD only lasted 10 days. The owner said he had seldom heard such negative feedback about a movie. Said many people would say: “I want to watch Nttd, but I don’t want to see James Bond die.” Said ticket sales were very anemic, and he needed Bond to do well, but it definitely did not. Average screening for the 10 day run, with 4 showings per day: 15 people.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited October 2021 Posts: 4,343
    Our local cinema has 6 screens. NTTD only lasted 10 days. The owner said he had seldom heard such negative feedback about a movie. Said many people would say: “I want to watch Nttd, but I don’t want to see James Bond die.”Said ticket sales were very anemic, and he needed Bond to do well, but it definitely did not. Average screening for the 10 day run, with 4 showings per day: 15 people.

    Europe disagrees.

    EDIT: NTTD had an A- Cinemascore and most importantly achieved the 2nd best drop on its second weekend among the top 5 highest grossing films of 2021, bested only by the US-only phenomenon that was Shang-Chi. That means the word of mouth is solid. So your story doesn't apply in the greater scheme.
  • matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    No, I dont see a concensus re that issue, its an ongoing discussion with many fans having no issue or happy to "take it on the chin". I think there is concensus or a clear area of critique re the issues I listed.

    Most people I spoke to, I would say the general consensus has been with the ones who didn't hate the movie - they liked the film until the very end (killing off Bond), and Bond's death also seems to be the biggest gripe of all with fans who are not happy with NTTD.

    Just my take on it, for what its worth.
    This!!!

    And if anyone watched Calvin Dyson’s review of the film that is the one thing that he HATED the most. In his opinion it’s the single worst idea in the entire franchise. I think that says something. For me until now it was “Brother-gate” from SP as the single worst thing in the entire series (I haaaaaated this with a passion and still do) but now it may be Bond’s death. It’s a tough call between those two. And I’m actually shocked that I don’t hate Bond being a daddy as much as I probably should. Seems sacrilegious for us fans. But the death of 007, with missiles raining down on him and blowing him to kingdom come, just leaves knots in your stomach. In the worst way.

    The fact that Bond doesn't even try to escape. He just stands there, commits suicide. You end up feeling sorry for Bond, and that's not something I want to get from a Bond movie.
    Exactly! And the rush to destroying the base was forced just to kill Bond. Because there really was no reason to so urgently fire those missiles. Why the rush? What would have happened if they destroyed it 30 minutes later? An hour later? We’re never explained why the urgency. Just that we gotta do it now or there will be nothing left to save! Huh?

    The buyers were approaching the island to get Heracles, that would've caused mass murder and global devastation.

    Have you even watched the film?
    What buyers? I didn’t see anyone except the ship that was firing the missiles at the base.

    And if these “buyers” were approaching why not target them instead?

    The first buyers that were approaching the island on two boats in order to buy Heracles.
    The MI6 didn't know they were buyers. Once they find out later on those individuals were there for Heracles (thanks to Swann) M is adamant to wait in order to find a way to solve the things diplomatically with the Russians and the Japanese, "we'll see what we can do".
    Moments later, after saying goodbye to Swann, Bond convinces a reluctant M to launch the missiles once he opened the blast doors in order to destroy the island, since that was the only way to prevent Heracles, such a potentially end of the world type of weapon, to leak destroying it once and for all. Let's not forget Bond had 9 minutes to leave the island - so that was a reasonable plan - after the missiles were launched and that destroying ships in Russian/Japanese waters would've generated an uncontrolled worldwide interest (there were Russians MiGs already flying over Q's plane). Burning the island to the ground was the best decision in order to obliterate Heracles forever without giving a chance to other nations to put their fingers on it and even ever know about it.

    Bond knew that and decided to go all in, because you know, he's James Bond.

    You asked about waiting one hour to bomb the island after killing the buyers. How about the risk of Heracles leaking? How about someone else closing the blast doors once Bond would've left. How about Safin escaping with some doses? How about Russian, Japanese and even Americans going there right after the Brits nuked a couple of random boats in Russian waters with no apparent reason?

    You seem to fail to understand the logic because the focus of the mission was to destroy Heracles, not to find a way to do it once Bond was 100% safe...
    Heracles leaking? What does that even mean? Leaking where?

    Are you talking about that “pond” that Safin’s minions were sweeping with their brooms? Lol! Which is hilarious just thinking about it. Where was that pond going to leak? And why didn’t it leak before but all of a sudden would leak now? That whole concept is so ridiculous that perhaps it’s silly to even discuss or try to justify it.

    I guess in order to discuss something rationally there should be some basis for reality there. Which of course there’s none of in this movie. So what we’re trying to rationalize is the leakage of some fairy tale pond with nanobots in it. This is nonsensical sci-fi territory.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited October 2021 Posts: 4,343
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    No, I dont see a concensus re that issue, its an ongoing discussion with many fans having no issue or happy to "take it on the chin". I think there is concensus or a clear area of critique re the issues I listed.

    Most people I spoke to, I would say the general consensus has been with the ones who didn't hate the movie - they liked the film until the very end (killing off Bond), and Bond's death also seems to be the biggest gripe of all with fans who are not happy with NTTD.

    Just my take on it, for what its worth.
    This!!!

    And if anyone watched Calvin Dyson’s review of the film that is the one thing that he HATED the most. In his opinion it’s the single worst idea in the entire franchise. I think that says something. For me until now it was “Brother-gate” from SP as the single worst thing in the entire series (I haaaaaated this with a passion and still do) but now it may be Bond’s death. It’s a tough call between those two. And I’m actually shocked that I don’t hate Bond being a daddy as much as I probably should. Seems sacrilegious for us fans. But the death of 007, with missiles raining down on him and blowing him to kingdom come, just leaves knots in your stomach. In the worst way.

    The fact that Bond doesn't even try to escape. He just stands there, commits suicide. You end up feeling sorry for Bond, and that's not something I want to get from a Bond movie.
    Exactly! And the rush to destroying the base was forced just to kill Bond. Because there really was no reason to so urgently fire those missiles. Why the rush? What would have happened if they destroyed it 30 minutes later? An hour later? We’re never explained why the urgency. Just that we gotta do it now or there will be nothing left to save! Huh?

    The buyers were approaching the island to get Heracles, that would've caused mass murder and global devastation.

    Have you even watched the film?
    What buyers? I didn’t see anyone except the ship that was firing the missiles at the base.

    And if these “buyers” were approaching why not target them instead?

    The first buyers that were approaching the island on two boats in order to buy Heracles.
    The MI6 didn't know they were buyers. Once they find out later on those individuals were there for Heracles (thanks to Swann) M is adamant to wait in order to find a way to solve the things diplomatically with the Russians and the Japanese, "we'll see what we can do".
    Moments later, after saying goodbye to Swann, Bond convinces a reluctant M to launch the missiles once he opened the blast doors in order to destroy the island, since that was the only way to prevent Heracles, such a potentially end of the world type of weapon, to leak destroying it once and for all. Let's not forget Bond had 9 minutes to leave the island - so that was a reasonable plan - after the missiles were launched and that destroying ships in Russian/Japanese waters would've generated an uncontrolled worldwide interest (there were Russians MiGs already flying over Q's plane). Burning the island to the ground was the best decision in order to obliterate Heracles forever without giving a chance to other nations to put their fingers on it and even ever know about it.

    Bond knew that and decided to go all in, because you know, he's James Bond.

    You asked about waiting one hour to bomb the island after killing the buyers. How about the risk of Heracles leaking? How about someone else closing the blast doors once Bond would've left. How about Safin escaping with some doses? How about Russian, Japanese and even Americans going there right after the Brits nuked a couple of random boats in Russian waters with no apparent reason?

    You seem to fail to understand the logic because the focus of the mission was to destroy Heracles, not to find a way to do it once Bond was 100% safe...
    Heracles leaking? What does that even mean? Leaking where?

    Are you talking about that “pond” that Safin’s minions were sweeping with their brooms? Lol! Which is hilarious just thinking about it. Where was that pond going to leak? And why didn’t it leak before but all of a sudden would leak now? That whole concept is so ridiculous that perhaps it’s silly to even discuss or try to justify it.

    I guess in order to discuss something rationally there should be some basis for reality there. Which of course there’s none of in this movie. So what we’re trying to rationalize is the leakage of some fairy tale pond with nanobots in it. This is nonsensical sci-fi territory.

    There are only two possible options.

    You didn't even saw the film or you completely failed to followed it.

    Do you even understood what Heracles is and how it works?

    Perhaps you didn't noticed that Waldo travels with doses of Heracles in his luggage and that in his lab there were hundreds of thousands of doses ready to be potentially shipped. Jesus C...

    Ah, the buyers were on two boats. That shot was even in some trailer.
  • Posts: 526
    matt_u wrote: »
    Our local cinema has 6 screens. NTTD only lasted 10 days. The owner said he had seldom heard such negative feedback about a movie. Said many people would say: “I want to watch Nttd, but I don’t want to see James Bond die.”Said ticket sales were very anemic, and he needed Bond to do well, but it definitely did not. Average screening for the 10 day run, with 4 showings per day: 15 people.

    Europe disagrees.

    EDIT: NTTD had an A- Cinemascore and most importantly achieved the 2nd best drop on its second weekend among the top 5 highest grossing films of 2021, bested only by the US-only phenomenon that was Shang-Chi. That means the word of mouth is solid. So your story doesn't apply in the greater scheme.

    You mean that the US (North American) box office doesn’t matter very matter in the big scheme of things? The US box office is the hub of the world box office. Look at box office mojo. There is the domestic box office (US), and then there’s worldwide. Why does it just focus on the US (domestic) box office so much? I think the answer to that is pretty apparent. My local cinema owner said one couple showed up for yesterday’s 4 pm show. He said, “I knew we had to get rid of this thing. Going to bring Venom 2 back to make some money.” Good job Eon!
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    matt_u wrote: »
    Our local cinema has 6 screens. NTTD only lasted 10 days. The owner said he had seldom heard such negative feedback about a movie. Said many people would say: “I want to watch Nttd, but I don’t want to see James Bond die.”Said ticket sales were very anemic, and he needed Bond to do well, but it definitely did not. Average screening for the 10 day run, with 4 showings per day: 15 people.

    Europe disagrees.

    EDIT: NTTD had an A- Cinemascore and most importantly achieved the 2nd best drop on its second weekend among the top 5 highest grossing films of 2021, bested only by the US-only phenomenon that was Shang-Chi. That means the word of mouth is solid. So your story doesn't apply in the greater scheme.

    You mean that the US (North American) box office doesn’t matter very matter in the big scheme of things? The US box office is the hub of the world box office. Look at box office mojo. There is the domestic box office (US), and then there’s worldwide. Why does it just focus on the US (domestic) box office so much? I think the answer to that is pretty apparent. My local cinema owner said one couple showed up for yesterday’s 4 pm show. He said, “I knew we had to get rid of this thing. Going to bring Venom 2 back to make some money.” Good job Eon!

    No, your local cinema story doesn’t matter. After 10 days NTTD in the States is still performing well and it’s not suffering from this sentiment. If you guys prefer rubbish like Venom 2, Shang Chi and other nonsense it’s not EoN’s fault anyway.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,090
    Personal anecdotes are more relevant than statistics @matt_u!!
  • Posts: 526
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Our local cinema has 6 screens. NTTD only lasted 10 days. The owner said he had seldom heard such negative feedback about a movie. Said many people would say: “I want to watch Nttd, but I don’t want to see James Bond die.”Said ticket sales were very anemic, and he needed Bond to do well, but it definitely did not. Average screening for the 10 day run, with 4 showings per day: 15 people.

    Europe disagrees.

    EDIT: NTTD had an A- Cinemascore and most importantly achieved the 2nd best drop on its second weekend among the top 5 highest grossing films of 2021, bested only by the US-only phenomenon that was Shang-Chi. That means the word of mouth is solid. So your story doesn't apply in the greater scheme.

    You mean that the US (North American) box office doesn’t matter very matter in the big scheme of things? The US box office is the hub of the world box office. Look at box office mojo. There is the domestic box office (US), and then there’s worldwide. Why does it just focus on the US (domestic) box office so much? I think the answer to that is pretty apparent. My local cinema owner said one couple showed up for yesterday’s 4 pm show. He said, “I knew we had to get rid of this thing. Going to bring Venom 2 back to make some money.” Good job Eon!

    No, your local cinema story doesn’t matter. After 10 days NTTD in the States is still performing well and it’s not suffering from this sentiment. If you guys prefer rubbish like Venom 2, Shang Chi and other nonsense it’s not EoN’s fault anyway.
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Our local cinema has 6 screens. NTTD only lasted 10 days. The owner said he had seldom heard such negative feedback about a movie. Said many people would say: “I want to watch Nttd, but I don’t want to see James Bond die.”Said ticket sales were very anemic, and he needed Bond to do well, but it definitely did not. Average screening for the 10 day run, with 4 showings per day: 15 people.

    Europe disagrees.

    EDIT: NTTD had an A- Cinemascore and most importantly achieved the 2nd best drop on its second weekend among the top 5 highest grossing films of 2021, bested only by the US-only phenomenon that was Shang-Chi. That means the word of mouth is solid. So your story doesn't apply in the greater scheme.

    You mean that the US (North American) box office doesn’t matter very matter in the big scheme of things? The US box office is the hub of the world box office. Look at box office mojo. There is the domestic box office (US), and then there’s worldwide. Why does it just focus on the US (domestic) box office so much? I think the answer to that is pretty apparent. My local cinema owner said one couple showed up for yesterday’s 4 pm show. He said, “I knew we had to get rid of this thing. Going to bring Venom 2 back to make some money.” Good job Eon!

    No, your local cinema story doesn’t matter. After 10 days NTTD in the States is still performing well and it’s not suffering from this sentiment. If you guys prefer rubbish like Venom 2, Shang Chi and other nonsense it’s not EoN’s fault anyway.

    Here’s what does matter, personal stories aside, etc. Initial projection of NTTD US box office: $90 to $100 mill opening weekend—actual $56 million. Worldwide box office: around $450 million. Has to make around $900 million to break even or make money. Those numbers matter a great deal. In no way is this movie a success monetarily (which is all that matters).
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited October 2021 Posts: 8,090
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Our local cinema has 6 screens. NTTD only lasted 10 days. The owner said he had seldom heard such negative feedback about a movie. Said many people would say: “I want to watch Nttd, but I don’t want to see James Bond die.”Said ticket sales were very anemic, and he needed Bond to do well, but it definitely did not. Average screening for the 10 day run, with 4 showings per day: 15 people.

    Europe disagrees.

    EDIT: NTTD had an A- Cinemascore and most importantly achieved the 2nd best drop on its second weekend among the top 5 highest grossing films of 2021, bested only by the US-only phenomenon that was Shang-Chi. That means the word of mouth is solid. So your story doesn't apply in the greater scheme.

    You mean that the US (North American) box office doesn’t matter very matter in the big scheme of things? The US box office is the hub of the world box office. Look at box office mojo. There is the domestic box office (US), and then there’s worldwide. Why does it just focus on the US (domestic) box office so much? I think the answer to that is pretty apparent. My local cinema owner said one couple showed up for yesterday’s 4 pm show. He said, “I knew we had to get rid of this thing. Going to bring Venom 2 back to make some money.” Good job Eon!

    No, your local cinema story doesn’t matter. After 10 days NTTD in the States is still performing well and it’s not suffering from this sentiment. If you guys prefer rubbish like Venom 2, Shang Chi and other nonsense it’s not EoN’s fault anyway.
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Our local cinema has 6 screens. NTTD only lasted 10 days. The owner said he had seldom heard such negative feedback about a movie. Said many people would say: “I want to watch Nttd, but I don’t want to see James Bond die.”Said ticket sales were very anemic, and he needed Bond to do well, but it definitely did not. Average screening for the 10 day run, with 4 showings per day: 15 people.

    Europe disagrees.

    EDIT: NTTD had an A- Cinemascore and most importantly achieved the 2nd best drop on its second weekend among the top 5 highest grossing films of 2021, bested only by the US-only phenomenon that was Shang-Chi. That means the word of mouth is solid. So your story doesn't apply in the greater scheme.

    You mean that the US (North American) box office doesn’t matter very matter in the big scheme of things? The US box office is the hub of the world box office. Look at box office mojo. There is the domestic box office (US), and then there’s worldwide. Why does it just focus on the US (domestic) box office so much? I think the answer to that is pretty apparent. My local cinema owner said one couple showed up for yesterday’s 4 pm show. He said, “I knew we had to get rid of this thing. Going to bring Venom 2 back to make some money.” Good job Eon!

    No, your local cinema story doesn’t matter. After 10 days NTTD in the States is still performing well and it’s not suffering from this sentiment. If you guys prefer rubbish like Venom 2, Shang Chi and other nonsense it’s not EoN’s fault anyway.

    Here’s what does matter, personal stories aside, etc. Initial projection of NTTD US box office: $90 to $100 mill opening weekend—actual $56 million. Worldwide box office: around $450 million. Has to make around $900 million to break even or make money. Those numbers matter a great deal. In no way is this movie a success monetarily (which is all that matters).

    On the other hand, it’s about to be the second highest grossing Hollywood film of the year once it surpasses KONG vs GODZILLA this weekend. And has already surpassed three Marvel films (BLACK WIDOW, SHANG-CHI, and VENOM).

    The only other film that has a chance to overtake it is SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited October 2021 Posts: 4,343
    .
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited October 2021 Posts: 4,343
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Our local cinema has 6 screens. NTTD only lasted 10 days. The owner said he had seldom heard such negative feedback about a movie. Said many people would say: “I want to watch Nttd, but I don’t want to see James Bond die.”Said ticket sales were very anemic, and he needed Bond to do well, but it definitely did not. Average screening for the 10 day run, with 4 showings per day: 15 people.

    Europe disagrees.

    EDIT: NTTD had an A- Cinemascore and most importantly achieved the 2nd best drop on its second weekend among the top 5 highest grossing films of 2021, bested only by the US-only phenomenon that was Shang-Chi. That means the word of mouth is solid. So your story doesn't apply in the greater scheme.

    You mean that the US (North American) box office doesn’t matter very matter in the big scheme of things? The US box office is the hub of the world box office. Look at box office mojo. There is the domestic box office (US), and then there’s worldwide. Why does it just focus on the US (domestic) box office so much? I think the answer to that is pretty apparent. My local cinema owner said one couple showed up for yesterday’s 4 pm show. He said, “I knew we had to get rid of this thing. Going to bring Venom 2 back to make some money.” Good job Eon!

    No, your local cinema story doesn’t matter. After 10 days NTTD in the States is still performing well and it’s not suffering from this sentiment. If you guys prefer rubbish like Venom 2, Shang Chi and other nonsense it’s not EoN’s fault anyway.
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Our local cinema has 6 screens. NTTD only lasted 10 days. The owner said he had seldom heard such negative feedback about a movie. Said many people would say: “I want to watch Nttd, but I don’t want to see James Bond die.”Said ticket sales were very anemic, and he needed Bond to do well, but it definitely did not. Average screening for the 10 day run, with 4 showings per day: 15 people.

    Europe disagrees.

    EDIT: NTTD had an A- Cinemascore and most importantly achieved the 2nd best drop on its second weekend among the top 5 highest grossing films of 2021, bested only by the US-only phenomenon that was Shang-Chi. That means the word of mouth is solid. So your story doesn't apply in the greater scheme.

    You mean that the US (North American) box office doesn’t matter very matter in the big scheme of things? The US box office is the hub of the world box office. Look at box office mojo. There is the domestic box office (US), and then there’s worldwide. Why does it just focus on the US (domestic) box office so much? I think the answer to that is pretty apparent. My local cinema owner said one couple showed up for yesterday’s 4 pm show. He said, “I knew we had to get rid of this thing. Going to bring Venom 2 back to make some money.” Good job Eon!

    No, your local cinema story doesn’t matter. After 10 days NTTD in the States is still performing well and it’s not suffering from this sentiment. If you guys prefer rubbish like Venom 2, Shang Chi and other nonsense it’s not EoN’s fault anyway.

    Here’s what does matter, personal stories aside, etc. Initial projection of NTTD US box office: $90 to $100 mill opening weekend—actual $56 million. Worldwide box office: around $450 million. Has to make around $900 million to break even or make money. Those numbers matter a great deal. In no way is this movie a success monetarily (which is all that matters).

    So? This is a movie designed for a market that doesn’t exist anymore and the cause was the pandemic. Plus, a film is profitable far beyond its theatrical run.

    Just for the record NTTD will be #3 at the worldwide boxoffice at the end of the year. SP was #6 back in 2015. And since Bond is not exactly for kids and families, without mentioning the fact that was the first big film delayed because of COVID, is the blockbuster that suffered the most for the pandemic.
    To sum up, treating its international run like a disappointment is just ridiculous.

    N.B. Those $100 million prediction were never serious. Variety predicted something within the $60/75 million the day before that crazy one.
  • matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    No, I dont see a concensus re that issue, its an ongoing discussion with many fans having no issue or happy to "take it on the chin". I think there is concensus or a clear area of critique re the issues I listed.

    Most people I spoke to, I would say the general consensus has been with the ones who didn't hate the movie - they liked the film until the very end (killing off Bond), and Bond's death also seems to be the biggest gripe of all with fans who are not happy with NTTD.

    Just my take on it, for what its worth.
    This!!!

    And if anyone watched Calvin Dyson’s review of the film that is the one thing that he HATED the most. In his opinion it’s the single worst idea in the entire franchise. I think that says something. For me until now it was “Brother-gate” from SP as the single worst thing in the entire series (I haaaaaated this with a passion and still do) but now it may be Bond’s death. It’s a tough call between those two. And I’m actually shocked that I don’t hate Bond being a daddy as much as I probably should. Seems sacrilegious for us fans. But the death of 007, with missiles raining down on him and blowing him to kingdom come, just leaves knots in your stomach. In the worst way.

    The fact that Bond doesn't even try to escape. He just stands there, commits suicide. You end up feeling sorry for Bond, and that's not something I want to get from a Bond movie.
    Exactly! And the rush to destroying the base was forced just to kill Bond. Because there really was no reason to so urgently fire those missiles. Why the rush? What would have happened if they destroyed it 30 minutes later? An hour later? We’re never explained why the urgency. Just that we gotta do it now or there will be nothing left to save! Huh?

    The buyers were approaching the island to get Heracles, that would've caused mass murder and global devastation.

    Have you even watched the film?
    What buyers? I didn’t see anyone except the ship that was firing the missiles at the base.

    And if these “buyers” were approaching why not target them instead?

    The first buyers that were approaching the island on two boats in order to buy Heracles.
    The MI6 didn't know they were buyers. Once they find out later on those individuals were there for Heracles (thanks to Swann) M is adamant to wait in order to find a way to solve the things diplomatically with the Russians and the Japanese, "we'll see what we can do".
    Moments later, after saying goodbye to Swann, Bond convinces a reluctant M to launch the missiles once he opened the blast doors in order to destroy the island, since that was the only way to prevent Heracles, such a potentially end of the world type of weapon, to leak destroying it once and for all. Let's not forget Bond had 9 minutes to leave the island - so that was a reasonable plan - after the missiles were launched and that destroying ships in Russian/Japanese waters would've generated an uncontrolled worldwide interest (there were Russians MiGs already flying over Q's plane). Burning the island to the ground was the best decision in order to obliterate Heracles forever without giving a chance to other nations to put their fingers on it and even ever know about it.

    Bond knew that and decided to go all in, because you know, he's James Bond.

    You asked about waiting one hour to bomb the island after killing the buyers. How about the risk of Heracles leaking? How about someone else closing the blast doors once Bond would've left. How about Safin escaping with some doses? How about Russian, Japanese and even Americans going there right after the Brits nuked a couple of random boats in Russian waters with no apparent reason?

    You seem to fail to understand the logic because the focus of the mission was to destroy Heracles, not to find a way to do it once Bond was 100% safe...
    Heracles leaking? What does that even mean? Leaking where?

    Are you talking about that “pond” that Safin’s minions were sweeping with their brooms? Lol! Which is hilarious just thinking about it. Where was that pond going to leak? And why didn’t it leak before but all of a sudden would leak now? That whole concept is so ridiculous that perhaps it’s silly to even discuss or try to justify it.

    I guess in order to discuss something rationally there should be some basis for reality there. Which of course there’s none of in this movie. So what we’re trying to rationalize is the leakage of some fairy tale pond with nanobots in it. This is nonsensical sci-fi territory.

    There are only two possible options.

    You didn't even saw the film or you completely failed to followed it.

    Do you even understood what Heracles is and how it works?

    Perhaps you didn't noticed that Waldo travels with doses of Heracles in his luggage and that in his lab there were hundreds of thousands of doses ready to be potentially shipped. Jesus C...

    Ah, the buyers were on two boats. That shot was even in some trailer.
    You probably believe there’s an island between Russia and Japan where these people with brooms sweep this Hercules stuff with brooms on this magic pond. Lol!!

    And there isn’t really a scientist named Valdo Obruchev. Really.

    Bottom line is the writers came up with this nonsense that you’re so taken with in order to kill Bond. There’s no leakage and no buyers to blame. They wanted to kill Bond and they killed Bond. End of story.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    The funniest thing is that you weren’t even able to understand both how the villain’s weapon works nor that the villain wanted to sell it to buyers (mentioned THREE times) but then, between a rant and a complain, you urge people to “wake up”. So funny.

    This conversation is over anyway.

  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    Bond is fantastical. The science part of it always does and should stretch reality a bit. That's part of being a Bond story. I know fans like to pick apart and analyze the films, but I usually have no serious issues. We laughed at much in Moonraker, the invisible car in DAD, and jet pack with Sean - hey, that was real but still stretching things and at the time was considered absurd and wild. You want serious science, everything neat, that is usually not a Bond film. Fans here are still picking Skyfall apart. Are there usually plot holes in Bond movies? Why, yes. Is that really shocking at this point? Positively shocking ...? ;)
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,090
    There’s a part in the film where they wink at the audience acknowledging how silly it all is. It’s during M’s office when Q starts explaining nanobots. We cut to Tanner dryly saying “..right”.

    THUNDERBALL did this when the French agent sarcastically tells Bond after the jet pack escape “that was very practical”
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 3,291
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    No, I dont see a concensus re that issue, its an ongoing discussion with many fans having no issue or happy to "take it on the chin". I think there is concensus or a clear area of critique re the issues I listed.

    Most people I spoke to, I would say the general consensus has been with the ones who didn't hate the movie - they liked the film until the very end (killing off Bond), and Bond's death also seems to be the biggest gripe of all with fans who are not happy with NTTD.

    Just my take on it, for what its worth.
    This!!!

    And if anyone watched Calvin Dyson’s review of the film that is the one thing that he HATED the most. In his opinion it’s the single worst idea in the entire franchise. I think that says something. For me until now it was “Brother-gate” from SP as the single worst thing in the entire series (I haaaaaated this with a passion and still do) but now it may be Bond’s death. It’s a tough call between those two. And I’m actually shocked that I don’t hate Bond being a daddy as much as I probably should. Seems sacrilegious for us fans. But the death of 007, with missiles raining down on him and blowing him to kingdom come, just leaves knots in your stomach. In the worst way.

    The fact that Bond doesn't even try to escape. He just stands there, commits suicide. You end up feeling sorry for Bond, and that's not something I want to get from a Bond movie.
    Exactly! And the rush to destroying the base was forced just to kill Bond. Because there really was no reason to so urgently fire those missiles. Why the rush? What would have happened if they destroyed it 30 minutes later? An hour later? We’re never explained why the urgency. Just that we gotta do it now or there will be nothing left to save! Huh?

    The buyers were approaching the island to get Heracles, that would've caused mass murder and global devastation.

    Have you even watched the film?
    What buyers? I didn’t see anyone except the ship that was firing the missiles at the base.

    And if these “buyers” were approaching why not target them instead?

    The first buyers that were approaching the island on two boats in order to buy Heracles.
    The MI6 didn't know they were buyers. Once they find out later on those individuals were there for Heracles (thanks to Swann) M is adamant to wait in order to find a way to solve the things diplomatically with the Russians and the Japanese, "we'll see what we can do".
    Moments later, after saying goodbye to Swann, Bond convinces a reluctant M to launch the missiles once he opened the blast doors in order to destroy the island, since that was the only way to prevent Heracles, such a potentially end of the world type of weapon, to leak destroying it once and for all. Let's not forget Bond had 9 minutes to leave the island - so that was a reasonable plan - after the missiles were launched and that destroying ships in Russian/Japanese waters would've generated an uncontrolled worldwide interest (there were Russians MiGs already flying over Q's plane). Burning the island to the ground was the best decision in order to obliterate Heracles forever without giving a chance to other nations to put their fingers on it and even ever know about it.

    Bond knew that and decided to go all in, because you know, he's James Bond.

    You asked about waiting one hour to bomb the island after killing the buyers. How about the risk of Heracles leaking? How about someone else closing the blast doors once Bond would've left. How about Safin escaping with some doses? How about Russian, Japanese and even Americans going there right after the Brits nuked a couple of random boats in Russian waters with no apparent reason?

    You seem to fail to understand the logic because the focus of the mission was to destroy Heracles, not to find a way to do it once Bond was 100% safe...
    Heracles leaking? What does that even mean? Leaking where?

    Are you talking about that “pond” that Safin’s minions were sweeping with their brooms? Lol! Which is hilarious just thinking about it. Where was that pond going to leak? And why didn’t it leak before but all of a sudden would leak now? That whole concept is so ridiculous that perhaps it’s silly to even discuss or try to justify it.

    I guess in order to discuss something rationally there should be some basis for reality there. Which of course there’s none of in this movie. So what we’re trying to rationalize is the leakage of some fairy tale pond with nanobots in it. This is nonsensical sci-fi territory.

    There are only two possible options.

    You didn't even saw the film or you completely failed to followed it.

    Do you even understood what Heracles is and how it works?

    Perhaps you didn't noticed that Waldo travels with doses of Heracles in his luggage and that in his lab there were hundreds of thousands of doses ready to be potentially shipped. Jesus C...

    Ah, the buyers were on two boats. That shot was even in some trailer.
    You probably believe there’s an island between Russia and Japan where these people with brooms sweep this Hercules stuff with brooms on this magic pond. Lol!!

    And there isn’t really a scientist named Valdo Obruchev. Really.

    Bottom line is the writers came up with this nonsense that you’re so taken with in order to kill Bond. There’s no leakage and no buyers to blame. They wanted to kill Bond and they killed Bond. End of story.
    Just reading this back and forth on the thread, makes me yearn for a simple plot again with none of this far-fetched sci-fi crap or family backstories.

    Sanchez and his drugs with a basic battle between 2 people on a moving truck, GF wanting to destroy the gold at Fort Knox, Bond winning a game of cards to mess up the villain's plans, Bond being lured into a trap while on the Orient Express.

    That to me is Bond, not the farce that plagued much of NTTD, where the best parts of the film were the simple, basic things - the whole brilliant PTS, Bond taking a shower in Jamaica, Bond and Felix exchanging banter in a bar. These smaller moments is where the film triumphed, not nanobots, Hercules, roving eyes, and missiles raining down on Bond as he commits suicide because he has infected his other half and his daughter with nanobots.

    Utter crap!
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited October 2021 Posts: 12,459
    We all have our own take on "what is James Bond". That's fine; to be expected. But I'm still glad EON gambled on Craig and went the route they did, through all of this films. Plenty of the former Bonds' movies for me to appreciate too. Rather a good smorgasbord.

    Well, I found the end of NTTD truly noble and heroic; also fitting. I know this thread says "possible spoilers" but I would be more comfortable if you added a spoiler tag to your above post, @jetsetwilly.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 650
    I find Stromberg’s plan in TSWLM (my favorite Bond film) to be more straightforward, logical, and “realistic” than the mess in this film. The finale in TSWLM has an incredible Ken Adam set housing nuclear submarines and Bond’s mission is basically to stop 2 submarines from launching nukes on New York and Moscow. There’s a ticking clock to doomsday which really ratchets up the tension. It’s very grand scale but also very classic Bondish! No sappy and moapy villain with some magic pond of nanobots that might leak (?) somewhere unless the whole island is destroyed within the next 9 minutes. With Bond running to the top of the base so that he can face his destiny/death as some martyr for mankind. “No, we must kill Bond because if we try to kill the baddies approaching the island we might provoke an international incident”. Seriously? That’s the issue? It seems to me that every other Bond film had some serious threats of sparking international incidents (YOLT, TSWLM, MR, OP, TND, DAD, etc). and yet the solution was never to kill Bond. But here it’s the only solution?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,090
    It’s the story they chose to tell. If you don’t like it, fine. That’s on you.
  • RC7RC7
    edited October 2021 Posts: 10,512
    I find Stromberg’s plan in TSWLM (my favorite Bond film) to be more straightforward, logical, and “realistic” than the mess in this film. The finale in TSWLM has an incredible Ken Adam set housing nuclear submarines and Bond’s mission is basically to stop 2 submarines from launching nukes on New York and Moscow. There’s a ticking clock to doomsday which really ratchets up the tension. It’s very grand scale but also very classic Bondish! No sappy and moapy villain with some magic pond of nanobots that might leak (?) somewhere unless the whole island is destroyed within the next 9 minutes. With Bond running to the top of the base so that he can face his destiny/death as some martyr for mankind. “No, we must kill Bond because if we try to kill the baddies approaching the island we might provoke an international incident”. Seriously? That’s the issue? It seems to me that every other Bond film had some serious threats of sparking international incidents (YOLT, TSWLM, MR, OP, TND, DAD, etc). and yet the solution was never to kill Bond. But here it’s the only solution?

    They can’t risk a boat entering and/or leaving the island. Heracles isn’t yet on the approaching boats, it’s on the island. Hence - destroy the island. It’s very simple. Hate the nanobots all you want, that’s a separate issue, but the logic is clear.

    And to clarify, the solution here is not to kill Bond. They expect him to clear the island before impact.
Sign In or Register to comment.