Two whole years later- No Time To Die. A fitting end to a particular timeline, or a Bond faux pas?

1235»

Comments

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,255
    That’s fair @Torgeirtrap … a film doesn’t gel, it doesn’t gel.

    I’ve seen a few films where it was a hit amongst audiences or friends (or both), and I’m like: nope, didn’t do anything for me.

    Sometimes my perspective changes.

    Other times it doesn’t.

    No biggie.
  • NoTimeToLiveNoTimeToLive Jamaica
    Posts: 66
    I love NTTD and thought the ending was a fitting ending to Craig's Bond. It gave me mixed feelings when I first watched it at the theatres, because I didn't like the idea of killing Bond but I did like the execution as well as the "aftermath".
    Then I watched the movie a second time and I really loved it. I do believe No Time To Die is the best finale for Craig's Bond, though I can see why it doesn't sit well with many people.

    I don't understand the idea that Skyfall could work as a finale to Craig's era, though. Even back when the movie came out 10 years ago everywhere on the Internet I would read things like "it truly was a fitting ending to Craig's Bond" or hear my friends saying "it was the best way to end the James Bond movies" and even when Bond 24 was announced many people would ask "why are they making another one if Skyfall ended with that definitive ending".
    I don't understand it. Even if one chooses to ignore the loose ends from Quantum of Solace (nowadays Craig's movies are all interconnected but back then no one knew for certain whether Quantum would return, especially since Skyfall had dropped all plotlines from QoS and the Quantum movie itself got mixed receptions - thankfully it is now receiving the appreciation it deserves), the way Skyfall ends is the exact opposite of an ending. I mean, Moneypenny is introduced, a new M is promoted, even M asks Bond if he's "ready to get back to work" and hands him a new mission.
    Also, imagine how awkard Craig's era would have been had it ended with Skyfall: the era would essentially consist of two chapters: Bond begins (CR/QoS) and Bond ends (SF). Sooooo weird. Like a trilogy missing its middle installment.

    Spectre could have been a nice ending, I suppose, as the movie ties everything together, Blofeld is in prison and Bond leaves MI6 for good... but it felt rushed to me, ending Blofeld and Spectre just as they were introduced, Bond leaving for a woman he barely knows and with whom he's got little chemistry. So I'm glad we got No Time To Die.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,255
    @NoTimeToLive … other than loving NTTD from my first viewing, to last, I am of the same mind as you. This is a very fitting end, but I’m also aware that there would be fans that would despise it.

    But then again, is there one Bond film that every single fan unanimously loves? Probably not. So, in the end, and as the years go by, this will just be another Bond film in the entire collection… (some will like it, some will be meh on it, some will dislike it)…
  • Posts: 17,241
    peter wrote: »
    That’s fair @Torgeirtrap … a film doesn’t gel, it doesn’t gel.

    I’ve seen a few films where it was a hit amongst audiences or friends (or both), and I’m like: nope, didn’t do anything for me.

    Sometimes my perspective changes.

    Other times it doesn’t.

    No biggie.

    Indeed @peter. And NTTD is obviously far from the only film for me in that regard. One of the films that has gelled the least for me – more so than NTTD – is the highest grossing film of all time – Avatar… And for both these films I can appreciate the craftsmanship of filmmaking on screen, but it just falls flat even so.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,657
    peter wrote: »
    That’s fair @Torgeirtrap … a film doesn’t gel, it doesn’t gel.

    I’ve seen a few films where it was a hit amongst audiences or friends (or both), and I’m like: nope, didn’t do anything for me.

    Sometimes my perspective changes.

    Other times it doesn’t.

    No biggie.

    Indeed @peter. And NTTD is obviously far from the only film for me in that regard. One of the films that has gelled the least for me – more so than NTTD – is the highest grossing film of all time – Avatar… And for both these films I can appreciate the craftsmanship of filmmaking on screen, but it just falls flat even so.
    At least we agree on Avatar, @Torgeirtrap... for me, one of the most annoyingly bad movies I have watched. NTTD, not so at all.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited March 2023 Posts: 1,282
    peter wrote: »
    That’s fair @Torgeirtrap … a film doesn’t gel, it doesn’t gel.

    I’ve seen a few films where it was a hit amongst audiences or friends (or both), and I’m like: nope, didn’t do anything for me.

    Sometimes my perspective changes.

    Other times it doesn’t.

    No biggie.

    Indeed @peter. And NTTD is obviously far from the only film for me in that regard. One of the films that has gelled the least for me – more so than NTTD – is the highest grossing film of all time – Avatar… And for both these films I can appreciate the craftsmanship of filmmaking on screen, but it just falls flat even so.

    Much agreed @Torgeirtrap good of you to bring up Avatar alongside NTTD. The filmmaking of both is visually on point, but the films fall way too short. I even prefer the soundtracks of both films to the films themselves.
  • Posts: 17,241
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    That’s fair @Torgeirtrap … a film doesn’t gel, it doesn’t gel.

    I’ve seen a few films where it was a hit amongst audiences or friends (or both), and I’m like: nope, didn’t do anything for me.

    Sometimes my perspective changes.

    Other times it doesn’t.

    No biggie.

    Indeed @peter. And NTTD is obviously far from the only film for me in that regard. One of the films that has gelled the least for me – more so than NTTD – is the highest grossing film of all time – Avatar… And for both these films I can appreciate the craftsmanship of filmmaking on screen, but it just falls flat even so.
    At least we agree on Avatar, @Torgeirtrap... for me, one of the most annoyingly bad movies I have watched. NTTD, not so at all.

    Indeed, I just can't understand the love for Avatar – or the sequel for that matter!
    peter wrote: »
    That’s fair @Torgeirtrap … a film doesn’t gel, it doesn’t gel.

    I’ve seen a few films where it was a hit amongst audiences or friends (or both), and I’m like: nope, didn’t do anything for me.

    Sometimes my perspective changes.

    Other times it doesn’t.

    No biggie.

    Indeed @peter. And NTTD is obviously far from the only film for me in that regard. One of the films that has gelled the least for me – more so than NTTD – is the highest grossing film of all time – Avatar… And for both these films I can appreciate the craftsmanship of filmmaking on screen, but it just falls flat even so.

    Much agreed @Torgeirtrap good of you to bring up Avatar alongside NTTD. The filmmaking of both is visually on point, but the films fall way too short. I even prefer the soundtracks of both films to the films themselves.

    If I could take just one thing from each film @SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷, it would be the soundtracks. No doubt.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,657
    Indeed, I just can't understand the love for Avatar – or the sequel for that matter!
    I never developed an intention to watch the sequel since I found the original so devastatingly disappointing. Same, by the way, with all James Cameron films except maybe Aliens and the first two Terminators. Even Christopher Nolan made (some) better movies for my taste.. Though only a few.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 4,904
    Fascinating comments here from both sides. This film does seem to be either "I love it and think it's perfect." and "It is a flawed movie that doesn't work for me."

    The Craig films were meant to be a return to gritty, dangerous Bond. His final film has nanobots, a man with a bionic eyeball, a virus that transmits through a nanobot and causes instant death. It has our loner Bond embracing being a father. There are so many mis-steps with this film for me. It doesn't ring true to the character that he would fix breakfast for a child. That he would simply resign himself to death and wait for the missiles to rain down on him. It just falls flat for me and I am left with a "meh" when the ending rolls.

    CR was meant to be a reboot but by the end of Craig's run we have had multiple Aston Martins, gadgets back in the cars and in the films. We have had him recycle "We have all the time in the world" with none of the emotional weight of OHMSS. We have a recycled song ring out the film, and again without the punch of the first time it was used. Funny how a "wooden" actor in Lazenby had a better emotional ending then Craig.

    I would have preferred they ended Craig's reign with SF. If they were going to re-introduce SPECTRE why rush and pack everything in all one film. Why retrofit CR and QOS and SF into the jumbled mess of SP. Then dismiss it all and have a new villain. I honestly think Blofeld being the villain of NTTD would have given it some emotional punch and maybe redeemed SP in the process.

    From a craft point of view, NTTD is a beautifully shot film. I think the Cuba sets were so good they feel like they were on location. The Jamaica portion of the film is well done. They got the character of Nomi right, which was a fear of mine in this movie. However the cold ending and the points raised above mean it will never be a film I would watch or re-watch as much as some of the other films in the series.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 23,105
    How NTTD should have ended...
    USZdBDR.png
  • Posts: 1,478
    Dreams? Taking place in Bond's head?

    Will Bond 26 open with Jinx in a shower only to be joined by PB.
    How NTTD should have ended...
    USZdBDR.png

    Funny. Not quite sure about RM, but in sixty years of Q branch planning for Bond's every need, you'd think they come up with something better than "you need to be on that motorboat." Where's Little Nellie or that mini jet when you need it.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,000
    peter wrote: »
    When writing scripts, most screenwriters come up with an idea, and focus on how the film would end… Then they go back to the beginning and work on the various plot twists and plot points. So…

    Right. Nobody actually sits down and just writes things chronologically from beginning to end. It’s all about pooling ideas and patching them in a way that makes sense. That’s why there’s always so many different drafts.

    It’s not like Fleming started writing OHMSS and NOT knowing that it would end with Tracy dying.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited March 2023 Posts: 5,921
    thedove wrote: »
    Fascinating comments here from both sides. This film does seem to be either "I love it and think it's perfect." and "It is a flawed movie that doesn't work for me."

    The Craig films were meant to be a return to gritty, dangerous Bond. His final film has nanobots, a man with a bionic eyeball, a virus that transmits through a nanobot and causes instant death. It has our loner Bond embracing being a father. There are so many mis-steps with this film for me. It doesn't ring true to the character that he would fix breakfast for a child. That he would simply resign himself to death and wait for the missiles to rain down on him. It just falls flat for me and I am left with a "meh" when the ending rolls.

    CR was meant to be a reboot but by the end of Craig's run we have had multiple Aston Martins, gadgets back in the cars and in the films. We have had him recycle "We have all the time in the world" with none of the emotional weight of OHMSS. We have a recycled song ring out the film, and again without the punch of the first time it was used. Funny how a "wooden" actor in Lazenby had a better emotional ending then Craig.

    I would have preferred they ended Craig's reign with SF. If they were going to re-introduce SPECTRE why rush and pack everything in all one film. Why retrofit CR and QOS and SF into the jumbled mess of SP. Then dismiss it all and have a new villain. I honestly think Blofeld being the villain of NTTD would have given it some emotional punch and maybe redeemed SP in the process.

    From a craft point of view, NTTD is a beautifully shot film. I think the Cuba sets were so good they feel like they were on location. The Jamaica portion of the film is well done. They got the character of Nomi right, which was a fear of mine in this movie. However the cold ending and the points raised above mean it will never be a film I would watch or re-watch as much as some of the other films in the series.

    Agreed about a lot of these points. Oddly, a lot of the decisions--reintroducing Spectre so abruptly and "Brofeld"--seem to come have from the producers and not from the writers and directors.

    I still blame Mendes, though...he seeded a lot of missteps that started in SF that blossomed in SP. He's to blame for the "Scooby gang" "let's all work together" shift in focus. SF primarily works because of the actors, and Adele.

    I find the breakfast scene touching but a bit unrealistic. Perhaps they could have had Bond make her the scrambled egg recipe from 007 in New York!

    Nomi was a highlight for me--I appreciated her "on the job" especially in Jamaica and Cuba--but I thought her interactions with Madeleine at Belmarsh were very weird and catty. I also think her character is oddly shoehorned into Norway and to an extent on the island. Not sure if her 007 was needed all the way through the story, and we know Bond works better alone.

    I'm guessing Waltz wasn't available for a long shoot, which is why we got an extended cameo only. But I wish I could have seen Waltz do the unhinged Blofeld of YOLT. He was clearly up to it. That would have been something.
  • Posts: 6,665
    Quick opinion, for all its flaws (so, so many), the very worst part of NTTD was its title. The minute they chose that uninspired piece of **** as a title I felt something was off.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,483
    Univex wrote: »
    Quick opinion, for all its flaws (so, so many), the very worst part of NTTD was its title. The minute they chose that uninspired piece of **** as a title I felt something was off.

    It was almost A Reason To Die, so it could have been worse mate
  • timdalton007timdalton007 North Alabama
    Posts: 154
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Funny. Not quite sure about RM, but in sixty years of Q branch planning for Bond's every need, you'd think they come up with something better than "you need to be on that motorboat." Where's Little Nellie or that mini jet when you need it.

    As the line from Skyfall said: "We don't really go in for that anymore."

  • Posts: 1,478
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Funny. Not quite sure about RM, but in sixty years of Q branch planning for Bond's every need, you'd think they come up with something better than "you need to be on that motorboat." Where's Little Nellie or that mini jet when you need it.

    As the line from Skyfall said: "We don't really go in for that anymore."

    We may need a thread of the best lines from the series. That is among my favorites.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,053
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Quick opinion, for all its flaws (so, so many), the very worst part of NTTD was its title. The minute they chose that uninspired piece of **** as a title I felt something was off.

    It was almost A Reason To Die, so it could have been worse mate

    I'm getting sick of "Die" being in Bond titles. LALD worked. TND should have been called Tomorrow Never Lies and DAD should have been Beyond The Ice. Would have been more original. Surprisingly, I think NTTD worked having Die in the title.
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    Posts: 203
    ‘Live Gold And Die’ is about the most Bond of titles. Makes zero sense mind you.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,053
    JustJames wrote: »
    ‘Live Gold And Die’ is about the most Bond of titles. Makes zero sense mind you.

    Sounds like a Goldfinger type of title if EON ever brought him back.
  • Junglist_1985Junglist_1985 Los Angeles
    Posts: 1,006
    NTTD feels very awkward and uneven in its writing and tone. It almost comes across as a very expensive Bond imitation film. Despite some beautiful shots, I find the dream-like cinematography rather distracting and oversaturated. The dialogue is too chatty, and the villain/ending still isn’t “settling in” for me. Where NTTD has many excellent moments, at least Spectre has a decent 2/3.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,000
    I look forward to GOLD DIES AND KILLS.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,328
    How about getting Martin Campbell to direct his next Bond hit.
    GoldenDie

    Okay that was corny even for me. I'll see myself out.
  • Posts: 6,682
    Murdock wrote: »
    Okay that was corny even for me. I'll see myself out.

    Your post: A fitting end to this particular thread, or a Bond faux pas?
  • StrawberryJamStrawberryJam London England
    edited March 2023 Posts: 3
    Gold Never Dies, Only Lives to Kill with Love

    or something
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,328
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Okay that was corny even for me. I'll see myself out.

    Your post: A fitting end to this particular thread, or a Bond faux pas?

    =))
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 4,904
    No Time to Die reminded me of the exchange in the first Predator movie:

    Guy #1 "Hey dude you are bleeding."

    Guy #2 (Jesse Ventura) spits tobacco "I ain't got time to bleed!"

    Slightly off topic, but I wouldn't mind if they used a few Gardner titles, or even one of the Horowitz ones.
  • MansfieldMansfield Where the hell have you been?
    edited March 2023 Posts: 1,263
    I had the privilege of watching No Time to Die for the first time today. Overflowing emotions is the most succinct way I could describe the experience. Craig redefined Bond, and this was the culmination of everything previously established.

    There were moments of profound reflection that made the payoff immensely impactful and satisfying. Beginning in the PTS, Bond and Swann strive together to overcome the demons of their past. This emphasizes the level of commitment they share to each other and their union. Bond writing, “forgive me,” on the slip of paper he leaves at Vesper’s grave reflects the guilt he feels over her death and the unresolved feelings he has for her, but a willingness to move on and accept a life of love and happiness.

    Putting her on the train and the stiff upper lip delivery of his declaration they would never see each other again, in addition to the drawn out pause and nonverbal communication about losing control upon seeing her again set him apart as a masterclass in acting portrayal as Bond. When Bond seeks her out to reconcile his lack of trust and undying love for her, the delivery of never regretting a moment that brought him to her up until putting her on that train was very powerful. Enter the girl. This restored and upped the ante of the stakes for what is being fought for. Dad Bond was some of the most tender moments that I never expected or imagined I would see. It really shows how his love of family has taken the place for the love of country.

    And then we get to Safin, who is juxtaposed as a mirror to Bond, different to prior threads such as Trevelyan or Silva. He represents an ideological gap more significant than villains in the past. Their verbal sparring in front of his daughter was the final play. He posits that his methods have made Bond irrelevant. He will be remembered for his deeds and Bond will be lost to time and obscurity. Or will he? His daughter is the legacy of Bond. Safin fails to recognize this, making his logic faulty and doomed for failure. In the final confrontation when Bond is exposed to nanobots programmed to kill Swann and Mathilde, he shows the greatest loyalty and duty to family. It’s the same agent we’ve known all along, adapted to the change of time and life that is common to us all.

    Really beautiful story, and much like Skyfall, rises beyond the scope of a Bond film. Some of the small moments were the most touching, like the sense of pride he restrains when silently mouthing, “my family,” to the daughter’s stuffed animal he carries with him to his death.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 12,916
    Mansfield wrote: »
    I had the privilege of watching No Time to Die for the first time today. Overflowing emotions is the most succinct way I could describe the experience. Craig redefined Bond, and this was the culmination of everything previously established.

    There were moments of profound reflection that made the payoff immensely impactful and satisfying. Beginning in the PTS, Bond and Swann strive together to overcome the demons of their past. This emphasizes the level of commitment they share to each other and their union. Bond writing, “forgive me,” on the slip of paper he leaves at Vesper’s grave reflects the guilt he feels over her death and the unresolved feelings he has for her, but a willingness to move on and accept a life of love and happiness.

    Putting her on the train and the stiff upper lip delivery of his declaration they would never see each other again, in addition to the drawn out pause and nonverbal communication about losing control upon seeing her again set him apart as a masterclass in acting portrayal as Bond. When Bond seeks her out to reconcile his lack of trust and undying love for her, the delivery of never regretting a moment that brought him to her up until putting her on that train was very powerful. Enter the girl. This restored and upped the ante of the stakes for what is being fought for. Dad Bond was some of the most tender moments that I never expected or imagined I would see. It really shows how his love of family has taken the place for the love of country.

    And then we get to Safin, who is juxtaposed as a mirror to Bond, different to prior threads such as Trevelyan or Silva. He represents an ideological gap more significant than villains in the past. Their verbal sparring in front of his daughter was the final play. He posits that his methods have made Bond irrelevant. He will be remembered for his deeds and Bond will be lost to time and obscurity. Or will he? His daughter is the legacy of Bond. Safin fails to recognize this, making his logic faulty and doomed for failure. In the final confrontation when Bond is exposed to nanobots programmed to kill Swann and Mathilde, he shows the greatest loyalty and duty to family. It’s the same agent we’ve known all along, adapted to the change of time and life that is common to us all.

    Really beautiful story, and much like Skyfall, rises beyond the scope of a Bond film. Some of the small moments were the most touching, like the sense of pride he restrains when silently mouthing, “my family,” to the daughter’s stuffed animal he carries with him to his death.

    Very much appreciate your thoughts here @Mansfield.

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,255
    I second that @Mansfield … Crystallized my own feelings. Thanks for sharing.
Sign In or Register to comment.