NO TIME TO DIE (2021) - First Reactions

16791112263

Comments

  • Posts: 250
    bondsum wrote: »
    You do realize a new iteration of Bond will happen and that the character isn’t dead forever right?
    Yes, but it does make the Craig era seem rather redundant and something of an anomaly. It'll be interesting to see how they market the next James Bond actor and his first movie. Will it be a case of asking you to forget Craig's entire tenure and demise and go with a new iteration that resembles the classic Fleming character, or will they still acknowledge everything that took place in Craig's universe, with his Bond somehow miraculously surviving to come back with a new face—something that was first mooted for Lazenby's Bond movie, but ultimately dropped by the producers?

    Personally I think they'll go for a hard reboot, resetting the dials to zero. In all likelihood, they'll probably allow Ralph Fiennes to reprise his role again as M, the same way they allowed Judi Dench to crossover into CR, but that will most likely be it.

    How is it redundant? It's 5 films that tell a cycle of stories and have arguably repositioned Bond culturally. As mentioned above, all great mythic characters die and are reborn.
  • StarkStark France
    Posts: 154
    For those who have seen it, is there a possibility that Craig will make another film (answer without spoilers please) ?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython Omaha, NE
    Posts: 6,222
    bondsum wrote: »
    You do realize a new iteration of Bond will happen and that the character isn’t dead forever right?
    Yes, but it does make the Craig era seem rather redundant and something of an anomaly. It'll be interesting to see how they market the next James Bond actor and his first movie. Will it be a case of asking you to forget Craig's entire tenure and demise and go with a new iteration that resembles the classic Fleming character, or will they still acknowledge everything that took place in Craig's universe, with his Bond somehow miraculously surviving to come back with a new face—something that was first mooted for Lazenby's Bond movie, but ultimately dropped by the producers?

    Personally I think they'll go for a hard reboot, resetting the dials to zero. In all likelihood, they'll probably allow Ralph Fiennes to reprise his role again as M, the same way they allowed Judi Dench to crossover into CR, but that will most likely be it.

    I think you underestimate audiences. They’ll obviously understand that this will be a new iteration of Bond, much like how there’s different iterations of Sherlock Holmes. The difference is that it’s coming from the same production company. When a new Bond is being introduced, EON won’t need to tell people “forget about Craig”. They’ll focus on the new actor continuing a legacy that was started by Connery and is putting his own stamp like his predecessors.
  • edited September 2021 Posts: 46
    to bondywondy.

    I have not seen the movie yet, but if Craigs Bond is dead, it makes sense. As we saw in the first 20 movies, Bond is ageless that means than the Connery Bond is the Brosnan Bond. Die another day also confirms that telling about the 20 watches and the old equipment. This was stupid though because the movies were not set in specific time lets say 60s to 80s, but every movie was set to present day and you can see it from cold war mentions, gadgets, cars etc, which does not makes sense because Bond in day another day should be in his 60s like 65 years old. On the other way Craigs Bond gets older as movies are passing, meaning that the quantum case is set hours after casino, but skyfall is not. Malory mentions that Bond in Skyfall is already old. Spectre takes place in unknown time and NTTD 5 years after that. This means that the next Bond cannot be the same because he must be in his 50s. For the new Bond to be the same all his missions have to take place between quantum and Spectre, all set in the past. So as Craig is not the same as the other Bonds, the next one will not be the same as Craig, we may meet him as a veteran already though, without mention to his early years. This will not be a continuity error. A good continuity error was Lazenby telling "this never happened to the other fella" who was supposed to be the same man as Connery, and not just another 007.


    Also it was supposed that fired Boyle wanted to kill Bond and Barbara did not. So what changed now?
  • Posts: 295
    Drinman wrote: »
    I actually disagree that Craig played Fleming’s Bond. Somewhere along the way we conflated emotional with Fleming and I’m not sure where that came from. Fleming’s Bond was emotional for sure but he was also many other things which the modern film Bond is not. I feel like Barbara has wanted to fundamentally change the character from day one and whenever she is pressed for an explanation the easy thing to say is “Oh well we are just doing what Ian Fleming did” and I believe it’s a cop out.

    Fleming's Bond has a lot of interior dialogue that is unfilmable. It's great stuff but hard to translate. Craig's Bond takes those interior emotions and translates them to action.
  • Posts: 2,358
    bondywondy wrote: »
    Divides the fanbase. Long term loyal fans may or will hate this decision to kill off Bond but casual fans won't care. This is why there are YouTube reviews online and casual fans are giving it good reviews. Casual fans - fans that probably haven't seen many Bond films prior to Casino Royale - couldn't care less if Bond is dead. They have no emotional connection to the character. He's just another action hero. In a few weeks time they'll find another action hero to get excited about like Venom. If you don't care if Bond is dead… you don't have much of an emotional connection to the character. Just saying "this film is great" doesn't mean you care about the franchise and the fate of Bond.

    Yes, I, who have been a devotee of this franchise since I was 7 years old, am definitely just a "casual" fan and the people saying they're abandoning the franchise because they spoiled a movie for themselves and didn't like what they read are the "loyal" fans. Sure, makes perfect sense.

    If you don't want to go see the movie that's your choice, but I'm not going to sit here and be insulted because the franchise took a massive risk that I think paid off. I think the film IS brilliant and I care profoundly that they did what they did. The two aren't mutually exclusive.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,219
    Stark wrote: »
    For those who have seen it, is there a possibility that Craig will make another film (answer without spoilers please) ?

    The serious answer is no, the silly answer is lol.
  • HMBFFHMBFF Lisboa, Portugal
    Posts: 204
    Stark wrote: »
    For those who have seen it, is there a possibility that Craig will make another film (answer without spoilers please) ?

    No
  • DrinmanDrinman New York
    Posts: 40
    For those that have seen it how would you rate the cinematography?
  • Plot for Bond 26.


    Blofeld escapes prison. Bond persues Blofeld.

    - James you are alive
    - Yes this is my second life
    - You only live twice mister Bond.
  • edited September 2021 Posts: 295
    bondsum wrote: »
    You do realize a new iteration of Bond will happen and that the character isn’t dead forever right?
    Yes, but it does make the Craig era seem rather redundant and something of an anomaly. It'll be interesting to see how they market the next James Bond actor and his first movie. Will it be a case of asking you to forget Craig's entire tenure and demise and go with a new iteration that resembles the classic Fleming character, or will they still acknowledge everything that took place in Craig's universe, with his Bond somehow miraculously surviving to come back with a new face—something that was first mooted for Lazenby's Bond, but ultimately dropped by the producers?

    Personally I think they'll go for a hard reboot, resetting the dials to zero. In all likelihood, they'll probably allow Ralph Fiennes to reprise his role again as M, the same way they allowed Judi Dench to crossover into CR, but that will most likely be it.

    This is an interesting conversation because Bond fans have never had to deal with something like this but comic book fans regularly do. I'm not saying Bond should mimic comic book characters but Superman and Batman and X-MEN fans have been through this.

    Audiences are much more sophisticated about this kind of stuff now. Marvel and Star Wars and Star Trek have played in this of sandbox for years. Audiences know there will be a new Bond. They're not as tripped up on things like this. Audiences are groomed to now accept that the MCU Spider-Man is different from the one that Tobey Maguire played. They know that Ben Affleck's Batman is not the one appearing in next year's "The Batman."

    Comic book movies have made it so details like this aren't the confusing liability they once were. Bond will get rebooted. Audiences will know that he next Bond is different from Craig's Bond.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,219
    vasilismf wrote: »
    Plot for Bond 26.


    Blofeld escapes prison. Bond persues Blofeld.

    - James you are alive
    - Yes this is my second life
    - You only live twice mister Bond.

    Blofeld dies too in this one.
  • Posts: 295
    Univex wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Bond 26 is gonna be a total reboot so it doesn't really matter if Craig's Bond is dead. That's not even a point. This is not Marvel.

    Yes, it is Marvel :D NTTD is just another alternate reality in the multiverse ;) It's the What if, in the Bond cannon.
    Burgess wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Some of you are so fickle. I have not read the ending spoiler but how about instead of being mad that this ending you watch the entire movie and then maybe this ending will actually make sense. See the story play out and see how they tell the story to get to that ending.

    Who likes to see their hero die? Some people have watched James Bond for 60 years, and developed a ridiculous amount of emotional equity into that charter-he’s part of their lives. Some even doing the books before that. So it becomes like you know the person. Then all of a sudden, a fictional hero (and it is James Bond)-one that has always beaten the odds, saved the day, let you live vicariously through him is DEAD. For some people, that is ultra distressing. People go to see Bond kick ass, save the day, and escape the rough old world we live in. It uplifts people. We watch and rewatch, plus we want to see him do it again. Now all of a sudden that part of your life is DEAD. And it is hard to rewatch him in other movies because you know the character is gone. Wonder who came up with this stupid idea? Movie will not make as much $ as I would have. Mark it down. It may even flop. I hope it does.

    You do realize a new iteration of Bond will happen and that the character isn’t dead forever right?

    Yeah. But, Bond is Bond, no matter who plays it, and it also makes Craig’s Bond lesser (none of the other’s died). When you watch a Craig Bond now, the cloud of he died is going to permeate the movies. Leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Do you agree?

    The bad taste depends on whether you view Bond's death as being, well, bad. None of us want Bond to go away as a character. He won't. There will be a new Bond. But Craig's tenure has been an amazing encapsulated error of experimentation and subversion. Craig has both embraced the legacy and moved it forward. Craig finally did was only hinted at by Lazenby and Dalton: he played Fleming's Bond. Craig gave general audiences what fans already knew Bond possessed: a soul.

    For that, we should be thankful--critical when needed--but thankful. Craig has overseen the most successful and critically acclaimed era since 1967. There are some major shout outs in between but there is no doubt that Craig made it possible for Bond to go on for another several decades.

    So, Craig's Bond dies. Whether that's a fitting end depends on the material. Batman has died. Spider-Man has died. Captain Kirk has died. Superman has died. But they keep coming back. Like those characters, Bond is modern myth. Myths never truly die. They come back in new iterations.

    What a wonderful post, @Burgess.

    Thank you!
  • Posts: 2,358
    Drinman wrote: »
    For those that have seen it how would you rate the cinematography?

    10.

    Nearly every single frame of this film is masterfully composed. Skyfall might still edge out a win in that department, but either way it's neck-and-neck. I think I'd have to watch the two films back to back to really, definitively state which one wins. And I say that as someone who sobbed out of joy - in front of my entire family! - when Deakins won his first Oscar. Linus Sandgren did an absolutely sublime job.
  • matt_u wrote: »
    vasilismf wrote: »
    Plot for Bond 26.


    Blofeld escapes prison. Bond persues Blofeld.

    - James you are alive
    - Yes this is my second life
    - You only live twice mister Bond.

    Blofeld dies too in this one.

    are we sure? hahaha
  • edited September 2021 Posts: 3,316
    FourDot wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    You do realize a new iteration of Bond will happen and that the character isn’t dead forever right?
    Yes, but it does make the Craig era seem rather redundant and something of an anomaly. It'll be interesting to see how they market the next James Bond actor and his first movie. Will it be a case of asking you to forget Craig's entire tenure and demise and go with a new iteration that resembles the classic Fleming character, or will they still acknowledge everything that took place in Craig's universe, with his Bond somehow miraculously surviving to come back with a new face—something that was first mooted for Lazenby's Bond movie, but ultimately dropped by the producers?

    Personally I think they'll go for a hard reboot, resetting the dials to zero. In all likelihood, they'll probably allow Ralph Fiennes to reprise his role again as M, the same way they allowed Judi Dench to crossover into CR, but that will most likely be it.

    How is it redundant? It's 5 films that tell a cycle of stories and have arguably repositioned Bond culturally. As mentioned above, all great mythic characters die and are reborn.
    Redundant in that there's no consistency. It begins and ends with Craig. As an audience we all knew that Lazenby, Moore and Dalton were the same character as Connery's Bond—they just happened to be played by different actors, is all. Brosnan is where things start to get a little sketchy but, to all intents and purposes, it's the same character that featured in OHMSS. Not so with Daniel Craig's Bond. Aside from Blofeld, his Bond never went toe-to-toe with any of the same adversaries or even married Countess Teresa di Vicenzo. His Bond dies without having achieved that much, unlike the other Fleming iterations. You mention that all great mythic characters die and are reborn. That might be true had Craig's Bond reached the same mythical status as the previous Bonds, but his Bond only scratched the surface. His only took on a small handful of adversaries then popped his clogs!
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,219
    No Time to Die at this point feels like a title that tries to exorcise death, in a way. Plus, the story of his sacrifice won't die with him. See the very end of the film: "I'm gonna tell you a story".
  • Posts: 250
    bondsum wrote: »
    FourDot wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    You do realize a new iteration of Bond will happen and that the character isn’t dead forever right?
    Yes, but it does make the Craig era seem rather redundant and something of an anomaly. It'll be interesting to see how they market the next James Bond actor and his first movie. Will it be a case of asking you to forget Craig's entire tenure and demise and go with a new iteration that resembles the classic Fleming character, or will they still acknowledge everything that took place in Craig's universe, with his Bond somehow miraculously surviving to come back with a new face—something that was first mooted for Lazenby's Bond movie, but ultimately dropped by the producers?

    Personally I think they'll go for a hard reboot, resetting the dials to zero. In all likelihood, they'll probably allow Ralph Fiennes to reprise his role again as M, the same way they allowed Judi Dench to crossover into CR, but that will most likely be it.

    How is it redundant? It's 5 films that tell a cycle of stories and have arguably repositioned Bond culturally. As mentioned above, all great mythic characters die and are reborn.
    Redundant in that there's no consistency. It begins and ends with Craig. As an audience we all knew that Lazenby, Moore and Dalton were the same character as Connery's Bond—they just happened to be played by different actors, is all. Brosnan is where things start to get a little sketchy but, to all intents and purposes, it's the same character that featured in OHMSS. Not so with Daniel Craig's Bond. Aside from Blofeld, his Bond never went toe-to-toe with any of the same adversaries or even married Countess Teresa di Vicenzo. His Bond dies without having achieved that much, unlike the other Fleming iterations. You mention that all great mythic characters die and are reborn. That might be true had Craig's Bond reached the same mythical status as the previous Bonds, but his Bond only scratched the surface. His only took on a small handful of adversaries then popped his clogs!

    But we've known that this Bond was distinct from the other fellas since 2006.

    As for what he achieves as a mythic hero YMMV, clearly.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,219
    I love that Bond finds out about being a father seconds before facing his death.
  • Posts: 2,358
    matt_u wrote: »
    I love that Bond finds out about being a father seconds before facing his death.

    He doesn't. He knows right away. I don't know if you've seen the film but it's written on his face.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 36,603
    I asked it last night, might've gotten buried and overlooked, but are there any noteworthy fist fight sequences to look forward to?
  • Posts: 2,358
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I asked it last night, might've gotten buried and overlooked, but are there any noteworthy fist fight sequences to look forward to?

    Yes. There's maybe not strictly a flat out one-on-one (the biggest one I can think of is initiated by something significant that happens with a gun) but Bond does get to throw some fists during the action, all of which is glorious in this film.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 36,603
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I asked it last night, might've gotten buried and overlooked, but are there any noteworthy fist fight sequences to look forward to?

    Yes. There's maybe not strictly a flat out one-on-one (the biggest one I can think of is initiated by something significant that happens with a gun) but Bond does get to throw some fists during the action, all of which is glorious in this film.

    That's good, at least. I think the fight choreography in QoS really spoiled me. The Hinx fight in SP is probably the only highlight of the film for me. I always enjoy at least one good, proper fight in these films; it seemed hinted at during the Matera chase in the trailers but I wasn't sure if that'd be a couple of fists thrown and that's the end of it.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,219
    matt_u wrote: »
    I love that Bond finds out about being a father seconds before facing his death.

    He doesn't. He knows right away. I don't know if you've seen the film but it's written on his face.

    Really? Oh, well. I read on Reddit that he doesn't know. She explicitly tells him?

    Just being curious... his death occurs off screen? I mean, do we clearly see him engulfed by the flames of the explosion?
  • foo_yukfoo_yuk Canada
    Posts: 26
    Downbeat ending could have an impact on the box office when word of mouth gets around. Most Bond fans will turn out but worry about others who might just give it a miss. Personally disappointed in the ending - would much prefer to walk out the cinema feeling upbeat.
    The Rotten Tomatoes audience score is going to suck for NTTD. Will this movie (if you dislike it) affect the way you watch the other Craig movies? Or how you think of them?

    Yeah, Tony Stark dying really killed the audience score/rewatchability of Endgame… Oh wait.
  • A note on this being the silliest and most serious entry. It is a very serious movie, but DC plays this Bond more in line as a hybrid of Connery and Moore. I’m not a fan on Craig’s delivery on his attempts at humour, such lines that took me out were “It was an eye-opening experience”, or “just showed someone your new watch, reallyblew his mind
  • edited September 2021 Posts: 801
    bondywondy wrote: »
    Divides the fanbase. Long term loyal fans may or will hate this decision to kill off Bond but casual fans won't care. This is why there are YouTube reviews online and casual fans are giving it good reviews. Casual fans - fans that probably haven't seen many Bond films prior to Casino Royale - couldn't care less if Bond is dead. They have no emotional connection to the character. He's just another action hero. In a few weeks time they'll find another action hero to get excited about like Venom. If you don't care if Bond is dead… you don't have much of an emotional connection to the character. Just saying "this film is great" doesn't mean you care about the franchise and the fate of Bond.

    Yes, I, who have been a devotee of this franchise since I was 7 years old, am definitely just a "casual" fan and the people saying they're abandoning the franchise because they spoiled a movie for themselves and didn't like what they read are the "loyal" fans. Sure, makes perfect sense.

    If you don't want to go see the movie that's your choice, but I'm not going to sit here and be insulted because the franchise took a massive risk that I think paid off. I think the film IS brilliant and I care profoundly that they did what they did. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

    This.

    I've seen the film, and I couldn't agree more.

    First of all: Anyone who's spoiled it for themselves -- that's on you. Full stop. This is absolutely a film that must be enjoyed (relatively) cold to have it "work" to its intended effect, and if you read a paragraph on Reddit about the climax and form judgements before you've seen it -- obviously that intended effect won't work. An audience pays money to have an experience, but they're subverting their own experience by doing that. Again -- and I'm sorry, I know how tricky it will be to avoid these big spoilers for some -- but if you go that route, you have only yourself to blame.

    Second: Not only did I find the ending exceptionally well done, but it feels right. It's the right ending for this story. For his story. It's tragic, it's impactful, it's subversive. But it's also incredibly moving and illuminating. In death, it's teaching the rest of us something about life. A lesson many of us could probably do well to heed. That, to me, makes it the stronger artistic choice with the added built-in beauty that there are no real commercial consequences because Craig's era is self-contained. James Bond Will Return.

    Third, and I feel like I could write an entire book on this: the movie happening around this choice is such a direct conversation with fans -- call it a love letter, call it a paternal challenge, call it what you want -- that the ending feels so earned. My immediate reaction to the ending was along the lines of, "Well, they've just given me 150 minutes of classic Bond containing absolutely everything I've ever wanted to see, and there's almost nothing left. So yes, let's embrace this. Let's push this. Let's see what it does to me. There's no reason to cling to what's come before. There's nothing left to want, to see, or to say. We've earned it, let's go with it, let's find out just what this means to us."

    And sitting here, the day after, I know the answer to that last bit more than ever. It may be a controversial film, but it's crystallized what James Bond means to me. My heart is broken but it's also full. It's a weird feeling. But a meaningful one.

    I think that's the point.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,219
    That was a pleasure to read. @AgentM72
  • foo_yukfoo_yuk Canada
    Posts: 26
    If fan hissy fits lead to the next Bond being the “Rise of Skywalker” of Bond films I’m going to bite into the cyanide capsule in my back left molar. Do you know what it does to you? Watching Rise of Skywalker? Look on your work, JJ Abrams.
  • edited September 2021 Posts: 3,316
    I think you underestimate audiences. They’ll obviously understand that this will be a new iteration of Bond, much like how there’s different iterations of Sherlock Holmes. The difference is that it’s coming from the same production company. When a new Bond is being introduced, EON won’t need to tell people “forget about Craig”. They’ll focus on the new actor continuing a legacy that was started by Connery and is putting his own stamp like his predecessors.
    The difference is that the Sherlock Holmes stories have been in the public domain and been made by many different movie studios and TV companies since 1916, so audiences are more accustomed to the century long changes over a protracted period. Not so with James Bond. The Bond movies have been exclusively made by Eon (apart from 2) and have remained consistent in their approach and style, beginning with Connery in '62 up until today. I honestly couldn't tell you how many different actors have played Sherlock Holmes, but I can tell you how many have played Bond and when. I also think you're confusing what I meant. This will be the first time in its 60-year cinematic history that the producers will be asking its future audience to forget what they've just seen in the previous movie (something that had never been done before), and go with their new resurrected Bond in the next. It's going to be like Bobby Ewing returning to Dallas. You just know that a large swathe of the public will asking how James Bond is still alive when they just killed him off in NTTD, and have they just turned Bond into Kenny from South Park. I can almost see the memes now.
Sign In or Register to comment.