NO TIME TO DIE (2021) - First Reactions NO SPOILERS please

1356720

Comments

  • cwl007cwl007 England
    Posts: 595
    Question for anyone who's seen it. Does it retrospectively improve Spectre in any way? 🤞
  • cwl007 wrote: »
    Question for anyone who's seen it. Does it retrospectively improve Spectre in any way? 🤞

    No. It does however, give us a complete visual of the story Madeline told to Bond while on the train.
  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    Posts: 3,447
    cwl007 wrote: »
    Question for anyone who's seen it. Does it retrospectively improve Spectre in any way? 🤞

    I would say so. But maybe not all will agree with me. There is a lot to discuss...

    I definitely prefer it to SP but I would rank SF and CR higher.
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,834
    cwl007 wrote: »
    Question for anyone who's seen it. Does it retrospectively improve Spectre in any way? 🤞

    Yes I'd say it does, but not necessarily in ways you might have thought.
  • zebrafishzebrafish <°)))< in Octopussy's garden in the shade
    Posts: 3,433
    Is there much non-Zimmer music in the film? Is "Boom Shot Dis" in it?
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,834
    zebrafish wrote: »
    Is there much non-Zimmer music in the film? Is "Boom Shot Dis" in it?
    Nope, unfortunately no Boom Shot Dis. Although there is other music playing in several of the Jamaican scenes. Regarding Zimmer, I guess it depends on your opinion of sampling previous JB cues and themes.
  • JohnBarryJohnBarry Dublin
    edited September 2021 Posts: 34
    I've just seen it. I think it will take a while to formulate a complete opinion of it and where it falls within my ranking. I definitely prefer Casino Royale and Skyfall but I certainly didn't dislike NTTD either.
    Regards of how I feel about NTTD or Craig's tenure as a whole, I'm really hungry for a new Bond film where he just gets an assignment from M at the beginning and then spends the film executing that mission without any overly personal stuff.
  • Posts: 5,735
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    I've just seen it. I think it will take a while to formulate a complete opinion of it and where it falls within my ranking. I definitely prefer Casino Royale and Spectre but I certainly didn't dislike NTTD either.
    Regards of how I feel about NTTD or Craig's tenure as a whole, I'm really hungry for a new Bond film where he just gets an assignment from M at the beginning and then spends the film executing that mission without any overly personal stuff.

    Most of us want that. And we've all been wanting that for years and years. But they're in love with the "humane and personal angle". So, that's that. No more formula, probably. Just reinventions until it's unrecognisable. You see, these days, that's fashionable.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 36,603
    Univex wrote: »
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    I've just seen it. I think it will take a while to formulate a complete opinion of it and where it falls within my ranking. I definitely prefer Casino Royale and Spectre but I certainly didn't dislike NTTD either.
    Regards of how I feel about NTTD or Craig's tenure as a whole, I'm really hungry for a new Bond film where he just gets an assignment from M at the beginning and then spends the film executing that mission without any overly personal stuff.

    Most of us want that. And we've all been wanting that for years and years. But they're in love with the "humane and personal angle". So, that's that. No more formula, probably. Just reinventions until it's unrecognisable. You see, these days, that's fashionable.

    I also fear those days are long gone. Fingers crossed the next era returns to something like that but I won’t be surprised if they don’t.
  • edited September 2021 Posts: 5,735
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    I've just seen it. I think it will take a while to formulate a complete opinion of it and where it falls within my ranking. I definitely prefer Casino Royale and Spectre but I certainly didn't dislike NTTD either.
    Regards of how I feel about NTTD or Craig's tenure as a whole, I'm really hungry for a new Bond film where he just gets an assignment from M at the beginning and then spends the film executing that mission without any overly personal stuff.

    Most of us want that. And we've all been wanting that for years and years. But they're in love with the "humane and personal angle". So, that's that. No more formula, probably. Just reinventions until it's unrecognisable. You see, these days, that's fashionable.

    I also fear those days are long gone. Fingers crossed the next era returns to something like that but I won’t be surprised if they don’t.

    They are completely alienated on their own conception that this sort of subversion works and will keep working, meanwhile forgetting that if you subvert long and hard enough, there will be no more thing to subvert, and people will forget the original formula, which worked. There's that popular story about the goose with the golden eggs. But then again, there's also the one about the boy who cried wolf and no one listened :(

    If they made a low key very well written spy thriller contained within the original 60s formula and organics, with a sense of escapism and exoticism and an actor who resembled Fleming's depiction of Bond, I'd be over the moon. But they'll probably do another rogue/revenge rookie Bond, this time with a non caucasian (oh, they probably will) actor, with all the "family" drama and familiar new clichés. And I say new clichés because they aren't aware they've build a new formula, and that this new formula is already tired and spent.
  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    Posts: 3,447
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    I've just seen it. I think it will take a while to formulate a complete opinion of it and where it falls within my ranking. I definitely prefer Casino Royale and Skyfall but I certainly didn't dislike NTTD either.
    Regards of how I feel about NTTD or Craig's tenure as a whole, I'm really hungry for a new Bond film where he just gets an assignment from M at the beginning and then spends the film executing that mission without any overly personal stuff.

    Exactly my feelings (according to the ranking and mission)
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 2021 Posts: 10,451
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    I've just seen it. I think it will take a while to formulate a complete opinion of it and where it falls within my ranking. I definitely prefer Casino Royale and Spectre but I certainly didn't dislike NTTD either.
    Regards of how I feel about NTTD or Craig's tenure as a whole, I'm really hungry for a new Bond film where he just gets an assignment from M at the beginning and then spends the film executing that mission without any overly personal stuff.

    Most of us want that. And we've all been wanting that for years and years. But they're in love with the "humane and personal angle". So, that's that. No more formula, probably. Just reinventions until it's unrecognisable. You see, these days, that's fashionable.

    I also fear those days are long gone. Fingers crossed the next era returns to something like that but I won’t be surprised if they don’t.

    I think it's fine, something like CR is a film which really found a new audience for Bond, and most of us loved it too. We've still got the ones which are like the old ones: they are the old ones and they're not going anywhere.

    There's nothing wrong with having your main character involved with the story- look at superhero movies: no-one's complaining that the characters there get too personally involved because that's how those films have always been, and they go down a storm.

    What is it that's actually wrong with having the characters involved/caring about/affected by the mission?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited September 2021 Posts: 36,603
    mtm wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    I've just seen it. I think it will take a while to formulate a complete opinion of it and where it falls within my ranking. I definitely prefer Casino Royale and Spectre but I certainly didn't dislike NTTD either.
    Regards of how I feel about NTTD or Craig's tenure as a whole, I'm really hungry for a new Bond film where he just gets an assignment from M at the beginning and then spends the film executing that mission without any overly personal stuff.

    Most of us want that. And we've all been wanting that for years and years. But they're in love with the "humane and personal angle". So, that's that. No more formula, probably. Just reinventions until it's unrecognisable. You see, these days, that's fashionable.

    I also fear those days are long gone. Fingers crossed the next era returns to something like that but I won’t be surprised if they don’t.

    I think it's fine, something like CR is a film which really found a new audience for Bond, and most of us loved it too. We've still got the ones which are like the old ones: they are the old ones and they're not going anywhere.

    There's nothing wrong with having your main character involved with the story- look at superhero movies: no-one's complaining that the characters there get too personally involved because that's how those films have always been, and they go down a storm.

    What is it that's actually wrong with having the characters involved/caring about/affected by the mission?

    That's the one positive takeaway for me - the old films aren't going anywhere, so I'll always have the films I do enjoy, to enjoy.

    I never said there's nothing wrong with it, but every fan has their own tastes and I don't want to start having individual eras with each new actor that contain half-baked, interconnected plot points and narrative threads. I'm simple, I like having separate, Bond-saves-the-day missions. There's nothing wrong with that. That's what I grew up with and what Bond is for me and that's what I like.

    I can't agree or disagree with the superhero point, as I don't really watch those anymore. Those films are the textbook definition of what I'm not after in film.
  • I’m hopeful that the next Bond era will go back to more formula driven films, if only because each Craig film has added more and more of that stuff back into it because they know people like it. I’m not against there being another overarching narrative to the next era, I would just hope that it’s planned for a bit better and doesn’t totally overshadow the individual missions in each film. We’ll see, either way I’m excited for what comes next. They have always knocked it out of the park for a Bond actor’s first film.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 2021 Posts: 10,451
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    I've just seen it. I think it will take a while to formulate a complete opinion of it and where it falls within my ranking. I definitely prefer Casino Royale and Spectre but I certainly didn't dislike NTTD either.
    Regards of how I feel about NTTD or Craig's tenure as a whole, I'm really hungry for a new Bond film where he just gets an assignment from M at the beginning and then spends the film executing that mission without any overly personal stuff.

    Most of us want that. And we've all been wanting that for years and years. But they're in love with the "humane and personal angle". So, that's that. No more formula, probably. Just reinventions until it's unrecognisable. You see, these days, that's fashionable.

    I also fear those days are long gone. Fingers crossed the next era returns to something like that but I won’t be surprised if they don’t.

    I think it's fine, something like CR is a film which really found a new audience for Bond, and most of us loved it too. We've still got the ones which are like the old ones: they are the old ones and they're not going anywhere.

    There's nothing wrong with having your main character involved with the story- look at superhero movies: no-one's complaining that the characters there get too personally involved because that's how those films have always been, and they go down a storm.

    What is it that's actually wrong with having the characters involved/caring about/affected by the mission?

    That's the one positive takeaway for me - the old films aren't going anywhere, so I'll always have the films I do enjoy, to enjoy.

    I never said there's nothing wrong with it, but every fan has their own tastes and I don't want to start having individual eras with each new actor that contain half-baked, interconnected plot points and narrative threads. I'm simple, I like having separate, Bond-saves-the-day missions. There's nothing wrong with that. That's what I grew up with and what Bond is for me and that's what I like.

    Sure, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that (and obviously I love those old films too or I wouldn't be here) but I would have thought that there's something you don't like about the narrative threads etc. in order to have a preference at all? I enjoy both sorts of 007 film. Was it the stuff like mentions of Tracy in films such as LTK that started to put you off? I'm just curious, you don't have to answer if you don't want of course.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,642
    Univex wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    I've just seen it. I think it will take a while to formulate a complete opinion of it and where it falls within my ranking. I definitely prefer Casino Royale and Spectre but I certainly didn't dislike NTTD either.
    Regards of how I feel about NTTD or Craig's tenure as a whole, I'm really hungry for a new Bond film where he just gets an assignment from M at the beginning and then spends the film executing that mission without any overly personal stuff.

    Most of us want that. And we've all been wanting that for years and years. But they're in love with the "humane and personal angle". So, that's that. No more formula, probably. Just reinventions until it's unrecognisable. You see, these days, that's fashionable.

    I also fear those days are long gone. Fingers crossed the next era returns to something like that but I won’t be surprised if they don’t.

    They are completely alienated on their own conception that this sort of subversion works and will keep working, meanwhile forgetting that if you subvert long and hard enough, there will be no more thing to subvert, and people will forget the original formula, which worked. There's that popular story about the goose with the golden eggs. But then again, there's also the one about the boy who cried wolf and no one listened :(

    If they made a low key very well written spy thriller contained within the original 60s formula and organics, with a sense of escapism and exoticism and an actor who resembled Fleming's depiction of Bond, I'd be over the moon. But they'll probably do another rogue/revenge rookie Bond, this time with a non caucasian (oh, they probably will) actor, with all the "family" drama and familiar new clichés. And I say new clichés because they aren't aware they've build a new formula, and that this new formula is already tired and spent.

    Great Post @Univex

    Completely agree 👍
  • DrinmanDrinman New York
    edited September 2021 Posts: 40
    I think the issue is that Cubby would make the film that he thought audiences wanted to see, this current crop of Bond people make the movies that they want to make.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 36,603
    mtm wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    I've just seen it. I think it will take a while to formulate a complete opinion of it and where it falls within my ranking. I definitely prefer Casino Royale and Spectre but I certainly didn't dislike NTTD either.
    Regards of how I feel about NTTD or Craig's tenure as a whole, I'm really hungry for a new Bond film where he just gets an assignment from M at the beginning and then spends the film executing that mission without any overly personal stuff.

    Most of us want that. And we've all been wanting that for years and years. But they're in love with the "humane and personal angle". So, that's that. No more formula, probably. Just reinventions until it's unrecognisable. You see, these days, that's fashionable.

    I also fear those days are long gone. Fingers crossed the next era returns to something like that but I won’t be surprised if they don’t.

    I think it's fine, something like CR is a film which really found a new audience for Bond, and most of us loved it too. We've still got the ones which are like the old ones: they are the old ones and they're not going anywhere.

    There's nothing wrong with having your main character involved with the story- look at superhero movies: no-one's complaining that the characters there get too personally involved because that's how those films have always been, and they go down a storm.

    What is it that's actually wrong with having the characters involved/caring about/affected by the mission?

    That's the one positive takeaway for me - the old films aren't going anywhere, so I'll always have the films I do enjoy, to enjoy.

    I never said there's nothing wrong with it, but every fan has their own tastes and I don't want to start having individual eras with each new actor that contain half-baked, interconnected plot points and narrative threads. I'm simple, I like having separate, Bond-saves-the-day missions. There's nothing wrong with that. That's what I grew up with and what Bond is for me and that's what I like.

    Sure, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that (and obviously I love those old films too or I wouldn't be here) but I would have thought that there's something you don't like about the narrative threads etc. in order to have a preference at all? I enjoy both sorts of 007 film. Was it the stuff like mentions of Tracy in films such as LTK that started to put you off? I'm just curious, you don't have to answer if you don't want of course.

    None of that bothers me in the slightest - in fact, I actually love those little moments that tie all the old, individual eras together as one character, but it's done in small, lightly recognizable ways, not retroactively tying together previous events and characters that originally had nothing to do with one another (like Le Chiffre and co. being members of SPECTRE).
  • foo_yukfoo_yuk Canada
    Posts: 26
    I work as a screenwriter, and I can confirm it’s not just EON. Studios and writers rooms are stuck on this idea that if you don’t “make it personal” to the hero, it lacks stakes. I constantly bring up the old Bonds and how they’d go to work, get their orders, and carry out the mission (albeit in their non-conformist style). Their obsession with their work and sense of duty MAKE the missions personal because they won’t accept failure. It’s part of who they are.

    But it’s become so fashionable now… Even the Wayne family needed to be injected into Joker to give him a “personal” reason to hate Bruce Wayne *YAWN*

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 2021 Posts: 10,451
    Drinman wrote: »
    I think the issue is that Cubby would make the film that he thought audiences wanted to see, this current crop of Bond people make the movies that they want to make.

    They make tons and tons of cash though, so audiences do appear to want to see them too. NTTD had the biggest presale of tickets in this country since Endgame.

    Creasy47 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    I've just seen it. I think it will take a while to formulate a complete opinion of it and where it falls within my ranking. I definitely prefer Casino Royale and Spectre but I certainly didn't dislike NTTD either.
    Regards of how I feel about NTTD or Craig's tenure as a whole, I'm really hungry for a new Bond film where he just gets an assignment from M at the beginning and then spends the film executing that mission without any overly personal stuff.

    Most of us want that. And we've all been wanting that for years and years. But they're in love with the "humane and personal angle". So, that's that. No more formula, probably. Just reinventions until it's unrecognisable. You see, these days, that's fashionable.

    I also fear those days are long gone. Fingers crossed the next era returns to something like that but I won’t be surprised if they don’t.

    I think it's fine, something like CR is a film which really found a new audience for Bond, and most of us loved it too. We've still got the ones which are like the old ones: they are the old ones and they're not going anywhere.

    There's nothing wrong with having your main character involved with the story- look at superhero movies: no-one's complaining that the characters there get too personally involved because that's how those films have always been, and they go down a storm.

    What is it that's actually wrong with having the characters involved/caring about/affected by the mission?

    That's the one positive takeaway for me - the old films aren't going anywhere, so I'll always have the films I do enjoy, to enjoy.

    I never said there's nothing wrong with it, but every fan has their own tastes and I don't want to start having individual eras with each new actor that contain half-baked, interconnected plot points and narrative threads. I'm simple, I like having separate, Bond-saves-the-day missions. There's nothing wrong with that. That's what I grew up with and what Bond is for me and that's what I like.

    Sure, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that (and obviously I love those old films too or I wouldn't be here) but I would have thought that there's something you don't like about the narrative threads etc. in order to have a preference at all? I enjoy both sorts of 007 film. Was it the stuff like mentions of Tracy in films such as LTK that started to put you off? I'm just curious, you don't have to answer if you don't want of course.

    None of that bothers me in the slightest - in fact, I actually love those little moments that tie all the old, individual eras together as one character, but it's done in small, lightly recognizable ways, not retroactively tying together previous events and characters that originally had nothing to do with one another (like Le Chiffre and co. being members of SPECTRE).

    I agree that was done clumsily, but I don't dislike them being tied together like that; like the background threat of Blofeld appearing in most of the Connery movies, the FRWL mission being done to take revenge for Dr No etc. I think that stuff is fine.
    foo_yuk wrote: »
    I work as a screenwriter, and I can confirm it’s not just EON. Studios and writers rooms are stuck on this idea that if you don’t “make it personal” to the hero, it lacks stakes. I constantly bring up the old Bonds and how they’d go to work, get their orders, and carry out the mission (albeit in their non-conformist style). Their obsession with their work and sense of duty MAKE the missions personal because they won’t accept failure. It’s part of who they are.


    They're not wrong though. Of course it doesn't lack stakes completely, but don't we find CR more thrilling because it's about Bond in large part? All of the films are about celebrating Bond (much more so than something like Mission Impossible where Ethan Hunt isn't really the focus), so having the films about him make sense. We often talk about how DAF was a missed opportunity to have George back, taking revenge for Tracy etc.
    You have the stakes of 'will Bond get out alive' or 'will Bond save the world'- and that is good, but also if you mess that up then it gets a little bit duller. Look at Thunderball, where we never have a countdown and none of the main characters are in danger from the main threat (GF at least had Bond chained to the bomb)- and TB becomes one of the lesser movies because there's not much to care about that's onscreen.

    Fleming himself knew this: he made the book progressively more personal as they went on, because folks became more interested in Bond himself.
  • Posts: 250
    cwl007 wrote: »
    Question for anyone who's seen it. Does it retrospectively improve Spectre in any way? 🤞

    I would say it definitely does, particularly in regards to Blofeld.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 5,728
    Quality of Film, I’d say:
    CR
    SF
    SP
    QOS
    FourDot wrote: »
    cwl007 wrote: »
    Question for anyone who's seen it. Does it retrospectively improve Spectre in any way? 🤞

    I would say it definitely does, particularly in regards to Blofeld.

    This is definitely the hope, so I’m quite happy to hear this.
  • Posts: 2,358
    Having rewatched SPECTRE the night before the premiere, and having come away giving that film a lower score and ranking, I wouldn't say the film is retrospectively improved at all, but I would at least say Blofeld no longer competes with Greene as far as who Craig's worst villain is, and Madeleine Swann is MASSIVELY improved because of this film.
  • About to watch now. Only 4 other people here. Lovely.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e il momento che verrà
    Posts: 5,889
    fernadez wrote: »
    About to watch now. Only 4 other people here. Lovely.

    I’d love that! Of course I want it to be successful but I do prefer a slightly less crowded environment when I watch films.
  • GatecrasherGatecrasher Classified
    Posts: 265
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    fernadez wrote: »
    About to watch now. Only 4 other people here. Lovely.

    I’d love that! Of course I want it to be successful but I do prefer a slightly less crowded environment when I watch films.

    Same here. I’m off work at 3:00 next Friday and might go straight to the theatre to beat the rush hour/evening before the weekend crowd. In this environment, especially now, less is definitely more.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 36,603
    I have my tickets for next Thursday at 4 PM so I'm really hoping it's not too packed. As long as I have a couple seats empty on either side of me, I'll be happy.
  • I’m planning on going for a Sunday morning matinee. Not just for covid reasons but because I really don’t want my viewing disrupted by a bunch of people talking during the movie and being on their phones.
  • fadetoblack7fadetoblack7 Chicago IL
    Posts: 50
    Those who have seen it, how long does the action in Norway last roughly? Car chase and forest scene together.
  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    edited September 2021 Posts: 3,447
    Those who have seen it, how long does the action in Norway last roughly? Car chase and forest scene together.
    I answer your question with spoilertags: Maybe I felt the time wrong, but I estimate
    3 minutes car chase and around 4 min in the forest. Maybe longer...
Sign In or Register to comment.