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

11516182021298

Comments

  • Posts: 250
    FoxRox wrote: »
    FourDot wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    For those who’ve seen the Blofeld scene - just how YOLT-esque is it? I’ve been hoping for a long time for the classic, dramatic strangulation to be adapted on screen.
    To be honest as a fan of the film overall this was a bit of a monkey's paw wish fulfilment - it took me totally by surprise and the question is is it genuine or is it Bond playing mind games with Blofeld? Which for me is kind of a betrayal as the Fleming moment is so raw and monstrous and animalistic so... yeah I would say as someone who holds the YOLT novel as the pinnacle of any James Bond media, that bit sorta doesn't... work sadly.
    Geez. I hope I can glean *some* enjoyment out of this movie.
    I will say this is offset by an earlier Blofeld scene which instantly is one of my favourite Blofeld scenes ever, delightfully weird, extremely machiavellian and something Fleming might have dreamt up if he were writing in the 21st Century. I would find it hard not to get a great kick out of the scene in question, and it's precisely the kind of scene Spectre was missing.
  • I've had time to reflect on what I watched and said earlier, I haven't changed my mind, it's not good as I stated but maybe I'm being a little harsh. I was just so disappointed with what I watched after such a long wait. It seemed very lazy and weak in it's stucture and story and to me the betrayal of the character I first read then watched. Although the book/film personas are wildly different, up until Craigs tenure there had never been a divergence away from the central premise and nature of the character. Maybe I'm too old for the new emotionally screwed up incarnation but I also have to wonder to myself whether this in its self is making, god forbid, BOND irrelevant for the modern world.

    As some have said maybe this is EON preparing to bow out for a big pay day and let Amazon take the character in a new direction, who knows?

    But as a curtain fall for Craig it seems the curse of the final outing that always seems to be a poor effort with the exception of Lazenby who's one effort is exellent IMO. (DAF/Connery, AVTAK/Moore, LTK/Dalton, DAD/Brosnan & now NTTD/Craig all weak in the series)
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,890
    Was there not a BTS video recently about a harbor action scene with planes flying under a crane or something along those lines?? I avoided watching the actual thing because of spoiler concerns but what was that about exactly? Can't recall anything like that in NTTD.
  • Posts: 2,402
    Zarozzor wrote: »
    Question for those who have seen the film:

    I have seen a few people saying that NTTD will be like OHMSS. Not because of all the references to it, but because OHMSS was disliked by many for years and is now regarded as one of the best in the series.

    Do you think this will be the case?

    Yes. Except I also think in this case because we've had an extra 50 years of cinema and of Bond, there will be stronger support out of the gate as well.
  • edited September 2021 Posts: 387
    bondsum wrote: »
    Burgess wrote: »
    It seems you've taken my comments personally. It was not my intention to offend anyone. I'm a lifelong Bond fan. We all have that in common. What I mean by pointing out that audiences are more sophisticated now is that the content and nature of modern entertainment is multifaceted and complex.
    Sorry, my fellow Bond fan. I didn't mean to give the impression that I was slighted by your remarks. Sometimes a hurried typed response can come over as a tad brash. I apologize if I came across as that.

    I’m just getting the distinct impression that trying to discuss the next James Bond has already become verboten. Yes, I get that there’s going to be another actor after Daniel Craig playing James Bond. All I’m asking on this forum is whether you’d be happy seeing the next actor get blown to smithereens when he decides to call it a day, or would you rather they simply ignore this type of grand finale going forwards? What happens if their next choice of 007 only agrees to sign on the dotted line if he’s given the same dramatic finale as Craig when he passes on the baton? If they’re a relatively big name, such as Tom Hardy, it might be a major dealbreaker going into negotiations. Put it this way, if you’re an already established name, would you be willing to stick your neck out without being given same dramatic beats Craig was afforded? I don’t think you would. Which could mean that their next choice is going to be another up-and-comer rather than a familiar name. All I know is that Bond 26 is going to have to hit the ground running and outshine NTTD in every category. Going forwards, I just want Bond 26 to be bigger and better than Craig's Bond and hope they can deliver on it.

    I appreciate the apology. All good points. We can definitely agree that we all want Bond firing on all cylinders. We want Bond to dominate and deliver. Let's bask in the glory of NTTD right now because, next year, we're going to be hyped for the next Bond actor and Bond film. Long live James Bond.
  • Posts: 3,333
    Burgess wrote: »
    I appreciate the apology. All good points. We can definitely agree that what we all want Bond firing on all cylinders. We want Bond dominate and deliver. Let's bask in the glory of NTTD right now because, next year, we're going to be hyped for the next Bond actor and Bond film. Long live James Bond.
    I'll raise my glass to that.
  • Posts: 4,617
    To be fair, once the decision was taken to carry on with the SP story line, the writers were very restricted. We had a whole thread here (for example) re what to do with Mads - from early death to marriage/divorce to having a row or just forgetting her. etc. Thinking about the story, a huge ammount of time and effort is taken up simply trying to tie up all the loose ends. SP has alot to answer for IMHO. It's not only plot but the whole emotional rabbit hole that just got deeper and deeper until we get to the point where Bond is on the verge of tears in almost every other scene. Unthinkable in previous generations.
  • Posts: 2,402
    00Heaven wrote: »
    Did anyone notice the end shot with the Aston looked a bit gunbarrel’y with the light at the end of the tunnel? That was a nice touch. Even if I was a blubbering mess!

    Re: final shot
    It's definitely meant to be a gunbarrel homage. It might be my favourite final shot of any Bond film. On a related note I loved that one shot of Bond in the tunnel shooting the last of Safin's goons that cut to the gunbarrel angle (if only we could have gotten that pose in Craig's actual gunbarrels).
  • patb wrote: »
    To be fair, once the decision was taken to carry on with the SP story line, the writers were very restricted. We had a whole thread here (for example) re what to do with Mads - from early death to marriage/divorce to having a row or just forgetting her. etc. Thinking about the story, a huge ammount of time and effort is taken up simply trying to tie up all the loose ends. SP has alot to answer for IMHO. It's not only plot but the whole emotional rabbit hole that just got deeper and deeper until we get to the point where Bond is on the verge of tears in almost every other scene. Unthinkable in previous generations.

    Can't disagree with your analysis. problems with NTTD can be directly linked to SP.
  • imranbecksimranbecks Singapore
    Posts: 984
    Are spoiler tags necessary here since this thread is for spoilers?

    Anyway, I think I need to watch this a second time at a regular cinema to appreciate it more and look out for flaws. Thoroughly enjoyed my first viewing of it though via the giant IMAX screen which was really impressive. Way better than Qos and Spectre, no doubt about that. I like that there were also some comedic, tongue in cheek moments in the movie.

    But the ending still leaves me stunned. Can't stop thinking about the way the movie ended. Darn.
  • Posts: 503
    As others have pointed out, there's definitely a pattern going on.
    • Luke Skywalker
    • Han Solo
    • John Connor
    • Joel Miller
    • James Bond
    • Indiana Jones? (rumored)

    I get that James Bond will "return" in the next movie, but does anyone really believe it'll be a you-know-which-demographic in the role? I'd be shocked if so. But I don't see how they can subvert the Bond character too much without it all falling apart.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,999
    imranbecks wrote: »
    Are spoiler tags necessary here since this thread is for spoilers?

    Anyway, I think I need to watch this a second time at a regular cinema to appreciate it more and look out for flaws. Thoroughly enjoyed my first viewing of it though via the giant IMAX screen which was really impressive. Way better than Qos and Spectre, no doubt about that. I like that there were also some comedic, tongue in cheek moments in the movie.

    But the ending still leaves me stunned. Can't stop thinking about the way the movie ended. Darn.

    They're certainly always appreciated but we've gone several pages now with a mixed usage of them so don't feel obligated, I suppose. It definitely doesn't hurt though.
  • Posts: 4,617
    Thing is, when you consider the huge talent available, both on screen and off, what could they have done with a really good, one off script. It would have been stunning.
  • FourDot wrote: »
    Just seen it last night and ultimately I think the real miracle of the film is that it feels like this is where the previous 4 were headed- a synthesis albeit an occasionally sloppy and unwieldy one.

    This is the only Bond with a beginning so it only makes sense he should have a comprehensive ending. In a way Fukunaga is the ideal fella for this assignment - like his other films plot is almost a perfunctory consideration and this is a film about its protagonist's soul, his quest to find, finally his centre and the realisation that it is an impossibility.

    Also well done to the poster with the death god theory as that is manifest tenfold and becomes the raison d'etre for the ending- CraigBond's tendency for everything he touches tending to wither and die becoming quite literally his curse. If Spectre's question was "could Bond stop being Bond and everything that involves" then NTTD's answer is a full blown scream of "NO".

    I wish it was a little tighter in the middle and Malek's character given a bit more shape and a lot more screentime but honestly I'm almost as jubilant as I was in 06 and 12. I'm always going to be disappointed Craig didn't get one more boilerplate Bond film but if the trade off is this special interregnum where we get a series of films actually about James Bond rather than featuring him then I couldn't be happier. It's not for everyone - indeed not all of it is for me but at least nobody involved is going to die wondering.

    This may be one of my favourite reactions so far. Cheers.
  • Posts: 2,402
    imranbecks wrote: »
    Are spoiler tags necessary here since this thread is for spoilers?

    I generally just try to use them for the ending or for ultra-specific visual/audio details. Even if someone is okay with learning the plot before they go in, I don't think anyone wants to lose the fun of a good easter egg, for example.
  • Zarozzor wrote: »
    Question for those who have seen the film:

    I have seen a few people saying that NTTD will be like OHMSS. Not because of all the references to it, but because OHMSS was disliked by many for years and is now regarded as one of the best in the series.

    Do you think this will be the case?

    100% yes.

    I'm not even sure it will go through a period where it's considered "disliked" except amongst the most hardcore fans who really, really just reject the central emotional idea of the ending.
  • DCisaredDCisared Liverpool
    Posts: 1,329
    Still think it's mad that the fact Bond has a kid isn't the major talking point of this film. I think we should've believed bond was dead and then the last shot should've been of that teddy or Madeline and Mathilde going off with bond to live a happy life. Can't get over how depressing the whole thing is lol and whilst I liked ohmss being used in the score , the bond theme should've ended the film.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,196
    Bond wrote: »
    As others have pointed out, there's definitely a pattern going on.
    • Luke Skywalker
    • Han Solo
    • John Connor
    • Joel Miller
    • James Bond
    • Indiana Jones? (rumored)

    I get that James Bond will "return" in the next movie, but does anyone really believe it'll be a you-know-which-demographic in the role? I'd be shocked if so. But I don't see how they can subvert the Bond character too much without it all falling apart.

    And Rocky Balboa
  • imranbecksimranbecks Singapore
    Posts: 984
    Earlier today for the screening of the movie at IMAX. Really fun to go see the movie all dressed up! This being Craig's final one and after a long wait, I feel I should just bring out my tux for the occasion. Received an interesting freebie too. Some sort of fan art poster of Vesper and Le Chiffre. Really nice.

    51536124749_7d76a718fc_b.jpg
    51536331645_0c461604a2_b.jpg
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,999
    That's a very cool poster, @imranbecks. I hope you have fun!
  • Posts: 250
    Bond wrote: »
    As others have pointed out, there's definitely a pattern going on.
    • Luke Skywalker
    • Han Solo
    • John Connor
    • Joel Miller
    • James Bond
    • Indiana Jones? (rumored)

    I get that James Bond will "return" in the next movie, but does anyone really believe it'll be a you-know-which-demographic in the role? I'd be shocked if so. But I don't see how they can subvert the Bond character too much without it all falling apart.

    And Rocky Balboa

    Rocky hasn't died though...?
  • Tokoloshe2Tokoloshe2 Northern Ireland
    Posts: 1,175
    One minor point I haven't seen mentioned yet: There is an inconsistency between Mr White saying of his wife "She left long ago" and the murder of Madeline's mother in NTTD.

    White having remarried is a plausible explanation, but not a very good one.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,196
    FourDot wrote: »
    Bond wrote: »
    As others have pointed out, there's definitely a pattern going on.
    • Luke Skywalker
    • Han Solo
    • John Connor
    • Joel Miller
    • James Bond
    • Indiana Jones? (rumored)

    I get that James Bond will "return" in the next movie, but does anyone really believe it'll be a you-know-which-demographic in the role? I'd be shocked if so. But I don't see how they can subvert the Bond character too much without it all falling apart.

    And Rocky Balboa

    Rocky hasn't died though...?

    Though he was for Creed 3, maybe I’m mistaken
  • Posts: 4,617
    Could White have been lying to cover up waht really happened?
  • Posts: 486
    Thoroughly enjoyed it but goodness knows where I'll rank it amongst the other Craig films, particularly as someone whom found a lot to enjoy in QOS and found SF to be overrated. It certainly doesn't have the lows - and lulls - of SP and yet I missed some of the moodier and dare I say more Bondian sequences of that film.

    Though who wants the same film twice? The Bond films are formulaic, and it's a formula I'm addicted to but it's those slight variances in the formula with each film that keeps us coming back intrigued as always. As a Bond film NTTD doesn't have a plot that's especially original or a story which desperately needed to be told but as a finale for Craig it's very satisfying. Craig's Bond is more fleshed out here than we've ever had before and the dialogue such as his sparring with M a lot more palatable this time round.

    Hard not to see this being a hit with the public as with CR and SF as it has a strong human interest story with some tragedy to tug the heartstrings. The action was fine but it's not truly the all out action blockbuster that some reviews have touted it as. I found the Matera chase sequence disappointingly brief. Some nice fisticuffs from Bond though and the EMP dispatch of a villain got the biggest laugh from the audience I was with.

    I was actually impressed with Rami Malek, more underused than underwhelming. His first full scene in the film (after the pre-credit appearance) in Madeline's office is probably him at his creepiest. I'm undecided about Nomi. Fortunately not an irritating character trying to do Bond down as we might fear but the film would have worked just as well without her.

    Hypocritically I'll say whilst Ana de Armas's Paloma is very much a shoe-in character too she's such a welcome appearance for her 12 minute screen time and terrific chemistry with Craig. If Craig had continued as Bond we could have had her as a recurring character whenever Bond was in that neck of the woods. I never had a problem with Madeline in SP, I liked how aloof she was, but she's well served and fleshed out here and gets in on the some of the action too. It was nice to see her back.

    Other than the callbacks to Vesper's theme, SF, the OHMSS theme and We Have All The Time In The World I didn't notice much from Hans Zimmer's score. Some would say that's exactly how a score should be, unobtrusive, but whilst I'll still pick up the soundtrack tomorrow I wouldn't say he was especially any better than Newman to be honest.

    I'm looking forward to seeing it on IMAX tomorrow and how that might change my perception of certain things such as the action sequences. It will be good to soak up Linus Sandgren's cinematography on a bigger screen. This truly is a lush and colourful looking film after the sepia SP.

    Not a franchise best entry but still an exceedingly well made effort from EON. This deserves to be praised and do well and I applaud them for holding out until it got a proper theatrical release. I'm just so glad we got that one more film from Craig and that it's finally been released and didn't disappoint.
  • Posts: 250
    Tokoloshe2 wrote: »
    One minor point I haven't seen mentioned yet: There is an inconsistency between Mr White saying of his wife "She left long ago" and the murder of Madeline's mother in NTTD.

    White having remarried is a plausible explanation, but not a very good one.

    Madeleine also mentions "after the divorce" when they're at L'Americain so they've really whiffed on that despite retaining the detail about the bleach. Whoops.

    On the plus side, one of the greatest villains of all time, Feathers McGraw, now appears in a Bond film.

    On a different note, re: Kleinman's titles
    the use of Britannia as a cornerstone of the imagery is really genius - not only as a throwback to the OHMSS titles and foreshadowing of Bond's icon on Q's map, but the fact that she is an emblem of the Royal Navy's victories... by whose hand Bond dies.
  • GatecrasherGatecrasher Classified
    Posts: 265
    I’d like to know if the henchman, Primo, makes a good henchman in this film. Besides Hinx, the henchmen in all of Craig’s film have been either nondescript or unmemorable. Thoughts?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,999
    FourDot wrote: »
    Tokoloshe2 wrote: »
    One minor point I haven't seen mentioned yet: There is an inconsistency between Mr White saying of his wife "She left long ago" and the murder of Madeline's mother in NTTD.

    White having remarried is a plausible explanation, but not a very good one.

    Madeleine also mentions "after the divorce" when they're at L'Americain so they've really whiffed on that despite retaining the detail about the bleach. Whoops.

    On the plus side, one of the greatest villains of all time, Feathers McGraw, now appears in a Bond film.

    On a different note, re: Kleinman's titles
    the use of Britannia as a cornerstone of the imagery is really genius - not only as a throwback to the OHMSS titles and foreshadowing of Bond's icon on Q's map, but the fact that she is an emblem of the Royal Navy's victories... by whose hand Bond dies.

    I'd say that's compliments of not having a clear plan or outline from the beginning and sort of retroactively tweaking things and making stuff up as you go - the details quickly get muddled and contradicted. To me, it seems like an easy thing to catch and memorize for later scripts, though, but I'm no screenwriter myself.
  • Posts: 4,617
    IMHO, not the best. If you look back, classic henchman either have a special/unique weapon or are just huge and threathening (or both). Primo was neither (unless he had a laser built into the eye? Now there's an idea)
  • Posts: 503
    Dunno if anyone mentioned it yet, but Q also revealed he is
    homosexual

    Seems like they just threw that in there because "we're hip! we're modern"!
Sign In or Register to comment.