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

11718202223298

Comments

  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 573
    It has crossed my mind if they would make an alternative ending for the bluray... I am highly sceptical of that, however... Plus there's quite a lot to change to make that work.

    But I'd appreciate some fanservice there :P.
  • ChevronChevron Northern Ireland
    Posts: 370
    Just popped on here after seeing the movie. I've been pretty much avoiding the forums for months to avoid being spoiled.

    Interesting to see how strongly people are reacting to the death. I'm OK with it.

    As soon as they started talking about the garden of death I was thinking "is it on an island near Japan? Yes? Holy crap, they're doing You Only Live Twice."

    So I actually like how it ended. Because I can tell myself he's probably not actually dead because of how he came back in the books.

    I loved the callbacks to OHMSS. The line "we have all the time in the world" and the use of the music stunned me. The way the Aston Martin in the tunnel faded out like in a gunbarrel was lovely.

    And his story goes on as Madeleine tells the girl about him.

    Anyway I'm surpringly OK with it. A heroic death saving the world.

    And James Bond will return.
  • DCisaredDCisared Liverpool
    Posts: 1,329
    Absolutely loved it. My favorite thing about it? It's a loud and proud sequel to the last movie. It's like EON said: "Whats that, you say? Didn't like Spectre? Go - - - - yourself! Cuckoo!" :))

    Blofeld really does love the cuckoo line.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 7,999
    Zarozzor wrote: »
    I’m sure it’s already been mentioned but the way he fades into the light during the gun barrel is foreshadowing the ending.

    I feel it partly is, but in hindsight I feel it's also foreshadowing of
    how the PTS is about Madeleine, not Bond
    .

    It also works as a nod to the one in OHMSS, as Lazenby Bond’s image dissipates.
  • 00Heaven wrote: »
    Rainy wrote: »
    I do wonder what general audiences will think of it.

    Two friends who are casual watchers have already told me they're confused at how this works for the future.

    Absolutely guaranteeing a big turnout for the next one then, too. ;)
  • edited September 2021 Posts: 820
    NicNac wrote: »
    AgentM72 wrote: »
    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.
    I agree with this. And even the ending will be forgiven in time by hard core fans, especially when the next actor is cast.
    Everyone who has asked me if I liked the film I’ve told them I loved 99% of it. And that’s the truth. I didn’t like the final pay off but in time I will be much more forgiving until eventually it becomes immaterial.
    Seeing it again on Wednesday with the wife. I know she will love it

    Same!

    Although, I'm already liking the payoff after the first viewing. I mean it must be felt on first viewing -- that's your only chance, unspoilt, to have it really work as an emotional experience. Every time after that is intellectual.

    I'm seeing it again next week multiple times, but I'm already convinced my opinion is only going to get stronger. I'm also looking forward to really taking in the rest of the film. When I saw it the first time, I was so charged up/anxious to finally be in the moment that even though I loved it all, it flew by so quickly and I know there's things I missed.

    For example, still not clear at all on how the farm/factory is supposed to work. Like what are all the hazmat-suited characters even doing in the radioactive water? Considering it's such a central setpiece, my one major criticism is that those elements of Safin's plot needed way way way more clear exposition.
  • ChevronChevron Northern Ireland
    edited September 2021 Posts: 370


    My one big criticism is how undeveloped Safin's motivation was. It was like "the audience knows there needs to be a bond villain." Handwave.

    That being said his appearance in the opening sequence was very good and made an impression.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited September 2021 Posts: 13,350
    From August 2018:

    James Bond director Danny Boyle quit the franchise in a row over killing off the spy.

    Daniel Craig, who is said to be filming his final 007 movie, and producer Barbara Broccoli are believed to have wanted to Bond to die in a “spectacular finale”, according to sources.

    But Oscar-winner Boyle, 61, refused to kill off the secret agent, labelling the idea “ridiculous”.

    One insider told the Sun on Sunday: “There were discussions about killing off Bond in dramatic fashion at the end.

    “It would be a final hurrah for Daniel, and leave fans hanging.

    “It would also leave it open for a twist in the next instalment — either Bond hadn’t died or there could be a Doctor Who-esque regeneration with a new actor.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/7102013/danny-boyle-quit-james-bond-franchise-in-a-row-over-offing-the-super-spy-in-dramatic-finale-to-the-25th-film/
  • Posts: 503
    People always ragging on The Sun, but here they are.... right again.
  • JeffreyJeffrey The Netherlands
    Posts: 308
    I saw the movie today at 00:15 am in a theater filled up with about one third of the capacity.

    One thing I noticed is that with most Bond films I have seen in the cinema, there are always a couple of moments when the audience has a laugh or even applauds. There was very little of that this time. The scientist for example, was clearly a character ment to make some laughs a couple of times - but that didn't work with this audience.

    In general: there is a lot to like about this film. The action, stunts, locations the way it all comes together on screen: it looks beautiful. The story was interesting. The soundtrack was pretty good. I really enjoyed large parts of the movie.

    But unfortunately, I found it to be an overly emotional film. The death of Felix, the death of B(r)ofeld, the separation with Madeline, becoming a father - and ultimately being killed off - blasted from the face of the earth. But only after being shot multiple times and even incurably poisoned resulting in never being able to be near your wife or child again.

    For me, they just went too far this time. Especially with him dying. I wasn't shocked by it in the sense: I did not see it coming. I knew they might do it. But I felt disappointed by the fact that they really went this way.

    Looking back I think SF was the turning point for Craig's Bond. It was a hugely successful film and a film that was very personal and emotional for Bond. With things we didn't see before. M dying, Bond crying, his past being explored (parents dying, Blofeld) etc. And I liked SF, but I preferred the tone of CR.

    Then with SP, it was again personal and emotional. And instead of dialling it back a bit, they doubled down on it.

    I desperately want to see a Bond movie with a less emotional/personal story. Just a exciting mission. Bond being cool, not being mocked or questioned about his relevance.

    In conclusion: there are some great scenes. The film looks great. Craig's acting is very good, although sometimes a bit out of character. But they went too far with killing him off. I have yet to plan my second viewing, think I might just wait a little longer with it this time.
  • I can't wait to hear the reactions of movie theater packed with a French audience going to see this movie in English with subtitles (a lot do so here in Paris), who will hear this new character who only speaks in French !
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 686
    I think NTTD is an incredibly well made film, but... resorting to killing off long-running characters, shock revelations about the past of the character, etc, these are things you should, imo, avoid in a franchise like Bond where you want the character to keep on going indefinitely. They've tried to go for the easy emotional punch of killing-off the title character, but they're presumably going to bring him back next movie? It's a cheap shock gimmick with no weight behind it, just like giving him a child that we're never going to see again, or killing-off Felix; it's a narrative cul-de-sac requiring a reboot immediately after. It's Craig's equivalent of the Invisible Car Of No Return.

    I guessed they'd kill of Craig's Bond because of some of the things said a few years ago, and it didn't bother me as much as I thought it might, but it did mean that the ending was predictable and lacked any emotional weight for me. Marvel comics have sadly been going down this route for decades now, killing-off a character with a huge amount of fan-fare, only to resurrect them a few years later for a similar publicity (and sales) boost. It becomes a cycle with ever diminishing returns.

    It also worries me that part of this seems to be that Eon no longer have faith in their ability to make a Bond movie that rests on its ability to entertain and enthral without the whole "...and NOTHING will ever be the same for Bond again!" gimmick. FRWL, Goldfinger, TSWLM... these films concentrated on making Bond on a mission exciting in itself, built great villains for Bond to fight, created iconic sequences etc without resorting to the shock revelation crutch. They've got the talent, but they seem to me to have lost confidence in the old formula.

    This sounds like I hated NTTD - I didn't, I enjoyed it until they upped the melodrama somewhere over the halfway mark, and even then I didn't hate it. There are great action sequences, and the cinematography is superb, but I just didn't find the plotting worked for me. I can see it worked for a lot of people, though. Just wanted to post my thoughts.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,567
    Samuel001 wrote: »
    From 2018:

    Daniel, and Barbara are believed to have wanted Bond to die in the “spectacular finale” but Danny refused labelling the idea “ridiculous”, according to sources.

    One insider told the Sun on Sunday: “There were discussions about killing off Bond in dramatic fashion at the end.

    “It would be a final hurrah for Daniel, and leave fans hanging.

    “It would also leave it open for a twist in the next instalment — either Bond hadn’t died or there could be a Doctor Who-esque regeneration with a new actor.
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/7194901/new-james-bond-movie-finland-actress-daniel-craig-love-interest/amp

    Well, the film did borrow from the novel YOLT, and we know how that ended and how TMWTGG started.
  • JeffreyJeffrey The Netherlands
    Posts: 308
    NicNac wrote: »
    Samuel001 wrote: »
    From 2018:

    Daniel, and Barbara are believed to have wanted Bond to die in the “spectacular finale” but Danny refused labelling the idea “ridiculous”, according to sources.

    One insider told the Sun on Sunday: “There were discussions about killing off Bond in dramatic fashion at the end.

    “It would be a final hurrah for Daniel, and leave fans hanging.

    “It would also leave it open for a twist in the next instalment — either Bond hadn’t died or there could be a Doctor Who-esque regeneration with a new actor.
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/7194901/new-james-bond-movie-finland-actress-daniel-craig-love-interest/amp

    Well, the film did borrow from the novel YOLT, and we know how that ended and how TMWTGG started.

    Well, in retrospect: I’m with Boyle on this one.
  • I loved it. I do wonder if they would use the TMWTGG opening for the next one but I think they should start clean and go back to stand alones. Every thing they did here felt like the right choice to end Craig's tenure.
  • Posts: 503
    2019:
    Boyle would not confirm the details of his axed screenplay, although he shared regrets over not being able to pursue his Bond dreams.

    “What John [Hodge] and I were doing, I thought, was really good,” Boyle told Empire. “It wasn’t finished, but it could have been really good. We were working very, very well, but they didn’t want to go down that route with us. So we decided to part company, and it would be unfair to say what it was because I don’t know what Cary [Joji Fukunaga] is going to do. I got a very nice message from him and I gave him my best wishes… It is just a great shame.”

    https://www.indiewire.com/2019/03/danny-boyle-breaks-silence-bond-25-exit-1202052588/

    Now I'll always wonder what Boyle's Bond 25 could've been... I feel some resentment at Broccoli for rejecting Boyle and going with what we've now gotten.
  • JohnBarryJohnBarry Dublin
    Posts: 34
    That quote that M read at the end, is that from a Bond novel?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,369
    The film has already leaked online. That certainly didn't take long at all.
  • I think NTTD is an incredibly well made film, but... resorting to killing off long-running characters, shock revelations about the past of the character, etc, these are things you should, imo, avoid in a franchise like Bond where you want the character to keep on going indefinitely. They've tried to go for the easy emotional punch of killing-off the title character, but they're presumably going to bring him back next movie? It's a cheap shock gimmick with no weight behind it, just like giving him a child that we're never going to see again, or killing-off Felix; it's a narrative cul-de-sac requiring a reboot immediately after. It's Craig's equivalent of the Invisible Car Of No Return.

    I guessed they'd kill of Craig's Bond because of some of the things said a few years ago, and it didn't bother me as much as I thought it might, but it did mean that the ending was predictable and lacked any emotional weight for me. Marvel comics have sadly been going down this route for decades now, killing-off a character with a huge amount of fan-fare, only to resurrect them a few years later for a similar publicity (and sales) boost. It becomes a cycle with ever diminishing returns.

    It also worries me that part of this seems to be that Eon no longer have faith in their ability to make a Bond movie that rests on its ability to entertain and enthral without the whole "...and NOTHING will ever be the same for Bond again!" gimmick. FRWL, Goldfinger, TSWLM... these films concentrated on making Bond on a mission exciting in itself, built great villains for Bond to fight, created iconic sequences etc without resorting to the shock revelation crutch. They've got the talent, but they seem to me to have lost confidence in the old formula.

    This sounds like I hated NTTD - I didn't, I enjoyed it until they upped the melodrama somewhere over the halfway mark, and even then I didn't hate it. There are great action sequences, and the cinematography is superb, but I just didn't find the plotting worked for me. I can see it worked for a lot of people, though. Just wanted to post my thoughts.

    Spot on post.
  • Posts: 485
    Bond wrote: »
    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"!

    Can't say Henderson in YOLT ever struck me as hip and modern.
  • JohnBarry wrote: »
    That quote that M read at the end, is that from a Bond novel?
    Jack London.

  • JohnBarryJohnBarry Dublin
    Posts: 34
    Zarozzor wrote: »
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    That quote that M read at the end, is that from a Bond novel?
    Jack London.

    Thanks, I was wondering if it was from a Bond novel because M doesn't mention the author, unlike Dench in Skyfall who does mention Tennyson's name.
  • edited September 2021 Posts: 503
    "Let me tell you about a man... his name was Bond, James Bond"

    Am I the only one who thinks that line is just as cheesy as ones like "Christmas comes once a year" in the Brosnan era? I cringed.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 686
    Bond wrote: »
    "Let me tell you about a man... his name was Bond, James Bond"

    Am I the only one who thinks that line is just as cheesy as ones like "Christmas comes once a year" in the Brosnan era? I cringed.

    I looked at the kid and realised her next would almost certainly be "I'd rather you just gave me my phone to play with."

    But we all know what long car rides with your parents can be like.
  • Posts: 526
    bondywondy wrote: »
    bondywondy wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    bondywondy wrote: »
    Got back an hour ago from midnight showing, my good I went in with low expectations but this really was like trying to polish a turd.
    It is so bad, poor wishy washy villain, Craigs Bond flips between angst ridden killing machine to some kind of retarded emotional Mod Edit wit, everybody dies, Felix, Blofeld, all of bloody Spectre, this previously invincable shadow organisation and to top it off Bond is blown to bits......?

    I'm sorry but this is a Bond I'll be glad to see the back of. Loved CR, even quiet liked QoS but started to go wrong as I've said before with SF.

    Some of the action set pieces were good but overall it was a bloody big mess.

    Thanks for your review. I was hoping I was in a bad dream and was imagining the reviews about Bond actually dying! Oh well... it really happens.

    I don't want to see a film where Bond dies but then... guess what.. he's alive in Bond 26! It's silly and in my opinion disrespectful to Barbara's father's legacy.

    If Bond isn't really dead, no body found and missing in action and that is confirmed in Bond 26's teaser trailer, I can buy into that premise. However, if Eon have 100 percent killed off Daniel Craig's James Bond then no thanks. I don't want to invest 2 hours 40 mins waiting to see him die.

    It's also incredible/mind boggling/depressing to know all the positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and on YouTube don't seem to care Bond dies. A 59 year long cinematic hero dies and it's like "who cares?" If you're a genuine Bond fan or even a paid critic you would think you would question the decision to kill off James Bond (albeit in a contrived way as we all know James Bond will return.)

    How do you kill off James Bond but in the end credits state Bond will return? It's a contrived gimmick. Eon are literally having their cake and eating it. They can exploit the emotional impact of Bond's death but also dismiss that impact in three/four years time when they make Bond 26 with the new back from the dead/rebooted Bond.
    Once you watch it you’ll see that they 100% kill him off.

    Then how do you do Bond 26? It's not the original James Bond unless it's set before Dr. No. I doubt Amazon want to make period Bond films set in the 1950s.

    Eon have torn up the reality rulebook. If Bond is dead but comes back, there is no real danger. Bond dies but he lives. Er... okay. Does that make continuity sense? Not really.

    I've no idea how they're going to do Bond 26. My guess is most casual fans won't care and just accept Bond is alive and with a new face.

    I guess a full reboot is the only way forward. Eon have boxed themselves into a corner and will have to reset the franchise from zero.




    Of course they’re gonna reboot. It’s what Spider-Man has already done twice so far and no one has an issue with it.

    Okay. I suppose fans unhappy with Bond dying will have to accept it or if not, boycott the film. I don't mean that to sound harsh but if you don't want to see James Bond die... there is no option but not to see NTTD. Just give it a miss and pretend Daniel Craig's era ended with SPECTRE. Bond and Swann driving away from London. The end.
    I’m going with what bondywondy said. Spectre is the end of the road for me. Bond drives off into the sunset alive and well. Spectre works as a solid bookend to the Craig era. Out of sight, out of mind. The more I read, this seems like the most depressing Bond ever made by a large margin. You have to wonder who came up with the morbid ending...and the motivation behind it. I guess DC had to back it, or obviously it would not have been made. Imo, you should not walk out of a Bond movie crying or with a heavy heart. Isn’t there enough doom and gloom these days? Anyways, I’m just going to leave it at that. And that you should never kill off James Bond. It’s never been done in 24 films, and after around 60 years. Why are we doing it now?
  • JohnBarryJohnBarry Dublin
    Posts: 34
    Maybe I missed something, but can anyone explain why Madeline lied about the child being Bond's daughter. I don't get why she initially said "she isn't yours". Bond even questions that by mentioning her blue eyes.

  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,655
    I'm just home from my first viewing and I liked it considerably more than SPECTRE...probably putting it somewhere around my number five. I'm not going to add any spoilers...they seem to be there, judging from the last posts (didn't read those 21 pages altogether). Still one remark: The end credits end with "James Bond will return" That should at least rule out a "Jane Bond" coming up, be it Lashana Lynch or whoever. By the way, I liked all three of his tough female sidekicks (including Madeleine but not counting Moneypenny).
  • Posts: 485
    Bond wrote: »
    "Let me tell you about a man... his name was Bond, James Bond"

    Am I the only one who thinks that line is just as cheesy as ones like "Christmas comes once a year" in the Brosnan era? I cringed.

    I didn't find it cheesy but I didn't think it worked as a line though. Maybe if it was years later and Mathilde had been older and not remembered him. "Let me tell you about that man..." would have made more sense.

    Bless Bond for stopping to pick up her 'Doo Doo' despite being in the thick of things.
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    edited September 2021 Posts: 1,884
    Bond wrote: »
    "Let me tell you about a man... his name was Bond, James Bond"

    Am I the only one who thinks that line is just as cheesy as ones like "Christmas comes once a year" in the Brosnan era? I cringed.

    I liked the line even if it sounds familiar from another movie. Bond has become legend/myth essentially. He lives on through the people he met and their stories. (Of course he also
    lives on through his daughter Mathilde.)

  • JohnBarry wrote: »
    Zarozzor wrote: »
    JohnBarry wrote: »
    That quote that M read at the end, is that from a Bond novel?
    Jack London.

    Thanks, I was wondering if it was from a Bond novel because M doesn't mention the author, unlike Dench in Skyfall who does mention Tennyson's name.

    It’s a direct reference to Moneypenny using the same quote in YOLT, the book !
Sign In or Register to comment.