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

16566687071298

Comments

  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    Swann keeping her daughter a secret it's extremely understandable...
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 573
    Hmm OK. Thank you for the well reasoned explanation for it. I just didn't really think of it that way until then.

    Must go though!!
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 3,333
    Some very good points there @bondywondy. Though I don't think the producers were being arrogant, I just think they saw this as a chance to bring Craig's era to a close, which they always saw as its own self-contained entity. But as you rightly pointed out, Bond 26 will make his death seem rather meaningless when we're expected to go along with a new iteration of the same character just a few years down the line. Part of me agrees with those that think they made brave choices, whilst the other side agrees with those that think it's altered the cinematic DNA of the character indefinitely. I suppose the major difference with OHMSS was that the producers didn't bring back Tracy Bond immediately after killing her. Once she was dead, she stayed dead, giving her final moments more impact. The same can't be said of James Bond himself.

    I've only seen the movie once so I might have a different opinion on my second viewing. Personally, I still feel torn by the way in which Bond died. I'm undecided whether it was a heroic thing to do, or simply Bond throwing in the towel after being severely wounded. Looking at the many different scenarios and possible outcomes, I still felt he could've survived and waited for a technological cure for the nanobot virus rather than choosing death itself. I dunno, I'll have to see the entire third act again. Put it this way, it's going to take a very long time before I can say with any clarity where this movie finally falls in my overall ranking.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    @bondywondy I simply respectfully disagree with your points.
    Except the fact that it is a divisive film; it is. A few have a sort of "middle ground" feeling about it, but it seems most fans either love it or hate it.

    1) Morality - You say EON should preserve Bond; they have done so. They respect the character. They respect the audience in general. They don't aim to please every spectrum of Bond fan, nor should they. They have moved the series forward, with boldness at times (and obviously with this film). Otherwise repeating same formula and taking no risks would have killed the franchise years ago. Their moral/ethical imperative, in my eyes, is to treat the character with respect, do not let the series stagnate, do their best to provide top quality films that respect the history of Bond but also continue fresh elements, and films that will continue to do good box office. They are good stewards of Cubby's legacy.

    2) Divisive - it is a divisive film. Other films have had controversies but this is the strongest one. I can live with that.

    3) Disrespectful - No, absolutely this is not true for all older fans. Or even for all fans in general. I'm an older fan and in no way do I feel disrespected by this fine Bond film. Others sure might, you obviously do, but you cannot lump us all together. I respect Barbara and all involved in EON more than ever for taking this risk and making such a very fine, beautifully crafted Bond film.

    4 Continuity nightmare - this could actually make me laugh, but I know you are serious. There is no real continuity in the history of Bond films. Just some here and there; not really until Craig's tenure. And there is zero reason for the next Bond film to even mention Craig's Bond. Just start fresh, like they have before, and move on. Just make the next one as beautifully well made and give us a great story and great new Bond actor - all those important elements. But continuity? Not a problem, no.

    5) Arrogance - Bond is theirs, their character, their responsibility. I sense a lot of arrogance from some fans, but not from EON. What you call arrogance, I would say is just confidence and a willingness to be creative and expand the Bond stories to give many fans a different kind of Bond, a different kind of Bond world and film to experience - knowing they cannot please all the fans.

    6) Meaningless death - 100% strongly disagree. This story gave us a sad, tragic, yet profound, noble, and heroic death for Bond. Craig's films tell the story from start to finish for this particular Bond, and I appreciate that. Each new Bond actor is James Bond. His dying in this film is for this set, this Bond. So yes, it was a meaningful death and now we move on to a new set of stories with the new James Bond. As we .... always have ... since Dr. No.

    I do not expect the folks I differ with will change their opinions much, nor will I. Maybe a little here and there. But I am okay with that. That's art. It's subjective. I go your way, you go your way. I hope whatever disagreements fans have about this particular film can settle down as "agreeing to disagree" and just watch, or do not watch, this Bond film again. I respect personal choices in film, music, art, dance, etc.

    Seething anger, bitterness, and wanting to change or control something that is totally out of our control and already moving on ... is unhealthy. And there will be many new Bond films coming our way in the future to enjoy (or not).

    I like writing about how much I like and value NTTD. I would like us to settle enough to be amiable and accepting of our different interpretations and enjoyment (or lack thereof) of this particular Bond film. That's what I hope.

    Meanwhile, I am seeing NTTD for the third time this Sunday. I am lucky in that my cinema here is safe and so relaxing. All my previous Bond films in America we were packed in like sardines, I had to sit with my feet up on the back of the chair in front of me to be at all comfortable, and yet I am so short that I had to fight to get to the best view possible as soon as the doors opened. I have a reserved seat here, at a rather luxurious theater, and that is the way to go. I wish everybody could have that kind of experience. B-)
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 7,953
    bondywondy wrote: »
    bondywondy wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    bondywondy wrote: »
    James Bond will return.

    .... which is Eon telling you James Bond is not dead. He's not dead. The text doesn't say

    A rebooted James Bond will return.
    Casino Royale was a reboot, and at the end of Die Another Day, it said James Bond will return.

    Also, Craig's Bond is in no way connected to any other. He's his own universe. It's been pretty clear that's the case since before Casino was even released. And again, even if Craig's Bond didn't die, they'd still reboot it, because to carry on his narrative with a different, younger actor, would make no sense.

    And killing Bond makes sense? Lol

    Tell that to all the fans that feel betrayed by that decision!

    Oh well I tried. I can't convince you lot you are all wrong. Wait and see... in three years time Bondywondy will be proven right and you can say "sorry, Bondywondy, you were right all along."
    😎 😉

    It actually does make sense. You (and others) may not like it, but this separate continuity allows them to kill Bond without and real impact to future films. What wouldn't make sense is to carry on this iteration of Bond who has been aging in-story over the past 3 films.

    I respectfully and profoundly disagree that it makes sense. Not wishing to bore you or others too long but here are reasons why it makes no sense and is therefore wrong.

    1 - 'Morality'
    Barbara Broccoli and MG Wilson didn't create James Bond. They were bequeathed the character due to bloodline. Ian Fleming created James Bond and Albert Broccoli and Harry Saltzman created/developed the cinematic version. From the most basic moral standpoint you can easily argue B and MG have no unilateral moral right to kill off Bond. They inherited the character so it is morally incumbent upon them to preserve Bond, not kill him off to appease an actor in his final film portraying James Bond.

    2 - 'Divisive'
    Killing James Bond creates a huge and potential forever rift in the fanbase. Many fans will never forgive or understand why Eon killed off Bond. I'm not going to guess what percentage of the fanbase hate the death of James Bond but it exists and will continue to exist. This is Eon's fault. There was zero reason to create this division in the fanbase. It serves no purpose at all. It doesn't bring the Bond fans closer together so it was nonsensical of Eon to allow the division to happen.

    3 - 'Disrespectful'
    Killing Bond is completely disrespectful to all the fans that have loyally supported the franchise since 1962. If Eon Productions can't see that or can see that but couldn't care less, that doesn't say much about them, does it? Nope.

    4 - 'Continuity nightmare'
    Killing off Bond destroys any semblance of linear continuity in the franchise. If Bond is dead in NTTD but alive in Bond 26 it's inherently nonsensical. Sure, fans can argue "it's just a reboot, deal with it!" but that doesn't negate nor justify the fact Bond died in Bond 25. You kill off Bond but he's still alive. Nonsensical.

    5 - 'Arrogance'
    It is the height of arrogance for Eon to kill off Bond, expect fans to be emotionally affected by his death, but then expect them to forget his death (or put it to one side) and form a long queue to see Bond 26. It's arrogant presumption to expect fans to accept his death then sheepishly accept he's alive again.

    6 - 'Meaningless death'
    The death of Bond is meaningless because we all know Bond isn't dead. People can argue and say "but Bond is dead, the next Bond isn't Craig's Bond!" but imho that view is nonsensical. The next Bond will be a 00, be referred to as James Bond, get orders from M, go on missions. He's still James Bond in character and job so his death in the previous film is meaningless. Death has meaning because it's loss. The person never comes back but Bond is coming back in Bond 26 so it's a lossless death. Nonsensical.

    All these reasons give me hope Bond isn't dead. The death of James Bond is a deliberate cliffhanger? It's possible. We'll have to wait and see.

    You're overthinking all of this and being over-dramatic. The world is going to move on from this, people are still going to go see Bond films. Maybe for YOU and others that share your sentiment that EON has done the unforgivable and that everything is nonsense from here on. But that's just your opinion, and you have to accept that not everyone here is befuddled by concepts like introducing a new James Bond that exists outside of the continuity of Craig's run. That's why it's called fiction.

    I read all of your reasoning, and they mean nothing to me. They hold no merit. Because I understand James Bond is just make believe. As much of a figment of one's imagination as Santa Claus.

    Anyway, this is the last time I'll respond to you unless you decided to stop being the personification of a brick wall.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    What if I watch NTTD, but leave 10 minutes before the movie is over? I don’t want to see what happens to Bond. How much would I miss?

    You have to see it in the context of the film. Much as you don't want to see Bond die, it works pretty well in relation to the story and is a poignant ending for Craig's tenure. There's also a small scene in M's office that really got me.

    I am surprised how many members are on this discussion who haven't seen the film yet. You're ruining it for yourselves.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited October 2021 Posts: 12,459
    @goldenswissroyale I am glad you enjoyed it more. I also enjoyed it more during my 2nd viewing. I could relax and try to pick up the more subtle nuances in it.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 7,953
    5) Arrogance - Bond is theirs, their character, their responsibility. I sense a lot of arrogance from some fans, but not from EON.

    I call it fan entitlement.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited October 2021 Posts: 5,679
    Seriously I’m not gonna explain the concept of a reboot again. If you don’t get it, you obviously don’t want to.
  • Posts: 1,009
    Univex wrote: »
    I don't have any problem with him dying. Not may main concern with the film.

    But I'll say this in favour of it, the next time around, we'll be jumping up and down our seats, afraid that the man will catch a bullet, be mangled, or die. It'll bring the sense of danger back. Bond can die, he's human, not a superhero from Krypton.

    Good angle here
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 7,953
    I remember when SKYFALL came out that a lot of the commentary was how killing M brought back a sense of danger, because while Bond will "obviously" never be killed the same couldn't be said for other long standing characters. Well, sounds like Bond is not impervious to death as well.

    Anyway, back to pearl clutching.
  • Posts: 3,333
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Seriously I’m not gonna explain the concept of a reboot again. If you don’t get it, you obviously don’t want to.
    I suppose it all depends on your definition of a reboot. A soft reboot and a hard reboot can be two different things. The Batman movies always go for a hard reboot, changing pretty much everything about them, right down to the theme music, suit, Batmobile, even the way Gotham City looks. Whereas Bond carries over the same iconography, theme music and sometimes even the same car and actors. Some members here even want the same actors (Naomie Harris, Ralph Fiennes, Ben Whishaw) to reprise their roles in the next reboot, which does bring into question what exactly are they asking for and do they themselves understand a reboot?
  • BelinusBelinus Scotland
    Posts: 48
    5) Arrogance - Bond is theirs, their character, their responsibility. I sense a lot of arrogance from some fans, but not from EON.

    I call it fan entitlement.

    I’m maybe missing the point here but why does not agreeing with the film ending make people arrogant or entitled? Surely it’s just the way they feel?

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 7,953
    Belinus wrote: »
    5) Arrogance - Bond is theirs, their character, their responsibility. I sense a lot of arrogance from some fans, but not from EON.

    I call it fan entitlement.

    I’m maybe missing the point here but why does not agreeing with the film ending make people arrogant or entitled? Surely it’s just the way they feel?

    More directed at bondy really. That nonsense of him writing a letter to EON encouraging them to retcon Bond’s death where he turns out alive decides to not reconnect with his daughter and Madeleine and just return to the service behaving like nothing ever happened.
  • BelinusBelinus Scotland
    Posts: 48
    Thanks. As I have said previously, I am upset at the ending of the film but I do feel that we have to accept what’s happened and move forward.
  • Belinus wrote: »
    5) Arrogance - Bond is theirs, their character, their responsibility. I sense a lot of arrogance from some fans, but not from EON.

    I call it fan entitlement.

    I’m maybe missing the point here but why does not agreeing with the film ending make people arrogant or entitled? Surely it’s just the way they feel?
    Some seem to be taking it very personal that some people dislike the film and/or the killing of Bond lol
  • Posts: 7,492
    Belinus wrote: »
    5) Arrogance - Bond is theirs, their character, their responsibility. I sense a lot of arrogance from some fans, but not from EON.

    I call it fan entitlement.

    I’m maybe missing the point here but why does not agreeing with the film ending make people arrogant or entitled? Surely it’s just the way they feel?
    Some seem to be taking it very personal that some people dislike the film and/or the killing of Bond lol

    Not really. However people seem to take it extremely personal that they dared to do something groundbraking and unexpected with "their" character.
  • Posts: 3,333
    I tend to agree @MakeshiftPython. What's done is done, so there's little point in trying to turn back the clock. This is why my attention has mostly been focused on the "reboot" and what kind of a Bond we're going to get in the twenty-sixth installment. The Craig Era is now officially over for those that have already seen NTTD, just as it was for Connery in DAF (1971).
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 661
    Most of the people taking the plotting personally are giving their thoughts on the film and its plot-points, not other posters, and that is what this thread is for. Argue against those reasons, by all means, but...

    "Play the ball, not the man."

    Many of the pro-NTTD are making personal remarks about the posters. It's just unnecessary, imo.

    This is exactly like it was on the Star Wars forums at the height of the prequels.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 232
    Re Bond's death I'm not going to repeat my earlier posts. I'll retire from the conservation and I'll give my review of NTTD when I see it on home video.

    I'll just reiterate the most compelling reason why I think James Bond is not dead. Plot potential.

    By fooling the worldwide audience that Bond is dead, Eon have a once in a franchise opportunity to exploit that scenario. The marketing and story potential is huge. How did Bond escape death? Where is he? Will he ever return to MI6? How can he recover from the nanobots virus? Prime material to explore in Bond 26. Arguably too good to dismiss with a full reboot.

    Also, I would argue Bond is just one version, one person, not many people. It's the interpretation that changes but the dna, the core essence of Bond never changes so this is why I remain committed to the belief Bond has not died in No Time To Die. My prediction is Bond 26 will be a sequel to NTTD albeit with a new actor in the role and a degree of tonal change.

    I have screensaved this post so I can show it when Bond 26 is released (assuming my prediction is correct). 😊
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    You should screensave Q's monitor where they show Bond's life parameters as well.

    This is becoming embarassing at this point.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    Do I have to start singing that song from Frozen? ;) (you know, THAT song!)
  • BelinusBelinus Scotland
    Posts: 48
    bondywondy wrote: »
    Re Bond's death I'm not going to repeat my earlier posts. I'll retire from the conservation and I'll give my review of NTTD when I see it on home video.

    I'll just reiterate the most compelling reason why I think James Bond is not dead. Plot potential.

    By fooling the worldwide audience that Bond is dead, Eon have a once in a franchise opportunity to exploit that scenario. The marketing and story potential is huge. How did Bond escape death? Where is he? Will he ever return to MI6? How can he recover from the nanobots virus? Prime material to explore in Bond 26. Arguably too good to dismiss with a full reboot.

    Also, I would argue Bond is just one version, one person, not many people. It's the interpretation that changes but the dna, the core essence of Bond never changes so this is why I remain committed to the belief Bond has not died in No Time To Die. My prediction is Bond 26 will be a sequel to NTTD albeit with a new actor in the role and a degree of tonal change.

    I have screensaved this post so I can show it when Bond 26 is released (assuming my prediction is correct). 😊

    Bond has to be dead. Bond 26 cannot have him resurfaced with a wife / girlfriend and child. If it did they would have to kill them off at the start as I can’t see the film having Bond going home to them at the end of the night. To do that would be starting off on the wrong foot for the new Bond.

    I do agree that I personally have always thought on Bond as being one person. That’s one reason why I can’t get my head around killing him, but he is dead.
  • Posts: 6,507
    Are we still going on about this? I agree with @matt_u, this is becoming embarrassing.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    Anyway happy JB day folks!
  • BelinusBelinus Scotland
    Posts: 48
    matt_u wrote: »
    Anyway happy JB day folks!

    And to you. Didn’t realise that was a thing until I saw it on Twitter earlier
  • Posts: 7,492
    Belinus wrote: »
    bondywondy wrote: »
    Re Bond's death I'm not going to repeat my earlier posts. I'll retire from the conservation and I'll give my review of NTTD when I see it on home video.

    I'll just reiterate the most compelling reason why I think James Bond is not dead. Plot potential.

    By fooling the worldwide audience that Bond is dead, Eon have a once in a franchise opportunity to exploit that scenario. The marketing and story potential is huge. How did Bond escape death? Where is he? Will he ever return to MI6? How can he recover from the nanobots virus? Prime material to explore in Bond 26. Arguably too good to dismiss with a full reboot.

    Also, I would argue Bond is just one version, one person, not many people. It's the interpretation that changes but the dna, the core essence of Bond never changes so this is why I remain committed to the belief Bond has not died in No Time To Die. My prediction is Bond 26 will be a sequel to NTTD albeit with a new actor in the role and a degree of tonal change.

    I have screensaved this post so I can show it when Bond 26 is released (assuming my prediction is correct). 😊

    Bond has to be dead. Bond 26 cannot have him resurfaced with a wife / girlfriend and child. If it did they would have to kill them off at the start as I can’t see the film having Bond going home to them at the end of the night. To do that would be starting off on the wrong foot for the new Bond.

    I do agree that I personally have always thought on Bond as being one person. That’s one reason why I can’t get my head around killing him, but he is dead.

    Well... you know he is a fictional character...? Right...?
  • BelinusBelinus Scotland
    Posts: 48

    [/quote]

    Well... you know he is a fictional character...? Right...? [/quote]

    Ok, I’ll ignore the tone and give my reply. Yes, I know it’s a fictional character. I like reading fiction. I like when when it’s a series of books about one main character. In some series of books I’ve read the main character has died at the end. If done in the correct way I’m fine with that. I don’t however, expect said character to then reappear in the author’s next novel as though nothing has happened.

  • edited October 2021 Posts: 6,507
    matt_u wrote: »
    Anyway happy JB day folks!

    Oh yeah, that's true. Forgot it was today :)

    Happy James Bond day.
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 573
    Happy JB day all :).
Sign In or Register to comment.