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

19192949697245

Comments

  • Feyador wrote: »
    Follow up questions.
    • At what point did you all realize that the child was Bond’s?
    • And at what point did Bond realize that the child was his?
    When Safin told Madeleine that she had compromised herself with a killer (to survive), I thought there was a 3rd mystery character waiting to be introduced. Then I thought, the father was Safin himself (which would have been creepy, but suspension of disbelief had set in for me). It wasn’t until the moment where Safin said, “Look at your father!”, when I realized what was going on.

    I took Madeleine's initial claim at face value. I mean, what kind of person would lie about something like that?

    Perhaps one long practiced at the art of survival? And Madeleine is certainly a survivor. And a woman who has taught her own daughter how to hide.

    But I remained skeptical. And I think Bond himself didn't know for sure, as in his uncertainty in how to introduce Madeleine & Mathilde to Nomi, which is a moment I loved.

    And you know, except for confirming for Bond in their final dialogue scene together that Mathilde does have Bond's blue eyes (or consoling words to that effect) Madeleine never explicitly states that Mathilde is Bond's child. At least I think I'm right about that. But of course Mathilde must be, right? Could Safin be wrong or simply messing with Bond? It seems unlikely ....

    You know, until the Craig arc, I don't think we've really had much deliberate ambiguity in the series - though, of course, it just might be narrative incompetence in this instance. But either way, I had trouble making out some of the dialogue and will benefit tremendously from future subtitles/captions.

    As far as the Mathilde reveal, I took it as Bond didn't actually believe Madeleine when she told him she isn't his. I think from the moment we see her face and the light hits her blue eyes he knows that's his daughter. Just the way he looks at her you can tell he knows.
  • Posts: 614
    I think the more likely case is that both Craig and the producers saw eye to eye when it came to giving Bond an emotional death. Danny Boyle didn’t agree.

    I do look forward to finding out what exactly Boyle’s script would have been. That will always be the most interesting behind the scenes info for NTTD.

    Same here. Would like to know, whether it really was B oyle's refusa to let Bond die, mor whether uit was Boyle refusing to have the script revised and changed, or whether it was the casting of Tomasz Kot. Funnily, some days ago I found two articles about Boyle and Bond from the same source, the first one from 2018, where they wrote, that Boyle actually wanted Bond to be killed. In 2019/2020, the same source mentioned Boyle's refusal to have Bond killed as the reason for him walking out. Now, I can't find these articles anymore, other wise I would posted them. But maybe I will find them again.

    But, yes, would be great to know the Boyle/Hodge script.

    I remember very well that Boyle was supposed to have walked away because he wanted Bond to die and Eon refused. I remember it 100%.

    A model example of misdirection, as it turns out.
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    edited October 2021 Posts: 224
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    I say it constantly lol but if any of these people were in charge of the Bond franchise we’d have just watched the 24th remake of Dr. No.
    That's unnecesarrily rude. Trench warfare going on around here.
    Yet, I agree with @NickTwentyTwo. Given how little some are willing to deviate from the safest version of the so-called "Bond formula", we'd just end up with a generic, by-the-numbers reproduction of GF or TSWLM. I like a film that takes chances. Remember OHMSS? I bet some "true fans" really hated a Bond film that sees 007 tie the knot in 1969. Now, it's considered one of the best in the series if not THE best. Another bold move, LTK, was also heavily criticised. OMG, Bond operates outside the service! Now, it's another fairly well-received "special" film. I don't mind the occasional risky film.

    It goes the other way, too. If you keep pushing boundaries and stretching things further and further, you invariably end up destroying what you've created.

    And BTW nobody wants copies of earlier Bond movies. The Bond formula is very basic and leaves room for plenty of originality. It's one of the reasons why the Bond series has lasted up until now.

    So-called traditionalists don't want copies of Bond movies, we just don't want outright subversion and sabotage.
  • Posts: 13,169
    Just got back from a matinee showing and I EFFIN" LOVED IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Holy crap that was great!

    This is my favorite Craig Bond film by far..............although I love the others.

    Damn!!!!

    Well worth the wait.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 35,383
    Feyador wrote: »
    Follow up questions.
    • At what point did you all realize that the child was Bond’s?
    • And at what point did Bond realize that the child was his?
    When Safin told Madeleine that she had compromised herself with a killer (to survive), I thought there was a 3rd mystery character waiting to be introduced. Then I thought, the father was Safin himself (which would have been creepy, but suspension of disbelief had set in for me). It wasn’t until the moment where Safin said, “Look at your father!”, when I realized what was going on.

    I took Madeleine's initial claim at face value. I mean, what kind of person would lie about something like that?

    Perhaps one long practiced at the art of survival? And Madeleine is certainly a survivor. And a woman who has taught her own daughter how to hide.

    But I remained skeptical. And I think Bond himself didn't know for sure, as in his uncertainty in how to introduce Madeleine & Mathilde to Nomi, which is a moment I loved.

    And you know, except for confirming for Bond in their final dialogue scene together that Mathilde does have Bond's blue eyes (or consoling words to that effect) Madeleine never explicitly states that Mathilde is Bond's child. At least I think I'm right about that. But of course Mathilde must be, right? Could Safin be wrong or simply messing with Bond? It seems unlikely ....

    You know, until the Craig arc, I don't think we've really had much deliberate ambiguity in the series - though, of course, it just might be narrative incompetence in this instance. But either way, I had trouble making out some of the dialogue and will benefit tremendously from future subtitles/captions.

    As far as the Mathilde reveal, I took it as Bond didn't actually believe Madeleine when she told him she isn't his. I think from the moment we see her face and the light hits her blue eyes he knows that's his daughter. Just the way he looks at her you can tell he knows.

    That's exactly how I saw it too. From the moment he saw her, I think he knew.
  • Posts: 7,327
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Just got back from a matinee showing and I EFFIN" LOVED IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Holy crap that was great!

    This is my favorite Craig Bond film by far..............although I love the others.

    Damn!!!!

    Well worth the wait.

    Great news! I remember how sceptical you were a couple of days ago... :P
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded Riding a white swan to Matera
    edited October 2021 Posts: 12,409
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I finally got to see it at 4 pm yesterday in a near empty theater, needed to collect my thoughts after that emotional ending and see how I felt this morning. First, here's a photo of my daughter and I, taken outside the theater an hour or so before I went in. She's spent the last several weeks watching the other 24 installments right alongside me, so I thought it fitting to get a picture with her before the only one she's yet to see. All in due time, though, I'll change that once the 4K is out!

    2f8r1v4b44pz.jpeg


    I'm going to need to see this one a few more times at least before I'm able to rank it but it was even better than I suspected it might be.

    I'm really shocked by how the aspects I was most worried about (Bond and Madeleine's relationship, the MI6 crew, Mathilde, Bond dying) ended up being some of my favorite moments. I didn't sense an iota of chemistry between Bond and Madeleine in SP but I absolutely bought their journey in NTTD - settling in off the grid, the atmosphere between the two when things go south and there's a sense of betrayal, finding one another five years on, emotions still running high. I can't believe I walked away feeling for Madeleine so much and enjoying her character so much.

    Also, this is one of the most non-Bondian Bond films I've ever seen. I need more viewings of it but this may very well be Craig's best performance; he felt so human, so real, like James Bond was no longer a character but an actual ex-agent living off the grid who is called back into action. The way the conversations flow, the fresh and natural nature of the quips, it didn't feel at all choreographed, didn't feel like dialogue written down on a page (sans a few moments, of course). All the one liners related to the bionic eye were great and it seems Craig's sarcasm and sense of humor finally hit its full potential. He had me cheering, laughing and crying throughout this. I'd say if there's ever a Bond performance worthy of awards, it'd be this one. I just can't believe how great his take was after SP.

    The MI6 crew was still used a bit too much for my tastes, but holy hell, M was solid, in a similar situation to M in SF, Moneypenny wasn't bad or cringe and this is one of my favorite Q performances in ages (his final moments with Bond? Incredible).

    Mathilde was so beautiful and it was instantly easy to connect with her story and feel for her when she's scared, when she loses Dou Dou, when she smiles at the start of a story about James Bond. I can't believe how well it was executed. I became a father in January to my beautiful daughter and I'm sure that recent life experience made me all the more emotional.

    And Bond dying? I was prepped and ready for it but I think I cried like a baby nonstop for the last five or so minutes before the credits rolled. It was heroic in a personal sense, effective and very emotionally charged. I get why they did it and I gotta say, it doesn't bother me at all, just made the stakes and the finale all the more special to me.

    There are bits that didn't work for me, sure. Valdo had one or two OK moments but for the most part, he was slimy, embarrassing and featured way too often. He's like a Boris Grishenko-lite but missed the mark so often (that CGI shot of him falling down the elevator shaft, screaming was so bad) and didn't bring anything to the table for me. Maybe that'll be better on subsequent viewings, though, as the theater I was in had bizarre sound issues - sometimes the dialogue felt muted, other times the score was too loud to hear what else was going on. I could still piece together what was going on but I would've loved some subtitles, damn.

    I also think from the PTS to Cuba is incredible and Norway to the finale is excellent, but I could've done with something in the middle of the film, where it dragged just a hair and lost some momentum.

    Also, I quite dug Safin, but much like others, his objective is quite muddled at times (I'll admit, I got lost at times on what was done by SPECTRE's hand, what was the result of Safin, Primo's motivations etc.) and that'll likely be helped with more viewings, some subtitles and letting things breathe more so I can check out more details and let the story click even more. His appearances are sort of akin to Dr. No but he doesn't get the same sort of reveal that Julius does - a quick monologue with Bond before disappearing, the rest of his moments on the island are slightly sinister but not terribly threatening or impactful. I love Malek and wish he had some more to work with here (and I do wish they had a proper tussle at the end of the film like I was expecting, but seeing Bond finally shoot and kill a target after so many years, on top of Safin's glee over Bond never, ever being able to interact with Madeleine and Mathilde again makes up for things considerably).

    The action here is consistently solid, easily my second favorite of the series but nothing will beat QoS' frenetic energy for me. I will say, though, that most of these moments are way too short and deserved just a few minutes longer. In hindsight, it seems super easy to piece together the entire PTS in Matera simply because of how short it is - the foot race back to Madeleine and the car chase were brilliant, but definitely needed more time. I really, really like the shot of Bond dropping the mines, taking out the car, drifting and spinning 360 degrees while firing at the other pursuing vehicle and then moving on. Bond weighing his options and the supposed betrayal while all the goons unload on the DB5, Madeleine pleading with him to do something, only for him to say "OK." and destroy everything in sight and escape was great.

    The title sequence had some surprisingly great moments and motifs in it, but damn, they really need to go with some fresh blood next time. It feels like Kleinman keeps trying to come up with something akin to the M:I series that shows off the major events of the film instead of working a couple of thematic elements, some guns and girls in and leaving it at that. I don't need any more Bond silhouettes enveloped in mystery, I don't need his relationship on display, none of it. I can't recall much of it now (maybe that says something) but I felt it stood out much more positively for me than his last two works. Not a fan of that title song at all, though, but it's better than Sam Smith's mewling "work."

    Jamaica is one of the highlights. Hell, I wish the film had spent at least half its runtime here, so I could've enjoyed more of the culture and beautiful nightlife it had to offer. The return of Felix is great - perhaps their camaraderie and close "buddy-ness" doesn't work as much since the man's been sidelined since 2008 and their relationship never grew, but I'll chalk that up to off-screen happenings, because their connection here is palpable and I loved their conversation in the bar together. His death hit me really hard - I think in a film where you're killing off Bond and Blofeld, you don't have to kill so many iconic characters by taking out Leiter too - but it is a good motivator for Bond wanting to destroy Ash later on. Ash, before I forget, was great, playing the goofy, fake-nervous State Department representative who clearly has ulterior motives (seriously, from the second he was on screen, did anybody think he was going to remain a good guy? I do think the series needs to step away from these obvious double agents and friends-turned-enemies, it's a bit repetitive by this point). The way he giggles when Valdo kicks him the gun, the way he nervously stumbles over his words when first meeting Bond. Very solid. I also liked the little red-lit tussle between Bond and Ash - but again, it's done way too quick. It starts to get great and it's over before you know it.

    The Cuba scenes were very classic (some of the gunplay felt a bit one note to me) and Zimmer's score here is incredible (the bit as Bond screams and throws himself and the other guys through the rail is one of my favorite moments) and there's a real fantastical feel to everything else - the scenery, a wild sex/birthday party for SPECTRE where Blofeld fakes crazy so he can be in attendance via a bionic eye, the instant chemistry Bond and Paloma share (she was so damn lovable and fun, I wish she had more screentime too). It really worked for me. I caught the MGW cameo too! Felt pretty obvious to me and I had forgotten about it, wasn't even looking for it.

    We get one Blofeld scene in the middle of the film and he's much, much better than he was in SP. I thought this scene was going to be insanely hokey and bordering on cringe but it was quite good. It wasn't anywhere near as overblown as I thought it would be. It's just a shame they thought it was a good idea to introduce Blofeld in the fourth film and kill him off at the end of an era. Onto the next one, I suppose! I think this is where I really start to have issues - all the nanobot and sci-fi stuff gets a bit ridiculous and the way they continuously explain it, leading to something inevitable, gets a little old. I think these moments would've fared better had they been spaced out more throughout the film's long runtime (which, yes, has terrific pacing and doesn't at all feel like a near-three hour film) or were simply explained quicker and more bluntly. These are the only moments that bog the entire experience down and make it feel a little on the long side. After that, though, I can't believe how quick it moves.

    The emotion is instantly ramped up yet again as Bond tracks down Madeleine and they share a loving moment before the reveal of Mathilde, who you can sense Bond instantly recognizes as his child, even if Madeleine wishes to brush it off and keep with finding Safin. I can't remember all the lines but I think there were a few one liners or comments here that gave me a chuckle, like the "how many secret rooms did your dad have?" line by Bond. It's funny to look back at Mr. White as this mysterious henchman in 2006 and now, 15 years later, Bond is in his old house, dating his daughter, realizing Mr. White's granddaughter is his own daughter. It's poetic, in a sense, even if I disagree with the "genius" behind an arc that was clearly retroactive. I love the action kicking off by Bond casually wondering why Nomi (I think that's how it went) is tracking Bond and not Ash, before realizing she is indeed tracking Ash and he's incredibly close. Great moment of tension that segues into everything going downhill. Once again, however, the Norway action is short - I felt like they really talked up that car chase (which does look beautiful, I love how practical it is throughout and don't get tired of all the cars and bikes coming into frame by speedily jumping over that hill) for just how short it is. What's it last, three minutes maybe? However, then we get a lovely, horror-esque hunting scene in the woods, where Bond amasses any tools and weapons he can find to take out anyone in sight. It's good fun, though I was a bit bummed by how quickly he dispatches Ash (I really dig that FYEO throwback where he casually let's the car crush him before moving on). I would've enjoyed another fight between the two.

    And finally, the finale, the point of the film that has some of the biggest highlights of the movie for me, some of the most emotional beats in the series, yet a lot of underwhelming aspects too. An old submarine pen on a World War II island? Love it. I really enjoyed the dark, wet nature of the base itself, all the shadows lurking about, flashlights illuminating these parts. I only wish the mysterious, poisonous nature of the entire lair was played up more, but I suppose we get this with Valdo's death, the nanobot vials, etc. It was used to great effect, it felt like a very long finale and I love all the work Bond and Nomi put into the mission, getting everyone to escape, Bond having to run back to open the silo doors, making his escape, seeing them shut, going back and accepting his fate. I really loved his fake begging, pleading and apologizing to Safin, too, while he slowly draws his PPK and takes out his bodyguards in rapid fashion. The tracking shot was so brilliant, effective, frenetic. This is where the gunplay and action is the biggest highlight for me, I wish it was just as impactful and gritty throughout the rest of the action sequences (whereas in Cuba, it sort of feels...flat? Quick? I don't know how to describe it.) Safin's monologue is pretty good, I just wanted much more from a villain so mysterious, from a villain who managed to single-handedly wipe out the majority of SPECTRE. You can question his abilities, where he sort of has this impossible ability to predict the future and what will happen, ala Silva, but it's the biggest way they move the big plot points forward so I accept it for what it is.

    And Bond's death? Insanely emotional, I cried, and the track (I'm guessing it's 'Final Ascent' though I could be wrong, haven't looked into the track titles all that much) couldn't have been more fitting. Also, I was surprised that all the OHMSS stuff didn't bother me in the slightest. Hearing those sweeping moments of Barry got me really emotional yet giddy as a lifelong Bond fan, and WHATTITW playing as the film closes couldn't have been more poetic for me. It does get a little "in your face" with all the "...have all the time in the world" comments but it was still effective for me. The last conversation Bond has with Q and Madeleine was supercharged in its passion and sentimentality, it was excellent. I can't believe how sad it got me and yet I still walked away happy, ended up loving the closing out of his story this way while simultaneously excited for what a new, fresh era will bring. Craig's best performance, by far, I think. I couldn't be happier that he chose to return one last time and absolutely crushed it. His legacy would've been much worse off for me had he ended things with the dumpster fire that is SP.

    Nomi got better for me as the film went on, particularly during the finale, but I felt like her sarcastic almost bitterness at times was way too played up and extreme, especially when Bond was clearly warming to her, giving her leads, congratulating her, etc. It's like she couldn't let her guard down at all. But as I said, once they're working together and communicating in the finale, I loved the repertoire and bonding they shared. Her action scenes are quite good here, loved the way she kills Valdo then instantly segues into gunning down a few bad guys and making her escape.

    Think I'll stop there, I'm rambling at this point, and even then, I'm sure there are several moments, lines, characters, aspects of the film, etc. that I've glossed over or missed. I'm surprised just how much of the film feels familiar to me after only one viewing, how much I walked away remembering, even after a night of sleep, and I look forward to further familiarizing myself with this installment. It's a really fitting, heroic end (and yes, I see it as heroic - Bond is going to die from his gunshot wounds anyway, he can never, ever hold his daughter or Madeleine again, and the blast doors need re-opened to ensure the destruction of the island - how is that not heroic?) for Craig and I love what they brought to the table. I had my reservations with the first few trailers, but the more I saw in the last two months or so, the more excited and optimistic I got. The spoilers I read brought that down for me a tad, only to somehow end up being the film's greatest strengths for me.

    Thanks for reading my wall of text and rambling thoughts.

    I haven't loved a Bond installment wholeheartedly or walked away satisfied from a new Bond movie since 2008. It's great to be back and feeling this way again.

    So great to read all of this, @Creasy47 ! I am relieved you enjoyed so much of this beautiful, stunning Bond film. I am mostly glad you got the ending, though painful, to be an appropriate one for this particular Bond. It is very satisfying for me too. I hope to see it 4 times in the cinema (my cinema experience here is amazing and safe; that helps me with that decision).

    This story of 007, start to finish, does not ever need to be repeated. We have it as a set story, a jewel, amongst all the other kind of Bond films we already have - and for the ones in the future, which will need a different tone. Start fresh. It opens up everything.

    I greatly value Daniel's performance, Cary's direction, Linus's cinematography, the bravery of EON to do this, and the script (even with small issues I have with it). Just this particular story being told this well for this Bond - our realistic, gritty, vulnerable, yet to his last moment truly selfless, heroic Bond - is a rare gift. I appreciate the film, no matter how hard the ending hits me. And for me, this film will probably stay in my top 10. It is now in my top 5. Thank you for all your thoughtful words in your review, @Creasy47 . You make some good points.
  • FeyadorFeyador Montreal, Canada
    edited October 2021 Posts: 341
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Those wounds absolutely would've killed him. I don't see any scenario where he re-opens the blast doors, escapes the island, avoids the explosions, gets back to Nomi/Q/whatever and is treated for his wounds. If the missiles didn't kill him, the gunshot wounds were going to.

    My reading, exactly ... maybe with nine minutes left he could have gotten clear, however unlikely. But not with two minutes left after having to reopen those blast doors and carrying those wounds.

    I've seen some fans suggest that his supposed (in)actions here are tantamount to suicide. And yet, while Craig-Bond may have some kind of death wish*, that doesn't accord with my own understanding of the conclusion to NTTD.

    * Note the closeup on Bond's face in the DB5 when surrounded by SPECTRE assassins in Matera when Madeleine literally has to beg him to "do something".
  • So I have seen it 5 times now, and I think I can't judge it on its own merit. If I try to judge it on its own merit, then alas Safin is a too "weak" character with unclear motivation in the end. But I prefere to judge more the 5 movies arc than the last movie. And with this in mind, my first thought is that SP is a missed opportunity. If they had gone with the initial plan
    M being a traitor
    I think there would have been a way to make the whole arc so much better. And if they had written SP knowing what the end of NTTD would be later, I think they could have been so much tighter. Ah ! Now I can't wait to see what's next. Their last reboot is still the last masterpiece of the franchise, IMO.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 35,383
    Thanks for that, @4EverBonded. I had a sneaking suspicion beforehand I'd like it well enough but didn't think it'd hit me so emotionally and powerfully as it did. I'm also shocked at how fantastic Craig's performance was here too, I don't think he could've played it any better than he did.

    If I'm lucky in subsequent viewings, it might even hit the top of my Top 10. If not, I couldn't be happier with an 11th or 12th place ranking. That'd be lovely.
  • HildebrandRarityHildebrandRarity Centre international d'assistance aux personnes déplacées, Paris, France
    Posts: 354
    Most of the stories about the intelligence world these days are about cyber-warfare, hacking, surveillance, etc. I don't want a Bond plot to revolve about this, but the films needed to acknowledge the situation that these things exist. The previous version of Q is one of the most prominent examples (along with Moneypenny) of why the formula was stale and more concerned about fan service than effectiveness. Desmond Llewelyn played the part until he was 84. By this point, his scenes were mostly an opportunity for jokes, with a bunch of useless inventions being demonstrated until Bond receives the three gadgets that will play some part in the story. The jokes also started to get overplayed around The Spy Who Loved Me.
    And when Llewelyn retired (even if he hadn't died, his final shot in TWINE clearly showed he was retiring), they used instead one of the greatest British physical comedians of all times to emphasize even more the jokey nature of these scenes.
    Neither Llewelyn nor Cleese would be remotely credible near a modern computer. You can imagine Cleese yelling at a computer, and that's about it.
  • Posts: 1,256
    It’s quite cheering today read all these positive reviews stateside (I assume) mainly because a success for NTTD is a success for the franchise. Which makes me happy.

    I dislike the ending. Massively. However I’m also aware that I need to get used to it and I’m not going to let it spoil what is 80% of a fantastic film. I’m looking forward to my second viewing. I really am. Partly because the first hour is up there with the greatest of the franchise.

  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded Riding a white swan to Matera
    Posts: 12,409
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Thanks for that, @4EverBonded. I had a sneaking suspicion beforehand I'd like it well enough but didn't think it'd hit me so emotionally and powerfully as it did. I'm also shocked at how fantastic Craig's performance was here too, I don't think he could've played it any better than he did.

    If I'm lucky in subsequent viewings, it might even hit the top of my Top 10. If not, I couldn't be happier with an 11th or 12th place ranking. That'd be lovely.

    I hope Daniel is nominated for awards for this one. I know, I know, the genre and track record of award committees goes against that happening. But I do hope so; he deserves professional recognition for this role. He really is outstanding.
  • Creasy47 wrote: »
    Feyador wrote: »
    Follow up questions.
    • At what point did you all realize that the child was Bond’s?
    • And at what point did Bond realize that the child was his?
    When Safin told Madeleine that she had compromised herself with a killer (to survive), I thought there was a 3rd mystery character waiting to be introduced. Then I thought, the father was Safin himself (which would have been creepy, but suspension of disbelief had set in for me). It wasn’t until the moment where Safin said, “Look at your father!”, when I realized what was going on.

    I took Madeleine's initial claim at face value. I mean, what kind of person would lie about something like that?

    Perhaps one long practiced at the art of survival? And Madeleine is certainly a survivor. And a woman who has taught her own daughter how to hide.

    But I remained skeptical. And I think Bond himself didn't know for sure, as in his uncertainty in how to introduce Madeleine & Mathilde to Nomi, which is a moment I loved.

    And you know, except for confirming for Bond in their final dialogue scene together that Mathilde does have Bond's blue eyes (or consoling words to that effect) Madeleine never explicitly states that Mathilde is Bond's child. At least I think I'm right about that. But of course Mathilde must be, right? Could Safin be wrong or simply messing with Bond? It seems unlikely ....

    You know, until the Craig arc, I don't think we've really had much deliberate ambiguity in the series - though, of course, it just might be narrative incompetence in this instance. But either way, I had trouble making out some of the dialogue and will benefit tremendously from future subtitles/captions.

    As far as the Mathilde reveal, I took it as Bond didn't actually believe Madeleine when she told him she isn't his. I think from the moment we see her face and the light hits her blue eyes he knows that's his daughter. Just the way he looks at her you can tell he knows.

    That's exactly how I saw it too. From the moment he saw her, I think he knew.

    Of course. And Madeleine knows he knows. The second "she's not yours" means "you will not be her father".
  • ToTheRight wrote: »
    Just got back from a matinee showing and I EFFIN" LOVED IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Holy crap that was great!

    This is my favorite Craig Bond film by far..............although I love the others.

    Damn!!!!

    Well worth the wait.

    Fantastic to hear you loved this!
    You know I was worried that I would either love the film or hate it, but as it stands I feel my expectations were merely met, and I'm satisfied with how the film turned out. Which is a good thing, of course! :))
  • Posts: 131
    Hi from an MI6 newbie, but a lifelong Bond fan. I just stumbled onto this forum last night, and this thread has been a great read – I am only about halfway through it.

    I saw NTTD a few days ago and am still having trouble organising my thoughts about it. It is not my cup of tea (glass of vodka martini?), but to borrow a phrase beloved by parents, I am not angry, just disappointed.

    Online user reviews tend to go for extremes (best Bond film ever vs worst Bond film ever)… I rather agree with the reviewer who said NTTD was made by people who do not like Bond films. It is a fitting goodbye to Daniel Craig and an OK film, but to me, it is not really a Bond film, at any rate not a good Bond film, despite having the requisite bells and whistles. By contrast, say, Moonraker is pretty dire as a film but firmly belongs in the Bond canon.

    The Bond film canon thrives on formula, and has amassed a great deal of goodwill over the years thanks to it. Where Fleming’s Bond often comes across as a borderline-psychopath loner with a tough, thankless job and a troubled personal life, the pre-Craig films have collectively been glossier and more light-hearted than Fleming’s source material, and have enjoyed broader appeal than the books.

    Some attitudes and tropes have aged better than others (Live & Let Die kinda makes me groan in its entirety), in the same way as much of the “science” from 1960’s and 70’s Bonds no longer holds water, and there is nothing wrong with a thoughtful update (Judi Dench’s M being a great example); but IMO a Bond film constant is that it should be, broadly speaking, fun to watch, no matter what politics its makers or viewers stand by. It does not have to be an Oscar contender; its major selling point is a guaranteed two hours of an escapist thrill ride, offering glimpses of a dangerous-but-glamorous, devil-may-care fantasy lifestyle.

    Mess with the formula too much, tip the balance too far, and the appeal fades. Strip away too much of movie!Bond’s mystique, take away his ability to cheat death and danger, and he is just a burned-out guy with issues. Too much “entertainment” results in the likes of Octopussy, too much “gritty realism”, while arguably truer to Fleming, makes the films start to lose their identity, approaching run-of-the-mill action flicks or, in NTTD’s case, dissolving into action-filled melodrama. There are plenty of good films in both categories, but it is disappointing to see Bond folding into either, or both. Casino Royale and Skyfall struck the right balance; IMO the other three Craig films did not.
    (as an aside, I realise that in another film universe, the same arguments could be used against Nolan’s superb Batman films; and I do not have a good answer as to why IMO the realistic take works better there. Maybe by following Nolan chronologically, the Bond update seems derivative rather than fresh).

    As someone here said, the filmmakers’ and Craig’s stated intention, starting from CR, was to subvert the genre and the character. An intriguing and initially well-executed premise that may have been needed to take the franchise into the 21st century, but one that does not seem to work as well over time. IMO they overdid it with the constant subversion reaching its peak in NTTD, deconstructing stale and successful clichés alike in a soap-opera-worthy plot seemingly written by committee (don't get me started on the child, a plot trope to end all plot tropes that is as un-Bond-like as it gets).

    NTTD felt drawn-out, disjointed, ponderous and bleak most of the time despite the action. In striving to make Bond more realistic and more relevant, they only made him dour and downbeat. By amping up the emotional stakes, I think the filmmakers actually made it less engaging, especially given Craig’s all-too-evident character fatigue and the lack of chemistry between him and Lea Seydoux. The writers left so much of the viewers’ expected involvement hanging on the Bond-Madeleine family drama that it derailed the overall plot while the main villain was reduced to a cipher (no CR pun intended) and other characters (most woefully Ana de Armas’ Paloma, but also Felix Leiter, Moneypenny, even Blofeld) were left short-changed. This also applies to the “new 007”, whose character plays out more like a walking plot device than a real person, so little effort seems to have gone into her story. Compare her portrayal to Skyfall’s Moneypenny, and the difference leaps to the eye. And the multi-film storyline, a departure from the pre-Craig film canon not too bothered with continuity, was no help here, weighing the plot down with emotional baggage from previous films.

    From a box-office perspective, so long as viewers buy into the first film of a “saga” (as was the case with CR), it helps keep a captive audience for the duration of the arc. Looking back at the five latest films, it seems that their overarching plot was the filmmakers’ intention starting from Casino Royale, and I suspect that the success of Nolan’s Batman films, among others, may have been an added push in that direction for later films. But where Skyfall is brilliant and gripping on its own merits, Spectre and NTTD over-rely on the overarching plot to maintain interest. And it looks like by getting to co-produce Spectre and NTTD (a position no other Bond actor got up to), Craig had a great deal of creative control over the plot and above all, over the ending to suit his vision of the character – based on his post-Spectre quotes, I am positive that he was an enthusiastic supporter, if not the main proponent, of the final twist. To most viewers it is Marmite; my experience was more of a "meh"...

    Then again, the fact that the Craig films have become a standalone franchise-within-a-franchise may be a good thing after all. For DC Bond fans, they provide the character with a complete, stylistically consistent story with a closure that, like it or not, followed from the plot and character development in his five films. For those less taken with Craig’s Bond (I am clearly in the latter camp, CR and Skyfall notwithstanding), it helps set these films apart from the rest of the canon. Whether Bond 26 will start another arc or follow the more loosely-tied plot convention of the first 20 films, for better or worse, NTTD has left behind it a clean slate, albeit of the scorched-earth variety, but I actually think it may be easier post-NTTD to pick up where the earlier Bonds left off, more or less. Either that, or make films set in the 1960s, Fleming-era.

    NTTD has its highlights; the Matera chapter is gripping, the all-too-short Cuban sequence (kudos to Ana de Armas, who had great chemistry and good banter with DC!) is the highlight on par with the best Bond films, and the cinematography is beautiful. But to me it looks like, in between obsessively tying up loose ends, knocking down plot clichés, and giving Daniel Craig his desired exit, while ticking the requisite number of Bond boxes, NTTD ended up smaller than the sum of its parts and forgot to be a Bond film somewhere along the way.
  • ToTheRight wrote: »
    Just got back from a matinee showing and I EFFIN" LOVED IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Holy crap that was great!

    This is my favorite Craig Bond film by far..............although I love the others.

    Damn!!!!

    Well worth the wait.

    Awesome, glad you enjoyed it.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,548
    Hi from an MI6 newbie, but a lifelong Bond fan. I just stumbled onto this forum last night, and this thread has been a great read – I am only about halfway through it.

    I saw NTTD a few days ago and am still having trouble organising my thoughts about it. It is not my cup of tea (glass of vodka martini?), but to borrow a phrase beloved by parents, I am not angry, just disappointed.

    Online user reviews tend to go for extremes (best Bond film ever vs worst Bond film ever)… I rather agree with the reviewer who said NTTD was made by people who do not like Bond films. It is a fitting goodbye to Daniel Craig and an OK film, but to me, it is not really a Bond film, at any rate not a good Bond film, despite having the requisite bells and whistles. By contrast, say, Moonraker is pretty dire as a film but firmly belongs in the Bond canon.

    The Bond film canon thrives on formula, and has amassed a great deal of goodwill over the years thanks to it. Where Fleming’s Bond often comes across as a borderline-psychopath loner with a tough, thankless job and a troubled personal life, the pre-Craig films have collectively been glossier and more light-hearted than Fleming’s source material, and have enjoyed broader appeal than the books.

    Some attitudes and tropes have aged better than others (Live & Let Die kinda makes me groan in its entirety), in the same way as much of the “science” from 1960’s and 70’s Bonds no longer holds water, and there is nothing wrong with a thoughtful update (Judi Dench’s M being a great example); but IMO a Bond film constant is that it should be, broadly speaking, fun to watch, no matter what politics its makers or viewers stand by. It does not have to be an Oscar contender; its major selling point is a guaranteed two hours of an escapist thrill ride, offering glimpses of a dangerous-but-glamorous, devil-may-care fantasy lifestyle.

    Mess with the formula too much, tip the balance too far, and the appeal fades. Strip away too much of movie!Bond’s mystique, take away his ability to cheat death and danger, and he is just a burned-out guy with issues. Too much “entertainment” results in the likes of Octopussy, too much “gritty realism”, while arguably truer to Fleming, makes the films start to lose their identity, approaching run-of-the-mill action flicks or, in NTTD’s case, dissolving into action-filled melodrama. There are plenty of good films in both categories, but it is disappointing to see Bond folding into either, or both. Casino Royale and Skyfall struck the right balance; IMO the other three Craig films did not.
    (as an aside, I realise that in another film universe, the same arguments could be used against Nolan’s superb Batman films; and I do not have a good answer as to why IMO the realistic take works better there. Maybe by following Nolan chronologically, the Bond update seems derivative rather than fresh).

    As someone here said, the filmmakers’ and Craig’s stated intention, starting from CR, was to subvert the genre and the character. An intriguing and initially well-executed premise that may have been needed to take the franchise into the 21st century, but one that does not seem to work as well over time. IMO they overdid it with the constant subversion reaching its peak in NTTD, deconstructing stale and successful clichés alike in a soap-opera-worthy plot seemingly written by committee (don't get me started on the child, a plot trope to end all plot tropes that is as un-Bond-like as it gets).

    NTTD felt drawn-out, disjointed, ponderous and bleak most of the time despite the action. In striving to make Bond more realistic and more relevant, they only made him dour and downbeat. By amping up the emotional stakes, I think the filmmakers actually made it less engaging, especially given Craig’s all-too-evident character fatigue and the lack of chemistry between him and Lea Seydoux. The writers left so much of the viewers’ expected involvement hanging on the Bond-Madeleine family drama that it derailed the overall plot while the main villain was reduced to a cipher (no CR pun intended) and other characters (most woefully Ana de Armas’ Paloma, but also Felix Leiter, Moneypenny, even Blofeld) were left short-changed. This also applies to the “new 007”, whose character plays out more like a walking plot device than a real person, so little effort seems to have gone into her story. Compare her portrayal to Skyfall’s Moneypenny, and the difference leaps to the eye. And the multi-film storyline, a departure from the pre-Craig film canon not too bothered with continuity, was no help here, weighing the plot down with emotional baggage from previous films.

    From a box-office perspective, so long as viewers buy into the first film of a “saga” (as was the case with CR), it helps keep a captive audience for the duration of the arc. Looking back at the five latest films, it seems that their overarching plot was the filmmakers’ intention starting from Casino Royale, and I suspect that the success of Nolan’s Batman films, among others, may have been an added push in that direction for later films. But where Skyfall is brilliant and gripping on its own merits, Spectre and NTTD over-rely on the overarching plot to maintain interest. And it looks like by getting to co-produce Spectre and NTTD (a position no other Bond actor got up to), Craig had a great deal of creative control over the plot and above all, over the ending to suit his vision of the character – based on his post-Spectre quotes, I am positive that he was an enthusiastic supporter, if not the main proponent, of the final twist. To most viewers it is Marmite; my experience was more of a "meh"...

    Then again, the fact that the Craig films have become a standalone franchise-within-a-franchise may be a good thing after all. For DC Bond fans, they provide the character with a complete, stylistically consistent story with a closure that, like it or not, followed from the plot and character development in his five films. For those less taken with Craig’s Bond (I am clearly in the latter camp, CR and Skyfall notwithstanding), it helps set these films apart from the rest of the canon. Whether Bond 26 will start another arc or follow the more loosely-tied plot convention of the first 20 films, for better or worse, NTTD has left behind it a clean slate, albeit of the scorched-earth variety, but I actually think it may be easier post-NTTD to pick up where the earlier Bonds left off, more or less. Either that, or make films set in the 1960s, Fleming-era.

    NTTD has its highlights; the Matera chapter is gripping, the all-too-short Cuban sequence (kudos to Ana de Armas, who had great chemistry and good banter with DC!) is the highlight on par with the best Bond films, and the cinematography is beautiful. But to me it looks like, in between obsessively tying up loose ends, knocking down plot clichés, and giving Daniel Craig his desired exit, while ticking the requisite number of Bond boxes, NTTD ended up smaller than the sum of its parts and forgot to be a Bond film somewhere along the way.

    Very good, well thought out review @NeverSayNever

    I liked the film a lot, but I agree on a lot of your points.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded Riding a white swan to Matera
    Posts: 12,409
    I love that this film completes Daniel Craig's story arc and gives us the story of James Bond, first start as a 00 all the way through to a genuinely noble, heroic end. It is set apart, his era. I found NTTD, though heart-wrenching, to be so fitting and satisfying. I'm enjoying more with each viewing. What a stunning film.
  • Posts: 67
    Splendid review, thank you.

    I’m just watching SP again. I really wish they’d driven off into the new dawn for good. Knowing they didn’t is, well, I’m sure you understand.
  • Creasy47 wrote: »
    I finally got to see it at 4 pm yesterday in a near empty theater, needed to collect my thoughts after that emotional ending and see how I felt this morning. First, here's a photo of my daughter and I, taken outside the theater an hour or so before I went in. She's spent the last several weeks watching the other 24 installments right alongside me, so I thought it fitting to get a picture with her before the only one she's yet to see. All in due time, though, I'll change that once the 4K is out!

    2f8r1v4b44pz.jpeg


    I'm going to need to see this one a few more times at least before I'm able to rank it but it was even better than I suspected it might be.

    I'm really shocked by how the aspects I was most worried about (Bond and Madeleine's relationship, the MI6 crew, Mathilde, Bond dying) ended up being some of my favorite moments. I didn't sense an iota of chemistry between Bond and Madeleine in SP but I absolutely bought their journey in NTTD - settling in off the grid, the atmosphere between the two when things go south and there's a sense of betrayal, finding one another five years on, emotions still running high. I can't believe I walked away feeling for Madeleine so much and enjoying her character so much.

    Also, this is one of the most non-Bondian Bond films I've ever seen. I need more viewings of it but this may very well be Craig's best performance; he felt so human, so real, like James Bond was no longer a character but an actual ex-agent living off the grid who is called back into action. The way the conversations flow, the fresh and natural nature of the quips, it didn't feel at all choreographed, didn't feel like dialogue written down on a page (sans a few moments, of course). All the one liners related to the bionic eye were great and it seems Craig's sarcasm and sense of humor finally hit its full potential. He had me cheering, laughing and crying throughout this. I'd say if there's ever a Bond performance worthy of awards, it'd be this one. I just can't believe how great his take was after SP.

    The MI6 crew was still used a bit too much for my tastes, but holy hell, M was solid, in a similar situation to M in SF, Moneypenny wasn't bad or cringe and this is one of my favorite Q performances in ages (his final moments with Bond? Incredible).

    Mathilde was so beautiful and it was instantly easy to connect with her story and feel for her when she's scared, when she loses Dou Dou, when she smiles at the start of a story about James Bond. I can't believe how well it was executed. I became a father in January to my beautiful daughter and I'm sure that recent life experience made me all the more emotional.

    And Bond dying? I was prepped and ready for it but I think I cried like a baby nonstop for the last five or so minutes before the credits rolled. It was heroic in a personal sense, effective and very emotionally charged. I get why they did it and I gotta say, it doesn't bother me at all, just made the stakes and the finale all the more special to me.

    There are bits that didn't work for me, sure. Valdo had one or two OK moments but for the most part, he was slimy, embarrassing and featured way too often. He's like a Boris Grishenko-lite but missed the mark so often (that CGI shot of him falling down the elevator shaft, screaming was so bad) and didn't bring anything to the table for me. Maybe that'll be better on subsequent viewings, though, as the theater I was in had bizarre sound issues - sometimes the dialogue felt muted, other times the score was too loud to hear what else was going on. I could still piece together what was going on but I would've loved some subtitles, damn.

    I also think from the PTS to Cuba is incredible and Norway to the finale is excellent, but I could've done with something in the middle of the film, where it dragged just a hair and lost some momentum.

    Also, I quite dug Safin, but much like others, his objective is quite muddled at times (I'll admit, I got lost at times on what was done by SPECTRE's hand, what was the result of Safin, Primo's motivations etc.) and that'll likely be helped with more viewings, some subtitles and letting things breathe more so I can check out more details and let the story click even more. His appearances are sort of akin to Dr. No but he doesn't get the same sort of reveal that Julius does - a quick monologue with Bond before disappearing, the rest of his moments on the island are slightly sinister but not terribly threatening or impactful. I love Malek and wish he had some more to work with here (and I do wish they had a proper tussle at the end of the film like I was expecting, but seeing Bond finally shoot and kill a target after so many years, on top of Safin's glee over Bond never, ever being able to interact with Madeleine and Mathilde again makes up for things considerably).

    The action here is consistently solid, easily my second favorite of the series but nothing will beat QoS' frenetic energy for me. I will say, though, that most of these moments are way too short and deserved just a few minutes longer. In hindsight, it seems super easy to piece together the entire PTS in Matera simply because of how short it is - the foot race back to Madeleine and the car chase were brilliant, but definitely needed more time. I really, really like the shot of Bond dropping the mines, taking out the car, drifting and spinning 360 degrees while firing at the other pursuing vehicle and then moving on. Bond weighing his options and the supposed betrayal while all the goons unload on the DB5, Madeleine pleading with him to do something, only for him to say "OK." and destroy everything in sight and escape was great.

    The title sequence had some surprisingly great moments and motifs in it, but damn, they really need to go with some fresh blood next time. It feels like Kleinman keeps trying to come up with something akin to the M:I series that shows off the major events of the film instead of working a couple of thematic elements, some guns and girls in and leaving it at that. I don't need any more Bond silhouettes enveloped in mystery, I don't need his relationship on display, none of it. I can't recall much of it now (maybe that says something) but I felt it stood out much more positively for me than his last two works. Not a fan of that title song at all, though, but it's better than Sam Smith's mewling "work."

    Jamaica is one of the highlights. Hell, I wish the film had spent at least half its runtime here, so I could've enjoyed more of the culture and beautiful nightlife it had to offer. The return of Felix is great - perhaps their camaraderie and close "buddy-ness" doesn't work as much since the man's been sidelined since 2008 and their relationship never grew, but I'll chalk that up to off-screen happenings, because their connection here is palpable and I loved their conversation in the bar together. His death hit me really hard - I think in a film where you're killing off Bond and Blofeld, you don't have to kill so many iconic characters by taking out Leiter too - but it is a good motivator for Bond wanting to destroy Ash later on. Ash, before I forget, was great, playing the goofy, fake-nervous State Department representative who clearly has ulterior motives (seriously, from the second he was on screen, did anybody think he was going to remain a good guy? I do think the series needs to step away from these obvious double agents and friends-turned-enemies, it's a bit repetitive by this point). The way he giggles when Valdo kicks him the gun, the way he nervously stumbles over his words when first meeting Bond. Very solid. I also liked the little red-lit tussle between Bond and Ash - but again, it's done way too quick. It starts to get great and it's over before you know it.

    The Cuba scenes were very classic (some of the gunplay felt a bit one note to me) and Zimmer's score here is incredible (the bit as Bond screams and throws himself and the other guys through the rail is one of my favorite moments) and there's a real fantastical feel to everything else - the scenery, a wild sex/birthday party for SPECTRE where Blofeld fakes crazy so he can be in attendance via a bionic eye, the instant chemistry Bond and Paloma share (she was so damn lovable and fun, I wish she had more screentime too). It really worked for me. I caught the MGW cameo too! Felt pretty obvious to me and I had forgotten about it, wasn't even looking for it.

    We get one Blofeld scene in the middle of the film and he's much, much better than he was in SP. I thought this scene was going to be insanely hokey and bordering on cringe but it was quite good. It wasn't anywhere near as overblown as I thought it would be. It's just a shame they thought it was a good idea to introduce Blofeld in the fourth film and kill him off at the end of an era. Onto the next one, I suppose! I think this is where I really start to have issues - all the nanobot and sci-fi stuff gets a bit ridiculous and the way they continuously explain it, leading to something inevitable, gets a little old. I think these moments would've fared better had they been spaced out more throughout the film's long runtime (which, yes, has terrific pacing and doesn't at all feel like a near-three hour film) or were simply explained quicker and more bluntly. These are the only moments that bog the entire experience down and make it feel a little on the long side. After that, though, I can't believe how quick it moves.

    The emotion is instantly ramped up yet again as Bond tracks down Madeleine and they share a loving moment before the reveal of Mathilde, who you can sense Bond instantly recognizes as his child, even if Madeleine wishes to brush it off and keep with finding Safin. I can't remember all the lines but I think there were a few one liners or comments here that gave me a chuckle, like the "how many secret rooms did your dad have?" line by Bond. It's funny to look back at Mr. White as this mysterious henchman in 2006 and now, 15 years later, Bond is in his old house, dating his daughter, realizing Mr. White's granddaughter is his own daughter. It's poetic, in a sense, even if I disagree with the "genius" behind an arc that was clearly retroactive. I love the action kicking off by Bond casually wondering why Nomi (I think that's how it went) is tracking Bond and not Ash, before realizing she is indeed tracking Ash and he's incredibly close. Great moment of tension that segues into everything going downhill. Once again, however, the Norway action is short - I felt like they really talked up that car chase (which does look beautiful, I love how practical it is throughout and don't get tired of all the cars and bikes coming into frame by speedily jumping over that hill) for just how short it is. What's it last, three minutes maybe? However, then we get a lovely, horror-esque hunting scene in the woods, where Bond amasses any tools and weapons he can find to take out anyone in sight. It's good fun, though I was a bit bummed by how quickly he dispatches Ash (I really dig that FYEO throwback where he casually let's the car crush him before moving on). I would've enjoyed another fight between the two.

    And finally, the finale, the point of the film that has some of the biggest highlights of the movie for me, some of the most emotional beats in the series, yet a lot of underwhelming aspects too. An old submarine pen on a World War II island? Love it. I really enjoyed the dark, wet nature of the base itself, all the shadows lurking about, flashlights illuminating these parts. I only wish the mysterious, poisonous nature of the entire lair was played up more, but I suppose we get this with Valdo's death, the nanobot vials, etc. It was used to great effect, it felt like a very long finale and I love all the work Bond and Nomi put into the mission, getting everyone to escape, Bond having to run back to open the silo doors, making his escape, seeing them shut, going back and accepting his fate. I really loved his fake begging, pleading and apologizing to Safin, too, while he slowly draws his PPK and takes out his bodyguards in rapid fashion. The tracking shot was so brilliant, effective, frenetic. This is where the gunplay and action is the biggest highlight for me, I wish it was just as impactful and gritty throughout the rest of the action sequences (whereas in Cuba, it sort of feels...flat? Quick? I don't know how to describe it.) Safin's monologue is pretty good, I just wanted much more from a villain so mysterious, from a villain who managed to single-handedly wipe out the majority of SPECTRE. You can question his abilities, where he sort of has this impossible ability to predict the future and what will happen, ala Silva, but it's the biggest way they move the big plot points forward so I accept it for what it is.

    And Bond's death? Insanely emotional, I cried, and the track (I'm guessing it's 'Final Ascent' though I could be wrong, haven't looked into the track titles all that much) couldn't have been more fitting. Also, I was surprised that all the OHMSS stuff didn't bother me in the slightest. Hearing those sweeping moments of Barry got me really emotional yet giddy as a lifelong Bond fan, and WHATTITW playing as the film closes couldn't have been more poetic for me. It does get a little "in your face" with all the "...have all the time in the world" comments but it was still effective for me. The last conversation Bond has with Q and Madeleine was supercharged in its passion and sentimentality, it was excellent. I can't believe how sad it got me and yet I still walked away happy, ended up loving the closing out of his story this way while simultaneously excited for what a new, fresh era will bring. Craig's best performance, by far, I think. I couldn't be happier that he chose to return one last time and absolutely crushed it. His legacy would've been much worse off for me had he ended things with the dumpster fire that is SP.

    Nomi got better for me as the film went on, particularly during the finale, but I felt like her sarcastic almost bitterness at times was way too played up and extreme, especially when Bond was clearly warming to her, giving her leads, congratulating her, etc. It's like she couldn't let her guard down at all. But as I said, once they're working together and communicating in the finale, I loved the repertoire and bonding they shared. Her action scenes are quite good here, loved the way she kills Valdo then instantly segues into gunning down a few bad guys and making her escape.

    Think I'll stop there, I'm rambling at this point, and even then, I'm sure there are several moments, lines, characters, aspects of the film, etc. that I've glossed over or missed. I'm surprised just how much of the film feels familiar to me after only one viewing, how much I walked away remembering, even after a night of sleep, and I look forward to further familiarizing myself with this installment. It's a really fitting, heroic end (and yes, I see it as heroic - Bond is going to die from his gunshot wounds anyway, he can never, ever hold his daughter or Madeleine again, and the blast doors need re-opened to ensure the destruction of the island - how is that not heroic?) for Craig and I love what they brought to the table. I had my reservations with the first few trailers, but the more I saw in the last two months or so, the more excited and optimistic I got. The spoilers I read brought that down for me a tad, only to somehow end up being the film's greatest strengths for me.

    Thanks for reading my wall of text and rambling thoughts.

    I haven't loved a Bond installment wholeheartedly or walked away satisfied from a new Bond movie since 2008. It's great to be back and feeling this way again.

    Excellent review, a great read and i'm glad you enjoyed. I was nodding along with a lot of what you said. I saw it for the second time last night. Although i loved it on first viewing, there was so much to take in, i actually enjoyed it even more the second time. I totally agree that Craig felt so human in this film and its certainly up there as one of his best performances (along with CR). I also loved Paloma and you are absolutely right - she was so lovable and fun. I have totally warmed to Madeleine and i also enjoyed her character a lot. Ever since i left the cinema last night, i haven't been able to stop thinking of going to see it again. Some time over the next few days.
  • Posts: 1,256
    @NeverSayNever eelcome and great post

    I don’t have a problem with messing with the formula. I have more of a problem of messing with the character. I’ve said before the more bond becomes just another action hero the more he loses his unique appeal.

    Campbell nailed it when he said “all other action hero’s are blue collar”. I want some sophistication beyond wearing a Tom Ford suit and driving an Aston. I want him to walk into a hotel like he owns it and order a Dom perignon 53 like it’s his last night on Earth.

    That’s been sacrificed ever since the brosnan era. Shame
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython The Black Lodge
    Posts: 5,442
    It’s not absent in Craig’s run but it has been deemphasized. His most sophisticated moment might be when ordering a martini in CR.
  • Despite all the things I thought I'd have an issue with (dad Bond, dead Bond), the number one thing which ruined the entire movie for me was how every returning character, including Bond himself, had completely different personalities to the previous movies. They all behaved and spoke like they were totally different characters to before. It was like watching other actors in masks making a parody. So weird.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Hamburg, near the Atlantic Hotel
    Posts: 6,087
    This film has stuck in my mind after seeing it more than most others. I think I can only say that about GF, OHMSS, FYEO (my first) and CR.
    Has it "stuck in your mind...more than most others" after seein git, or has it stuck in your mind "after seeing it more than most others"?
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded Riding a white swan to Matera
    edited October 2021 Posts: 12,409
    That is true for me, too, @Thunderfinger. Definitely on my mind, like so many times each day. Long time since I have had that. I did for Skyfall, but not this strong. For Goldeneye and The Spy Who Loved Me definitely.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Hamburg, near the Atlantic Hotel
    Posts: 6,087
    RE the missing Bond mission 2010-12: try The International, starring Clive Owen. Bond film by another name. And at the then wind down of financial crisis, Bond vs cabal of city bankers would have made total sense.

    RE Q /gadgets etc: those had to come back. they just did not have to make a 'thing' of it. 'HEY! LOOK! HERE IS THE NEW Q!'
    THAT kind of indulgent plot substitute filler killed this series imho.

    Irony: they HAD a Q branch in BOTH Casino and Quantum. They even had two recurring actors. Precisely what Boothroyd would be: a kind of unsung hero type; brisk, civil servant /ex army armourers. As in QUARTERMASTERS!

    There was nothing original, funny or endearing about making q a needy geek.
    And there was no point in rebooting MoneyPenny just to put her back behind a desk with bugger all to do.

    So yes, I adore SKYFALL. But those reasons, among others = why it basically ended Craig's Bond and the series in many senses rather than refreshed it??

    I don't believe Cleese as Q would have worked with Craig, because of Cleese's pythonesque way of acting. Or maybe his Fawltyness.

    There's nothing wrong with Whishaw's Q being a new character. He may even be Major Boothroyd, revived, considering the DC era was a total reboot anyway. He's not THAT young and may indeed have reached the rank of Major before or when he was appointed quartermaster.

    Cleese certainly was not the same person, as he followed the original Q (Major Boothroyd) when the latter retired, with both appearing in the same film. And while I am a definite Monty Python fan, I hated Cleese's performance as the new Q ("R" was only what Brosnan asked him if that was his code). He appeared like a bumbling idiot, and the humour of his role was based upon that. Not what I'd expect from a "Q" character, too dumb and irritating.
  • JWPepperJWPepper You sit on it, but you can't take it with you.
    edited October 2021 Posts: 512
    Did i see Michael G. Wilson twice in the movie? Once as a member of spectre at the Spectre Cuba meeting and then later crossing the street with Madeleine in London (with the National/Royal Guard) or am I wrong?
  • Posts: 7
    I saw the film today. There were only three other people in the cinema. I live in Mississippi, where hunting, fishing, country music, and Friday night high school football are more interesting to people than James Bond. The state fair is going on now also. I hope attendance is better in other places in the United States.

    I enjoyed the film, but I wouldn't have understood it had I not seen Spectre and had read the spoilers. I even teared up when the OHMSS theme and We Have All the Time in the World played.

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 35,383
    Thank you, @LeonJames22! Those are all good points, absolutely. Glad you felt the same!
Sign In or Register to comment.