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

1969799101102298

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,372
    @jetsetwilly, I'd even be fine with an amalgamation of unused Fleming material across the novels and short stories being crammed into a few separate films.
  • Posts: 3,273
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @jetsetwilly, I'd even be fine with an amalgamation of unused Fleming material across the novels and short stories being crammed into a few separate films.

    That's exactly what I want too.

    If you look at the films from the 80's, there was quite a lot of Fleming material used in this way. FYEO, OP, TLD and LTK all followed this trend.
  • Posts: 12,243
    I remember seeing a lot comparing TLJ with NTTD, and how critics would supposedly end up liking the film a lot more than audiences. Not what I'm seeing now - NTTD seems to be primarily a hit with both, not to the extent of CR or SF, but significantly higher than QOS and SP.
  • WillardWhyteWillardWhyte Midnight Society #ProjectMoon
    Posts: 784
    Copied from the Members First reaction thread:

    Really enjoyed the film. Loved the music and nod to OHMSS. (downloading the soundtrack now for a full listen)

    Safin's nanomachine weapon reminded me of FoxDie from Metal Gear Solid. Hideo Kojima is way ahead of the pack.

    Looking forward to the second viewing.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,372
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @jetsetwilly, I'd even be fine with an amalgamation of unused Fleming material across the novels and short stories being crammed into a few separate films.

    That's exactly what I want too.

    If you look at the films from the 80's, there was quite a lot of Fleming material used in this way. FYEO, OP, TLD and LTK all followed this trend.

    Indeed, it can certainly be done in a good way and I'd just love to see more of his locations, characters, names, etc. get brought to the screen eventually in some form or fashion.
  • HildebrandRarityHildebrandRarity Centre international d'assistance aux personnes déplacées, Paris, France
    edited October 2021 Posts: 467
    The Last Jedi was a hit with most audiences. But the "true Star Wars fans" who hated it were younger and more vocal on social media than James Bond fans. Hence the ton of 3 hrs YouTube videos where somebody makes point after point in a monotonous voice to "prove" that it isn't a "proper" SW film.

    Comparatively, these people were less vocal two years later on Rise of Skywalker, which is the real unredeemable film in the whole series.
  • Posts: 12,243
    The Last Jedi was a hit with most audiences. But the "true Star Wars fans" who hated it were younger and more vocal on social media than James Bond fans. Hence the ton of 3 hrs YouTube videos where somebody made point after point in a monotonous voice to "prove" that it wasn't a proper SW film.

    Comparatively, these people were less vocal two years later on Rise of Skywalker, which is the real unredeemable film in the whole series.

    I think the entire sequel trilogy is a bust as a whole, for whatever that's worth. Just feels like to me there's a lot more of a positive air around NTTD than when TLJ came out, but maybe it's like you say and it's the difference of how vocal and widespread the other fanbase is. The audience RT score of TLJ is rough.
  • Posts: 3,273
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @jetsetwilly, I'd even be fine with an amalgamation of unused Fleming material across the novels and short stories being crammed into a few separate films.

    That's exactly what I want too.

    If you look at the films from the 80's, there was quite a lot of Fleming material used in this way. FYEO, OP, TLD and LTK all followed this trend.

    Indeed, it can certainly be done in a good way and I'd just love to see more of his locations, characters, names, etc. get brought to the screen eventually in some form or fashion.

    Its probably why I am more angry and disappointed at NTTD than I should be. There was hints at YOLT in the final part of the movie, and I honestly believed they would go the whole way. This was finally the Shatterhand chapter adapted on screen, in all its glory, just as faithful as the adaptation of the CR novel.

    It led me down a false path, so the ending came as a double blow for me.
  • Posts: 12,243
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @jetsetwilly, I'd even be fine with an amalgamation of unused Fleming material across the novels and short stories being crammed into a few separate films.

    That's exactly what I want too.

    If you look at the films from the 80's, there was quite a lot of Fleming material used in this way. FYEO, OP, TLD and LTK all followed this trend.

    Indeed, it can certainly be done in a good way and I'd just love to see more of his locations, characters, names, etc. get brought to the screen eventually in some form or fashion.

    Its probably why I am more angry and disappointed at NTTD than I should be. There was hints at YOLT in the final part of the movie, and I honestly believed they would go the whole way. This was finally the Shatterhand chapter adapted on screen, in all its glory, just as faithful as the adaptation of the CR novel.

    It led me down a false path, so the ending came as a double blow for me.

    To be fair though, the ending of CR is quite different in the film is well, from the actiony climax to the bit with White. I was rooting for the faithful YOLT ending as well and probably would have preferred it, but I think NTTD took a pretty large amount from the novel and made me very happy overall with how it was implemented.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,890
    Well I saw it last night; with subsequent viewings my opinion may change but my initial reaction is , underwhelmed. While there is a lot to like, the first hour is outstanding, there is just too much that drags this film down, mainly a ponderous, patchwork script, a very poorly defined villain and an uneven performance from Craig.
  • Posts: 3,273
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @jetsetwilly, I'd even be fine with an amalgamation of unused Fleming material across the novels and short stories being crammed into a few separate films.

    That's exactly what I want too.

    If you look at the films from the 80's, there was quite a lot of Fleming material used in this way. FYEO, OP, TLD and LTK all followed this trend.

    Indeed, it can certainly be done in a good way and I'd just love to see more of his locations, characters, names, etc. get brought to the screen eventually in some form or fashion.

    Its probably why I am more angry and disappointed at NTTD than I should be. There was hints at YOLT in the final part of the movie, and I honestly believed they would go the whole way. This was finally the Shatterhand chapter adapted on screen, in all its glory, just as faithful as the adaptation of the CR novel.

    It led me down a false path, so the ending came as a double blow for me.

    To be fair though, the ending of CR is quite different in the film is well, from the actiony climax to the bit with White. I was rooting for the faithful YOLT ending as well and probably would have preferred it, but I think NTTD took a pretty large amount from the novel and made me very happy overall with how it was implemented.

    Much of CR remains faithful to the novel though, just adapted to make it more cinematic. I really wish I could look positively on how NTTD ended, and I'm seriously jealous of all those who can.
  • WillardWhyteWillardWhyte Midnight Society #ProjectMoon
    Posts: 784
    talos7 wrote: »
    Well I saw it last night; with subsequent viewings my opinion may change but my initial reaction is , underwhelmed. While there is a lot to like, the first hour is outstanding, there is just too much that drags this film down, mainly a ponderous, patchwork script, a very poorly defined villain and an uneven performance from Craig.

    Interesting, I thought his performance was quite well. Second best since Casino Royale. I loved the back and fourth at M. Bond was taking his crap.
  • Posts: 3,273
    talos7 wrote: »
    Well I saw it last night; with subsequent viewings my opinion may change but my initial reaction is , underwhelmed. While there is a lot to like, the first hour is outstanding, there is just too much that drags this film down, mainly a ponderous, patchwork script, a very poorly defined villain and an uneven performance from Craig.

    Interesting, I thought his performance was quite well. Second best since Casino Royale. I loved the back and fourth at M. Bond was taking his crap.

    I thought Craig probably gave his best performance since CR, and was the main highlight for me.

    The only glaring moments were when he confronted Blofeld, which didn't feel like Bond anymore, but Craig suddenly wanting to do his thespian bits, and also the ending with Safin, when he kneels and starts saying `I'm sorry, I'm sorry.'

    These didn't feel like the Bond character anymore. Much of Craig's performance as Bond I can still identify with the Fleming books, but these 2 moments suddenly took me out of the film.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,372
    It’s currently my third favorite film of Connery’s era, a big highlight for me, but I felt it was Craig’s best performance easily. Totally blew me away.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,890
    talos7 wrote: »
    Well I saw it last night; with subsequent viewings my opinion may change but my initial reaction is , underwhelmed. While there is a lot to like, the first hour is outstanding, there is just too much that drags this film down, mainly a ponderous, patchwork script, a very poorly defined villain and an uneven performance from Craig.

    Interesting, I thought his performance was quite well. Second best since Casino Royale. I loved the back and fourth at M. Bond was taking his crap.

    I thought Craig probably gave his best performance since CR, and was the main highlight for me.

    The only glaring moments were when he confronted Blofeld, which didn't feel like Bond anymore, but Craig suddenly wanting to do his thespian bits, and also the ending with Safin, when he kneels and starts saying `I'm sorry, I'm sorry.'

    These didn't feel like the Bond character anymore. Much of Craig's performance as Bond I can still identify with the Fleming books, but these 2 moments suddenly took me out of the film.

    He was on point in the PTS, but from then on it was a mixed bag; there were too many times where I felt him come out of character. Once I get the Blu-ray I can break it down

  • HildebrandRarityHildebrandRarity Centre international d'assistance aux personnes déplacées, Paris, France
    Posts: 467
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I think the entire sequel trilogy is a bust as a whole, for whatever that's worth. Just feels like to me there's a lot more of a positive air around NTTD than when TLJ came out, but maybe it's like you say and it's the difference of how vocal and widespread the other fanbase is. The audience RT score of TLJ is rough.

    The audience RT scores can be manipulated, and they were, as people on 4chan and other places agreed to create multiple accounts there to make the score for this particular film sink faster. It's not an opinion poll, with some audience sample, like CinemaScore. The RT score favours people (and sock puppets) who want to express their opinion on their own volition. It tends to emphasize sharp takes on films, especially when they're part of a franchise with a strong fanbase. There's not the same feeling of tight online communities for Bond that there is for Star Wars, which may be why the RT score won't look as bad (and because RT introduced a few dispositions to prevent blatant manipulation after the TLJ episode), but I've already seen a lot of comments about the film in France that I tend to dismiss when there's a "woke" or a "Barbara Broccoli" in the first three lines.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited October 2021 Posts: 5,921
    Random thoughts:
    1. Ending is going to alienate more fans than people think.
    2. Madeleine Swan was tedious, lacked energy, and was a stale character. She brought the movie down. Paloma and Nomi were great.
    3. Spectre and NTTD should not have been made.
    4. Some fans will look at this as the end of Bond, and move on from the franchise because they believe he is dead. Period. So they’re done.
    5. In the reboot to come, please no: Spectre, Blofeld, Dr. No, etc. Let’s come up with some original villains and a FRESH story. This Bond is not connected to any continuity and does his own thing. Follow the tone of Casino and QOS. But the villains, and so on, 60 years is enough.

    I would like to now see more unused Fleming -

    1. the gangsters in DAF. In fact much of this book still hasn't been used.

    2. the card game at Blades from MR

    3. Viv Michel being held captive at a motel by gangsters who are about to rape her, only for Bond to rescue her.

    4. The opening to TMWTGG, and the rest of this novel properly adapted.

    There is enough material there to last around 4 movies, at least. A new actors entire reign.

    1. Barbara will never do it. Too cliche.

    2. Interesting but it will be difficult to make bridge filmic. Probably substitute another game.

    3. No. Too gritty and too drab a locale for Bond, plus legal difficulties imposed by Fleming himself. (Not that Eon/Amazon couldn't *buy* the rights now...but if I were Fleming's estate, I'd charge a pretty penny.)

    4. MR, DAF, and TMWTGG are the only two novels left largely unadapted, although DAF and TMWTGG are rather weak and not exactly crying out for adaptation. Perhaps TMWTGG swamp setting...but DAF is Bond getting the stuffing kicked out of him, etc. Not exactly inspired stuff.

    I predict Bond 26 will be a fairly faithful adaptation of MR, as CR was for Craig's first, although perhaps not set in the UK (as SF is so recent) and with a different card game substituting for bridge.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    edited October 2021 Posts: 686
    The only glaring moments were when he confronted Blofeld, which didn't feel like Bond anymore,
    I think what made it jarring for me was that Bond is so calm moments before, and regains his composure so quickly one someone comes to restrain him; plus, Blofeld is restrained and helpless. If the circumstances were different, particularly if Blofeld were loose, it would just have felt more natural (to me). When I get the film on Blu-ray and see it again maybe it won't seem so artificial.
    and also the ending with Safin, when he kneels and starts saying `I'm sorry, I'm sorry.'
    I think that's always supposed to feel a little fake because Bond is faking in order to get his gun; it's just a ploy, and is playing on Safin's ego in a not too subtle way.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 3,273
    echo wrote: »
    1. Barbara will never do it. Too cliche.
    Which is ironic, seeing what terrible cliche's she has gone with over the years. This is why she needs to step down.
    echo wrote: »
    4. MR and TMWTGG are the only two novels left largely unadapted, although TMWTGG is rather weak.

    And DAF. And TSWLM. And no, I don't think TMWTGG is rather weak. It's one of my favourite novels.

  • Posts: 7,500
    My main issue with the film is this: Too many characters

    At its heart, NTTD is a story about Bond and Madeleine's relationship, with Safin as the main, antagonizing threat. In addition to this the film gives us another key character in Mathilde, a 2nd Bond girl of sorts, and obviously we have a 3rd Bond girl in Nomi. On top of that we have an alternative villain and his organization in Blofeld and Spectre as well as two henchmen; Primo and Ash. We have two allies, Leiter as the main one and Paloma as the second. Like everyone else I liked Paloma a lot, but in truth there was no need for both her and Felix in the script. If that wasn't enough already we also have an extra villain slash comic relief character in Valdo who gets a surprisingly large chunk of screentime as well as the MI6 regulars who, deservedly so, get a considerable ammount of attention.

    So in total we are left with three Bond girls, two Villains, three henchmen (counting Valdo) and two allies. Even with almost three hours of film, these are just too many characters! And the result is that many of them are not fleshed out enough for my liking. I would have loved to see more of Paloma and Felix, but the film is in reality not big enough for both of them. I also wish Nomi, Safin and Ash had more screentime to make an even stronger impression. It is a shame as I think the casting is generaly terrific, and it is a testament to the overall quality of the acting and direction that most of the characters are still as memorable as they are. But it is a clear sign of too many rewrites and screenwriters involved, which unfortunately has been the norm in most of the modern Bond films.
  • talos7 wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Well I saw it last night; with subsequent viewings my opinion may change but my initial reaction is , underwhelmed. While there is a lot to like, the first hour is outstanding, there is just too much that drags this film down, mainly a ponderous, patchwork script, a very poorly defined villain and an uneven performance from Craig.

    Interesting, I thought his performance was quite well. Second best since Casino Royale. I loved the back and fourth at M. Bond was taking his crap.

    I thought Craig probably gave his best performance since CR, and was the main highlight for me.

    The only glaring moments were when he confronted Blofeld, which didn't feel like Bond anymore, but Craig suddenly wanting to do his thespian bits, and also the ending with Safin, when he kneels and starts saying `I'm sorry, I'm sorry.'

    These didn't feel like the Bond character anymore. Much of Craig's performance as Bond I can still identify with the Fleming books, but these 2 moments suddenly took me out of the film.

    He was on point in the PTS, but from then on it was a mixed bag; there were too many times where I felt him come out of character. Once I get the Blu-ray I can break it down


    I agree in a way, but instead of feeling him out of character, I took it as Bond as we've never seen him (a twice heartbroken, retired, wounded dog) having to deal with things he's never had to before - being replaced, trying to make a deal with his worst enemy, being conned into rejecting love, learning he is loved, having a daughter, discovering a family....etc. If he had played all these moments as the suave spy in Spectre or the blunt instrument in CR, I would have had a hard time believing him. Just a couple moments when he was talking to Safin did I wish Craig had made different acting choices.
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    Question about the missile silo that was converted into the manufacturing farm…

    What exactly was in the water/liquid that Waldo fell in to? Was this supposed to be where the nanobots were harvested?
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 686
    jobo wrote: »
    My main issue with the film is this: Too many characters

    At its heart, NTTD is a story about Bond and Madeleine's relationship, with Safin as the main, antagonizing threat. In addition to this the film gives us another key character in Mathilde, a 2nd Bond girl of sorts, and obviously we have a 3rd Bond girl in Nomi. On top of that we have an alternative villain and his organization in Blofeld and Spectre as well as two henchmen; Primo and Ash. We have two allies, Leiter as the main one and Paloma as the second. Like everyone else I liked Paloma a lot, but in truth there was no need for both her and Felix in the script. If that wasn't enough already we also have an extra villain slash comic relief character in Valdo who gets a surprisingly large chunk of screentime as well as the MI6 regulars who, deservedly so, get a considerable ammount of attention.

    So in total we are left with three Bond girls, two Villains, three henchmen (counting Valdo) and two allies. Even with almost three hours of film, these are just too many characters! And the result is that many of them are not fleshed out enough for my liking. I would have loved to see more of Paloma and Felix, but the film is in reality not big enough for both of them. I also wish Nomi, Safin and Ash had more screentime to make an even stronger impression. It is a shame as I think the casting is generaly terrific, and it is a testament to the overall quality of the acting and direction that most of the characters are still as memorable as they are. But it is a clear sign of too many rewrites and screenwriters involved, which unfortunately has been the norm in most of the modern Bond films.

    Yeah, I tend to agree with this. I think pert of it is that Eon have been trying to stick to the multiple Bond girl formula, but they also don't want to dispose of any in the somewhat mechanical box-checking manner the franchise has become famous for; consequently Paloma doesn't actually serve the usual purpose of being both a sign of Bond's virility (for want of a better term), and as a way to get both Bond and the audience emotionally involved with wanting to get revenge on the villain (now known infamously as 'fridging').

    It's difficult to make a Bond film that still has enough of the old formula to appeal, but has also obviously evolved into being more aware and less mechanical. I think it's just going to be an ongoing struggle, and sometimes they'll get the balance right, and sometimes they won't. Paloma is great though, as is Felix, but as you say, Bond's relationship with Madeline and Mathilde (and Safin) is core to this story.
  • Feyador wrote: »
    BlondeBond wrote: »
    @00Heaven
    You're very kind.

    There is much to Madeleine that just gets overlooked. Two lines hit me in the gut in the film. After Bond accuses her of betraying him, won't listen to her at all, and pushes her onto a train, she desperately asks "how will I know you're okay." And then after he tells her he learned she didn't betray him, she says she understands that's who he is. After five years of heartbreak, she said that. I think she's wonderful.
    Yes, fully agree with your remarks here and above .... Madeleine's is a realistic, truly flesh & blood charactrization, which is unlike any we have had in the series. Vesper .... and [gulp] Tracy included.

    I love Vesper and Tracy. Eva Green and Diana Rigg were perfection in their roles. But Vesper is held by some as Bond's only possible true love almost solely due to Eva's acting and chemistry as opposed to content, IMO. The train scene again....it's a fantastic scene. But Vesper certainly gets awfully judgemental and sharp about Bond's poker game and possibly "funding terrorism" when she is the one who personally hands the suitcase over to the terrorists at the end of the movie. While this scene plays great at deceiving the audience and Bond about who she is, it never plays the same way again as it makes one wonder why she even decided to immediately criticize Bond's goals and efforts when she was already planning on doing worse. Also the boyfriend part bothers me. She apparently was so in love with her boyfriend that she was willing to do anything to free him yet she ditches him for Bond. I've seen some fans say she probably assumed the boyfriend was dead already, but that is never stated and if he was, there was nothing to continue to blackmail her with so that doesn't really work. And then we find out later on that he's not dead anyway.

    NTTD has now redeemed Madeleine's underwritten Spectre part in a way now that the audience can understand her and know who she is.

    Tracy now, I cannot criticize.
  • Posts: 526
    foo_yuk wrote: »
    Random thoughts:
    1. Ending is going to alienate more fans than people think.
    2. Madeleine Swan was tedious, lacked energy, and was a stale character. She brought the movie down. Paloma and Nomi were great.
    3. Spectre and NTTD should not have been made.
    4. Some fans will look at this as the end of Bond, and move on from the franchise because they believe he is dead. Period. So they’re done.
    5. In the reboot to come, please no: Spectre, Blofeld, Dr. No, etc. Let’s come up with some original villains and a FRESH story. This Bond is not connected to any continuity and does his own thing. Follow the tone of Casino and QOS. But the villains, and so on, 60 years is enough.

    In regards to 3, how did these fans come to terms with Casino Royale? There we have a Bond who becomes a 00 in 2006, (we clearly see the date on the surveillance discs in the Bahamas). He couldn’t have been the same Bond galavanting with sexy KGB agents or blowing up chemical factories in the USSR… he’d have been just a kid. Therefore, the next Bond is no different than Craig’s start, regardless if Craig’s Bond dies, goes to clown college or travels through time and gets stuck in the Wild West.

    I would say that it is the beginning of Bond, or that’s how general audiences would look at it. That is much different than the end/death of Bond. If that makes sense.
  • Posts: 2,400
    FoxRox wrote: »
    The Last Jedi was a hit with most audiences. But the "true Star Wars fans" who hated it were younger and more vocal on social media than James Bond fans. Hence the ton of 3 hrs YouTube videos where somebody made point after point in a monotonous voice to "prove" that it wasn't a proper SW film.

    Comparatively, these people were less vocal two years later on Rise of Skywalker, which is the real unredeemable film in the whole series.

    I think the entire sequel trilogy is a bust as a whole, for whatever that's worth. Just feels like to me there's a lot more of a positive air around NTTD than when TLJ came out, but maybe it's like you say and it's the difference of how vocal and widespread the other fanbase is. The audience RT score of TLJ is rough.

    The problem is the audience score for TLJ was impacted by the fact that ANYONE could go in, make a b.s. profile, leave a rating, repeat as often as they wanted. RT changed their system in response so that people now have to verify A: that they watched the film B: that they're actually a person, so what happened to TLJ is never going to happen again with the audience score on RT.
  • EinoRistoSiniahoEinoRistoSiniaho Oulu, Finland
    Posts: 73
    bondywondy wrote: »
    I responded to a few. 😊 The Sun quoted an insider saying Bond can survive or they reboot.

    It's 50:50?

    We're not Eon so we can't say with 100 percent certainty what will happen. That's all I'm saying. 😉
    Michael G. Wilson has stated that the Craig era should be seen as its own "miniseries" within the Bond series. There will be a reboot with 100% certainty.
  • Posts: 6,665
    talos7 wrote: »
    Well I saw it last night; with subsequent viewings my opinion may change but my initial reaction is , underwhelmed. While there is a lot to like, the first hour is outstanding, there is just too much that drags this film down, mainly a ponderous, patchwork script, a very poorly defined villain and an uneven performance from Craig.

    Your comment, dear @talos7, is spot on, IMO, and I believe that in years to come, this will slowly settle as the prevalent consensus on the film. IMO, of course, but we shall see ;)
  • Posts: 6,727
    talos7 wrote: »
    Well I saw it last night; with subsequent viewings my opinion may change but my initial reaction is , underwhelmed. While there is a lot to like, the first hour is outstanding, there is just too much that drags this film down, mainly a ponderous, patchwork script, a very poorly defined villain and an uneven performance from Craig.

    Agree with a lot of this! I stated that Craig seems at his most relaxed here, so I get what you said in your other post, that it was out of character! Still a strong performance though! But, unlike CR, theres a hell of a lot wrong with it!
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    edited October 2021 Posts: 648
    Honestly the fact that this is even being compared to TLJ is bad enough. And it's undeniably part of a trend in Hollywood to destroy classic action franchises by undermining their heroes and replacing them with more PC figures. They did it with Luke, John Connor, and now Bond. That's why I don't buy the arguments about how Craig's previous films were all leading up to this. They weren't. There's nothing in any previous entry which made this the inevitable conclusion. This was Eon doing what they've done for the entirety of the Craig era: following fads. With QOS it was Bourne, with SF it was Batman, with SP it was Mission Impossible, and now with NTTD it's Star Wars and Marvel.
Sign In or Register to comment.