NO TIME TO DIE (2021) - Critical Reaction and Box Office Performance

1104105107109110172

Comments

  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    QQ7 wrote: »
    https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/world/?ref_=bo_nb_hm_tab

    Just compare domestic and foreign numbers for Venom and NTTD.
    It's clear that one movie appeals to USA and other to foreign audience and vice versa.

    Only 23% of Venom's earnings are foreign.

    It will not surprise me if the US box office 2021 ends with the top four titles being Marvel films (Black Widow, Shang-Chi, Venom, and Spider-Man), which really demonstrates just how massively popular Marvel is in the US. I don't think Bond has a chance of cracking that top four.

    You're forgetting The Eternals. They'll kick Venom's ugly butt. You heard it here first.

    HA!

    You’re right, I did forget. :)) Can you blame me though? The trailers for it makes it look so dull and forgettable. But fans will eat it up anyway as if it’s a moral obligation.

    The trailer played before my showing of NTTD and the audience was oddly unresponsive to it.
  • QQ7 wrote: »
    https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/world/?ref_=bo_nb_hm_tab

    Just compare domestic and foreign numbers for Venom and NTTD.
    It's clear that one movie appeals to USA and other to foreign audience and vice versa.

    Only 23% of Venom's earnings are foreign.

    It will not surprise me if the US box office 2021 ends with the top four titles being Marvel films (Black Widow, Shang-Chi, Venom, and Spider-Man), which really demonstrates just how massively popular Marvel is in the US. I don't think Bond has a chance of cracking that top four.

    You're forgetting The Eternals. They'll kick Venom's ugly butt. You heard it here first.

    HA!

    You’re right, I did forget. :)) Can you blame me though? The trailers for it makes it look so dull and forgettable. But fans will eat it up anyway as if it’s a moral obligation.

    For what it's worth: I'm a comics fan. The Eternals was created by Jack Kirby. "Moral Obligation" is an understatement.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,070
    I hope it’s much better than the trailers present it.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    Plenty of people still love seeing a movie on a big cinema screen.
    That is not dead yet. At all.
  • I read that NTTD opened in second place in Russia with $4.5 million in its opening weekend ($5.3 million including Thursday previews), narrowly trailing Venom-2's $4.7 million second weekend. In ruble currency it opened tops in the franchise with R326m, bigger than SPECTRE's R268m, but in dollar terms there's no way it will reach Skyfall's total of $17m in Russia.
  • Posts: 3,291
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Now that it’s over,what let the Craig era down for me is that we never got to see Bond given a mission by M ( Besides CR ).He only stumbled across missions and seemed to retire multiple times.He actually seemed to hate his job really.CR worked because it was an origin story but as soon as the credits rolled on that one he was Bond and the following films should have been mission based.

    Instead they tried to turn it into a saga and because they didn’t plan it out and took it one film at a time,they didn’t really know what they were doing like Kevin Feige does with the MCU.James Bond is appealing because he’s a fantasy character but to have film after film of him quitting and moping about his lost love got tedious.Bond loses Tracey in OHMSS ( A film that NTTD tries to ape by directly lifting dialogue and music from it ) but we don’t hear about it again until TSWLM and even then it’s just a brief mention.

    So when Martin Campbell and Henry Cavill are doing the press rounds for Bond 26, I hope they emphasise they are bringing the fun back to the series 😉

    Campbell I would definitely be up for. I doubt it will be Cavill though. Too famous, and too established in other similar genre hero roles. Unfortunately his ship has sailed.

  • edited October 2021 Posts: 3,333
    As I've already stated, I'll allow that Henry Cavill just gave a mediocre performance as a very poorly-written Superman. But again, I'm just an old curmudgeon: the last good performance as Superman I've seen was given by Christopher Reeve. You could believe that his Clark Kent fooled all those people all those years with nothing but a pair of glasses. Henry C. I can accept as Napoleon Solo, but I'd really rather not see him as James Bond. Different strokes for different folks I guess.
    I agree Christopher Reeve's first Superman movie was great and still the torchbearer for the character. Hell, I won't even stop there, the same applies to Jor-El, Lex Luther, Perry White and General Zod in the same movie. But the less said about Superman: Quest for Peace the better. Cavill's misfortune was being cast in an ill-concieved reboot that failed to deliver on its promise which just went the same in vogue route of making the character darker and less aspirational for young kids. I don't think modern audiences were actually asking for it. I also think the general consensus held by most cinemagoers is that Cavill was good, and certainly looked the part, but the movie he was in was not.
    Campbell I would definitely be up for. I doubt it will be Cavill though. Too famous, and too established in other similar genre hero roles. Unfortunately his ship has sailed.
    Unfortunately, I believe you're 100% right about Cavill. They'll be going for another Craig-type actor for the role, but much younger than he was when first cast as 007.
  • Never seen the appeal of Cavill myself. He looks the part, but I thought he was very bland and wooden in UNCLE, and a complete non entity in MI (good in the fight scenes though, I’ll give him that).

    I think Bond needs someone with real screen presence, who can make the smooth operator stuff feel natural and effortless. Cavill is too robotic imo. I don’t think he has the acting ability that Craig and Dalton had or the sheer movie star power that you need to carry a Moore/Brosnan type film.
  • Posts: 4,602
    It's interesting where we are with the whole series. DC is being widely praised for his acting ability both over the arc and especially for NTTD and yet, at the same time, some fans looking towards casting someone who, to be fair, struggles in this area.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 3,333
    patb wrote: »
    It's interesting where we are with the whole series. DC is being widely praised for his acting ability both over the arc and especially for NTTD and yet, at the same time, some fans looking towards casting someone who, to be fair, struggles in this area.
    Was Brosnan ever considered the embodiment of a powerhouse performer though? Sure, he earned some plaudits after GE in various roles, but he was never considered anything more than just a competent actor before he took on the role. For the record, I don't think it will be Cavill. Whenever I've mentioned his name, it's been in reference to how a lot of outsiders from our MI6 community see which direction this series should go in, not so much how those within it see it. I also understand the argument that now they've cast a "proper" trained actor in the role of Bond, they can no longer go back to a lacking-in-credentials type actor. I don't personally agree with that, but I do understand that side of the argument.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,070
    I certainly don’t want another Lazenby situation where they just pick a guy that looks like a James Bond but is completely flat in the acting department. I know he has his fans, I could never understand it. He’s surface level Bond. So was Brosnan, though by 2002 I think he grew as an actor and had finally owned the role in DAD, whereas in GE he comes off so stiff and calculated that he never feels human.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 3,333
    I can fully understand your viewpoint @MakeshiftPython. There's those that want a James Bond that looks aesthetically like their perception of Bond as seen in the 70's and 80's Milk Tray adverts or Action Man dolls, and there's those who aren't particularly fussed so long as he can act like a well trained thespian. Striking the right balance will be what Bond 26 either succeeds or fails on.

    Craig's final Bond outing is still too early to reach a general consensus over. I can still recall the intense and eager enjoyment of DAD in 2002 on the old KTBE forums. Many hailing it as a modern day Bond for the 21st century and Brosnan's finest entry, and if you didn't appreciate DAD then perhaps Bond was no longer for you. It was the main reason why I joined the forum back in 2002 before it morphed into MI6. There was many a heated discussion over the merits and demerits of DAD, not too dissimilar to the current movie. I'm not comparing the two movies, just the lively debates that ensued. I don't think we're quite there yet with NTTD. As Bond 26 nears its production date, they'll be more newcomers with differing opinions to our existing ones that will come to the fore. That said, I still believe Dirty Harry summed it up best on the topic of people and their opinions.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited October 2021 Posts: 8,070
    That reminds me, Roger Moore doesn’t get enough credit for his acting. He works a lot with his charm, certainly, but there’s subtle moments that no untrained actor can pull off easily like in LALD where he’s told “Mrs Bond” is waiting for him. For that brief moment you see Moore’s Bond show a bit of vulnerability/surprise over what he heard, and then we see the cogs turning in Bond’s head as the receptionist is speaking, as if he’s taking a moment to register what he heard and is realizing something is amiss. It’s not a scene I see get mentioned a lot especially compared to TSWLM’s “alright, you’ve made your point”.
  • Posts: 3,333
    I really like Roger Moore in LALD @MakeshiftPython. I know it has its faults and isn't spoken about in the same breath as some of the other Bond classics, but I happen to think Moore gives his best performance as Bond in LALD. Also, all the quips land and Moore's eyebrow is kept firmly in check throughout.
  • QQ7QQ7 Croatia
    Posts: 371
    I want legend that is Martin Campbell to reboot James Bond for the 3rd time. Pretty please!
  • RyanRyan Canada
    Posts: 692
    Campbell is 2 for 2 so far, so I'd love to make it 3 for 3. I know he's getting up there in age, but as long as he is up to the task and willing to do it then why not?
  • Posts: 490
    I'm so so so glad Craig came back for one more. Spectre lacked the energy and punch to be the final chapter and I don't think it was ever intended to be. They made it sort of ambiguous to give DC an out if he wanted it. NTTD was always intended as the final chapter and gave this era the explosive ending it deserved. Every aspect was dialed up to 11.
  • I think if the script is up to snuff then Campbell will do a good job. He had the benefit of some of the best Bond scripts with GE and CR.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,677
    ertert wrote: »
    I'm so so so glad Craig came back for one more. Spectre lacked the energy and punch to be the final chapter and I don't think it was ever intended to be. They made it sort of ambiguous to give DC an out if he wanted it. NTTD was always intended as the final chapter and gave this era the explosive ending it deserved. Every aspect was dialed up to 11.

    It would've been a real shame to end an era that started so strongly on something like SP. I'm glad he returned one last time and delivered such a hit.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,500
    ‘No Time To Die’ Monday Box Office 31% Higher Than ‘Spectre’, Bond’s 5-Day Domestic Cume Eyeing $67M+
    https://deadline.com/2021/10/no-time-to-die-monday-box-office-domestic-1234854716/
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 622
    That reminds me, Roger Moore doesn’t get enough credit for his acting. He works a lot with his charm, certainly, but there’s subtle moments that no untrained actor can pull off easily like in LALD where he’s told “Mrs Bond” is waiting for him. For that brief moment you see Moore’s Bond show a bit of vulnerability/surprise over what he heard, and then we see the cogs turning in Bond’s head as the receptionist is speaking, as if he’s taking a moment to register what he heard and is realizing something is amiss. It’s not a scene I see get mentioned a lot especially compared to TSWLM’s “alright, you’ve made your point”.

    Moore was also (in my opinion) the most skilled of the six actors with quips and humorous reactions. The scene in NTTD in which Bond returns to MI6 and the desk employee does not recognize his name? Moore would've made that moment something wonderful -- but sadly, in Craig's hands, I think it lands with a thud (it doesn't help that the lighting makes him appear ready to be displayed at Madame Tussauds).

    One of the panelists on the James Bond & Friends podcast went on and on about Bond's "So there we were..." monologue to Blofeld and how it was Craig's Moore moment, but the scene is so badly written even people who liked the film are confused by it, and I'm not even convinced Craig knew what he was doing in it.

    I'll just add that I think Craig is a fine actor with a lot of range, and is more than capable of tackling humor -- he's hilarious in LOGAN LUCKY and should have been nominated for an Academy Award for that scene-stealing supporting role. But, I feel, much like Brosnan (who had megawatt star power on Remington Steele and was charming AND funny) there seems to be something in the Bond template that's shackling him -- a pressure to always be tough, or serious, or unflappable.

    Or it could just be bad writing!
  • Posts: 5,886
    In France, 1 384 858 people have seen NTTD so far.

    http://www.jpbox-office.com/fichfilm.php?id=18174&view=2

    Not bad, not bad at all for only a week. Now, will the movie have legs ? We shall see.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,697
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    One of the panelists on the James Bond & Friends podcast went on and on about Bond's "So there we were..." monologue to Blofeld and how it was Craig's Moore moment, but the scene is so badly written even people who liked the film are confused by it, and I'm not even convinced Craig knew what he was doing in it.

    What in the world was confusing about that scene?

  • Posts: 622
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    One of the panelists on the James Bond & Friends podcast went on and on about Bond's "So there we were..." monologue to Blofeld and how it was Craig's Moore moment, but the scene is so badly written even people who liked the film are confused by it, and I'm not even convinced Craig knew what he was doing in it.

    What in the world was confusing about that scene?

    I've seen people on this board point out that Craig doesn't even seem to be playing the same character in that scene, and it's pretty much the feeling I had in the theater. One example is his attempt to strangle Blofeld: It isn't properly set up in the writing, and I didn't believe for a second that Bond would lose his cool that much. Where it becomes confusing is when audiences see this and assume from Bond's irrational behavior that it's all an act or a con and when it's revealed that it isn't, they're left scratching their heads.

    And "Die, Blofeld, die!!" as Calvin Dyson said, is just cheesy, whether or not it's Fleming.
  • Escalus5 wrote: »
    One of the panelists on the James Bond & Friends podcast went on and on about Bond's "So there we were..." monologue to Blofeld and how it was Craig's Moore moment, but the scene is so badly written even people who liked the film are confused by it, and I'm not even convinced Craig knew what he was doing in it.

    What in the world was confusing about that scene?

    Exactly. And it was skillfully played by Mr Craig.
  • Escalus5 wrote: »

    And "Die, Blofeld, die!!" as Calvin Dyson said, is just cheesy, whether or not it's Fleming.

    Ah, I see. So Fleming is no longer the ultimate source of what is or is not appropriate for Bond. Now Dyson is the ultimate source. Nice to know, thanks.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,697
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    One of the panelists on the James Bond & Friends podcast went on and on about Bond's "So there we were..." monologue to Blofeld and how it was Craig's Moore moment, but the scene is so badly written even people who liked the film are confused by it, and I'm not even convinced Craig knew what he was doing in it.

    What in the world was confusing about that scene?

    Exactly. And it was skillfully played by Mr Craig.

    Indeed, I love it. The way he goads Blofeld is brutal. Describing the failure in detail and saying it's like "everything that is Ernst Stavro Blofeld" with sarcastic praise. Blofeld clearly knows what Bond is doing.

    As for finding it odd that Bond would lose his cool with a guy who just tried to kill him and ruined the last five years of his life, I guess I just don't see the problem.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    Well, some of us definitely got a different impression. I never felt any part of the film was cheesy, including this scene. I thought it was fine, very well done, and I loved the reference to Fleming. I have zero issues with this part.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 490
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    One of the panelists on the James Bond & Friends podcast went on and on about Bond's "So there we were..." monologue to Blofeld and how it was Craig's Moore moment, but the scene is so badly written even people who liked the film are confused by it, and I'm not even convinced Craig knew what he was doing in it.

    What in the world was confusing about that scene?

    Exactly. And it was skillfully played by Mr Craig.

    Indeed, I love it. The way he goads Blofeld is brutal. Describing the failure in detail and saying it's like "everything that is Ernst Stavro Blofeld" with sarcastic praise. Blofeld clearly knows what Bond is doing.

    As for finding it odd that Bond would lose his cool with a guy who just tried to kill him and ruined the last five years of his life, I guess I just don't see the problem.

    I loved how Blofeld's entire scheme in NTTD was just to screw with Bond and ruin his life. Just profoundly petty.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 110
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    One of the panelists on the James Bond & Friends podcast went on and on about Bond's "So there we were..." monologue to Blofeld and how it was Craig's Moore moment, but the scene is so badly written even people who liked the film are confused by it, and I'm not even convinced Craig knew what he was doing in it.

    What in the world was confusing about that scene?

    Exactly. And it was skillfully played by Mr Craig.

    Indeed, I love it. The way he goads Blofeld is brutal. Describing the failure in detail and saying it's like "everything that is Ernst Stavro Blofeld" with sarcastic praise. Blofeld clearly knows what Bond is doing.

    As for finding it odd that Bond would lose his cool with a guy who just tried to kill him and ruined the last five years of his life, I guess I just don't see the problem.

    Since Blofeld is the "author of all his pain", it's more like the last 15 years. I was shocked he didn't try to choke him as soon as Madeline left the room.
Sign In or Register to comment.