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

1143144146148149298

Comments

  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    Or at least have him dive off the island as it blows up, and then Bond is presumed dead. Did he make it, or didn't he. You could still have the obituary scenes afterwards. This again keeps in line with Fleming.
    Because that’s what would really sell the dramatic finale, Bond taking a swan dive off a cliff…
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Minion wrote: »
    Or at least have him dive off the island as it blows up, and then Bond is presumed dead. Did he make it, or didn't he. You could still have the obituary scenes afterwards. This again keeps in line with Fleming.
    Because that’s what would really sell the dramatic finale, Bond taking a swan dive off a cliff…

    ...just to be killed by a giant squid.
  • Birdleson wrote: »
    I too want the giant squid.

    CGI has reached a point where it could be done incredibly realistically and with all the excitement and terror of the scene in the novel.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,336
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I too want the giant squid.

    I hope it's in the next Bond film. A Bond film set in a tropical setting ala Dr. No or Thunderball would be just what the doctor ordered.
  • Minion wrote: »
    Or at least have him dive off the island as it blows up, and then Bond is presumed dead. Did he make it, or didn't he. You could still have the obituary scenes afterwards. This again keeps in line with Fleming.
    Because that’s what would really sell the dramatic finale, Bond taking a swan dive off a cliff…

    ...just to be killed by a giant squid.

    Lol. NTTD would shoot up several places in my rankings if this was how it had really ended.
  • Posts: 3,289
    Minion wrote: »
    Or at least have him dive off the island as it blows up, and then Bond is presumed dead. Did he make it, or didn't he. You could still have the obituary scenes afterwards. This again keeps in line with Fleming.
    Because that’s what would really sell the dramatic finale, Bond taking a swan dive off a cliff…

    No, I wouldn't really want that either, but much prefer it to Bond standing there and getting blown up.

    I would have preferred they had the balls to stick to the novel. Bond gets amnesia and doesn't know who he is anymore, before setting off sailing to Russia. Doesn't know he has a child, and doesn't know who Madeline is. That would have been just as tragic, probably even a more downbeat sad ending that what we got instead.

    You could still cut to Madeline and the daughter in the Aston as the final shot.
  • Posts: 3,289
    Minion wrote: »
    Or at least have him dive off the island as it blows up, and then Bond is presumed dead. Did he make it, or didn't he. You could still have the obituary scenes afterwards. This again keeps in line with Fleming.
    Because that’s what would really sell the dramatic finale, Bond taking a swan dive off a cliff…

    ...just to be killed by a giant squid.

    :)) I like it!
  • Posts: 3,289
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I too want the giant squid.

    So do I too, but it seems to be the one thing the Fleming naysayers jump on, so I'm trying to appease them in some way... ;)
  • Posts: 3,289
    If Purvis & Wade came up with a giant squid, or a killer who's most dangerous when there's a full moon, or had Bond believe he saw a statue move in response to his prayer, or did a comedy dream sequence of Bond's married life, I feel confident it would not be loved.

    As is, Fleming soaked Blofeld's story arc in coincidence, and people don't like that movie Blofeld is steeped in it as well. :-??

    I don't have issues with Blofeld in YOLT. Had NTTD played out the same way, I would have much preferred that. Safin as a villain meant nothing to Bond, whereas Blofeld did. There was a much bigger payoff. Safin was a waste.

    As for giant squid's, this seems to be one of the things Fleming haters keep falling back on to emphasise their point that going back to the books for unused material is bad.

    The point is that there’s a thing with fans giving weird Fleming elements a pass that they never would if it were under a different name.

    Like if Purvis & Wade came up with the girls being brainwashed into poisoning earth’s agriculture, there would be many fans talking about how ludicrous that is and how it brings down the film for them the same way nanobots brings down NTTD.

    But because Fleming came up with that nearly 60 years ago we don’t give it much thought like we would with a brand new film because in everyone’s minds it’s always been part of Fleming’s canon.

    Just like how in 40 years fandom will have reached a point of accepting NTTD as something that was done at one point in the franchise’s history and not really be all that bothered because by then it’s not seen as a novelty.

    I’ve seen this with Star Trek, where fans are so used to original TOS episodes having ludicrous storylines but if done today would balk at how silly it is.

    There are certain things from the novels you would never adapt, and the giant squid is probably one of them, so is a nodding statue. So I agree that not all Fleming is sacrosanct.

    There was never a literal nodding statue in Fleming. Just Bond second-guessing whether a statue had nodded while feeling particularly superstitious. The same as people jumping at shadows.

    The giant squid, on the other hand, is well overdue and hopefully will turn up during the next Bond's run.

    I know, but I have to try and reach some compromise with the Fleming haters.... ;)
  • Posts: 3,289
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Why? They have no more say than you or I do.

    Ok then, I want a massive giant squid in the next one, with Bond having strange dreams, eating scrambled eggs every 30 minutes, scenes with Bond taking cold showers, and Bond taking a drug before going on a mission.

    Better?

    (I would actually love this, BTW...) ;)
  • Birdleson wrote: »
    Why? They have no more say than you or I do.

    Ok then, I want a massive giant squid in the next one, with Bond having strange dreams, eating scrambled eggs every 30 minutes, scenes with Bond taking cold showers, and Bond taking a drug before going on a mission.

    Better?

    (I would actually love this, BTW...) ;)

    You just gave me goosebumps. ;)
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    Minion wrote: »
    Or at least have him dive off the island as it blows up, and then Bond is presumed dead. Did he make it, or didn't he. You could still have the obituary scenes afterwards. This again keeps in line with Fleming.
    Because that’s what would really sell the dramatic finale, Bond taking a swan dive off a cliff…

    ...just to be killed by a giant squid.

    Ok, I’m sold.
  • I get the divisiveness with Bond dying in NTTD but I, like many on this forum, view Craig’s timeline as a stand alone from what came before. We know that CR was Bond Begins, how does that fit into the continuity or timeline? Why can’t NTTD be the conclusion, be where this version of Bond is Bond Ends?
  • Posts: 526
    I’m going to treat NTTD as non-canon. That’s my solution to the problem known as NTTD (continuity, arc, etc.). Ahhh. I feel much better already. B-)
  • I’m going to treat NTTD as non-canon. That’s my solution to the problem known as NTTD (continuity, arc, etc.). Ahhh. I feel much better already. B-)

    According to Fukunaga, there were actual discussions concerning treating the end of Spectre, from Blofeld's head-drilling onward, as but a dream. You could take Fukunaga up on that and treat the end of SP and everything that happens in NTTD as merely a dream. Then Craig's tenure ends with him getting his head drilled.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,696
    If Purvis & Wade came up with a giant squid, or a killer who's most dangerous when there's a full moon, or had Bond believe he saw a statue move in response to his prayer, or did a comedy dream sequence of Bond's married life, I feel confident it would not be loved.

    As is, Fleming soaked Blofeld's story arc in coincidence, and people don't like that movie Blofeld is steeped in it as well. :-??

    I don't have issues with Blofeld in YOLT. Had NTTD played out the same way, I would have much preferred that. Safin as a villain meant nothing to Bond, whereas Blofeld did. There was a much bigger payoff. Safin was a waste.

    As for giant squid's, this seems to be one of the things Fleming haters keep falling back on to emphasise their point that going back to the books for unused material is bad.

    The point is that there’s a thing with fans giving weird Fleming elements a pass that they never would if it were under a different name.

    Like if Purvis & Wade came up with the girls being brainwashed into poisoning earth’s agriculture, there would be many fans talking about how ludicrous that is and how it brings down the film for them the same way nanobots brings down NTTD.

    But because Fleming came up with that nearly 60 years ago we don’t give it much thought like we would with a brand new film because in everyone’s minds it’s always been part of Fleming’s canon.

    Just like how in 40 years fandom will have reached a point of accepting NTTD as something that was done at one point in the franchise’s history and not really be all that bothered because by then it’s not seen as a novelty.

    I’ve seen this with Star Trek, where fans are so used to original TOS episodes having ludicrous storylines but if done today would balk at how silly it is.

    There are certain things from the novels you would never adapt, and the giant squid is probably one of them, so is a nodding statue. So I agree that not all Fleming is sacrosanct.

    There was never a literal nodding statue in Fleming. Just Bond second-guessing whether a statue had nodded while feeling particularly superstitious. The same as people jumping at shadows.

    The giant squid, on the other hand, is well overdue and hopefully will turn up during the next Bond's run.

    I know, but I have to try and reach some compromise with the Fleming haters.... ;)

    Is there really a cabal of people here who hate Ian Fleming's novels?
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 526
    I’m going to treat NTTD as non-canon. That’s my solution to the problem known as NTTD (continuity, arc, etc.). Ahhh. I feel much better already. B-)

    According to Fukunaga, there were actual discussions concerning treating the end of Spectre, from Blofeld's head-drilling onward, as but a dream. You could take Fukunaga up on that and treat the end of SP and everything that happens in NTTD as merely a dream. Then Craig's tenure ends with him getting his head drilled.

    Okay, Some Kind of Hero, you have my creative wheels spinning. Keep in mind, I’m more of a DC Bond fan than I am a Bond fan overall, or of the franchise. I don’t care for Connery (too smarmy), Moore (slapstick), Dalton (great, enjoyed his 2, Brosnan (boorish). But, I am a hardcore DanielCraig Bond fan. I’ve seen Casino Royale 218 times. So, what I am considering is to end Craig’s Bond for myself at Skyfall. That is the perfect ending for Craig’s Bond imo. “With pleasure M. With pleasure.” If I go this route, I wouldn’t watch Spectre again. I never plan on watching NTTD again. The more I think about it, the more I detest it. Out of mind, out of existence. I do have to think I’m this though...
    Note: I do love the Fleming novels overall. And some of the other books as well.
  • Posts: 526
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I’ve always said we’re best off (as in happiest) creating our own inner continuity, be damned with what the producers meant or what other fans think, or what anybody else wants it to be. To me it’s always been the same Bond no matter what, with no regard to the contradictions and inconsistencies. And Admiral Hardgreaves certainly became M.

    Agreed Birdleson. What do you think of my idea to end the Craig series (for myself) at Skyfall? The DC trilogy. NTTDhas certainly had an affect on how I view the entire Craig arc. For the worse, I’m afraid. I never looked more forward to a movie, and I was never more disappointed and flattened by one. Amazing how irony can bite you.
  • Posts: 526
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I thought it was great for the reasons I gave above.

    Thanks! For some reason, I feel a lot better now. I really do. Goodbye Spectre, goodbye NTTD. I’ll keep them on my shelf, but I’m done with that continuity. I prefer to see Bond and M at the end of Skyfall, preparing to go on his missions, and all is well. Spectre, and the more I think about it, that movie is just a mess. Blofeld, Madeline, Spectre, Cuckoo, whew. And that pts scene with the Coptor was so good until the corny music when it went upside down. Totally took me out of the moment. I just could not stand the Blofeld in DC’s arc. Bond throws away his gun and walks off...That never worked for me. And NTTD, I won’t even go there anymore. Rant over. I feel much better!
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 372
    Remember how Snake Plissken died, killed by USPF, gunned down at the end of Escape From L.A.?

    Well he didn't, because "He's not even here, it's a hologram!".

    Maybe 007 dying is a holo-projection. After all, "this installation is from the fifties" a time when not only Bond was created (wink from the writers) but also Laser Holography started to shape. Maybe the installation as some kind of laser projection he uses.

    Maybe Bond choose to make it appear he dies because he knows he can't see Madeleine and the child again, so he "disappear".

    After all, the last shot is highly suspicious. To me, it looked like a Hologram and the explosions seemed to wade through him like he was made of light.

  • Posts: 3,289
    If Purvis & Wade came up with a giant squid, or a killer who's most dangerous when there's a full moon, or had Bond believe he saw a statue move in response to his prayer, or did a comedy dream sequence of Bond's married life, I feel confident it would not be loved.

    As is, Fleming soaked Blofeld's story arc in coincidence, and people don't like that movie Blofeld is steeped in it as well. :-??

    I don't have issues with Blofeld in YOLT. Had NTTD played out the same way, I would have much preferred that. Safin as a villain meant nothing to Bond, whereas Blofeld did. There was a much bigger payoff. Safin was a waste.

    As for giant squid's, this seems to be one of the things Fleming haters keep falling back on to emphasise their point that going back to the books for unused material is bad.

    The point is that there’s a thing with fans giving weird Fleming elements a pass that they never would if it were under a different name.

    Like if Purvis & Wade came up with the girls being brainwashed into poisoning earth’s agriculture, there would be many fans talking about how ludicrous that is and how it brings down the film for them the same way nanobots brings down NTTD.

    But because Fleming came up with that nearly 60 years ago we don’t give it much thought like we would with a brand new film because in everyone’s minds it’s always been part of Fleming’s canon.

    Just like how in 40 years fandom will have reached a point of accepting NTTD as something that was done at one point in the franchise’s history and not really be all that bothered because by then it’s not seen as a novelty.

    I’ve seen this with Star Trek, where fans are so used to original TOS episodes having ludicrous storylines but if done today would balk at how silly it is.

    There are certain things from the novels you would never adapt, and the giant squid is probably one of them, so is a nodding statue. So I agree that not all Fleming is sacrosanct.

    There was never a literal nodding statue in Fleming. Just Bond second-guessing whether a statue had nodded while feeling particularly superstitious. The same as people jumping at shadows.

    The giant squid, on the other hand, is well overdue and hopefully will turn up during the next Bond's run.

    I know, but I have to try and reach some compromise with the Fleming haters.... ;)

    Is there really a cabal of people here who hate Ian Fleming's novels?

    I certainly hope not, but I'm doing my best to try and weed them out. Thankfully I know you are not one. You've convinced me you are a fan (despite your hatred of giant squid)... ;)
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 1,030
    I prefer to see Bond and M at the end of Skyfall, preparing to go on his missions, and all is well.

    I remember seeing that scene and being really pleased that it appeared the 'reboot' idea had finished, and there was to be no more personal issues and 'going rogue' in the future. They'd told the story of how Bond came to be Bond, and everything was in its place to send him off on proper missions.
    I couldn't have been more wrong, could I? Look what a mess we've ended up with. Retired dad Bond, killing off Felix and blowing Bond up.
    Gee, thanks for that!
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,711
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondywondy wrote: »
    Seve wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    I love the fact Bond took a hailstorm of missiles to the face, yet there are still fans suggesting he’s alive. I would say I’m surprised but it seems symptomatic of today’s society where a fair portion seem incapable of accepting reality...

    ...Daniel Craig’s Bond died. The character of James Bond didn’t
    Yes. It was confirmed in the film, and confirmed several times after the fact by those creatively in charge of the film.

    Interesting

    So you find it quite unreasonable for someone to see the character of James Bond killed on screen, and then moments later see a post script which states that "James Bond will return" and not wonder if that means he is did not die after all?

    You choose to make the distinction between "James Bond as played by Daniel Craig" and "James Bond the immortal character" and will be unfazed when a complete stranger turns up in Bond 26 as if nothing had happened

    Yet somehow you are surprised that others might think Craig-Bond is not dead and could yet appear in Bond 26

    I agree with you that the intention of everyone involved in making NTTD is that Craig-Bond will not return

    But I'm not at all surprised that others think he might, particularly casual viewers who do not hang on EON's every announcement.

    And in the World of James Bond, Never Say Never Again!

    1657962993-DrSpockFascinating.jpg

    I mean, really, it's hard to argue with your point here. Fundamentally, the film says "James Bond is dead", and then "James Bond Will Return". They're diametrically opposed statements to make. I tend to agree with those that liken it to "The king is dead, long live the king", and that James Bond stories will return, but you're not wrong.

    Until we know the story premise of Bond 26... noone can state with absolute certainty Craig's Bond is dead. It's just people's opinions posted on the internet. We don't know what Eon will do. 😉

    How is the flat earth community these days?

    Navy missiles land on top of a man and atomize the entire island; there is always a chance you survive that... 🙄 Just keep blinding yourself from the obvious.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,696
    If Purvis & Wade came up with a giant squid, or a killer who's most dangerous when there's a full moon, or had Bond believe he saw a statue move in response to his prayer, or did a comedy dream sequence of Bond's married life, I feel confident it would not be loved.

    As is, Fleming soaked Blofeld's story arc in coincidence, and people don't like that movie Blofeld is steeped in it as well. :-??

    I don't have issues with Blofeld in YOLT. Had NTTD played out the same way, I would have much preferred that. Safin as a villain meant nothing to Bond, whereas Blofeld did. There was a much bigger payoff. Safin was a waste.

    As for giant squid's, this seems to be one of the things Fleming haters keep falling back on to emphasise their point that going back to the books for unused material is bad.

    The point is that there’s a thing with fans giving weird Fleming elements a pass that they never would if it were under a different name.

    Like if Purvis & Wade came up with the girls being brainwashed into poisoning earth’s agriculture, there would be many fans talking about how ludicrous that is and how it brings down the film for them the same way nanobots brings down NTTD.

    But because Fleming came up with that nearly 60 years ago we don’t give it much thought like we would with a brand new film because in everyone’s minds it’s always been part of Fleming’s canon.

    Just like how in 40 years fandom will have reached a point of accepting NTTD as something that was done at one point in the franchise’s history and not really be all that bothered because by then it’s not seen as a novelty.

    I’ve seen this with Star Trek, where fans are so used to original TOS episodes having ludicrous storylines but if done today would balk at how silly it is.

    There are certain things from the novels you would never adapt, and the giant squid is probably one of them, so is a nodding statue. So I agree that not all Fleming is sacrosanct.

    There was never a literal nodding statue in Fleming. Just Bond second-guessing whether a statue had nodded while feeling particularly superstitious. The same as people jumping at shadows.

    The giant squid, on the other hand, is well overdue and hopefully will turn up during the next Bond's run.

    I know, but I have to try and reach some compromise with the Fleming haters.... ;)

    Is there really a cabal of people here who hate Ian Fleming's novels?

    I certainly hope not, but I'm doing my best to try and weed them out. Thankfully I know you are not one. You've convinced me you are a fan (despite your hatred of giant squid)... ;)

    I like the squid! I'm just saying that it's one of many Fleming ideas that a lot of people wouldn't accept if it weren't Fleming, or if they didn't know it was Fleming.

    And I'll say this: Ian Fleming would not have been thrilled about CR06. His Bond gives no hint of ever being the "gratuitously murder a guy at an embassy and then break into your boss's house" type, nor as hyperaggressive nor as heartbroken over Vesper. If Fleming got pissed off over Honey Ryder not being left to an army of crabs, he probably wouldn't like seeing "the bitch is dead" being turned into a bit of bravado from a very, very sad James Bond.

    I think this "blunt instrument" line has been taken out of context. James Bond is a blunt instrument of the state in that he is not a diplomat, but a licensed killer. It is not a reference to any aspect of his character or demeanor. Roger Moore was as much a blunt instrument as any of the others. It's the role, not the man.

    But I do like reading people pointing out that Fleming's Bond enjoyed his life and actually made a point of doing so. On dark days he might think about his likely early death, but it wasn't a defining characteristic. Scrambled eggs was probably more central to who he was. :))

  • Posts: 1,314
    Out of interest would anyone who doesn’t like the ending (me included) prefer it if you didn’t see the explosions consume bonds body. Like if it panned up to the sky as the rockets fell.

    There’s something about seeing him die like that I’m uncomfortable with. It’s just like rogue one, but I care about the character. It’s too gratuitous.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited October 2021 Posts: 4,343
    The way Craig delivers the “It’s all right Q. It’s all right” line is heartbreaking.

    Before release I always thought he would kinda sacrifice to save the day but the movie would’ve ended with a hint of him surviving - like showing Swann arriving in Matera and seeing his DB5 in front of their hotel - but now I’m happy they didn’t chose that route.

    His last moments are so well done. I just love how Bond is handled like a true hero, the ultimate hero. He not only saves the whole world from oblivion, a first time for Craig’s incarnation, but he also accepts death peacefully in order to save his family.
    Killing off Bond is a big deal. A very big deal, and they found the only way I can possibly imagine to make it 100% work. They came up not only with the perfect story, but with the perfect story arc to pull this off.
  • matt_u wrote: »
    The way Craig delivers the “It’s all right Q. It’s all right” line is heartbreaking.

    Before release I always thought he would kinda sacrifice to save the day but the movie would’ve ended with a hint of him surviving - like showing Swann arriving in Matera and seeing his DB5 in front of their hotel - but now I’m happy they didn’t chose that route.

    His last moments are so well done. I just love how Bond is handled like a true hero, the ultimate hero. He not only saves the whole world from oblivion, a first time for Craig’s incarnation, but he also accepts death peacefully in order to save his family.
    Killing off Bond is a big deal. A very big deal, and they found the only way I can possibly imagine to make it 100% work. They came up not only with the perfect story, but with the perfect story arc to pull this off.

    Agree with all of this. Loved that line too. Shades of Lazenby's "it's alright, it's quite alright really" as he holds his dead wife.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 3,333
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    No one knows what to expect from B26. Until we hear further I don’t see the point in being unnecessarily negative.
    Talking of being unnecessarily negative @RC7 what are you current thoughts on using the OHMSS Theme and WHATTITW in NTTD? I can distictly recall you saying that both these musical cues didn't belong in a Craig Bond movie because they belong exclusively to OHMSS. Has your view now changed after watching NTTD? Just curious as you were very adamant and unnecessarily negative about it a few year's ago when I made the suggestion.

    I don’t think it does belong. But here we are. It is what it is. For clarity, negativity around B26 just seems premature to me. Negativity around NTTD, fill your boots.
    Thank you for your vague response @RC7. One day we might find out what you really think about NTTD.

    For clarity, having worries about what direction B26 will go in, is not negativity.
  • RC7RC7
    edited October 2021 Posts: 10,512
    bondsum wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    No one knows what to expect from B26. Until we hear further I don’t see the point in being unnecessarily negative.
    Talking of being unnecessarily negative @RC7 what are you current thoughts on using the OHMSS Theme and WHATTITW in NTTD? I can distictly recall you saying that both these musical cues didn't belong in a Craig Bond movie because they belong exclusively to OHMSS. Has your view now changed after watching NTTD? Just curious as you were very adamant and unnecessarily negative about it a few year's ago when I made the suggestion.

    I don’t think it does belong. But here we are. It is what it is. For clarity, negativity around B26 just seems premature to me. Negativity around NTTD, fill your boots.
    Thank you for your vague response @RC7. One day we might find out what you really think about NTTD.

    I thought it was excellent. It struck an almost impossible balance of delivering old school thrills whilst packing an emotional punch. Still think the reimagining of Blofeld is the most egregious decision of this era, and I found his scene a bit of a damp squib, but otherwise it felt like all departments brought their A game . Whether you bought the ending or didn’t I refuse to believe anyone left the film bored or ambivalent. So they did their job.
    bondsum wrote: »
    For clarity, having worries about what direction B26 will go in, is not negativity.

    I just don’t think there’s anything to worry about yet, quite literally. The umbilical cord has been cut on the last 15 years. We have the cleanest of clean slates.
  • Posts: 1,394
    I’m going to treat NTTD as non-canon. That’s my solution to the problem known as NTTD (continuity, arc, etc.). Ahhh. I feel much better already. B-)

    That’s how i came to terms with the awful Star Wars sequel trilogy.It’s not canon to me.The Skywalker saga ended with Return Of The Jedi.

Sign In or Register to comment.