NO TIME TO DIE (2021) - Members' Reviews and Discussions (SPOILERS)

1222325272834

Comments

  • Posts: 2,388
    Does anyone want future Bond movies to open with a prologue without Bond the way NTTD did? When young Maddy whipped out her gun and started firing that was a pleasant surprise. I liked it....

    I mean, at least the PTS, for being extended, DOES still have Bond in it. I really loathe the PTS of LALD and TMWTGG for not having Bond at all (FRWL gets away with it for being a really effective opening).
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 37,929
    I don't necessarily need a prologue but I'm all for a PTS sans Bond.
  • FoxRox wrote: »
    I do have a good gut feeling though time will treat the Craig era well; all these years later, CR and SF are easily some of the most widely beloved movies in the series, and most of the other actors didn't get to have even two on that level.
    Sorry but Connery had 5 and Moore had 6 that were on that level or higher.

  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,283
    Moore 6?

    XD XD XD
  • edited November 2021 Posts: 7,423
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I do have a good gut feeling though time will treat the Craig era well; all these years later, CR and SF are easily some of the most widely beloved movies in the series, and most of the other actors didn't get to have even two on that level.
    Sorry but Connery had 5 and Moore had 6 that were on that level or higher.


    So which is the one of the Moore films that isn't at the same level? ;)
  • BirdlesonBirdleson Moderator
    Posts: 1,617
    I’d put LALD, TSWLM and FYEO above. TMWTGG is about even.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 395
    I prefer moore over connery.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,283
    I love Roger but unfortunately none of his films are in my top 10.
  • jobo wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I do have a good gut feeling though time will treat the Craig era well; all these years later, CR and SF are easily some of the most widely beloved movies in the series, and most of the other actors didn't get to have even two on that level.
    Sorry but Connery had 5 and Moore had 6 that were on that level or higher.


    So which is the one of the Moore films that isn't at the same level? ;)
    AVTAK. It’s my least favorite of the Moore films but on the other hand it’s got my favorite villain duo of Walken and Grace Jones! Plus that awesome Barry score, Duran Duran, the scenes at Zorin’s chateau, Patrick MacNee, and the Golden Gate finale!

    Come to think of it - I’d sooner reach for this film than either CR or SF. And between CR and SF I’d sooner reach for SF. CR just doesn’t lend itself to rewatches for some reason. I guess it’s the reboot thing. SF feels like a more traditional Bond film, hence the Craig film that I can rewatch the most. That said, none of his films are as rewatchable as the Connery and Moore ones.

  • edited November 2021 Posts: 2,878
    I just gave NTTD a watch again tonight with my wife, and we both kept an open mind this time round. Sorry, no I like it even less now, and I tried desperately to like it, hoping I would find something that would change my mind.

    If anything, I found more irritations this time round. The whole flashback in Norway PTS is way too long, it drags. Craig's acting with Blofeld is even more jarring this time round, didn't feel like Bond at all.

    The Cuba action scenes just about got away with not being cheesy and corny, ala Brozza and Moore, but it wouldn't have taken much more to push it in the wrong direction. It was borderline.

    The soap opera drama levels reminded me of TWINE, a film that I absolutely hate. I want a taut espionage hard edged gritty spy thriller, but this definitely ain't it.

    The ending is still the stupidest thing in the entire movie, there is no way I can get past this either. When the end credits roll and ATTITW plays, I suddenly felt exactly as I did the first time round in the cinema, a feeling I had conveniently forgotten until now. And no, it wasn't depression or sadness. It was in sheer disbelief, a shake-of-the-head, WTF, did that really just happen moment.

    I'm sorry to say I'm even seeing Craig as Bond in a different light now, which is a shame because I thought he was the next best thing to Connery when CR came out, and had the potential to even beat him. It felt like this was the Daniel Craig show, he's been given everything he wants, he calls the shots, he decides what is in and what isn't. His performance in this film is probably the worst of his tenure, as he really isn't even trying to play Fleming Bond anymore, but Daniel Craig.

    Sorry for repeating myself, and I know fans of the film are tired of hearing people like myself moan about the film. I've tried to keep off this thread for that very reason, but after giving it another watch tonight, I was hoping there would be a lightbulb moment, something would click, and I would see what you fans are seeing.

    Unfortunately the click went in the wrong direction. even the parts I thought were ok on first viewing have changed now. Oh well, this is one I will have to skip from now on, and hope the next film is more in line with what I expect in a Bond movie.

    Rant over, and this is the last time I'll post on these review threads (promise)!
  • I'm with you all the way on this, but I think your review will be seen as near trolling on here.
    I'd say he had one Bond film too many, but there's a growing argument that they should have wound it up after Skyfall. Hmm.
  • BirdlesonBirdleson Moderator
    Posts: 1,617
    I'm with you all the way on this, but I think your review will be seen as near trolling on here.
    I'd say he had one Bond film too many, but there's a growing argument that they should have wound it up after Skyfall. Hmm.

    Knowing how it all fell out, and the long gap, even before Covid, I would agree. For me personally, NTTM came so close to redeeming the last nine years, but that ultimate decision appears to be something I can't get around.
  • Posts: 7,423
    jobo wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I do have a good gut feeling though time will treat the Craig era well; all these years later, CR and SF are easily some of the most widely beloved movies in the series, and most of the other actors didn't get to have even two on that level.
    Sorry but Connery had 5 and Moore had 6 that were on that level or higher.


    So which is the one of the Moore films that isn't at the same level? ;)
    AVTAK. It’s my least favorite of the Moore films but on the other hand it’s got my favorite villain duo of Walken and Grace Jones! Plus that awesome Barry score, Duran Duran, the scenes at Zorin’s chateau, Patrick MacNee, and the Golden Gate finale!

    Come to think of it - I’d sooner reach for this film than either CR or SF. And between CR and SF I’d sooner reach for SF. CR just doesn’t lend itself to rewatches for some reason. I guess it’s the reboot thing. SF feels like a more traditional Bond film, hence the Craig film that I can rewatch the most. That said, none of his films are as rewatchable as the Connery and Moore ones.


    I get the point about rewatchability. A nice quality about the Moore films is that they are mindless fun you can put on whenever you want without having to invest much braincell activity. They are perfect for lazy afternoons or when you feel tired. That is the only thing we will agree on though. I rate both CR and SF abowe all of the Moore films. NTTD as well.
  • @jetsetwilly excellent post! I agree with a lot of what you said, especially how it's more a Daniel Craig movie than a James Bond movie. Unfortunately I don't think this film will age well.
  • ObannoObanno Somewhere & Everywhere
    Posts: 14
    I just gave NTTD a watch again tonight with my wife, and we both kept an open mind this time round. Sorry, no I like it even less now, and I tried desperately to like it, hoping I would find something that would change my mind.

    If anything, I found more irritations this time round. The whole flashback in Norway PTS is way too long, it drags. Craig's acting with Blofeld is even more jarring this time round, didn't feel like Bond at all.

    The Cuba action scenes just about got away with not being cheesy and corny, ala Brozza and Moore, but it wouldn't have taken much more to push it in the wrong direction. It was borderline.

    The soap opera drama levels reminded me of TWINE, a film that I absolutely hate. I want a taut espionage hard edged gritty spy thriller, but this definitely ain't it.

    The ending is still the stupidest thing in the entire movie, there is no way I can get past this either. When the end credits roll and ATTITW plays, I suddenly felt exactly as I did the first time round in the cinema, a feeling I had conveniently forgotten until now. And no, it wasn't depression or sadness. It was in sheer disbelief, a shake-of-the-head, WTF, did that really just happen moment.

    I'm sorry to say I'm even seeing Craig as Bond in a different light now, which is a shame because I thought he was the next best thing to Connery when CR came out, and had the potential to even beat him. It felt like this was the Daniel Craig show, he's been given everything he wants, he calls the shots, he decides what is in and what isn't. His performance in this film is probably the worst of his tenure, as he really isn't even trying to play Fleming Bond anymore, but Daniel Craig.

    Sorry for repeating myself, and I know fans of the film are tired of hearing people like myself moan about the film. I've tried to keep off this thread for that very reason, but after giving it another watch tonight, I was hoping there would be a lightbulb moment, something would click, and I would see what you fans are seeing.

    Unfortunately the click went in the wrong direction. even the parts I thought were ok on first viewing have changed now. Oh well, this is one I will have to skip from now on, and hope the next film is more in line with what I expect in a Bond movie.

    Rant over, and this is the last time I'll post on these review threads (promise)!

    I agree wholeheartedly. Yes the film does have some good moments in it but most things just seem jarring:

    1. The Louis Armstrong song...why?! Why not challenge the composer to create a unique sound for this movie. It just screams laziness and clearly creativity is at an all time low.

    3. Where was James Bond? This was an imposter.

    5. Bond and M....what the hell was that about? It first reared its ugly head in Spectre and now this? This is the worse take on their relationship in the series bar none.

    7. All the deaths to key characters just don't work. Felix is in the film 5 minutes and was last seen in the series in 2008! it just reeked of sentimentality for sentimentality's sake.

    9. CJF unfortunately won't be coming back...he did a good job but his vision was limited. This was a Craig and producer led story unfortunately. Also anyone who calls Connery's Bond a rapist without context doesn't really get the Bond character. Please just have British directors from now on.

    11. Whishaw and Harris are the only supporting cast that constantly deliver with their performance regardless of the material. Not to mention that they really look like they are genuinely pleased to be a part of the series, which is refreshing.

    13. Which leads me to my final and probably most controversial point...Craig has only been doing this for money and ego. He doesn't care about the character, the fans or history. This movie was the Daniel Craig show with no consideration for the character of James Bond. An actor taking the role and then insisting that the character get killed off has nothing to do with Bond and everything to do with the actor's relationship to the material.

    The easiest example of this is Harrison Ford's relationship to Han Solo. Famously he didn't want to return after "Empire" and insisted his character get killed then so he wouldn't have to play it anymore, and the compromise was putting him in a Carbonite Skinner Box. To get Ford to come back after the initial trilogy, guess what his demand was? Yes, that Solo gets killed for real this time. It has nothing to do with fans' love of the character or franchise or even logic; it is only because the actor is tired of the role. The same thing happened here.

    Craig never hid his dislike of the character and franchise, similar to Connery. However, where they differ was that Connery felt he was being ripped off (which he was) whereas Craig was rolled out the red carpet and still acted like a whiny sod. Yes the role is demanding and his injuries didn't help, but I honestly believe every Bond actor sustained injuries while making their movies but can't really recall any of them moan and complain. They grinned and got on with it.

    Barbara Broccoli's insistence that she can't imagine anyone else in the role is ridiculous and not really helping whoever it is they choose next. Bond existed before Craig and will continue to do so after Craig. Her stance is embarrassing considering Craig's outward disdain for the character but apparent love of the paycheck. He's made bank, increased his visibility, and no longer has to play Bond thus he really has never looked happier in the last 15 years!

    Like I said, there are aspects of NTTD that I do like, but remove the gimmicky elements and poorly thought through 'surprises', all you really have is a generic expensive looking Bond movie in the mold of John Glen. It was more concerned with its star than actually making a solid movie with a solid villain. The script had no charm, no wit or intelligence and absolutely no creativity. Back to the drawing board.
  • edited November 2021 Posts: 214
    The whole flashback in Norway PTS is way too long, it drags.

    It's less than 7 minutes and I thought the whole concept of a prologue based on 2 characters who are central to the story was interesting. Also had my first big surprise in the movie, no one was expecting little Maddy to whip out a gun and start firing.

  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,243
    The whole flashback in Norway PTS is way too long, it drags.

    It's less than 7 minutes and I thought the whole concept of a prologue based on 2 characters who are central to the story was interesting. Also had my first big surprise in the movie, no one was expecting little Maddy to whip out a gun and start firing.

    Well, if you watched Spectre, it's implied she uses it ("that's why I hate guns")
  • I just gave NTTD a watch again tonight with my wife, and we both kept an open mind this time round. Sorry, no I like it even less now, and I tried desperately to like it, hoping I would find something that would change my mind.

    If anything, I found more irritations this time round. The whole flashback in Norway PTS is way too long, it drags. Craig's acting with Blofeld is even more jarring this time round, didn't feel like Bond at all.

    The Cuba action scenes just about got away with not being cheesy and corny, ala Brozza and Moore, but it wouldn't have taken much more to push it in the wrong direction. It was borderline.

    The soap opera drama levels reminded me of TWINE, a film that I absolutely hate. I want a taut espionage hard edged gritty spy thriller, but this definitely ain't it.

    The ending is still the stupidest thing in the entire movie, there is no way I can get past this either. When the end credits roll and ATTITW plays, I suddenly felt exactly as I did the first time round in the cinema, a feeling I had conveniently forgotten until now. And no, it wasn't depression or sadness. It was in sheer disbelief, a shake-of-the-head, WTF, did that really just happen moment.

    I'm sorry to say I'm even seeing Craig as Bond in a different light now, which is a shame because I thought he was the next best thing to Connery when CR came out, and had the potential to even beat him. It felt like this was the Daniel Craig show, he's been given everything he wants, he calls the shots, he decides what is in and what isn't. His performance in this film is probably the worst of his tenure, as he really isn't even trying to play Fleming Bond anymore, but Daniel Craig.

    Sorry for repeating myself, and I know fans of the film are tired of hearing people like myself moan about the film. I've tried to keep off this thread for that very reason, but after giving it another watch tonight, I was hoping there would be a lightbulb moment, something would click, and I would see what you fans are seeing.

    Unfortunately the click went in the wrong direction. even the parts I thought were ok on first viewing have changed now. Oh well, this is one I will have to skip from now on, and hope the next film is more in line with what I expect in a Bond movie.

    Rant over, and this is the last time I'll post on these review threads (promise)!

    I don't hate TWINE (I think TWINE is largely a better Bond film than NTTD) and I certainly don't think Craig could ever top Connery (no Bond actor ever will imo) but everything else you said in your post I fully agree with.

    Upon NTTD's release, I had it slightly on par with SF. Now, it's dropped just above SP. NTTD has a few good scenes but the film just collapses once Bond arrives in Cuba. Some of Craig's acting choices are questionable and his character arc from CR just seems off. I said this upon the film's initial release in September and I'm glad you've said it too, that Craig was being Craig in this film rather than Bond.

    In all honesty, NTTD is a decently made film but it's not a great Bond film and I'm willing to bet before long more and more people won't regard it as highly as they currently do.
  • Posts: 369
    Wow I strongly disagree. For me it improves with every viewing.

    I feel the Blofeld/Bond confrontation is one of the highlights of the movie.
    This time, Christoph Waltz nailed the character 200% right.

    All he does is sitting in a cell, and he is way more dangerous and threatening than in any part of Spectre.

    The moment when he confess to Bond he did it, right from his cell, and Bond realises this A hole ruined his last 5 years and his relationship with the woman he loves, and Bond cracks and grabs him by the throat and goes "Die Blofeld Die!" is amazing.

    I don't feel this was the DC show. It felt Bondian from the beginning to the end. Killing Bond is the clencher, again this should have been done in QOS, (as the Garden Of Death).

    NTTD redeems the last 3 films, it's finally the CR sequel that I expected after CR. The other 3 have their moments, but nowhere do they work as a complete Bond adventures as much as this one. The structure is perfect, with the assault on the vilains lair arking back to TSWLM. This is pure Bond, just like CR was.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 395
    Moore and brosnan movies are what cinematic bond should be.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 21,687
    I'm with you all the way on this, but I think your review will be seen as near trolling on here.
    I'd say he had one Bond film too many, but there's a growing argument that they should have wound it up after Skyfall. Hmm.

    There is absolutely no way @jetsetwilly, who is a respected member, will ever be mistaken for a troll.
  • Posts: 2,878
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I'm with you all the way on this, but I think your review will be seen as near trolling on here.
    I'd say he had one Bond film too many, but there's a growing argument that they should have wound it up after Skyfall. Hmm.

    There is absolutely no way @jetsetwilly, who is a respected member, will ever be mistaken for a troll.

    Cheers mate! B-)
  • DarthDimi wrote: »
    There is absolutely no way @jetsetwilly, who is a respected member, will ever be mistaken for a troll.

    I'm glad to hear it. I was getting a taste of growing impatience towards people who aren't over the moon with the new film, last night.

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 21,687
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    There is absolutely no way @jetsetwilly, who is a respected member, will ever be mistaken for a troll.

    I'm glad to hear it. I was getting a taste of growing impatience towards people who aren't over the moon with the new film, last night.

    Then some of them are coming dangerously close to trolling. Whatever the personal opinion of us, mods, trolling will not be accepted, no matter what side they're operating from. @jetsetwilly continues to voice his opinion in a fashion that is nothing short of respectful and correct.

    And at least he has actually seen the film -- more than once, in fact.
  • edited November 2021 Posts: 214
    w2bond wrote: »
    Well, if you watched Spectre, it's implied she uses it ("that's why I hate guns")

    I did...but haven't in a couple years so I don't remember juicy little tidbits like that. I do remember her handling one in the train though, and surprising Bond when he tried to explain a gun to her.

  • Saw it a 2nd time last night and I had to push myself to see it due to the fact it would be coming to VOD soon enough and would be out of the cinema. When I play back a Bond movie in my mind, I want to be able to pick through a lot of different sections and incidents. For a film that's 2 hours and 45 minutes there didn't seem to be enough material to justify such a running time. I always remember reading about how Cubby felt that the script for Octopussy didn't have enough "bumps in the road" hence the introduction of writer George MacDonald Fraser. No Time To Die favours these bumps in terms of personal stuff but not as an adventure film.

    I have a tendency to see things in sections and for me we go from a Jamaica set up to a pitstop in Cuba before moving almost backwards to London. This section is essentially a debrief which doesn't quite justify such a protracted stay and gives the picture a very boxed in feel to it. How much more interesting might it have been to have MI6 come to Bond which would've kept the film flowing. The opportunity for an audience with Blofeld seemed to be the main appeal for dragging him back. I'm a great fan of Craig's performance as Bond but his reactions in this scene feel quite phony and forced. He's always favoured restraint over being verbose. He probably says more dialogue in this single scene than during the entire running time of Quantum of Solace! His argy bargy in M's office also seemed a bit over the top. And after the Norway section we move into the island finale and then see you in another 5 years.

    Action wise, I enjoyed the pre-title and the Cuba scene is frivolous fun but I felt the Norway stuff was bland and the final machine gun gauntlet to get to the control room was generic and had shades of Tomorrow Never Dies. Bond movies were always renowned for defined action set pieces which mixed violence, imagination and intelligence but I do feel this film didn't engineer enough of those opportunities into the story. For all of its faults, I felt Spectre at least aimed to achieve that which is probably why I'm fond of it. On first viewing of Bond 25, I actually didn't think that the island section would be the last stop of the movie and only the demise of 007 elevates it somewhat from being entirely weak.

    This all sounds very negative I know but I don't doubt the good intentions of the film makers to tell a more emotional story and largely they do succeed in terms of it not feeling forced or fake. Lea Seydoux is a great dramatic actress and whilst not blessed with a cheerful personality she brings a visceral reality to the dangerous situations she finds herself in. Her reactions in the Aston Martin as Primo is blasting at the window and subsequent heartbreak as Bond dumps her on the train are incredibly real. The young female actresses are also exceptional especially the young lady playing Mathilde. She looks genuinely frightened in the scenes where she's supposed to be. On 2nd viewing I think Rami Malek serves the film very well. Whereas previous Craig movies have tried to beef up the villain, it seems appropriate to the emotional focus of the film to keep him as a catalyst for events. Weirdly enough I think he may even be responsible for bringing Bond, Madelaine and Mathilde together. I found Nomi to be quite irrelevant to the film and whilst I've heard people rightly praising Paloma, I couldn't really see her fitting into the entire picture considering the tone they were going for.

    As for Craig, I've always enjoyed his restrained take on Bond. From his walk, to his minimal dialogue, he projected the confidence of someone who really didn't need to express himself through words. And in his own unique way he was funny! In Spectre he started to get a bit more loose and enjoy himself which I found endearing and probably another reason why I like the film. He continues that here but at times, especially the scenes with Obruchev, he loses that Bond aura of coolness and can seem quite like a normal bloke. And yet when he's limping his way towards the ladder to climb back up to open the blast doors, I was moved by his vulnerability and his final moments.

    The Craig era has given us a lot to argue about but most importantly it's given us a definitive beginning and a definitive end. Casino Royale's opening credits have taken on an added depth now as Craig approaches the camera just before the music ends and his journey begins. And it's not about an investment in continuity, it's a rare emotional arc being given to a cinematic audience. These sentiments are hardly unique but for myself it's been 15 years of my life and 5 films which have been markers for where I was at that time. I'm especially reminded of my loved ones who saw many of those films with me but who sadly aren't here today to complete that journey and bid farewell to a fantastic James Bond. Nevertheless I leave with lots of fond memories which I'm very grateful to have.
  • edited November 2021 Posts: 214
    His argy bargy in M's office also seemed a bit over the top.

    He was being indignant on purpose....he suspected M was involved in a way he shouldn't be...and M also disparaged a close ally that Bond just lost....he had nothing to lose by being a dick in return.

    Unlike the old days when Dench's M was tearing him a new one.

  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,233
    His argy bargy in M's office also seemed a bit over the top.

    He was being indignant on purpose....he suspected M was involved in a way he shouldn't be...and M also disparaged a close ally that Bond just lost....he had nothing to lose by being a dick in return.

    Unlike the old days when Dench's M was tearing him a new one.

    My thoughts exactly. It was a lot more appropriate, IMO, than how Bond was acting towards M in the beginning of Spectre.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython Omaha, NE
    edited November 2021 Posts: 6,692
    matt_u wrote: »
    Moore 6?

    XD XD XD

    I have SF, CR, and NTTD all ranked above Moore’s run. I like Moore, but he’s just not what I want out of Bond.
  • BirdlesonBirdleson Moderator
    edited November 2021 Posts: 1,617
    LALD and TSWLM are perpetual Top Ten for me. The only Craig film to best them is CR, though QOS is only two spots behind. in fact, let's do this:

    Moore/Craig
    1
    CR

    2-5
    LALD
    TSWLM
    QOS
    SF

    6-8
    FYEO
    TMWTGG
    NTTD

    9
    OP

    10-11
    AVTAK
    MR

    12
    SP
Sign In or Register to comment.