No Time To Die: Why It Should Not Have Been Made (The Way It Was)

1679111232

Comments

  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited December 2021 Posts: 4,343
    Every actor plays a different incarnation of the same character. It’s not that complicated. It’s not about timelines. It’s not like in the novels. It’s not like in the MCU. From DN to DAD it’s not a single timeline because, for example, Bond doesn’t age and there’s no continuity, there’s not a connected storyline between different eras. All six are canon.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,324
    Yes, it seems most people disagree with me.

    When I say 'not allowed' I obviously mean I don't like it. Okay?

    And yes, different actors playing different parts is allowed. Sorry, I mean it's acceptable to me.

    How about what's narratively dishonest? Do you agree that the Bond films have a bit of a history of being "narratively dishonest"? Perhaps that can help you to worry a tad less about another actor stepping in just . like . that.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited December 2021 Posts: 2,857
    Ludovico wrote: »
    No more personal baggage? Fine, but find another way for the viewers to get emotionally involved. Standalone missions? Fine, but then find another way to show the badguy is a genuine threat and not merely the villain of the week. Bond cannot die? Fine, but find a way, after 25 movies, to give a sense of danger.
    Nailed it. If they're not going to repeat the personal baggage and interconnected arcs, they're exactly the elements that need to be built-in to future films in order to sustain the sort of depth they were going for in the Craig era. You can have everything else we want from a Bond film too, but a film with these things in it would be a standout.
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 3,209
    Watching the brilliant LTK again the other night, and the scene when Felix says `he was married once, but that was a long time ago'.

    I remembered at the time watching the film in the cinema, and thinking that was a nice nod to the past, to OHMSS. I didn't think `hang on a minute, Bond is the same age now as he was back in 1969.' You just accept it's in the same reality, the same loose timeline, and Dalton is playing the same character as Moore, Connery and Lazenby.

    So this is why many fans are having a hard time accepting Craig's death, as if we are supposed to then immediately look forward to the next film, particularly after the end credits boldly state the usual `James Bond will return'.

    I think it was one step too far from the franchise, despite the `Craig is in a different timeline, so its ok' defence that many are claiming. I find what they did in NTTD as unforgivable as invisible cars, CGI surfing, Tarzan yells and double-taking pigeons, maybe moreso, as they were mainly tongue-in-cheek moments. Bond's death is a much more significant issue. It's a landmark moment in the franchise, outweighing everything before it - Tracy, M and Vesper's death, even Felix's (silly) death. It's cheap gimmick crap, designed to shock general audiences that are not huge Bond fans, and at the risk and expense of pissing off lifelong fans (and yes, there are many who are extremely not happy with the ending).
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 624
    ^ I'm a "huge Bond fan" and his death was fine with me. There's no way they could have continued DC's timeline if Bond just shot Safin and rode into the sunset with M&M and Dou Dou. (Unless they went the novel YOLT-TMWTGG route and somehow also disregard the fact that he has a bioweapon in him targeted to kill his child.)

    I like CR-NTTD. It was a wild ride, but if DC's death is what it takes to return to normalcy i.e. "the original formula", I'm fine with it.

    If anything I think BB and MGW would welcome a return to a looser continuity. They seem to tire themselves out trying to think of where they should take the character next.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    matt_u wrote: »
    Every actor plays a different incarnation of the same character. It’s not that complicated. It’s not about timelines. It’s not like in the novels. It’s not like in the MCU. From DN to DAD it’s not a single timeline because, for example, Bond doesn’t age and there’s no continuity, there’s not a connected storyline between different eras. All six are canon.

    Yes, more or less. The film makers never thought overly much about continuity or making everything match up and make sense from one film to another. They just thought about getting the films made.
  • . And they won't kill him again, probably. But they might. I mean, they could, if they re-boot him again.

    How about if they promise to kill him in every 25th film? That way, you & I will probably both be dead, really dead for sure, just the way you like it, by the time they kill Bond again.
  • I think your issue is you don't like reboots, which in some form, we will get for B26. For that I highly recommend the Ian Fleming novels if you want UNQUESTIONABLY one man, one Bond, from beginning to end of his life as an agent. He even dies TWICE and is brought back in the very next book.

    I don't remember him dying twice. Are you talking about the ending of From Russia With Love? My copies don't describe his certain death at all. I can't think of another instance where he even vaguely dies in the books.

    "How faithless my readers are. Surely they should assume that if James Bond were to die, it would not be as a result of a kick in the shin"
    Ian Fleming Dec '57

  • "How faithless my readers are. Surely they should assume that if James Bond were to die, it would not be as a result of a kick in the shin"
    Ian Fleming Dec '57

    Well how about a missile up his ass? :))

    Maybe his death in YOLT is a bit of a stretch, but he certainly wasn't James Bond anymore, and the world thought him dead.

    But yes. I was mainly talking about FRWL. I recall it being said that Ian Fleming at the time wanted to stop writing Bond books so the ending of FRWL was him being killed. Then he changed his mind and wrote Doctor No.
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 985
    But yes. I was mainly talking about FRWL. I recall it being said that Ian Fleming at the time wanted to stop writing Bond books so the ending of FRWL was him being killed. Then he changed his mind and wrote Doctor No.

    I've seen it written a few times on this board that 'Fleming killed Bond off'. But he never did. 'Russia' was left open ended, and I reckon we might never know Fleming's true intention regarding that ending, as I've read conflicting reports over the years.
    I actually think he may have been growing tired of Bond, yet the positive response to Russia gave him new enthusiasm, (as it should have, it's his best novel for many). But I'm just guessing this.
    One thing Fleming would NEVER have done, was kill Bond off properly (with a true death scene), and then resurrect him in the next book without any explanation apart from 'it's a different timeline'. He would have least done the decent thing and set any more Bond adventures before his death, or found a way to explain how he wasn't really dead, (in a Conan-Doyle way).
    I hope we can all at least agree on that, he took his characters' continuity rather more seriously than these movie types,
  • Posts: 1,678
    Loved Craig as Bond. Hated Craig's self contained universe elements, like the death of Felix. Ecstatic that Bond will get a reboot from scratch. I am also someone who has already had his two or three ultimate Bond films already made.
  • I hope we can all at least agree on that, he took his characters' continuity rather more seriously than these movie types,

    Oh for sure. No arguments here.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,655
    Watching the brilliant LTK again the other night, and the scene when Felix says `he was married once, but that was a long time ago'.

    I remembered at the time watching the film in the cinema, and thinking that was a nice nod to the past, to OHMSS. I didn't think `hang on a minute, Bond is the same age now as he was back in 1969.' You just accept it's in the same reality, the same loose timeline, and Dalton is playing the same character as Moore, Connery and Lazenby.
    Absolutely, I concur!
    So this is why many fans are having a hard time accepting Craig's death, as if we are supposed to then immediately look forward to the next film, particularly after the end credits boldly state the usual `James Bond will return'.

    I think it was one step too far from the franchise, despite the `Craig is in a different timeline, so its ok' defence that many are claiming. I find what they did in NTTD as unforgivable as invisible cars, CGI surfing, Tarzan yells and double-taking pigeons, maybe moreso, as they were mainly tongue-in-cheek moments. Bond's death is a much more significant issue. It's a landmark moment in the franchise, outweighing everything before it - Tracy, M and Vesper's death, even Felix's (silly) death. It's cheap gimmick crap, designed to shock general audiences that are not huge Bond fans, and at the risk and expense of pissing off lifelong fans (and yes, there are many who are extremely not happy with the ending).
    I need to watch LTK again really soon.
    =D>
  • Posts: 15,729
    Strip away the gimmickry, and the DAYS OF OUR LIVES/ ALL MY CHILDREN soap opera drama and we'd probably be left with a more fun Bond adventure.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,655
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Strip away the gimmickry, and the DAYS OF OUR LIVES/ ALL MY CHILDREN soap opera drama and we'd probably be left with a more fun Bond adventure.

    Hey! Chieun said soap operas were this country's only significant contribution to the arts! [-X
  • Posts: 15,729
    chrisisall wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Strip away the gimmickry, and the DAYS OF OUR LIVES/ ALL MY CHILDREN soap opera drama and we'd probably be left with a more fun Bond adventure.

    Hey! Chieun said soap operas were this country's only significant contribution to the arts! [-X

    Haha! I do wonder since many of the daytime soaps my mom watched when I was a kid are long cancelled, if that format didn't sneak it's way into mainstream filmmaking?
    Every show today seems to have an arc, as do many franchise films.
  • Posts: 52
    It is actually becoming a worrying trait that the Bond actors who do multiple films, seem to be signing off with a stinker of a film.

    Connery - DAF (weakest film until NTTD)
    Moore - AVTAK (which I actually quite enjoy but regarded as weak)
    Dalton - LTK (tremendous film but wasn't planned to be his last)
    Brosnan - DAD (only MR, DAF and NTTD are worse)
    Craig - NTTD (25th place out of 25 and a bona fide travesty of a Bond film)

    Only Dalton signed off with a corker but, obviously when made, they probably thought he'd do a couple more. I have a soft spot for AVTAK as it was my first Bond cinema experience at 7 yrs old though I understand people's issues with it.

    I'm hoping for a return to films with a nice balance of action, serious story, humour, charm and no melodrama. Craig, as good an actor as he is, can keep his melodrama. Hopefully, that nonsense got blown up with him. I want back to a nice balance, like FRWL, GF, TB or more recently GE.
  • KenAustinKenAustin United States
    Posts: 226
    I liked DAD I didn't think it was weak, honestly the only thing in the film I didn't like was the human taser exoskeleton.
  • DAD is so much more fun than NTTD. At least it doesn't take itself so seriously, and get bogged down in its own importance. I wonder how it would be viewed if they'd not done the CGI stuff (para-surf and Jinx's dive), dumped the robo-suit and tidied up the hammy dialogue a little.
    I don't know who said 'a well made slap in the face' on here about NTTD, but I laughed at that.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,655
    I don't know who said 'a well made slap in the face' on here about NTTD, but I laughed at that.
    That was me. ;)
  • edited January 2022 Posts: 12,828
    And this is why “why won’t EON ever listen to the fans?” is a silly question. Ten years ago anyone praising DAD on here would have been laughed at. Now Craig has taken Brosnan’s place as the new whipping boy, it’s an underrated gem. In ten years time the consensus will probably be pining for Craig’s “melodrama” and slagging off the new guy. Fans always moan.
    It's cheap gimmick crap, designed to shock general audiences that are not huge Bond fans, and at the risk and expense of pissing off lifelong fans (and yes, there are many who are extremely not happy with the ending).

    Translation: I didn’t like it. Seriously this is getting so boring. “I didn’t like it, therefore it was a woke conspiracy designed to use cheap gimmicks they stole from Marvel to seperate the fake fans from the real fans” or whatever the line is now. They told the story they wanted to tell. You didn’t like it, some of us did. That’s all there is to it. I don’t see the point in these constant baseless assertions about why they did it, and I don’t see the point in playing the “lifelong fan” card either. Meaningless. That applies to most of us on this site, including those of us who liked it, and guess what? We’re literally no more important than any other viewer.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,844
    Craig has taken Brosnans place as the whipping boy? Really, I don’t think so. I might be wide of the mark, but I feel like a shift has taken place in regards the general feeling towards Craig, though it hasn’t been that drastic. This forum looks less like a Daniel Craig fan forum, that’s all.

    Craig is in no danger of being lumped in with Lazenby and Dalton.
  • Posts: 3,209
    And this is why “why won’t EON ever listen to the fans?” is a silly question. Ten years ago anyone praising DAD on here would have been laughed at. Now Craig has taken Brosnan’s place as the new whipping boy, it’s an underrated gem. In ten years time the consensus will probably be pining for Craig’s “melodrama” and slagging off the new guy. Fans always moan.
    It's cheap gimmick crap, designed to shock general audiences that are not huge Bond fans, and at the risk and expense of pissing off lifelong fans (and yes, there are many who are extremely not happy with the ending).

    Translation: I didn’t like it. Seriously this is getting so boring. “I didn’t like it, therefore it was a woke conspiracy designed to use cheap gimmicks they stole from Marvel to seperate the fake fans from the real fans” or whatever the line is now. They told the story they wanted to tell. You didn’t like it, some of us did. That’s all there is to it. I don’t see the point in these constant baseless assertions about why they did it, and I don’t see the point in playing the “lifelong fan” card either. Meaningless. That applies to most of us on this site, including those of us who liked it, and guess what? We’re literally no more important than any other viewer.
    There are plenty of other threads praising the hell out of NTTD, and any dissenting voices are usually sent packing. Why not leave us be in this tiny corner of the forum to allow us to do some well deserved NTTD bashing? What's the point in coming in here to tell us its getting boring to read?

    If you are getting bored hearing these moans, then maybe stay clear of these kind of threads. There are plenty other threads where you can all back slap each other on how great NTTD is.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    Posts: 1,380
    They got it out of their system, it made money and on average people liked it. They will never kill Bond again and for that we can be thankful.
  • Posts: 3,209
    LucknFate wrote: »
    They will never kill Bond again and for that we can be thankful.
    How can you be so sure?
  • And this is why “why won’t EON ever listen to the fans?” is a silly question. Ten years ago anyone praising DAD on here would have been laughed at. Now Craig has taken Brosnan’s place as the new whipping boy, it’s an underrated gem. In ten years time the consensus will probably be pining for Craig’s “melodrama” and slagging off the new guy. Fans always moan.
    It's cheap gimmick crap, designed to shock general audiences that are not huge Bond fans, and at the risk and expense of pissing off lifelong fans (and yes, there are many who are extremely not happy with the ending).

    Translation: I didn’t like it. Seriously this is getting so boring. “I didn’t like it, therefore it was a woke conspiracy designed to use cheap gimmicks they stole from Marvel to seperate the fake fans from the real fans” or whatever the line is now. They told the story they wanted to tell. You didn’t like it, some of us did. That’s all there is to it. I don’t see the point in these constant baseless assertions about why they did it, and I don’t see the point in playing the “lifelong fan” card either. Meaningless. That applies to most of us on this site, including those of us who liked it, and guess what? We’re literally no more important than any other viewer.

    ^ This. ^ Thank you, @thelivingroyale.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    Posts: 1,380
    LucknFate wrote: »
    They will never kill Bond again and for that we can be thankful.
    How can you be so sure?

    No other filmmaker is going to want to retread the same stunt that someone else has already done with the franchise, at least not for another decade or two.
  • Posts: 3,209
    And this is why “why won’t EON ever listen to the fans?” is a silly question. Ten years ago anyone praising DAD on here would have been laughed at. Now Craig has taken Brosnan’s place as the new whipping boy, it’s an underrated gem. In ten years time the consensus will probably be pining for Craig’s “melodrama” and slagging off the new guy. Fans always moan.
    It's cheap gimmick crap, designed to shock general audiences that are not huge Bond fans, and at the risk and expense of pissing off lifelong fans (and yes, there are many who are extremely not happy with the ending).

    Translation: I didn’t like it. Seriously this is getting so boring. “I didn’t like it, therefore it was a woke conspiracy designed to use cheap gimmicks they stole from Marvel to seperate the fake fans from the real fans” or whatever the line is now. They told the story they wanted to tell. You didn’t like it, some of us did. That’s all there is to it. I don’t see the point in these constant baseless assertions about why they did it, and I don’t see the point in playing the “lifelong fan” card either. Meaningless. That applies to most of us on this site, including those of us who liked it, and guess what? We’re literally no more important than any other viewer.

    ^ This. ^ Thank you, @thelivingroyale.

    You've forced the dissenting voices out of all the other threads, and now you are trying to do the same in this one too....
  • And this is why “why won’t EON ever listen to the fans?” is a silly question. Ten years ago anyone praising DAD on here would have been laughed at. Now Craig has taken Brosnan’s place as the new whipping boy, it’s an underrated gem. In ten years time the consensus will probably be pining for Craig’s “melodrama” and slagging off the new guy. Fans always moan.
    It's cheap gimmick crap, designed to shock general audiences that are not huge Bond fans, and at the risk and expense of pissing off lifelong fans (and yes, there are many who are extremely not happy with the ending).

    Translation: I didn’t like it. Seriously this is getting so boring. “I didn’t like it, therefore it was a woke conspiracy designed to use cheap gimmicks they stole from Marvel to seperate the fake fans from the real fans” or whatever the line is now. They told the story they wanted to tell. You didn’t like it, some of us did. That’s all there is to it. I don’t see the point in these constant baseless assertions about why they did it, and I don’t see the point in playing the “lifelong fan” card either. Meaningless. That applies to most of us on this site, including those of us who liked it, and guess what? We’re literally no more important than any other viewer.
    There are plenty of other threads praising the hell out of NTTD, and any dissenting voices are usually sent packing. Why not leave us be in this tiny corner of the forum to allow us to do some well deserved NTTD bashing? What's the point in coming in here to tell us its getting boring to read?

    If you are getting bored hearing these moans, then maybe stay clear of these kind of threads. There are plenty other threads where you can all back slap each other on how great NTTD is.

    Because maybe it's not all that well deserved. Whether or not you like the ending -- and you have every right to your opinion in that regard -- the majority of the film is well conceived and fabulously executed. The very title of this topic thread -- "Why NTTD Should Not Have Been Made" -- is a calculated slap in the face to the many, many talented professionals who worked on this film. It WAS made. It's not going away. Grow up and get just a little bit realistic. Criticize it all you want, just don't try to claim that it shouldn't have been made. It achieved its' dual aims: Craig left the series on a note that he and his fans can appreciate; and it made a big batch of $$$$$ for Eon and their investors. Sorry you don't belong to either of those camps.
  • You've forced the dissenting voices out of all the other threads, and now you are trying to do the same in this one too....

    Yea, I'm always of being told I'm talking daft or being boring when I talk about how disappointing NTTD is. Yet I wouldn't think of telling people who love it to keep quiet about their admiration of it. It doesn't seem to work both ways on here. If we're not full of admiration for what's been served up, it seems we should just say it once, then shut up forever.
    At least let us have one thread in all these hundreds where we can let off a little steam.
Sign In or Register to comment.