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

1151618202132

Comments

  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,195
    I find it extremely inconsistant that SPECTRE is described as being extremely powerfull when it comes to terrifying Bond. They simply know everything about Bond and what he does, where he goes to, even though Bond has retired in the meantime. How many SPECTRE agents were waiting at Vesper's grave? They also arrange a birthday party for Blofeld mainly because they forsee that Bond will go there so that they can kill him with the nano bots. At the same time, they know nothing about Safin who easily kills them all in less than 10 minutes. How can that be expained? This is just lazy writing.
  • Posts: 3,275

    I think I need to take one of those courses...
    :))

  • I think I need to take one of those courses...
    :))

    "No you don't."
    "Yes I do."
    "No. You don't..."
  • Posts: 15,785
    GBF wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    This seems very far off the subject of this thread.
    Let's get back on track please.

    Right. Forthwith!

    Bond blaming Madeline for the Vesper tomb explosion without proof was soap opera-level writing. Yes, it made for an amazing melodramatic scene inside the DB5 as the gunshots fractured the bulletproof glass, but like they say in fencing- what's the point?

    He was already betrayed by Vesper in a similar way, and between Primo, and the phone... Spectre/Blofeld did a pretty good job of framing Madeleine IMO. And, the bags already packed and set to go at the hotel when he returned...

    And Madeleine picking that moment to say "There's something I need to tell you..." didn't do her any favours either.

    Makes perfect sense to me.

    The problem is that SPECTRE seems to spend all their efforts only in fooling Bond all day long as if they did not have more important things to do. At the same time they are simply wiped out by a random goon called Safin. There is just something wrong with the script. SPECTRE is just so extremely underdeveloped by the writers.

    I prefer the days when SPECTRE had better things to do......like stealing nuclear missiles and holding the world for ransom.


    chrisisall wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    This seems very far off the subject of this thread.
    Let's get back on track please.

    Right. Forthwith!

    Bond blaming Madeline for the Vesper tomb explosion without proof was soap opera-level writing. Yes, it made for an amazing melodramatic scene inside the DB5 as the gunshots fractured the bulletproof glass, but like they say in fencing- what's the point?

    Sadly, I think soap opera level writing is a trend now. After my last viewing of NTTD, I thought this was one of the weakest written films in the series. Elements of the plot: the ending, and the new 007 seemed to have been written as merely a gimmick rather than solid story telling. The nanobots scheme, to me is about as good as Gustav Graves' plot from DAD.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,449
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    GBF wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    This seems very far off the subject of this thread.
    Let's get back on track please.

    Right. Forthwith!

    Bond blaming Madeline for the Vesper tomb explosion without proof was soap opera-level writing. Yes, it made for an amazing melodramatic scene inside the DB5 as the gunshots fractured the bulletproof glass, but like they say in fencing- what's the point?

    He was already betrayed by Vesper in a similar way, and between Primo, and the phone... Spectre/Blofeld did a pretty good job of framing Madeleine IMO. And, the bags already packed and set to go at the hotel when he returned...

    And Madeleine picking that moment to say "There's something I need to tell you..." didn't do her any favours either.

    Makes perfect sense to me.

    The problem is that SPECTRE seems to spend all their efforts only in fooling Bond all day long as if they did not have more important things to do. At the same time they are simply wiped out by a random goon called Safin. There is just something wrong with the script. SPECTRE is just so extremely underdeveloped by the writers.

    I prefer the days when SPECTRE had better things to do......like stealing nuclear missiles and holding the world for ransom.


    chrisisall wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    This seems very far off the subject of this thread.
    Let's get back on track please.

    Right. Forthwith!

    Bond blaming Madeline for the Vesper tomb explosion without proof was soap opera-level writing. Yes, it made for an amazing melodramatic scene inside the DB5 as the gunshots fractured the bulletproof glass, but like they say in fencing- what's the point?

    Sadly, I think soap opera level writing is a trend now. After my last viewing of NTTD, I thought this was one of the weakest written films in the series. Elements of the plot: the ending, and the new 007 seemed to have been written as merely a gimmick rather than solid story telling. The nanobots scheme, to me is about as good as Gustav Graves' plot from DAD.

    Agreed on the nanobots thing. G.I. Joe: The Rise Of Cobra did it years ago and even in that film it felt stupid. Luckily, it doesn't matter all that much in NTTD (just a bit more than the ATAC in FYEO or the microchips in AVTAK). But I was, indeed, disappointed with this part when I saw the film the first time. Nanobots? Really? That's so comic booky. It doesn't ruin the film for me, though.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,000
    What's wrong with comic booky stuff? It's not like Bond was never above that. Even Fleming indulged in that like Bond having to face off a giant squid.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,449
    I should have used a different term, because you are right, @MakeshiftPython. I guess the nanobots felt a tad cheap. But like I said, I don't mind because they matter little. They didn't ruin the film for me.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited January 2022 Posts: 4,343
    I found the killer bio robots spreading like a virus really cool. Plus, the idea of the people becoming potential walking weapons resonates in a deeper way after two years of COVID.
  • Posts: 12,243
    Hardly the most “ridiculous” thing we’ve seen in the Bond universe.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Hardly the most “ridiculous” thing we’ve seen in the Bond universe.

    To me, each movie sort of plays in its own sandbox. Loosely connected (like OHMSS & LTK). Sometimes not so loosely (CR & QOS).
    Then we have the anomalies like SP & NTTD which try to be tightly connected, but feel like completely different films in tone, style & substance....
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,000
    chrisisall wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Hardly the most “ridiculous” thing we’ve seen in the Bond universe.

    To me, each movie sort of plays in its own sandbox. Loosely connected (like OHMSS & LTK). Sometimes not so loosely (CR & QOS).
    Then we have the anomalies like SP & NTTD which try to be tightly connected, but feel like completely different films in tone, style & substance....

    This is why QOS horribly fails as a direct follow up. It’s just too stylistically different from CR in terms of pacing, second unit, editing, etc to serve as a continuation.

    It helps that CR, SF, SP, and NTTD share the same second unit director Alexander Witt. There’s a certain elegance to his action sequences (though let down by Lee Smith’s editing in SP), whereas with Dan Bradley handling QOS is going so hard for the frantic shakycam and rapid editing he did better in the Bourne films, that it makes that film look like the red headed bastard stepchild of Craig’s run.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited January 2022 Posts: 17,687
    chrisisall wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Hardly the most “ridiculous” thing we’ve seen in the Bond universe.

    To me, each movie sort of plays in its own sandbox. Loosely connected (like OHMSS & LTK). Sometimes not so loosely (CR & QOS).
    Then we have the anomalies like SP & NTTD which try to be tightly connected, but feel like completely different films in tone, style & substance....

    This is why QOS horribly fails as a direct follow up. It’s just too stylistically different from CR in terms of pacing, second unit, editing, etc to serve as a continuation.

    It helps that CR, SF, SP, and NTTD share the same second unit director Alexander Witt. There’s a certain elegance to his action sequences (though let down by Lee Smith’s editing in SP), whereas with Dan Bradley handling QOS is going so hard for the frantic shakycam and rapid editing he did better in the Bourne films, that it makes that film look like the red headed bastard stepchild of Craig’s run.

    I feel like you're focusing more on action & editing than I am. And from that perspective, I agree.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,000
    Even in just non-action scenes there’s no room to breathe like in the other films. I put that all on Marc Forster and his desire to make a movie that moves fast like a bullet. I’m glad he never returned for Bond.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,195
    Even in just non-action scenes there’s no room to breathe like in the other films. I put that all on Marc Forster and his desire to make a movie that moves fast like a bullet. I’m glad he never returned for Bond.

    That is all true. At the same time however, there are also quite some bigger changes after QoS that seperate the first two Craig films from his final three. The higher influene of the mi6 regulars for instance, the constant focus on the UK as a main location, the change from rather down to earth to more outlandish plots (Silva's escape plan, Blofeld's and Bond's backstory, Safin's character and the nano bots), the return to gadgets, etc.).
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,000
    I think all that was inevitable with Craig’s run no matter what. CR is the way it is because it’s an adaptation of a Bond novel that is probably the most grounded of the novels, but I never assumed that it was going to serve as the blueprint of all future Craig films and stick to it. Even Fleming’s novels gradually got more heightened as they went. That what they decided to do with QOS because the first film was such a huge hit, they wanted to not only rinse and repeat but also accentuate the grittier elements people thought was novel for Bond. “Here’s Craig Bond with wounds all over his face! Look how dirty his wardrobe got! No more world domination plots or gadgets, we’re just sticking to political coups because you like grittier plots right RIGHT???”

    I don’t see an alternate reality where Craig’s run didn’t grow more into the traditional Bond formula. And thank goodness, because that would have been more boring than what we got. I imagine if they wanted to push further into the traditional elements rather than stagnate Bond, we probably would have been introduced to a new Q in Craig’s second film rather than held off to the third.
  • edited January 2022 Posts: 3,275
    GBF wrote: »
    Even in just non-action scenes there’s no room to breathe like in the other films. I put that all on Marc Forster and his desire to make a movie that moves fast like a bullet. I’m glad he never returned for Bond.

    That is all true. At the same time however, there are also quite some bigger changes after QoS that seperate the first two Craig films from his final three. The higher influene of the mi6 regulars for instance, the constant focus on the UK as a main location, the change from rather down to earth to more outlandish plots (Silva's escape plan, Blofeld's and Bond's backstory, Safin's character and the nano bots), the return to gadgets, etc.).

    Bond bled more and looked more battered after action in his first 2. Mendes seemed to deviate from this in his 2 films, (despite Bond's injury after falling from the train in SF), particularly with that ridiculous spectacle in SP when Bond is right as rain after having his head drilled moments earlier.

    At least NTTD addressed this and we had Bond bleed and look battered again after an ordeal.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,195
    GBF wrote: »
    Even in just non-action scenes there’s no room to breathe like in the other films. I put that all on Marc Forster and his desire to make a movie that moves fast like a bullet. I’m glad he never returned for Bond.

    That is all true. At the same time however, there are also quite some bigger changes after QoS that seperate the first two Craig films from his final three. The higher influene of the mi6 regulars for instance, the constant focus on the UK as a main location, the change from rather down to earth to more outlandish plots (Silva's escape plan, Blofeld's and Bond's backstory, Safin's character and the nano bots), the return to gadgets, etc.).

    Bond bled more and looked more battered after action in his first 2. Mendes seemed to deviate from this in his 2 films, (despite Bond's injury after falling from the train in SF), particularly with that ridiculous spectacle in SP when Bond is right as rain after having his head drilled moments earlier.

    At least NTTD addressed this and we had Bond bleed and look battered again after an ordeal.

    Yes exactly. Bond puts himself into God mode a few times in his last three films. The fall from the bridge in Skyfall has been mentioned. In Spectre it was most obvious with the "one man against the whole crater lair battle" and the insane helicopter take down in the end. In NTTD, it is not as extreme, but even then I have often wondered whether it is Bond or a superhero. How many explosions can a single man survive? How lucky can a man be to never be hit by a bullet from a maschine gun?

    In his first two films, he seemed to have a few more physical constraints.
  • At least NTTD addressed this and we had Bond bleed and look battered again after an ordeal.

    One thing you can't accuse NTTD of, is giving Bond an easy time. If you like to see him battered, bleeding, downtrodden and killed off (of course), NTTD is the film for you!
    I remember when they were filming, they said "we're really putting him through it". They were right.
    Of course, that happened in the novels too, (without the blowing him up to smithereens bit, of course).
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited January 2022 Posts: 8,000
    GBF wrote: »
    GBF wrote: »
    Even in just non-action scenes there’s no room to breathe like in the other films. I put that all on Marc Forster and his desire to make a movie that moves fast like a bullet. I’m glad he never returned for Bond.

    That is all true. At the same time however, there are also quite some bigger changes after QoS that seperate the first two Craig films from his final three. The higher influene of the mi6 regulars for instance, the constant focus on the UK as a main location, the change from rather down to earth to more outlandish plots (Silva's escape plan, Blofeld's and Bond's backstory, Safin's character and the nano bots), the return to gadgets, etc.).

    Bond bled more and looked more battered after action in his first 2. Mendes seemed to deviate from this in his 2 films, (despite Bond's injury after falling from the train in SF), particularly with that ridiculous spectacle in SP when Bond is right as rain after having his head drilled moments earlier.

    At least NTTD addressed this and we had Bond bleed and look battered again after an ordeal.

    Yes exactly. Bond puts himself into God mode a few times in his last three films. The fall from the bridge in Skyfall has been mentioned. In Spectre it was most obvious with the "one man against the whole crater lair battle" and the insane helicopter take down in the end. In NTTD, it is not as extreme, but even then I have often wondered whether it is Bond or a superhero. How many explosions can a single man survive? How lucky can a man be to never be hit by a bullet from a maschine gun?

    In his first two films, he seemed to have a few more physical constraints.

    I’ll give it to you on SP where he survives a drill torture. Otherwise I don’t think you’re making a strong point. He jumps out of a plane, pulls his chute a few feet off the ground and SURVIVES that. How is that different from his bridge fall in the next film?

    I think you’re mistaking cuts on his face for actual consequential injuries that prevent him from physically doing work. It was a big deal in 2006 to see lacerations in his face when talking with M after the airport sequence, because that wasn’t something we saw in Bond films. But that’s all just surface level stuff.

    And then let’s not forget NTTD literally ends with him actually dying. Some superhero!
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited January 2022 Posts: 2,898
    Ironically, Alexander Witt was the second unit director on The Bourne Identity but, for QOS, EON hired Dan Bradley who'd done the inferior sequels.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    For decades, the audience has mocked the Bond films due to how the villains lay out their plans in great detail, dine and wine Bond, give him a tour and so on instead of just shooting him.

    And now: "WHAT THE HELL? HOW COULD THEY DO THAT?"
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,195
    For decades, the audience has mocked the Bond films due to how the villains lay out their plans in great detail, dine and wine Bond, give him a tour and so on instead of just shooting him.

    And now: "WHAT THE HELL? HOW COULD THEY DO THAT?"

    But did Safin just shoot Bond? No, He was also debating with Bond about how similar they are and that he has to wipe out the evil, bla bla...
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    GBF wrote: »
    For decades, the audience has mocked the Bond films due to how the villains lay out their plans in great detail, dine and wine Bond, give him a tour and so on instead of just shooting him.

    And now: "WHAT THE HELL? HOW COULD THEY DO THAT?"

    But did Safin just shoot Bond? No, He was also debating with Bond about how similar they are and that he has to wipe out the evil, bla bla...
    GBF wrote: »
    For decades, the audience has mocked the Bond films due to how the villains lay out their plans in great detail, dine and wine Bond, give him a tour and so on instead of just shooting him.

    And now: "WHAT THE HELL? HOW COULD THEY DO THAT?"

    But did Safin just shoot Bond? No, He was also debating with Bond about how similar they are and that he has to wipe out the evil, bla bla...

    Let s allow him a little gloating. He earned it.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,948
    GBF wrote: »
    GBF wrote: »
    Even in just non-action scenes there’s no room to breathe like in the other films. I put that all on Marc Forster and his desire to make a movie that moves fast like a bullet. I’m glad he never returned for Bond.

    That is all true. At the same time however, there are also quite some bigger changes after QoS that seperate the first two Craig films from his final three. The higher influene of the mi6 regulars for instance, the constant focus on the UK as a main location, the change from rather down to earth to more outlandish plots (Silva's escape plan, Blofeld's and Bond's backstory, Safin's character and the nano bots), the return to gadgets, etc.).

    Bond bled more and looked more battered after action in his first 2. Mendes seemed to deviate from this in his 2 films, (despite Bond's injury after falling from the train in SF), particularly with that ridiculous spectacle in SP when Bond is right as rain after having his head drilled moments earlier.

    At least NTTD addressed this and we had Bond bleed and look battered again after an ordeal.

    Yes exactly. Bond puts himself into God mode a few times in his last three films. The fall from the bridge in Skyfall has been mentioned. In Spectre it was most obvious with the "one man against the whole crater lair battle" and the insane helicopter take down in the end. In NTTD, it is not as extreme, but even then I have often wondered whether it is Bond or a superhero. How many explosions can a single man survive? How lucky can a man be to never be hit by a bullet from a maschine gun?

    In his first two films, he seemed to have a few more physical constraints.

    I’ll give it to you on SP where he survives a drill torture. Otherwise I don’t think you’re making a strong point. He jumps out of a plane, pulls his chute a few feet off the ground and SURVIVES that. How is that different from his bridge fall in the next film?

    I think you’re mistaking cuts on his face for actual consequential injuries that prevent him from physically doing work. It was a big deal in 2006 to see lacerations in his face when talking with M after the airport sequence, because that wasn’t something we saw in Bond films. But that’s all just surface level stuff.

    And then let’s not forget NTTD literally ends with him actually dying. Some superhero!

    Technically, when a shute opens it reaches its maximum velocity immediately (that's the whole principle of it), so it makes sense Bond and Camille survive.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,195
    GBF wrote: »
    GBF wrote: »
    Even in just non-action scenes there’s no room to breathe like in the other films. I put that all on Marc Forster and his desire to make a movie that moves fast like a bullet. I’m glad he never returned for Bond.

    That is all true. At the same time however, there are also quite some bigger changes after QoS that seperate the first two Craig films from his final three. The higher influene of the mi6 regulars for instance, the constant focus on the UK as a main location, the change from rather down to earth to more outlandish plots (Silva's escape plan, Blofeld's and Bond's backstory, Safin's character and the nano bots), the return to gadgets, etc.).

    Bond bled more and looked more battered after action in his first 2. Mendes seemed to deviate from this in his 2 films, (despite Bond's injury after falling from the train in SF), particularly with that ridiculous spectacle in SP when Bond is right as rain after having his head drilled moments earlier.

    At least NTTD addressed this and we had Bond bleed and look battered again after an ordeal.

    Yes exactly. Bond puts himself into God mode a few times in his last three films. The fall from the bridge in Skyfall has been mentioned. In Spectre it was most obvious with the "one man against the whole crater lair battle" and the insane helicopter take down in the end. In NTTD, it is not as extreme, but even then I have often wondered whether it is Bond or a superhero. How many explosions can a single man survive? How lucky can a man be to never be hit by a bullet from a maschine gun?

    In his first two films, he seemed to have a few more physical constraints.

    I’ll give it to you on SP where he survives a drill torture. Otherwise I don’t think you’re making a strong point. He jumps out of a plane, pulls his chute a few feet off the ground and SURVIVES that. How is that different from his bridge fall in the next film?

    I think you’re mistaking cuts on his face for actual consequential injuries that prevent him from physically doing work. It was a big deal in 2006 to see lacerations in his face when talking with M after the airport sequence, because that wasn’t something we saw in Bond films. But that’s all just surface level stuff.

    And then let’s not forget NTTD literally ends with him actually dying. Some superhero!

    Technically, when a shute opens it reaches its maximum velocity immediately (that's the whole principle of it), so it makes sense Bond and Camille survive.

    Daniel Craig's Bond is certainly the most physical Bond and there are quite often parts when his actions come close to being impossible. Him surviving that fall down the bridge in Skyfall is the most obvious one, especially since he is also extremely injured and out of conscious due to him being shot by Moneypenny. In Spectre, there are plenty of these scenes where the action is completely unbelievable. The plane car chase, the crater lair action the helicopter shot. In NTTD I still find it a bit boring that Bond again hits each henchman with the first shot and that he survives the explosions of several granades directly next to him. In earlier Bond films, Bond needed much more support to take down the villains. He also missed the villains quite a few times when he tried to shoot them.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,449
    Hold on. It's James Bond! I don't like it when he needs several attempts. Shoot - kill - repeat. Because he's the best, you see.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,948
    GBF wrote: »
    GBF wrote: »
    GBF wrote: »
    Even in just non-action scenes there’s no room to breathe like in the other films. I put that all on Marc Forster and his desire to make a movie that moves fast like a bullet. I’m glad he never returned for Bond.

    That is all true. At the same time however, there are also quite some bigger changes after QoS that seperate the first two Craig films from his final three. The higher influene of the mi6 regulars for instance, the constant focus on the UK as a main location, the change from rather down to earth to more outlandish plots (Silva's escape plan, Blofeld's and Bond's backstory, Safin's character and the nano bots), the return to gadgets, etc.).

    Bond bled more and looked more battered after action in his first 2. Mendes seemed to deviate from this in his 2 films, (despite Bond's injury after falling from the train in SF), particularly with that ridiculous spectacle in SP when Bond is right as rain after having his head drilled moments earlier.

    At least NTTD addressed this and we had Bond bleed and look battered again after an ordeal.

    Yes exactly. Bond puts himself into God mode a few times in his last three films. The fall from the bridge in Skyfall has been mentioned. In Spectre it was most obvious with the "one man against the whole crater lair battle" and the insane helicopter take down in the end. In NTTD, it is not as extreme, but even then I have often wondered whether it is Bond or a superhero. How many explosions can a single man survive? How lucky can a man be to never be hit by a bullet from a maschine gun?

    In his first two films, he seemed to have a few more physical constraints.

    I’ll give it to you on SP where he survives a drill torture. Otherwise I don’t think you’re making a strong point. He jumps out of a plane, pulls his chute a few feet off the ground and SURVIVES that. How is that different from his bridge fall in the next film?

    I think you’re mistaking cuts on his face for actual consequential injuries that prevent him from physically doing work. It was a big deal in 2006 to see lacerations in his face when talking with M after the airport sequence, because that wasn’t something we saw in Bond films. But that’s all just surface level stuff.

    And then let’s not forget NTTD literally ends with him actually dying. Some superhero!

    Technically, when a shute opens it reaches its maximum velocity immediately (that's the whole principle of it), so it makes sense Bond and Camille survive.

    Daniel Craig's Bond is certainly the most physical Bond and there are quite often parts when his actions come close to being impossible. Him surviving that fall down the bridge in Skyfall is the most obvious one, especially since he is also extremely injured and out of conscious due to him being shot by Moneypenny. In Spectre, there are plenty of these scenes where the action is completely unbelievable. The plane car chase, the crater lair action the helicopter shot. In NTTD I still find it a bit boring that Bond again hits each henchman with the first shot and that he survives the explosions of several granades directly next to him. In earlier Bond films, Bond needed much more support to take down the villains. He also missed the villains quite a few times when he tried to shoot them.

    Well I agree with you that its often pushing it. Personally I found it more jarring with SP. Especially the plane-scene you mentioned. We know Bond is very tough and keeps on going, but even for him there should be limits. And the plane-sequence is definately one too far. I wondered why the landrovers didn't decide to just stop and let Bond glide past. He had no way of stopping or steering.

    I think NTTD finds a better balance in this.

    The fall in SF was high, but he fell into a fast streaming river, which makes it easier to servive the first impact. So does the fact that his body was completely relaxed (he was unconcious after all falling down). Still, his lungs should be full of water after initial impact, or did he wake up because of it? And then... yes, indeed, you'll have to make a full story to make it fit.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,898
    Needles to the brain? Mere pinpricks!
  • Venutius wrote: »
    Needles to the brain? Mere pinpricks!

    The shoot-out after those needles to the brain was definitely two or three steps too far for me. I'd have been a little easier with the whole thing if Madeleine had helped Bond somehow with the shoot-out & escape...helping him stand upright & shuffle out of the crater base, if nothing else...but no, SuperBond has to do it all himself.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Venutius wrote: »
    Needles to the brain? Mere pinpricks!

    Maybe it worked like acupuncture?
Sign In or Register to comment.