It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Madeleine might have planned on telling him whenever they'd get around to having a talk about what their relationship even is. He cut her out of his live quite severely five years prior and their entire relationship must have been pretty traumatic for her, including raising their child on her own.
I also find it makes Madeline a tad unlikeable. It doesn't come across that she's a strong sole parent, as much as it feels like she's deceived Bond in keeping him from his child, that he doesn't know exists. Which is ironic because the reason he abandoned her in Matera, was her being secretive which hinted at the possibility of her working for Spectre. So to find out she's kept his daughter secret from him, doesn't put her in a favourable light.
Maybe she could have shouted "I don't know, why this is happening. I'm not one of them" a bit more often, but really, what was she supposed to do during that car chase? He is convinced she's SPECTRE and I don't think there was any way to stop him from dropping her.
That's very true and I can't argue with any of that my friend. I just didn't like the "she's not yours" line, it feels very unclear and Safin's reveal of his daughter later wasn't at all impactful
I can see it from Bond's perspective as well though, she says the night before the tomb explosion "I'll tell you all my secrets" I think that then Blofeld hinting at her being part of the plan, would trigger anyone's trust issues.
I do think the fact that they go to Vesper's tomb and then having Bond doubt Madeline was a mistake personally.
It would have been for Bond to have put Madeline on the train to protect her, rather than because he couldn't trust her. Have Bond leave Madeline because he knows he can never have a normal life and she would be safer without him
Which is why he smiles in the end.
That line is one of the long list of things that I can make to work in my head, but I totally understand that people bump on or just dislike it. It's been said before, but through the discussions over the last months that seems to be christalizing as the early legacy of the film. All the hooks for possible explanations are in the film, but it's so (over-)stuffed with things and some are so tenuous that people just don't want to go along on the ride.
And I am really not saying this in a "you have to be smart to understand the genius of the film". Not at all. It's more about your willingness to like it, rather than any ability to understand it.
Sounds like something Fleming's Bond would think, haha. Yeah, I do agree and I've always thought Bond's 'redemption' in NTTD needed to be better thought out.
It's the only Bond movie I find unpleasant. Even the CGI horrors of DAD, and the slapstick cringey Tarzan yells I can almost enjoy not liking, if that makes sense. NTTD I actually dislike so much, I can't find any affection for it at all.
One thing I haven't seen mentioned, is Saffin threatening Matilde. Putting a cute kid in danger like that, felt very un-Bondian. It almost verged on being in bad taste in a Bond film. Talking her away from her mother, and seeing her mum in distress felt like the film was going somewhere that Bond films hadn't gone before, and I wasn't entirely comfortable with it. Did anyone else feel this, or am I being over-sensitive?
You're not alone mate.
I have no problem involving children in Bond films, I like those kids in DAF and in TMWTGG, what I didn't like was they're trying to make all things complicated to elevate the drama but in a messy way, like yes, Safin taking away Mathilde from Madeleine, I would have feel for that scene if we knew from that start that it was Bond's daughter, but we're curious about what's happening and does the movie thinks that we care for them? We care for Mathilde? I know she's a child but what's her role in this film?, We didn't even know if she's Bond's daughter or not, how can we feel for that scene, maybe she's Safin's daughter, so maybe he has the right? We're left a bit confused.
We audience thinking of the plot holes in the film and kept being confused, while the film keeps on making scenes like this, of course how can we care about it, I mean what's happening? I'm confused.
To be honest, none of the films in the Craig Era felt Bondian.
And this film was really the culmination of it all, imagine Bond's confession in Norway when Talking to Madeleine, it doesn't feel Bond to me, I can't imagine Connery or the other Bonds doing it, and maybe even Fleming's Bond, he can't deeply confess like that to a girl, he can admit his feelings but he's still cold and keeping it in a masculine manner, especially that he suspected this woman of betraying him, so why to act like that?
The coldness was gone to this point, Bond can be vulnerable but not to the point of this like he's already a touchy feely, he can be human but still keeping his attitude, his coldness, him being hard.
And this film was for me, another 'This Time It's Personal' plot again.
And I'm tired of those plots, involving Bond in a personal way.
Why can't we have a plot where Bond was not personally involved with the villain?
When Safin involves Madeleine and Mathilde in his plot, I said to myself "Oh, so another this time it's personal for Bond again".
And yes, I missed the Classic Bond films.
Welcome back! @patb
cheers
That’s just what is on screen in the film itself, and once you look at the echoes of QoS, Skyfall, Spectre, and even CR in the story, there’s more. Bond himself ends in much the way Vesper does. He knows while he lives, the people who want to be with him are at risk. So he dies in fire. (Leiter’s death also foreshadows this.)
I’ve literally only watched the film once and got that, and it changed my mind about the whole Craig era series.
That's exactly what I want from Bond, style, luxurious scenery but always a hint of doom
I couldn't agree more.
Same. Totally. It may look idyllic, but there's something off-kilter and deadly just beneath the surface. 'You're living in a ruin - you just don't know it yet.' But you will...
I did, I was already softening my stance largely because the production values and cinematography is really excellent, but NTTD pushed me into actually really liking the bunch. Without the others being such departures, NTTD wouldn’t be able to do what it does, and I think it does an excellent job. Especially considering how every film had some weird arse thing against it in production (Strikes, fires…) and it wasn’t planned fully. The only mis-step is borrowing from Austin Powers for Blofeld.
I wouldn’t even be surprised if the next Bond film actually stars Craig again, with just enough ‘Doctor No’ and ‘YOLT’ in the film to get away with amnesiac Bond washing up. I think they won’t, and hope they don’t. It feels like that would be their insurance plan if audiences really railed against the death (complete with a surprise ‘just one more then’ from Craig) but I think NTTD has been just succesfuo enough they won’t need it.
Because in the context of the story (and this is a larger mythological motif) there is an opposition between "killer" and "life-creator". Think about how in the beginning of NTTD, Madeleine thinks her dad is a doctor (healer) when her mother tells her that he's actually a killer. One saves, one destroys. Same logic why in Spectre, Madeleine was introduced as a doctor — a doctor is the opposite profession of an assassin.
So having a kid is the most concrete "creation" one can have. Literally creating something out of nothing!
George Lucas has a good bit here where he sums this all up
So were Saddam Hussein or Stalin also redeemed because they had kids and created life? Creating life isn't a spectacular achievement--it's an everyday thing that has filled up the world with seven billion people. You can even create life by accident, which is what Bond did. Reproducing hardly seems like a great moral achievement or signifier of redemption.
Agreed, think of rapists and sexual assaulters, they've impregnated some of their victims, does it make them redeemable? Or I can take Mr. White as an example, he has a child which is Madeleine, but does it redeemed him because he created life?
(B) Yes, ironically, In the end, Whites *only* redemption of any kind comes about because he is Madelines father.
With OHMSS, Bond not only lost Tracy but he weeps for the loss of his future dreams/hopes of a family life with her (well written IMHO). They could have used the same tactic in NTTD with Bond/Mads openly referencing their hopes and his future life as a father. There is a well written scene in Highlander where Heather refers to her dream of having kids with Connor and they both know it wont happen.
PS with a time jump, you can play a game with the audience. For example, Bond and Mads in a park and a kid comes running up to Bond shouting "daddy" and, for a fraction of a second, the audience thinks "what?!" but the kid runs passed Bond to a guy behind them. Sometimes it's better to give the audience the credit for having an imagination and thinking/relating to Bond's future rather than having a physical new character that does very little and actually becomes a dreadful liability as the plot unfolds.
Yes, I liked the idea that after Bond dumped her, she found a new man to love her and gave her the future that she really wanted.
Now Bond realized that he lost his chance at Madeleine, because she already found a family of her own.
Bond suddenly realized his mistakes, he regretted the decision he made in Matera before, but now there's nothing he can do about it, it's already done, he can't have a family with Madeleine now.
There's a comment I saw in YouTube, I will find it again and post it here, I've read that and left me thinking that it would have make sense.