NO TIME TO DIE- is it divisive?

14567810»

Comments

  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited September 26 Posts: 4,491
    TripAces wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    I know this is ironic given Lazenby's recent remarks, but I don't see Connery agreeing to play gay in OHMSS in 1968.

    I don't recall if Bray is gay in the book but Maibaum/Raven/Hunt made a clever decision here in having a straight man trying to maintain a gay cover around a bevy of beautiful women.

    Compare Craig's line upon meeting Silva in SF. We're, thankfully, in a different era now.

    But we're off topic.

    @echo Thing is if you listen to Sam Mendes in the skyfall commentary he said it wasn't at all bond was gay same with the writer on skyfall who is gay said it had nothing to do with bond being gay.

    I always assumed Bond was alluding to being "strapped to a chair" in CR.

    Seems unlikely. Craig does not read the line that way.

    He actually does.

    During the encounter, Bond says of M, "She never tied me to a chair."

    "Her loss," Silva says and then goes on to mention the training Bond must be trying to remember, given this predicament: in a chair, at the mercy of the man who's put him there.

    "What's the regulation to cover this?" Silva eventually asks. "Well, first time for everything."

    And to that, Bond says, "What makes you think this is my first time?"

    The line is delivered perfectly.

    Yes, there are homosexual undertones...but then again, so was the encounter with LeChiffre. In my mind, that torture scene with LeChiffre was exactly what he was alluding to here.

    Really?

    https://www.indiewire.com/2021/09/james-bond-refused-studio-cut-skyfall-gay-scene-1234663130/

    What are you disagreeing with?
    So layered.

    Indeed it is, and I think it's so layered that people on this thread are not grasping certain things. In any case, for whatever reason, some seem to forget that Bond had already been strapped to a chair. And that irony is thick in this scene with Silva.

    Casino_Royale-228915228-large.jpg

    skyfall-daniel-craig-bardem-rotator.jpg

  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,544
    TripAces wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    I know this is ironic given Lazenby's recent remarks, but I don't see Connery agreeing to play gay in OHMSS in 1968.

    I don't recall if Bray is gay in the book but Maibaum/Raven/Hunt made a clever decision here in having a straight man trying to maintain a gay cover around a bevy of beautiful women.

    Compare Craig's line upon meeting Silva in SF. We're, thankfully, in a different era now.

    But we're off topic.

    @echo Thing is if you listen to Sam Mendes in the skyfall commentary he said it wasn't at all bond was gay same with the writer on skyfall who is gay said it had nothing to do with bond being gay.

    I always assumed Bond was alluding to being "strapped to a chair" in CR.

    Seems unlikely. Craig does not read the line that way.

    He actually does.

    During the encounter, Bond says of M, "She never tied me to a chair."

    "Her loss," Silva says and then goes on to mention the training Bond must be trying to remember, given this predicament: in a chair, at the mercy of the man who's put him there.

    "What's the regulation to cover this?" Silva eventually asks. "Well, first time for everything."

    And to that, Bond says, "What makes you think this is my first time?"

    The line is delivered perfectly.

    Yes, there are homosexual undertones...but then again, so was the encounter with LeChiffre. In my mind, that torture scene with LeChiffre was exactly what he was alluding to here.

    Really?

    https://www.indiewire.com/2021/09/james-bond-refused-studio-cut-skyfall-gay-scene-1234663130/

    What are you disagreeing with?

    That either Silva or Bond is referring to being tied to a chair. It's not how audiences, commentators, the studio, or the director appear to have taken it. The rhetorical question 'What's the regulation to cover this?', asked while Silva strokes Bond and suggests they 'eat each other' couldn't be easier to understand.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,233
    TripAces wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    I know this is ironic given Lazenby's recent remarks, but I don't see Connery agreeing to play gay in OHMSS in 1968.

    I don't recall if Bray is gay in the book but Maibaum/Raven/Hunt made a clever decision here in having a straight man trying to maintain a gay cover around a bevy of beautiful women.

    Compare Craig's line upon meeting Silva in SF. We're, thankfully, in a different era now.

    But we're off topic.

    @echo Thing is if you listen to Sam Mendes in the skyfall commentary he said it wasn't at all bond was gay same with the writer on skyfall who is gay said it had nothing to do with bond being gay.

    I always assumed Bond was alluding to being "strapped to a chair" in CR.

    Seems unlikely. Craig does not read the line that way.

    He actually does.

    During the encounter, Bond says of M, "She never tied me to a chair."

    "Her loss," Silva says and then goes on to mention the training Bond must be trying to remember, given this predicament: in a chair, at the mercy of the man who's put him there.

    "What's the regulation to cover this?" Silva eventually asks. "Well, first time for everything."

    And to that, Bond says, "What makes you think this is my first time?"

    The line is delivered perfectly.

    Yes, there are homosexual undertones...but then again, so was the encounter with LeChiffre. In my mind, that torture scene with LeChiffre was exactly what he was alluding to here.

    Really?

    https://www.indiewire.com/2021/09/james-bond-refused-studio-cut-skyfall-gay-scene-1234663130/

    What are you disagreeing with?

    That either Silva or Bond is referring to being tied to a chair. It's not how audiences, commentators, the studio, or the director appear to have taken it. The rhetorical question 'What's the regulation to cover this?', asked while Silva strokes Bond and suggests they 'eat each other' couldn't be easier to understand.

    Be careful not to underestimate one’s ability to misunderstand things.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,544
    TripAces wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    I know this is ironic given Lazenby's recent remarks, but I don't see Connery agreeing to play gay in OHMSS in 1968.

    I don't recall if Bray is gay in the book but Maibaum/Raven/Hunt made a clever decision here in having a straight man trying to maintain a gay cover around a bevy of beautiful women.

    Compare Craig's line upon meeting Silva in SF. We're, thankfully, in a different era now.

    But we're off topic.

    @echo Thing is if you listen to Sam Mendes in the skyfall commentary he said it wasn't at all bond was gay same with the writer on skyfall who is gay said it had nothing to do with bond being gay.

    I always assumed Bond was alluding to being "strapped to a chair" in CR.

    Seems unlikely. Craig does not read the line that way.

    He actually does.

    During the encounter, Bond says of M, "She never tied me to a chair."

    "Her loss," Silva says and then goes on to mention the training Bond must be trying to remember, given this predicament: in a chair, at the mercy of the man who's put him there.

    "What's the regulation to cover this?" Silva eventually asks. "Well, first time for everything."

    And to that, Bond says, "What makes you think this is my first time?"

    The line is delivered perfectly.

    Yes, there are homosexual undertones...but then again, so was the encounter with LeChiffre. In my mind, that torture scene with LeChiffre was exactly what he was alluding to here.

    Really?

    https://www.indiewire.com/2021/09/james-bond-refused-studio-cut-skyfall-gay-scene-1234663130/

    What are you disagreeing with?

    That either Silva or Bond is referring to being tied to a chair. It's not how audiences, commentators, the studio, or the director appear to have taken it. The rhetorical question 'What's the regulation to cover this?', asked while Silva strokes Bond and suggests they 'eat each other' couldn't be easier to understand.

    Be careful not to underestimate one’s ability to misunderstand things.

    :)) I certainly don't! I remember someone once suggesting that the 'Don't ask, don't tell' thing in some American-penned Clinton-era Brosnan film wasn't a reference to a deeply controversial policy of that name from that precise moment in history. Most odd
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 1,695
    Not so much as a script change, as much as a promotion change.
    I wouldn't have announced it as Craig's last. All the way through the build up, "the death of Bond", was speculated and I think it would have been more interesting had they acted as if Daniel was going to do more, then the ending would have been more impactful.

    The focus of the film was too much on Craig's last film and tying up loose ends, rather than on the actual adventure.

    It's a year ago today I first saw NTTD, and I'm going to watch tonight and see how I feel about it. It'll be my 5th viewing
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 12,807
    Wow, you're right, it has been out a year now. Only seen it twice... First viewing was good, second was better. Maybe this is one film that will improve with each watch, like QOS does for me.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited September 30 Posts: 1,544
    I think the only part that doesn't improve is the histrionic presentation of Bond's death. On the rewatch, it's just "get on with it, stop preparing me for it".
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lagos, Nigeria
    edited September 30 Posts: 364
    I think another mistake EON did was, they focused too much on Bond's death and forgot about the events in the film that led to his death. If those events were given the same profound thought as Bond's death, Bond would have earned the permission to die in NTTD, even if I prefer him to be alive at the end of every film.
  • MI6HQMI6HQ SIS Building, London, United Kingdom
    edited September 30 Posts: 1,626
    I still don't liked NTTD, just because of Madeleine she's so prominent and central character in this one that Bond almost became a side character.

    I would have buy it more, if it's Monica Bellucci's Lucia Sciarra, it would make much more sense, because of her deep connections to SPECTRE.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 37,929
    QBranch wrote: »
    Wow, you're right, it has been out a year now. Only seen it twice... First viewing was good, second was better. Maybe this is one film that will improve with each watch, like QOS does for me.

    Just the three for me, two in theaters and one when it came out on 4K. I'm gonna start a new Bondathon in the next month or two, eager to see it in a full marathon finally versus one split up as I awaited its release in theaters.
Sign In or Register to comment.