Two whole years later- No Time To Die. A fitting end to a particular timeline, or a Bond faux pas?

135

Comments

  • edited March 2023 Posts: 3,367
    It's not an ending I've ever liked in both concept and execution. But I suppose when all's said and done even I can admit it's a logical way to end the Craig era. Just not a satisfying one for everyone.
  • Posts: 1,043
    peter wrote: »
    I think most people would have liked Skyfall to be the end of Craig's era.
    “Most people”??... Other than half a dozen ppl on this site, I’ve never, ever, ever, heard this claim.

    I meant most people in relation to this site. I know the film was popular with critics and the public, as I said earlier.
    I'll re-phrase that as quite a few people on this site have said they'd have preferred Skyfall to be Daniel Craig's last Bond film.
    Sorry for the confusion. I was in hurry when I wrote that.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 1,615
    I enjoyed seeing more of Craig's Bond...even if I didn't really like the last two films. But to be honest, Skyfall had such a stylish Bondian ending. The acting, directing, music, cinematography, plus the Gunbarrel sequence were all done perfectly...that it's not difficult to imagine Skyfall as the perfect ending for Craig's Bond.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,527
    Put me down as a person on this site who definitely would not have wanted Skyfall to be Craig’s last film. I derive a ton of enjoyment from Spectre despite its myriad problems, and I really enjoy NTTD as well.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,048
    @RichardTheBruce … I keep threatening an MI6 NTTD Fan Club, lol... Maybe it's time (I kid, I kid)
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 1,615
    Put me down as a person on this site who definitely would not have wanted Skyfall to be Craig’s last film. I derive a ton of enjoyment from Spectre despite its myriad problems, and I really enjoy NTTD as well.

    To be honest, I'm beginning to think I like SP more than NTTD. Mendes knew how to present James Bond visually....even with the film's problems.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,110
    Regarding NTTD, I quite liked the Nomi character and wished they gave her more to do. I would have liked to have seen her and Bond scaling their way up to the poison garden a la the novel.

    And removing her from the action at the end made no sense to me...you have two 00s. Use them.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,824
    echo wrote: »
    And removing her from the action at the end made no sense to me...you have two 00s. Use them.
    And have 'em both blown up?

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,048
    007HallY wrote: »
    It's not an ending I've ever liked in both concept and execution. But I suppose when all's said and done even I can admit it's a logical way to end the Craig era. Just not a satisfying one for everyone.

    @007HallY , I definitely understand your perspective. It’s honest and it’s also nice to see how you can see why they ended it this way.

    EoN, and the other creatives involved (from all of the writers and director and the distributors), must have known that this conclusion would have ticked off a portion of their built in audience.

    But all of them decided to go for it.

    I admire them for making that choice, and I luckily loved it since I first laid my tear-filled eyes on the image of my favourite James Bond being blown to smithereens (not to be too melodramatic about it, 😂)
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,527
    I've said it before, but also the fact that they didn't dwell on it all after it happened (quick meeting in M's office, quick scene in car), rather than some drawn out service and showing everybody crying about it endlessly (my mind goes back to Return of the King...) really helps NTTD's rewatchability.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,048
    @NickTwentyTwo … agreed about the resolution. It wasn’t heavy handed.

    In fact it was very short, sweet and classy.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited March 2023 Posts: 7,527
    Agreed, and beautifully shot, IMO.

    I'm beginning to think the aesthetics and cinematography of Bond are the strongest factor in me being a fan. Applying also to Fleming's descriptions in the novels.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,730
    I've said it before, but also the fact that they didn't dwell on it all after it happened (quick meeting in M's office, quick scene in car), rather than some drawn out service and showing everybody crying about it endlessly (my mind goes back to Return of the King...) really helps NTTD's rewatchability.

    I must agree here. Truthfully, it was the nanobot ploy that made it hard for me to really be okay with this movie. Bond looking up to face his fate with no fear was actually pretty intense.
    That he got to that point because, nanobots... I mean, that's Stargate Atlantis stuff for cripe's sake! ;))
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,527
    Yeah, I didn't love nanobots. It was certainly a contrivance to get us to that ending.
  • Posts: 2,400
    peter wrote: »
    I think most people would have liked Skyfall to be the end of Craig's era.
    “Most people”??... Other than half a dozen ppl on this site, I’ve never, ever, ever, heard this claim.

    I meant most people in relation to this site. I know the film was popular with critics and the public, as I said earlier.
    I'll re-phrase that as quite a few people on this site have said they'd have preferred Skyfall to be Daniel Craig's last Bond film.
    Sorry for the confusion. I was in hurry when I wrote that.

    And I'm obviously just a member of the general public and not someone with a decade's history on this site, thanks.
  • Posts: 1,707
    What was it about those nanobots so many of us did not like?

    If Bond had to die--and he did, even though it was no time to die--what other plot device ensuring Bond's sacrifice and death would have worked that would have seemed less contrived?

  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,824
    I can see why one would not subscribe to that nanobot story, but I don't think it is so outrageous compared to other semi-sci-fi ideas in the entire franchise. I don't think anyone in 1963 subscribed to that homing device on Goldfinger's car, either. Just remember that the key to appreciating James Bond is "suspension of disbelief". And that does it for me, even in NTTD (a brilliant film, by the way, unless of course I've mentioned it before).
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,730
    CrabKey wrote: »
    What was it about those nanobots so many of us did not like?

    If Bond had to die--and he did, even though it was no time to die--what other plot device ensuring Bond's sacrifice and death would have worked that would have seemed less contrived?

    Seriously? I could come up with many given the time or motivation to try...
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,527
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    I can see why one would not subscribe to that nanobot story, but I don't think it is so outrageous compared to other semi-sci-fi ideas in the entire franchise. I don't think anyone in 1963 subscribed to that homing device on Goldfinger's car, either. Just remember that the key to appreciating James Bond is "suspension of disbelief". And that does it for me, even in NTTD (a brilliant film, by the way, unless of course I've mentioned it before).

    I agree, it wasn't outside the realm of possibility for a Bond film; personally I think I would have preferred a biological virus, which I think was something they were considering.
  • Posts: 1,707
    chrisisall wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    What was it about those nanobots so many of us did not like?

    If Bond had to die--and he did, even though it was no time to die--what other plot device ensuring Bond's sacrifice and death would have worked that would have seemed less contrived?

    Seriously? I could come up with many given the time or motivation to try...

    My question isn't addressed to you personally. It's just out there for anyone who'd like to take a stab at it.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,730
    CrabKey wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    What was it about those nanobots so many of us did not like?

    If Bond had to die--and he did, even though it was no time to die--what other plot device ensuring Bond's sacrifice and death would have worked that would have seemed less contrived?

    Seriously? I could come up with many given the time or motivation to try...

    My question isn't addressed to you personally. It's just out there for anyone who'd like to take a stab at it.

    The nanobots ploy makes it easy. Science that can't be perfectly explained nor understood. Forcing Bond into a place where he had to die without nonsense would have required actual writing skills.
    Him sacrificing himself to save Leiter?
    Him dying while killing the big bad?
    Making it back home with a wound that ended him just before he reached the front door?
    Endless possibilities never explored because... nanobots.
  • DwayneDwayne New York City
    Posts: 2,703
    While things my change in the future, for now my opinion on NTTD hasn’t changed: as a Bond film it ranks in the middle of the pack.

    On the positive side, NTTD is a far better film than SP and I felt that the chemistry between Craig and Léa Seydoux was better. The action was good, I thought that the homages to prior Bond films – especially OHMSS – were well handled, Zimmer’s score was top-notch and Craig (as always) is excellent.

    The elephant in the room, is of course, Bond’s death. Maybe my Bond fan card should be revoked, but for whatever reason, I was not as moved by it as I thought I would be. In fact, Leiter’s passing affected me more – especially during my first viewing of the film.

    Oddly, I’m not entirely sure why I feel that way. Perhaps subconsciously I viewed Bond’s death scene as being too passive and I would have liked something more “in battle.” Again, that was my impression in October 2021, and I still haven’t been able to shake it. That said, whenever Bond 26 is released and I have a chance to really place the Craig era in context (for me), I may feel differently.

    My two cents anyway.

    A quick aside: While NTTD did good box-office in the US (maybe not as well as some would have liked, but still good), I don’t remember there being a lot a “buzz” about the fact that Bond died at the end of the film. And by “buzz” I’m not referring to the film press, but to more general media. You would have thought that given the status of Bond in popular culture; it would have been the topic of wide conversation. I could be wrong about this, but I don’t recall any. Maybe with super-heroes being killed right and left, the "death of the hero" is somewhat passe.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited March 2023 Posts: 3,450
    I think my recent comment also belongs in here:

    I've just realized that the Craig Era leaned too much on damaged Bond Girls, I think it's one of the aspects why his tone was also dour and serious.

    The 'Bird With A Wing Down' aspect has been overused in the Craig Era (with an exception of Paloma or maybe Strawberry Fields), all of Craig's Bond Girls had that sort of inner heavy baggage in them, they're burden, too heavy to watch.

    I understand Vesper, but the rest, like Camille, Severine, Lucia Sciarra and Madeleine Swann, they're all very dour to watch because all of them were tragic, could we rest from that?

    I'd liked to see Bond Girls with sense of humor and fun, and witty as Bond himself.

    That's why it's a breathe of fresh air to see someone like Paloma, just playful and fun, a woman with no problems and not complicated.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,012
    Even if Bond had lived, NTTD would be my least favourite of Dan's films. Matera, Jamaica, Paloma, the trawler, MI6? Great. Soup gags, Borat, Cuba, Belmarsh, nanobots, Iceland, Safin's island? Not so much. I'm still firmly of the opinion that Bond shouldn't die. I reached an accommodation with it after a few weeks, I could see how it worked in the context of the film and if it'd been a one-off movie with a lead character other than James Bond, I'd have no problem with the death. Heroes do sacrifice themselves. Heroes do die. But Bond's death? Not what I ever wanted to see.
  • Posts: 15,950
    I'd say it was a faux pas stylishly executed, yet poorly written.
    The trend of an iconic, beloved hero performing self sacrifice, IMO had run it's course by the time NTTD was released.
    The biggest faux pas for me personally, is post NTTD, I'm not excited to see what happens next. That was a 6 year gap, and unlike GOLDENEYE, I don't feel the series was rejuvenated after the hiatus. If anything, killing Bond only compounds that error.
    Of course, the intention wasn't to rejuvenate the series, but permanently end that iteration of Bond. In that respect I suppose it works, but doesn't exactly make me enthused for whatever Barbara and Michael come up with next.
    Looking back, the Craig era itself makes me feel like the series is winding down. Not just the longer gaps, but the various attempts to do something shocking (like killing Bond, M, Felix, etc), reek of desperation. At least that's how I feel when I rewatch those films now. I still love them regardless, but I'm not holding my breath on anything new.
    Future Bond films may be akin to, say, waiting for someone to make a new Tarzan or Dracula movie. They happen occasionally, and some are better than others, but they're not what I call a series or franchise. Just one off revivals of iconic characters.
    Time will tell, but those are my feelings two years on from NTTD.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 6,858
    A bit late to contribute here, but I’ll keep it short.

    Used to really hate it, but I’ve slightly warmed to it lately.

    The first part is excellent, the pts, Jamaica and Cuba. All great stuff.

    The second part is a bit convoluted I think. Killing off Felix felt unnecessary, killing off Blofeld off-screen and by accident makes FYEO’s chimney drop look like a stroke of genius and Bond’s death felt convoluted and overly dramatic. The film refers to OHMSS so many times, I would expect they would have learned from the way Tracy’s death was handled. Less fuss, but with a real gut punch.

    Now with all that being said, three aspects do keep my interest throughout:

    - Léa is outstanding from beginning to end, what an actress!
    - having become a dad myself fairly recent, I was truly invested in the father-daughter storyline, Lisa-Dorah Sonnet was phenomenal all the way through too. And there are few child actors who are. Impressive stuff.
    - The cinematography, heads-off to Linus Sandgren.

    Now that was longer than I anticipated. All in all I’d give a higher rating than a few months ago, though some of my original gripes still stand.

  • edited March 2023 Posts: 1,043
    And I'm obviously just a member of the general public and not someone with a decade's history on this site, thanks.

    I've already re-written it once. But just for you, I'll do a third version. Here you go . . .


    Without prejudice. . .
    Certain members of this site, (but perhaps not the majority), as evidenced by opinions herein, might/would have preferred Skyfall to have been Craig's last Bond film. That's not to say that people who liked Spectre and/or Skyfall aren't just as much Bond fans as those that didn't, and furthermore, may even have greater commitment to the Bondian cause.


    Is that okay?

    I can do a fourth version if required, should anyone else find issue with it. But I think I have all bases covered now.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    I think it was a wonderful finale to this particlular timeline and like others I rate DC the second best Bond ever just close behind SC.

    The movie in general works great for me and I enjoy rewatching it, I think the finale is great - though the things I disliked I dislike even more: Safin is badly written and also the otherwise great Malek can't turn this material into something better on-screen. And I still simply hate Waltz as Blofeld. It's not as bad as SPECTRE in this regard - still I am totally annoyed by his casting, his performance and how they wrote this character in SP and NTTD.

    But - to summarize and stay true to the thread's title: I think it was a good ending for *this* timeline. Next film should show a different Bond and just enter Moneypenny's office like nothing happened.
  • edited March 2023 Posts: 315
    I don't approve of the death of James Bond. I will never support it. I felt it was completely unnecessary and silly because you're supposed to watch No Time To Die and feel sadness when Bond dies but a few minutes later the end credits roll and inform us...

    James Bond will return

    So we're supposed to feel sadness or some other emotion at the passing of Bond but told "don't worry, he'll be alive in the next film!"

    Just silly.

    However, if NTTD were Eon's final produced Bond film I guess the death of James Bond could be justified. It would draw the 25 film franchise to a natural end. The End. But I don't think Barbara Broccoli plans to sell up. Amazon has bought MGM so it's very unlikely Eon want to ditch their new relationship with Amazon/MGM.

    I also apportion some of the foolishness and blame to Daniel Craig. It's been suggested he was the driving force behind wanting Bond to die in NTTD (possibly a condition of his return to the role). If the rumour is true, Danny Boyle rejected Craig's demand and this led to Boyle leaving the film.

    Sadly, we can't undo time. No Time To Die happened and fans have to accept it. You don't have to support the next film. You can boycott Bond 26 in protest at the decision to kill off Bond. That's a personal decision. It's counter-intuitive because all fans want the franchise to continue and prosper, but killing off Bond could be a sufficient reason to question your loyalty to the franchise? Perhaps.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,048
    @bondywondy

    Boyle was fired because he didn’t want anyone but his writer touching the script they had. He was against rewrites and he was very much against professional script-doctors jumping on board what has been described as quite a dull screenplay.

    Unfortunately for him, he didn’t own the rights to the script— EoN did and still does. They fired him because he wasn’t a team player.

    Bond, like other tent pole pics, have quite a number of script doctors doing passes. Some may polish dialogue, others, action; some may have to do heavier lifting on story and character. It’s the way of big budget script development.

    Danny Boyle comes from an indie background and was still playing in that sandbox when he was canned.

    EoN was correct in getting rid of him.

    As for NTTD being silly, I guess I’m a silly person because I loved it .
Sign In or Register to comment.