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
The point is they couldn't have done it unless all parties agreed and thought it worthwhile on some level. And all parties were free to say no, go a different direction with the next Bond film (even without Craig), or not be involved at all if they had issues with it. We don't even know the specifics of Craig's contract (it could well have been an agreement to stick to the proposed story elements, not just Bond's death).
It's interesting that the sinking house in CR was brought up, as that seems to be another controversial creative choice amongst fans. It's actually one I've rethought. Nowadays, I genuinely think the third act of CR would have been ruined had we gotten Vesper's quiet, more Melodrama tinged suicide from the book. Even if an alternative sequence had felt underwhelming I think it would have resulted in audiences feeling cheated of a gripping finale. I'd argue it's actually a great action sequence and it even improves on the novel in the sense that we actually see Vesper making the decision to take her own life. And yet many of us here moan about it, even offer more 'Fleming accurate' alternatives... and no, none of these I've read would, in my opinion, be better than what we got. I think what we have to understand is that sometimes what we want or think right for a Bond film by our own criteria isn't always the best route for the story filmmakers are trying to tell.
I'm not saying I like the idea of Bond's death, nor do I think it the right choice for a Bond adventure in general, but it's one I've rethought as well with more watches of NTTD. You can look at the first page of this thread and see the mental gymnastics I myself made about two years ago trying to justify why the ending 'didn't work', or supposedly felt emotionally flat etc. The truth is if the ending hadn't affected me to some extent emotionally (and I think it always will on some level when it comes to a character we have an attachment to) I wouldn't have tried to pick the ending apart. Almost like if it wasn't a 'legitimate' story choice it didn't happen, weird as it sounds.
Nowadays, similar to the sinking house in CR, I just don't see any alternative for this particular film that would have felt as satisfying for the majority of audiences as the one we got. And it's worth saying that while we can discuss and overanalyse this ending till the cows come home, I know plenty of people - not necessarily big Bond fans - who watched NTTD and were emotionally affected by Bond's death. So this certainly wasn't a failure of a choice, however unusual it was.
Whenever I look back on arguments I myself made I just don't find them insightful anymore. Stuff about how the story was supposedly working 'too hard' to establish the mechanics of the nanobots and lead up to Bond's death (the Calvin Dyson argument I guess you can say. As much as I enjoy his film reviews it's a bit of a silly argument in hindsight - of course the film is going to foreshadow Bond's death and have him die in a relevant way to the story. Just because one is a bit sad or annoyed that they killed Bond off doesn't mean storytelling in general is now in some way to blame). Any alternative endings amongst fans either miss the point entirely, having Bond walk into the sunset happily with his family (which would have been far more unusual than Bond dying I'd argue), or give him more ambiguous death (again, pretty much in an effort to not have Bond 'die' while, for all intents and purposes, he pretty much dies in many of these hypothetical endings anyway). I would say @Pierce2Daniel's first post sums up the strengths of the ending very well.
Is it the best ending in the Bond franchise? Can't say one way or the other. I'd say probably not, and NTTD certainly isn't my favourite Bond movie, but that's just my opinion. For better or for worse it's the end of the Craig Bond storyline. I do think sometimes as fans our attachment to this character can really cloud our judgment though, regardless of whether it's complaining about sinking houses, or Bond going into space, or indeed being blown up. Sometimes we have to look at these films with fresh eyes to get something out of them, or failing that just not watch them. Plenty of other Bond films to pick from!
Anyway, rant over ;)
Or Mathis?
The infamous dumpster death scene
Regarding the CR sinking building, I don't love it because I remember my reaction to it in the cinema: Vesper's betrayal of Bond was the exciting thing happening in that part of film- I wanted to see Bond's reaction, I wanted to see the dramatic fallout of it. Him following her, the tension of it, the slight unreadability of Craig's Bond all made it more exciting. And I remember feeling frustrated because instead of all that we had this slightly rote Bond action scene getting in the way of it. Maybe if it wasn't there I'd be saying that the film needs an action scene because it's a Bond movie, but regardless I just don't think it's integrated all that well.
To be honest I think to Mission Impossible Rogue Nation, which is a big action spy movie, and apparently there was a big action climax planned, but they found that the film just didn't want it and they ended with a couple of fights and then a very small scene where the villain gets his comeuppance, and it's immensely satisfying and doesn't, I think, miss not having a big action scene there at all.
Exactly. Very true. Plus, Mathis' death really works because of the build-up. The airplane conversation between him and Bond. Those kind of scenes help make tragic moments work.
If I have a nitpick, I'd say perhaps we could have had a bit more build up with maybe a quick scene of Vesper being on edge, but I think in practice it's one of those things where it would just slow the story down and lessen the impact. Oh well.
However, there is a curious side in me that would be interested in the alternative reality version that is considerably lower key.
The best Craig Bond ending is CR
M informs Bond, who has returned to service, that the organization behind Le Chiffre threatened to kill Vesper's lover unless she became a double agent. When Bond denounces Vesper as a traitor, M reasons that she likely made a deal with White by trading the winnings for Bond's life.
Realizing Vesper left her phone to help him, Bond checks the contacts and locates Mr. White at an estate in Lake Como. He shoots White in the leg and introduces himself: "The name's Bond, James Bond".
Other than that I personally prefer any version of the traditional classic Bond (happy) ending
Bond overloads the nuclear pool reactor as the launch commences. Dr. No fights him, but falls into the reactor pool and is boiled to death. Bond frees Ryder before the two escape the island by boat, moments before the base is destroyed. Felix finds the pair adrift at sea after their boat runs out of fuel, and has them towed to safety by a Royal Navy ship. As Ryder passionately kisses him, Bond lets go of the towrope to embrace her.
Bond and Amasova flee in an escape pod as Atlantis is sunk by torpedoes. Amasova picks up Bond's gun and points it at him, but then chooses not to kill him and the two embrace. The Royal Navy recovers the pod and the two spies are seen in an intimate embrace through its porthole, to the astonishment of their superiors on the ship.
I think with NTTD they wanted a shock of a rug pull moment, but that only works once.
I don't know what I would do to fix NTTD, I don't think seeing Bond die would ever work for me to be honest. I think the film having a more serious tone would have helped, but that's just my opinion.
Exactly. If Bond must die, make it a very serious adventure. Femme fatales, big betrayals, suspense, intensity, nail-biting, thrills, inventive action scenes, etc.
There you go. I think this might be the problem for many fans and the ending, as I was saying.
I wouldn’t say the last line is one to laugh at. It’s just a clunky bit of exposition. And of course many people on this forum have praised the Cuba sequence and Paloma, and things like Bond arrogantly bettering Nomi when he gets to MI6. Would those things be cut to make the film more serious? I think some of the lighter moments of NTTD are very good and needed.
To be honest, I just don’t see the logic. Again, a part of me thinks it gets into the territory of not liking the concept of the ending, and doing those mental gymnastics to justify why it doesn’t work. I think if NTTD had been any darker it wouldn’t have worked as a film, let alone a Bond film.
But what if NTTD felt like CR or SF? Those are serious Bond adventures in the same era, with lighter moments...but still gets the balance right.
I don't think SF's dissimilar in the way it blends tones. It's darker and fatalistic in places, but you get those overt crowd cheering moments such as the Aston Martin being revealed, Bond doing his cuffs after jumping on the train, the 'health and safety' and 'he's keen to get on' quips. If SF didn't have that element of humour and pure Bondian swagger it wouldn't be the film it is. Same for CR and things like the sinking house. The main difference between them and NTTD is that SF and CR are slightly more grounded and less 'big' in scale/story.
At any rate I think that comes down to personal opinion. I don't think it should have much impact on how the ending comes off.
I think the attitude of many fans towards the ending of NTTD is comparable to being hypnotised during a show. You can only be hypnotised if you want to (or at least the vast majority of the time this is the case). If you have no desire to cluck around like a chicken or do any of the funny things the hypnotist tells you when under, you won't be receptive to it.
If you don't like the idea of Bond dying, you're more likely to watch it arms crossed, telling yourself how much you don't like this. And you're less likely to be emotionally engaged with it. And in turn try to grapple with this by thinking about what the film did wrong. I'm not saying NTTD is perfect - far from it - but in terms of leading up to Bond's death, setting him up with a family, establishing the nanobots, it's generally coherent and effective - dare I even say well done. At any rate it shouldn't inherently minimise the impact of Bond's last moments. There's no reason it shouldn't be an emotional moment to the majority of viewers. So yeah, I have a bit of a newfound skepticism when people claim not to get anything out of NTTD's ending at all (of course we can all be different, but when there's such a disconnect between what a chunk of Bond fans say, what we're saying about this film, and how many others see it, I think the above is what's going on to some extent).