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
It's called, "conflict", and making obstacles harder at every turn for the protagonist. If these things are not found in a script, the script won't make it through one pass of a studio reader.
One thing I will give you from your list is the character of Nomi, who is a great character on paper but for me was wasted in this film and should have been kept for a different one.
The rest though? All great drama, I think.
Well, he returns to help Felix as his duty/it’s the right thing to do. And I suppose blowing up the island itself was in the name of duty. But yes I suppose so, he sacrificed himself for his family.
As @peter said to create compelling obstacles and tell an engaging story. I do agree with @Burgess that it might be a case of slightly too much plot (and I think Safin’s motives should have stuck to being about revenge) but it’s not unusual for a Bond film.
I think if Bond has left the service and then returns then it's totally natural to show us his replacement. But yeah, they didn't really find a role for her in the story beyond that and she was a bit wasted.
I think the story of NTTD holds up though.
He kills himself because he can't be in the same room with the one he loves and touch them. That's really it. It would maybe work for me if I believed his romance and his love for Madeleine, but for me it came across forced and unconvincing.
I feel like Bond returns to help Felix because Felix is a "brother from Langley" rather than any sense of duty. Bond would have been in retirement for some time before Felix rung him up: I don't really think it's duty that makes him want to get back in the game if he didn't get involved in a different way.
Bond then gets wrapped in after Felix's death and it becomes about duty for a period. He finds and kills Ash. Then he of course takes down Safin because it's right. But I always saw it as "one last go," a favour, rather than "I'm coming back." And I mean the sacrifice can't be put down to anything other than family. Once he opened the doors the world was saved and if he was about duty he'd get out alive to serve another day.
But he dies for his family and that's the main "punch" that the death is supposed to bring. And that ultimately is one of the places where it loses me personally (and maybe some others): why do I care so much about Madeleine and Mathilde?
Wait, hold on there: Does this mean a BIG plot point and driver in NTTD was inspired by the TV show, Pushing Daisies ?
Impossible for me to answer since I haven't got the slightest clue about what Pushing Daisies is. Sorry. Maybe rephrase the question?
But what I do know is this:
Craig's Bond is all Vesper. The graveyard scene in Matera he says "I miss you" before leaving his note. Why did he say that? That's something you would say if it was a parent or child that had died - and not a long lost love interest you should have gotten over. So there are certainly feelings there for her still. The love of his live, with Madeleine then falling into the if-you-can't-be-with-the-one-you-love-then-love-the-one-you-are-with category.
What's even worse: he put's her on a train, years pass, he accidentally meets her again, argues with her and BAM he's suddenly all teary-eyed "I love you" again with no hints or scenes of romance prior? No, that does not work for me. Especially because we have a blueprint for Bond being in love: his relationship with Vesper in CR. Now, that chemistry there was the best I've probably ever witnessed between Bond and a woman on screen. Bond and Madeleine - probably one of the worst.
It's very broadly like the YOLT book in a way. Bond accepts a comeback mission he's intrigued by, personal angles to it crop up/become apparent which spurs Bond on further, and by the end he gets a chance at happiness (even if it means in YOLT living in ignorance about his past) which is undercut by the endings. Again, very broad, and obviously specific motivations will be different, but it's interesting.
Dunno if you're thinking about it a bit too much with the Vesper thing. I thought it was one of the best bits of the film. A small moment, but understated and so well done (Craig's acting is magnificent in that moment too, and I love the reuse of the Vesper theme, so impactful). The literary Bond went back to visit Vesper's grave annually as well so it's very fitting.
Dunno if this is thinking about it too deeply myself, but the death of a friend or partner isn't a straightforward case of 'getting over it' even if you've emotionally moved on from that initial tragedy. You can still miss them and have those moments of reflection about them. I think in the film it's more about Madeline wanting Bond to completely leave behind his old life (he seemingly hasn't revisited Vesper's grave as much as his literary counterpart did).
I think that moment actually made the Madeline subplot a bit more impactful for me. Much like Fleming's Bond, Craig's Bond effectively had two chances at a happy life away from the Service, but fate brings him back. It's one of the weird tragedies of the character.
No it's as Reflsin says, if he left the island then the virus could/would find its way to them and kill them. He stops them from being in danger.
I find this quite a strangely dispassionate and logical way of looking at something which isn't a matter of logic at all.
Unfortunately losing a loved one (especially a long term girlfriend or whatever) isn't quite as straightforward as that.
Craig plays it beautifully. It's not tearful or melodramatic at all. There's almost this look of realisation as he says 'I miss you', as if he's finally found that way of articulating it. Love how understated it is.
I vote for Ludwig Göransson.
In fiction I can buy that Bond spends 15 years trying to move on from a love affair that lasted what? Weeks? Some months? Because it felt convincing on screen. In real life - if I had a friend like that - I would probably slap him occasionally and tell him that he didn't have enough time in the bank with her, to justify going 15 bloody years with a broken heart, unless there's some trauma involved.
Well, in my own experience of losing people close to me (in this case unfortunately a couple of friends, so perhaps not the same as Mr. Bond's situation) it's less a case of completely 'getting over it'. As I said there's always moments of reflection and a sense that you miss someone. Sometimes you're not quite sure how those things have affected you until you really have to confront it. But as you said everyone's different.
Anyway, we're talking about fiction here. I got the sense it was less a case of Bond being completely hung up on Vesper for 15 years (I mean, the guy went back to the Service, clearly had plenty of other affairs, and excelled in his job in the 15 years afterwards. He even says to Madeline he left her behind a while back). I think it's more a case where Madeline wanted to start a new life with Bond so felt it best for him to properly confront it one time and leave it behind him (again, it seems like he hadn't visited Vesper's grave at all compared to Fleming's Bond. It's more a case where he's pushed it all away which makes sense in his profession as an assassin/spy, but not so much when you're settling down).
Daniel Craig explains why the romance that nearly broke James Bond in Casino Royale is still tormenting him in No Time to Die
https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/no-time-to-die-daniel-craig-vesper-lynd-haunted-james-bond/
I mean, he's not wrong. You would be quite naturally mistrusting if you'd been betrayed like that and your profession needed you to be mistrustful to a large extent in order to survive. I can definitely see why it wouldn't be desirable for a long term relationship.
I don't get the sense he was thinking about Vesper every night or even really mourning her on even an annual basis. Like I said it was just something he pushed back. Again, in a top agent/assassin a pointed mistrust of everyone around you is a pretty desirable quality anyway.
https://deadline.com/2024/09/james-bond-producer-barbara-broccoli-qatari-gala-dinner-in-venice-1236076375/
I can agree with that. I think it was the writing that hurt their characters. Of the big names cast in Bond ally/villain/woman roles, I feel that Javier Bardem as Silva is the rare big name who works in his casting. It came down to the writing, honestly, and the storyline itself. Honorable mention: Albert Finney as Kincade, who was charming and helpful in his brief role. Also, Ben Whishaw as Q, he did feel different (in a good way), to the non-replaceable Desmond Llewellyn. Same with Moneypenny, props to EON for TRULY making her different to any we would have expected with her.
Yeah. I think because there wasn't too much talk or hype about the characters. Also, Skyfall triumphed because there were slight worries...as it was Mendes' first time at action filmmaking, so since people weren't expecting much from him, they were pleasantly surprised. So not hyping Mendes, made him sort of a dark horse and it favoured him. Albeit there was some hype towards Harris and Bardem, but they came out well.
Over all, the consistently dark tone of Skyfall helped the film. It's why M's death hits hard and it works. M's death works a whole lot better than Bond's death.
That's the thing that Lazenby, Dalton and Brosnan all have in common, they have chemistry with their leading ladies, the sense of familiarity and comfort while watching them with their leading ladies on screen.
The thing with Craig could be applied to Connery: one needs a specific actress to bring out the chemistry in either of them (the chemistry only worked in Honor Blackman, Akiko Wakabayashi, and Daniela Bianchi, but he didn't have any chemistry with Ursula Andress, Mie Hama, Claudine Auger and Jill St. John; I would argue that the lack of chemistry between Connery and St. John was due to Connery being out of shape and being older looking in contrast to St. John's youthful looks).
First loves are tricky.
As far as chemistry goes, I see it with Craig and Seydoux in NTTD but not in SP. If anything, I think she should have been angrier/more distrustful in SP, playing up her psychological issues rather than Bond's.
And I certainly think Connery had chemistry with St. John. Quite a bit, in fact.
It's funny how differently we all react to these things. I, for one, am far more convinced of Bond's love for Madeleine than most, it seems. I see these two 'loners' gravitating towards each other, with a passion that really builds in the Moroccan hotel, and culminates later in the film. A seemingly cold attitude on the surface doesn't mean there isn't something deeper going on. I always buy the love between these two. With ease.
Kind of amazing how every couple posts we discover a new way the Craig films were bad. Personally I loved them.