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
Clone theoryreally is looking likely.
Should have listened to PanchitoPistoles. He told you over a year ago that Seydoux will have a large role in the film.
And what if, this person that we can't see very well, is much much older ? Like no Madeleine, no a younger Madeleine, but Madeleine mother ? We know (from Tildsley) that the snow chalet was Madeleine is mother's house, and we know that Bond go back to this house in a no-snowy time before the off-road chase. Could Madeleine mother still can live here (and be the reason that Bond, Madeleine + the child we saw on photo in Toyota go there)? Could also explain why the stunt double used in the Norway bridge for the blonde with Bond seems old, older than the one used for Madeleine in Matera chase ?).
)BTW, did somebody have the photo of the child in the toyota ? I couldn't find it anymore)
It can't be a clone....surely we would be in DAD territory here. Using cloning has a whiff of changing the DNA of a North Korean Colonel into Toby Stephens....a bit too sci-fi for 007
I'm convinced that Bond will be Mathilde's father and that he will die saving her at the end of the film. Hence, why it is only Madeline and Mathilde in the car at the end. The call sheet is clear that Bond is not in the scene, perhaps the 'story' Madeleine tells is about Mathilde's father. We know Seydoux felt the story was emotional and made her cry
Kinda like Logan
Could end with that, and at the same time setting up for a new actor playing Bond in the future. But then again, why kill off Bond.
They have only replaced him in the past with other actors and we accept that but not so sure we would accept a dead bond at all, and then a fresh start.
You just reboot and start again from scratch....with this guy preferably:
I'm a big believer that the Craig series is self-enclosed saga within the franchise. It had a clear beginning, middle and now it needs an end. The series can then reboot and start again totally anew.
Still, just replace the actor. But don't kill of the character, reboot or not.
I agree. We've been promised "an emotionally satisfying end" to the Craig era. To me that means something bad ass along the lines of the final scene in CR.
Who?
Killing Bond is not the only way of achieving an ending similar to what you are describing, and is in fact the weakest one they could possibly come up with. Bond is a constant in the world. Killing him would take away the magic from the cinematic version of the character, and would taint his durability as an icon. He is always there when we need him! I really hope this is not what they have decided to do, as it will automatically drop NTTD in my estimation regardless of how well made it is.
Rebooting/changing actor is a difficult transition under the best circumstances. Why make it harder?
I think if the arc towards his death is well built, then it could work. In actual fact it would lend the piece real gravitas. I can imagine Fukunaga and Craig would want to do something along these lines. I don't think you should look at Bond as a piece of 'iconography', he's a character and in that sense he should be capable of having an emotional journey and potentially dying. I'm think less about the 'franchise' or 'brand' and more about the movie and character itself within NTTD.
But it's purely speculation on my part based on the fact that Bond isn't in the Vantage at the end and it's Madeleine driving with Mathilde. This might not even be the end. We will have to wait and see....
The bigger question here is Mathilde. Who the hell is she?!? We know she is a 5 year old French girl. So my guess is that after the Matera break-up, Madeleine realises she is pregnant. Perhaps this was the big night....
This would make her 5 years old.....Also, there is a precedent in Fleming for Bond having a child in YOLT. Making James Bond a father is certainly an interesting hook, more interesting is the notion that the famous womaniser now has a daughter. Perhaps it's the thing to make him change his attitude towards women slightly. There's room for some humour to be explored there.
This is an @antovolk question. The word on corona is so confusing, I hear it's better than hear it's worse. I hear we need to stay at home, now I hear it's fine to protest in crowds.
I'm totally lost on this point. I guess marketing is going to gear up in July with Tenet. But is Tenet even coming in July?! We are 6 weeks out and i have zero clue.
It's just one of those things. Some people will be fine with the idea.
After 24 films, gotta add something different I guess. I'm not too keen on the idea of it, but if the film itself is fantastic, then I will learn to accept it.
You can be a character, have an emotional journey with that character,
reveal new things about that character, and still be an icon. These things can, and have thus far, run in parallel. Ironically, killing him is what would cheapen his character. Bond is not a superhero, or a comic book character; killing him and then resurrecting him a few years later, no questions asked, shouldn't simply be done willy nilly.
It very well could make perfect sense in NTTD. But conceptually, when you've measured it all up, it's a counter-productive idea.
It's still indeed set for July and everything is still ramping up towards that - it's the film the global cinema reopenings are being built around. The problem is that it's all a house of cards. Yes, the UK is still set for July 4 reopenings, most major markets will be ready to go for then...except potentially the US major cities. If New York and LA say no to July (they contribute 12 to as much as 25% of the US box office for a major film like this), the entire thing likely collapses. San Francisco has already ruled out August so cinema owners are on edge whether NY and LA follow their lead.
Anyway, if the plan still sticks, I will be shocked if Bond isn't out front with a new trailer in front of Tenet. Except Tenet and Antebellum (out August, new trailer recently dropped too) everyone has paused their campaigns until cinemas do reopen and there is more clarity on the months following that.
Additional note...dubbing of the film slowly being finished up in lockdowns around the world
EON will only decide about November AFTER Tenet, Mulan and Wonder Woman 1984 came out. If those movies do good numbers, Bond will arrive in November. If they tank, he won't.
Is it resurrecting him if it's a new actor/new story/timeline etc?
I know I've said this before but this to me is genuinely no different than what we've been seeing with - admittedly - superheroes like Batman and Superman etc.
Mind you, I can definitely see the concern here with regards to how separately should the Craig films be treated from the rest of the franchise - there is probably a reason the Super Bowl spot explicitly said 'the 25th film' and the marketing never really leant into the 'finale' factor. That being said, there was a quote from MGW in one of the big magazine features that the Craig era is a 'miniseries within the series'. They've already done Bond's 'genesis' with Casino Royale. Trying to have it both ways with NTTD by trying to keep the vague-ish loose/nonexisting continuity with the preceding 20 films would be to me a real betrayal of that attempt - you have to follow through I'd say.
Absolutely...
I would say yes, it is. It's still the character of James Bond that would be resurrected.
But alas, if that's what they've decided to do, I'll just have to lump it, I suppose. It would be a shame for me, as I've loved everything I've seen about No Time To Die apart from this detail. It just happens to be a sizeable one!
Mind you, the series is known for ignoring sizeable plot details from one film to the next, so I can understand the counter argument too.
Don't remember the source. Pretty sure one the other guys in here knows, like @antovolk
[/quote]
I think Michael Wilson mentioned it in an interview, saying it was the longest yet at almost 20 minutes.
The plot, following the clapperboards, isn't that hard to piece together. I wrote this up last year.
https://www.ajb007.co.uk/post/964203/#p964203
I totally forgot that. Which is weird considering I'd been hoping that Bond 25 would be an adaptation of YOLT for years.
Do you think you could quickly give an updated rundown of the plot with this new info that we have?