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
This.
I want Bond to be badass, cool. Live to survive another day, still able to pull the women, show no signs of overt weakness (`I'm sorry, I'm sorry' to Blofeld) even if he was just faking it.
I don't want to feel sorry for Bond, which is what I felt like at the end of NTTD, like he was a tragic case and the only thing to put him out of his misery was to blow him up. I still want to walk out of the cinema on a high, wanting to be Bond. NTTD was the first Bond film I walked out of the cinema feeling the opposite - depressed, and sorry for the character.
After the dreadful 2 years we have just had, this is the last feeling I wanted when leaving the cinema, especially after a Bond film.
Well, it's a good thing then, I suppose, that NTTD doesn't really show us daddy Bond all that much because after the big parental revelation, we're constantly running around, shooting things up, ... He spends about as much time taking care of Mathilda as he does being married to Tracy in OHMSS, another incident of Bond choosing a normal life.
And for those constantly hiding behind Fleming, pretending they know the books inside-out: read them again! Bond contemplates leaving the service in pursuit of a settled life more than once. It really isn't so dramatically or painfully out of the ordinary as some want to make us believe.
And yes, dying makes him mortal. Were we ever asked to believe that James Bond is not a mortal man, then? Also, to say that the act of dying in these particular circumstances and after all he's been through renders his life "normal", is a ridiculous claim. "Oops, Iron Man is dead! Yeah, don't like that Tony Stark very much, what with his normal life and all."
Okay, I will give you this. NTTD didn't end on Christmas in Turkey or "I'm sooooo good, especially when I'm baaaad". You're right about this film leaving us heartbroken, like OHMSS, in fact. We're gutted. But is this a bad film because you had to return home an emotional wreck? Can a Bond film only be "good" when the final minute sees Bond driving off into the sunset? (OHMSS again?) So I respect, @jetsetwilly, that this may not have been the film you wanted. But it's the film we were given. And I myself and several others like this film, very much in fact. Some of us aren't put off by the ending in such a definitive way, or even not at all. So we are never going to agree, and we don't have to. But some of us can appreciate a Bond film even if it doesn't repeat the same beats all the time.
Once again, James Bond will return. This Bond won't, but James Bond will. There, we can all smile again. I'm not going to mourn Bond until the day when someone announces there will never be another Bond ever again.
I imagine if OHMSS had never been written by Fleming, and that it was EON that decided to do a story where Bond falls in love and gets married, there would be the gate keeping saying “YOU CAN’T DO WHAT FLEMING DIDN’T”.
I see that same attitude in regards to Bond learning he has a child. Meaning, it’s okay that Bond has a child but he should remain unaware because that’s how it was done in the books, before Fleming had a chance to maybe concoct a story where Bond does find out. But no, if Fleming never did that, then EON shouldn’t.
And what exactly was preventing Bond from using Skype to speak with Madeleine and Mathilde until they found a way to reverse the nanobots? Also, if Nomi hadn't been such a hothead 00, she wouldn't have killed Valdo Obruchev until he'd served all his uses. By killing Valdo, she is partly responsible for Bond's death if we go down the nanobot infection gave him no other option route.
What?!? This is getting out of hand.
Nanobots are eternal. Period.
There's no cure.
PS. I want to see the bold parts in a sequel called All the Calls in the World.
Having it be his last film is fine but using it as a marketing tool, especially given the ending feels odd.
This would be one film out of all of them, that I would want people to go in with the potential for another Daniel film. Driving to the first viewing I kept thinking I hope it's a good last film for Daniel to bow out on. I had that feeling of finality before the gunbarrell and I don't know whether that hurt my enjoyment of NTTD
So not only does he run the risk of people who have his best interests at heart testing on him to disable the nanobots with these people also doing their best to keep him in isolation and not accidentally touch him (and accidents invariably would happen)... But say the worst does come to pass and a group with more questionable motives find out, take him, and then experiment on him. Do you think they're going to care if they get the nanobots on them that will kill his lover and child? And this could be a realistic scenario given they were all in a rush to get to the island in the first place.
He's given an impossible situation. Every time it comes back to this you also have to remember that had he wanted to leave he very likely couldn't. He was bleeding out and the likelihood of him surviving was quite probably close to zero. Would he have tried had he not been infected? Sure. But at that point when he has the nanobots he knows in his heart of hearts that it would be for nought. He knew those wounds were fatal.
But then that brings up something else that doesn't have the same emotional punch (from the film's perspective to an audience member - not the actual plot point). You may complain about him sacrificing himself for the greater good in this manner... But imagine how you'd have felt if he just fell face down on the floor and bled to death. You'd be even more PO'd.
EDIT: Added a bit.
Personally, I think people are giving the film too much thought. It's a Bond film, roll with it. Yes, the ending is pretty dramatic, I get it. But does anyone start watching OHMSS, arms folded, because we know what happens at the end? Is the romance between Bond and Tracy tainted and is her presence in the film devastating because of the end? Is Bond's proposal scene vomit-inducing because of the darker shadows that hang over it?
Now then, are we never going to enjoy NTTD for about 98% of the movie because of the ending? I know the answer; I have gone back to rewatch the movie and I've had a blast from start to finish.
And in case someone screams FLEMING!, yes, I've been a good boy, I've read all the books, several times. It's a non-argument. "Fleming wouldn't have done this." Fleming wouldn't have had an oil tanker swallow up nuclear submarines; he wouldn't have shot Bond into space; he wouldn't have hollowed out a volcano; he wouldn't have built an invisible car... Shall we continue?
But… Craig’s Bond is dead. He’s not coming back. Is Hamlet any less tragic a play just because you can see a different theatre troupe perform it a year or two later?
Yup! You have a different way of trying to reason with people than I do but all this and more.
I wish people could just take it on face value and enjoy the story thats presented for all its flaws and ups and downs. Bond will return yadda yadda but alas...
Precisely. Bond will return. Not this Bond, but Bond.
Changed his ancestry too, after originally writing him as the most English seeming character ever. Which ironically has led to “we can’t have a black/asian Bond because he’s of Scottish and Swiss ancestry”.
And yeah, when I read the books, I was really surprised by how iconoclast he was. I’d gotten the impression from the fansites that the novels were all very LTK. Grim and gritty thrillers. But that really wasn’t the case at all. The cheeky self-depricating fourth wall breaks, weird little passages like him imagining an awkward meeting between all the dead Bond girls in heaven, his nightmare about being a boring chicken farmer. The common sentiment amongst fans now seems to that the novels should be treated as a bible, but I don’t think Fleming himself took them that seriously himself.
And even if he had, the series would’ve died on its arse years ago if they’d just stuck religiously to the books (I think we needed Moore to escape Connery’s shadow). As I was saying in another thread, when a character lasts this long and becomes part of the national consciousness like this, I think they transcend the source material. Fleming died over half a century ago. His novels will be public domain in a few years (already are in Canada). Bond is essentially a legend now, and you’ve got to expect different takes on old legends, imo. The RSC wouldn’t still be selling all those tickets to Shakespeare plays if they hadn’t started messing around with them.
Most of us would probably be happy with a traditional Bond film every two years, but the wider public have loads of those to enjoy already, and the blockbuster landscape is already oversaturated with other franchises that currently hold way more cultural capital (superheroes now are what spies were in the 60s). I can sympathise with the people who aren’t fans, because I struggled to adjust to the Craig era myself for a few years. But I’ve also seen the Craig era get the attention of so many people who I know wouldn’t care about a TND sort of Bond film, or even a TLD sort of one, and I think the box office shows I’m not alone in knowing those sorts of people. So, I think that sort of experimentation is probably important for keeping the brand alive.
You see, Bond 26 is where I have my own concerns going forwards. It's almost a given by many of you that Bond 26 is going to be a resounding success and not encounter any of the problems NTTD has brought up. Until I know more about B26, I'm afraid I can't share your wild optimism.
I used to feel that way until this happened (@2:10 mark):
This was different. Bond on the verge of tears? This was a human element I had rarely seen (save for the end of OHMSS). And I liked it. DC's version of Bond has been more relatable and thus more impactful.
Barbara Broccoli.
You've got Spiderman and the Avengers for that type of content now. Bond's moved on.
No one knows what to expect from B26. Until we hear further I don’t see the point in being unnecessarily negative.
I make this point as well. I'd go further and say that Fleming did all kinds of things fans would hate if they thought it was Purvis & Wade rather than Fleming.
Only if you hadn't read the books and weren't that familiar with the novels.
I have no thoughts about B26 yet. I am still in the now, with NTTD just released. B26 is distant future. When it comes, I will see it and make up my mind about it. But I see no rational reason for either worrying or being optimistic about a film that is highly speculative at this point. I am, however, very confident that what played out in NTTD won't influence the new film much.
Er, yeah, that would obviously be a prerequisite for that scenario? :-??
Then I'm not really sure what point you were making. People who haven't read Fleming demand Fleming, even if they don't recognise what Fleming is?
As is, Fleming soaked Blofeld's story arc in coincidence, and people don't like that movie Blofeld is steeped in it as well. :-??
I don't have issues with Blofeld in YOLT. Had NTTD played out the same way, I would have much preferred that. Safin as a villain meant nothing to Bond, whereas Blofeld did. There was a much bigger payoff. Safin was a waste.
As for giant squid's, this seems to be one of the things Fleming haters keep falling back on to emphasise their point that going back to the books for unused material is bad.