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
And the next Bond is the adventures of Mathilde Bond?
After all, Barbara said James Bond will never be played by a woman, and that we need to create women's characters instead.
Which is what they did with NTTD. They created a woman Bond. So that's one possibility that NTTD is a backdoor pilot to the new Bond. Mathilde Bond.
Can't wait!
And that’s why I don’t view it as a sad ending. Certainly it’s more optimistic than CR or SF were. Maybe a lot of those most critical of the decision don’t have families themselves to really understand the point it was making… at least, not happy ones. I dunno, just thinking out loud…
No they didn’t. They created a woman 007, for probably 20 minutes of screen time. Don’t make strawman arguments; you can’t just make up things to get upset about.
They said James Bond Will Return. That, by all accounts of the people in charge, will mean a male James Bond, not Mathilde Bond or anyone else.
It doesn’t matter. Everyone will feel how they want to feel and be upset with what they want to be upset about. It’s pointless to keep going around and around.
The fact that you only view their deaths as “shock value” says a lot. So what’s the point of killing Tracy? “Shock value”?
Anyway to get back on Bond topic, I met up with my cousin’s fiancé who had just watched a screener of NTTD. She was never really a fan of Craig as Bond, but despite that, the ending actually made her cry because she got that emotionally invested. I imagine the filmmakers love hearing those kinds of stories of audiences getting that swept up!
Did they though? There was a minor attempt between DN and FRWl, but from GF onwards I don't think they bothered with it at all.
Of all the 20 films, I think the Connery ones are the closest there is to an “arc” as it began with Bond’s first encounter with SPECTRE in DN and his final confrontation in DAF. It’s not very elaborate, but it’s a thread we see between the films besides GF.
Eventually NTTD will be regarded as a shock value movie because of the ending. No more, and no less. Because the ending towers above everything else that happens. And no, I think killing Tracy in OHMSS was a major way to expand and open the door for the evolution of Bond for the future. It had a purpose. But Lazenby blew his chance. Oh well, he is a terrible actor anyway.
At least it’ll always be regarded more favorably than trash like QOS.
DN-DAD is the same man for me though, CR-NTTD is another one.
DN-DAD is very loose with its continuity, but the title sequence of OHMSS, the Sean gadgets in George’s desk, the Tracy references in later episodes, and the old gadgets in DAD are convincing enough for me.
CR-NTTD is a different affair, with a new man introduced in the first film and him dying in the last. Fair enough.
I like it either way, both the more ambiguous suspend-your-disbelief winks between 1962 and 2002, as well as the clear timeline from 2006 to 2021.
Funny how there are videos on YT trying to tie all 25 films together as to make it all fit. There is even one that claims ‘you have been watching the Bond films the wrong way’.
Is it really so difficult to accept that it doesn’t have to fit, what’s wrong with a bit of ambiguity?
Check out the QOS appreciation thread. Many there would disagree. At any rate, I am done posting about NTTD, like I said in earlier post. Time to move on and leave it at being a bad memory.
Sounds more depressing than NTTD.
What’s to like? The cars in the PTS going VROOM VROOM? Bond being terribly written?
The death of Bond caused them to have to wrap up all the villains, because Bond must be there to protect the world
Given this era I wouldn't be surprised if Madeline and Mathilde got back to Matera and discover Mathilde has an arch nemesis from her past, who pushed her off the slide or something
NTTD is in many, many ways better - starting with the beautiful locations we can fully enjoy (even I would have liked a bit more of Jamaica myself) and there is so much to celebrate and like in it. I (strangely) did not mind the ending ... because personally I doubt the next actor's tenure (which will come) will be able to pull me in as much as Craig's tenure did. I became a Bond fan (like many) at age 10 and Sean Connery will remain my favourite - but I became the huge Bond fan I am today due to Craig's interpretation. To me NTTD is waaaay better than SP and even with this for sure unexpected ending I now have 4 really good Bond movies and I am very happy with it. I will go and see any new Bond movie for sure and like I enjoyed them all from Roger or Timothy or Pierce - but I am quite sure they will make it different again and I will remain a fan but maybe not to such extent I am for Connery's and Craig's tenures.
'I did my best not to.'
That's funnier than getting into some deep water or New York New York, no?
Not if she has a sex change first.
You weren’t in the writers room. Critiquing the film on its own terms is one thing, but making up an imaginary motivation for the ending and then getting angry about it just makes you look like a baby throwing their toys out of the pram.
We ALL love Bond in different flavours and that is why the franchise has endured! It's why it WILL endure, too!
I did enjoy most of the film. It is visually stunning, substantial and ambitious.
Did not mind them killing 007 just disliked its failed balance between brutal (the short coda) and mawkish (his monologue on the island). Missions going tits up and personnel dying IS a real and gritty fact from which Fleming no doubt would not have shied. It does no harm to wake us up to that. I would just rather they had not crammed and rushed it so much.
The 5 years / 5 year old kid thing is oddly a LOT like Iron Man, as is the death.
Love. Fatherhood. Death: Craig deserved 3 movies to confront ALL those. For all the shock value of the ending, it is ironically as glossy and sanitised and exaggerated as space lasers and invisible cars, thereby rendering it redundant.
Had we known he would die, in advance? This could have been an event, a Bond to end all Bonds, possibly following to the letter rather than spirit, some Fleming template?
You cannot make another On Her Majesty's Secret Service or remake it as that comes off like a hustle (TWINE has similar issue btw: easily remedied had Elektra's turn been the final scene twist and her death maybe the closing shot?).
So I suspect, alas, that NTTD will NOT age well and become simply a pub quiz trivia point: that film where Bond dies; same way you can get 'that one with the exploding milk bottles' as a team point.
Craig gave us, to my mind, a profound, perfect and punchy trilogy: Casino, Quantum, Skyfall. I leave it there. But I respect the endeavours of the subsequent outings and all who love them are entitled to do so, unreservedly.
Bond 26: gimme a third way centrist mid road adventure. Not bland but not too dark either. GOLDENEYE? TOMORROW NEVER DIES? LIVING DAYLIGHTS. RUSSIA WITH LOVE. SPY WHO LOVED ME. SKYFALL..et al..that sorta tone?!
Here endeth the lesson : happy tuesday ;) x
I'll see what I can do. But the mods might reject it for copyright and unlawful distribution.
Meanwhile, I had not seen this review before. It best sums up my own feelings about the film:
https://www.cnet.com/news/no-time-to-die-review-daniel-craig-says-goodbye-to-james-bond-in-style/
^Thank you!
:-? :bz :-q =D> :-SS :-B ;;) :P
*comeanddive*
I can imagine some people getting massive gasps.
Title Song:
New Bond theme:
Watch yourself, now...
I'm fine with them not making any more Bond movies. They've made enough, and the subversion is only going to get worse as time goes on, IMO.
Hmm.. I'm not convinced they have done all that can be done with the character.
There is a universe in which we can have a serious actor (even classically trained such as TD) bring a moderate but fresh take on 007, part fantasy, part heightened reality.
Somewhere between DC's intensity & Dalton's Fleming-esque interpretation, but with enough self-awareness to make it fun, such as with Connery's early pseudo-realistic plots.
You'd need a v good physical actor who is willing to understand the character.
The writing is key - and can easily be more in line with the style of the M:I series, without copying it - hence creating a visually pleasing action adventure that gives it's lead and main characters enough time to breathe.
More snooping around, building the plot - less pure action, less country-hopping.
Good plot development should negate the need for DC-universe melodrama. It CAN be done, but do Babs and MichaelGW have the nouse to find the right kind of writer(s)...?
Subversion can be a good thing. Sticking to the same formula for everything leads to stagnation, which it seems is what some people want for some reason. Shaking things up exists to allow the old ways to come back stronger and more interesting.
Agreed, and of course we still have all the Connery - Brosnan films for people to continue watching.
Having said that, I'd love a modern Bond film where he checks into a hotel room and looks around for bugging like in the old days.