NO TIME TO DIE (2021) - First Reactions vs. Current Reactions

4EverBonded

The series will continue. I am happy to make a bet on that. B-)
I think NTTD is a very satisfying end to Daniel's Bond story. And with the film being so bold, and with that story arc and that ending, it occurs to me that does make the next Bond film wide open for possibilities - it could go in many directions. That's great!

Meanwhile, I look forward to the dvd of NTTD and dissecting it bit by bit. It is not perfect, but I like it so very much. Also, do any of you know if there is a book being made on this one? I think there is ... please let me know. Thanks!

sworddevil1

What Craig Bond film is most similar to his acting style in NTTD? Seems like he is like Fleming’s Bond in CR and QOS, lighter tone in Skyfall, and much lighter in SP.

JohnBarry

I preferred Madeline in NTTD compared with Spectre but she still is massively inferior to Tracy and Vesper, and yet the film is desperate to try to put her at the same level as the other two.

imranbecks

4EverBonded wrote: »

The series will continue. I am happy to make a bet on that. B-)
I think NTTD is a very satisfying end to Daniel's Bond story. And with the film being so bold, and with that story arc and that ending, it occurs to me that does make the next Bond film wide open for possibilities - it could go in many directions. That's great!

No doubt. Which was why I stayed put until the end hoping to see "James Bond will return" so I know the franchise would continue, thankfully it was there right at the end of the credits.

But I won't forgive them for killing off Craig's Bond. Could've been handled better without killing him off. But that's that.

There is the making of book coming out soon.. https://www.amazon.com/No-Time-Die-Making-Film/dp/1789093597/?_encoding=UTF8&pf_rd_p=3ce1b876-0a55-4df3-b831-f015e3475dd6&pd_rd_wg=40m4K&pf_rd_r=E4QVJRTZ5F1HNB3F2ZY9&pd_rd_w=E9etm&pd_rd_r=c45d0087-386f-4e86-8396-b9fcf9565054&ref_=ci_mcx_mr_hp_m

MakeshiftPython

sworddevil1 wrote: »

What Craig Bond film is most similar to his acting style in NTTD? Seems like he is like Fleming’s Bond in CR and QOS, lighter tone in Skyfall, and much lighter in SP.

I thought he was much closer to Fleming in SF. He’s too much of a reckless thug in CR, but that was the point, because they wanted to have Craig’s Bond have a character evolution. By the time we got to SP, they were definitely shifting more towards Cinematic Bond, at least in a way that made sense for Craig’s interpretation. IMO, he’s at his best in SP. I loved little touches like leaving behind a bottle of expensive champagne for Q as compensation for the Aston Martin. The Bond in CR probably would have never been that courteous.

4EverBonded

@imranbecks Thanks very much for the info on the book!

Zekidk

MakeshiftPython wrote: »

sworddevil1 wrote: »

What Craig Bond film is most similar to his acting style in NTTD? Seems like he is like Fleming’s Bond in CR and QOS, lighter tone in Skyfall, and much lighter in SP.

IMO, he’s at his best in SP.

We went from CR's "learning how Bond became Bond" to a guy we just pity, in the course of five movies. He is the meanest, smartest and toughest in QoS, IMO.

MakeshiftPython

I think he’s too dumb and impulsive in QOS. I didn’t like how that film was just an extension of Bond Begins. They should have just set it two years after CR, and it’s less about griping over Vesper and more about finally getting some payback from that organization when he finally gets a solid lead.

007InAction

sworddevil1 wrote: »

007InAction wrote: »

Any First Reactions to the 007 gourmet popcorn ? 👍👍👍😉

Is it good?

I don't know. No popcorn release till november in Australia, Maybe ??? 😒
English movie goers must know the taste results ? :-c

Zekidk

MakeshiftPython wrote: »

I think he’s too dumb and impulsive in QOS..

Reckless, but not dumb. That's SP. This user comment from IMDB is hilarious:

"This movie is somewhat watchable if you manage to convince yourself that the hero is Ronald Bond, brother of the more famous and successful James Bond. Ronald of course, unlike his brother, is not the suave charmer and rascal type, but has more of a polish wrestler look and demeanor. Ronald has to rely on fools luck more than skill and intelligence to save his ill conceived ways of handling things. At the start of the movie for instance, he manages to raze two entire blocks of houses whilst trying to perform the simple task of taking out a bad guy with a snipers rifle. Not only that, but he also manages to miss the intended target.

He then proceeds to chase said villain into a helicopter that takes off and flies around over a huge crowd of people. Unlike his brother James, who would simply have disposed of the bad guy and then asked the pilot to land at some convenient location, Ronald finds it a good idea to also try and take out the pilot at the same time although should he succeed, the heli would undoubtedly crash into the crowd. Fools luck saves him this time though.

We get another show of his ineptness later on when he escapes out of a window. Since the bad guys chasing him would have no option but to follow him the same route, his brother would undoubtedly just turned around, wait for them to exit and them pick them off one by one with his Beretta. Ronald here of course just continues running and tries to speed off in his car resulting in a car chase. Fortunately someone must have called in a bomb threat because the city, Rome, is almost completely devoid of people. I know this, because I have been in Rome, and there's people and cars everywhere.

Later on when a woman he has, like only an idiot can, fallen in love with at first sight gets kidnapped by bad guys he proceeds to go after them in an aeroplane. His brother would of course just kept his distance, landed close to where the kidnappers cars stopped, and then snuck over to take care of business. Not so Ronald, he proceeds to attack them with the plane itself, seemingly without a plan. After failing miserably, as predicted, the plane crashes through a wood. Sheer luck however, not skill, eventually makes it so that he ends up at the same place as the baddies, most of them disposing of themselves in a crash, and thus lets him save the girl.

Ronalds plan for the end game has to be seen to be believed. After finding out somehow where the bad guy has his bad guy compound, Ronalds plan is simple; even though the villain knows his name, what he looks like and who he is, he will just go there, waltz right in, hope to be taken to the villain, tell him that he has come to kill him, and then do so. That's it, that's the whole plan. For some reason bringing a girl along also seems like a good idea.

All great fun though but watching James Bonds brother clown and clumsy his way through an adventure like this makes one long for an actual James Bond movie, it has been too long!"

MakeshiftPython

tl;dr

SP is flawed, but it will never bore me like the cheap euro actioner that QOS tries to be. It’s like the kind of forgettable film Gerard Butler makes for a dime.

Zekidk

That's certainly an opinion.

MakeshiftPython

Not just an opinion, but mine. ;)

Roadphill

Pierce2Daniel wrote: »

Okay...I've seen it twice and feel I can now really contextualise my thoughts.

NTTD, at heart, is a traditional Bond film, and that’s part of its pleasures. For a large part of its runtime, NTTD is actually a fun and entertaining film. The extra kicker is that the movie wants to do full justice to the emotional thrust of this being Daniel Craig’s exit from the series. And it does.

It's quite brave that they doubled down on the mythology from the Craig era. In this respect the film has a cumulative impact that, at times, is reminiscent of The Dark Knight Rises.



The opening is terrific. Fukunaga bravely wrong-foots the audience with the introduction in Norway and the sequence is rather haunting. It's involving as the young Madeleine (excellently played by Coline Defaud) is sympathetic and clearly outmatched. The sinister introduction for Safin is also note perfect. The match-cut to Matera is expertly handled and the entire opening sequence is just about the best action setpiece to kick off a Bond film there has been. You have to hand it to Cary Fukunaga for reintroducing the spectre of Vesper for that sequence; it makes Madeleine's 'betrayal' so much more impactful. The best part of the action sequence is that beat inside the car where Madeleine begs Bond to act yet he sits stony faced. It's such a tense bit of character work in the middle of a noisy action sequence.

The titles are a little disappointing. I couldn't get over quite how 'meh' they were. Some images are evocative and compelling. But so much of it feels pared down and uneventful. It's a shame as Billie Eilish's song is so good - but the images are not elevated by the song.



I suppose this feels like the perfect point to discuss Daniel Craig. He has a gift of a role to play this time. I have to say, Craig is seriously excellent in this film. It's up there with CR as his best performance as Bond. Firstly, he looks terrific as the wizened, rough spy. He wears his years well and has that leathery ruggedness to him. He's very convincing as the worldweary spy and killer. The deep lines to his face marking those vivid blue eyes have always had a weary sentiment. They’re flexed to a sharpened effect here as the apparent scars only make each punch feel harder, each kick more difficult to recover from. Linus Sandgren frames Craig as the battle-scarred soldier back from war (DC owes Linus a drink as he photographs him lovingly throughout NTTD).

Craig is having more fun in NTTD and his performance feels looser, more charismatic than ever (dare I even say a little camp). Equally, he's perfect as the stoic, romantic hero. There is a great feeling of finality to his performance, which is aided perfectly by a very game Fukunaga - who isn't afraid to make Bond vulnerable, angry and (as Blofeld says) sensitive.



Fukunaga himself is in seriously good form here. You can see his fingerprints. Especially in the themes (childhood trauma, cycles of violence and nature of time) and the filmmaking craft on display. There is some seriously elegant filmmaking on show here. Also, Fukunaga adds shocks of excitement by employing his rough and tumble, one-camera guerilla-style. That missile silo scene imbues the typically slick Bond with a dirty, visceral edge. It also matches Craig’s brawling style better than any other director he has had in the series.

With Fukunaga at the helm, NTTD aptly balances the franchise’s classic construct yet totally remakes what a Bond movie can be for a fitting, touching end to Craig’s tenure. The film is clearly hinting at OHMSS, but it's really YOLT and TSWLM that Fukunaga is aping. His handling of the relationship with Madeleine feels authentic - Seydoux is as dependently excellent as ever. However, the real performance that wins the film comes in the unexpected form of Lisa-Dorah Sonnet as Mathilde. She's so charming and cute. You can see why Bond actually allows himself to contemplate a life outside of MI6 for her.

Which brings me to that scene. Personally, I loved it. When I saw they were doing it I was totally sold. My heart broke when I saw Safin shoot Bond (something that no villain in 25 films had thought to do) and then poison 007. Craig plays that sequence perfectly; never allowing Bond seem like the victim. It has an almost poetic grace to it. When the missiles landed, I really felt something hit me in the chest emotionally. The ending is perfectly in tune with the sentiment established by Ian Fleming: Bond lives in the shadows and has resigned himself with the knowledge that men like him do not get normal lives. Often Bond would dream about being normal, but know that he had to play the role expected of him. The tragedy for Bond in NTTD, is that he starts as a man without a reason to live and ends with a family worth dying for. The film cruelly reminds Bond that he cannot have a normal life. It's truly heartbreaking. The Louis Armstrong song perfectly adds some honey to that brutal ending.



The film is not perfect though. It's positively drowning in plot and much of the convoluted ideas didn't really come into focus until a second viewing. The simple issue is that Heracles is just silly spy movie nonsense. The internal logic surrounding the device are confusing and illogical. It's a bit daft and feels more like something from a Mission Impossible or Marvel film - perhaps too fantastical for the Craig-era. I cannot fault them for thinking that a global pandemic was a more interesting device than the villain having an atomic bomb or whatever (it's way more timely than we would have thought), but the instantaneous and corny way people died was a bit lame.

There's a cartoonish grandeur to NTTD. At times it feels like 'a bit too much' - especially when they introduce so many gadgets and other silly elements (I'm looking at you Blofeld's magic eyeball). These moments are at odds tonally with the more serious movie NTTD wants to be. In this respect, the film is slightly uneven.

The film's attempts at humour are also pretty bad - especially every scene with David Denick. If you're looking for scenes to cut in this almost three hour film, then you should start there. However, Ben Whishaw is once again the MVP and makes the film particularly funny. His chemistry with Craig is excellent. Ralph Fiennes delivers a marvellous turn as M. His involvement in creating Heracles gives the character some meat to deal with. Naomie Harris is wasted (remember, she even went to Jamaica to promote the launch).

In respect to the new ladies: Paloma is terrific. The espionage logistics between Bond and her are so impeccably timed that they give off a ripe erotic charge. Lashana Lynch is great as Nomi. However, I really wanted to love her character and I just didn't. I feel they wasted the potential friction between having the new and old 007 going head to head. Initially, there is some fun one-upmanship, but it fizzles out with Nomi becoming too deferential to Bond. She is not helped by the fact that she gets lost in the middle of the film. It's shame as Nomi kicks arse, but perhaps suffers as the film is overstuffed with characters.



The jury was a little out on Rami Malek after my first viewing. The people I saw the film with the second time weren't impressed, but I think I like his performance. Malek is suitably creepy and clearly underplaying it (but somehow still chewing the scenery). His dialogue scenes are pretty interesting and he's compelling. I kinda wish Safin had a better motivation. Nevertheless, he has a brilliant lair, a sinister mask and a great costume. That final scene with him and Bond is a hall of fame moment for me.

NTTD is ridiculously watchable entertainment which feels like half its actual running time. Craig is at his most real and emotionally bruised. He never lets you forget that there’s a wounded, vulnerable human being beneath the licensed-to-kill MI6 agent. The movie’s big issue is that it's uneven - both silly and serious. It’s not until the last act when Craig takes the wheel that NTTD finds its emotional balance. It's an interesting choice by Fukunaga - in that NTTD is preposterousness but also touching and surprising.

Simply put, NTTD cements Daniel Craig has the definitive James Bond. Craig leaves it all on the field and goes above and beyond in every scene. For that alone, it gets the 5 star treatment.

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐/5

Great review old chap, even if I don't agree with a lot of it

DiscoVolante

I’m so terribly disappointed in the choices made for this movie. Probably need to rewatch it soon, but have no high hopes that it’ll change my mind. Nothing post Cuba works for me really.

imranbecks

DiscoVolante wrote: »

I’m so terribly disappointed in the choices made for this movie. Probably need to rewatch it soon, but have no high hopes that it’ll change my mind. Nothing post Cuba works for me really.

Likewise. I'm gonna go catch it for a 2nd time soon. Its an enjoyable Bond movie, and a pretty good one too, there is no doubt about that. All good except for how the ending was handled. Could've been so much more......

Zekidk

DiscoVolante wrote: »

Nothing post Cuba works for me really.

Many share that opinion, and I've heard it a lot. Care to elaborate?
For me the movie ended with Bond going full Rambo in the forest and avenging Felix.

DoubleOhDalton

I think the bitter feeling over Bonds death could’ve been lesser for everyone had it happened pre pandemic.

After the last 20 months or so we really needed it to be the Skyfall ending with Bond doing what he does best.

Hell! Here’s a radical idea. Have this film finished with what would normally be a pre title sequence opening. With Bond out on a new mission. (Could’ve utilised the tunnel gun-barrel idea here) and end the film knowing Bond (even with a family) will endeavour.

That’s what we needed hope! Unfortunately the film was made before the world went to shit.

matt_u

This film will become a classic. This is the OHMSS of this generation and a monumental achievement.

Yesterday I watched it for the second time with 5 friends of mine and they all adored it.

bondywondy

SpectreNumberTwo wrote: »

Problem I have with NTTD is that the world really really needed a positive experiance after the last year & half, not some depressing drama queen wanna be, which this was. If we don't get some positivity back soon then we'll all end up slitting our wrists.

I made this point earlier on in the thread. It's a grim irony Barbara Broccoli made a point about returning to the cinema after coronavirus. She said it is a time of celebration and community spirit (or words to that effect - the interview is on YouTube so you can hear the exact quote) ... and she gives the world a film where the hero dies. Not much to celebrate, is there?

MakeshiftPython

If Bond was unceremoniously killed by the villain and failed saving the world, THAT would have been awful. But that’s not the case.

0iker0

Zekidk wrote: »

DiscoVolante wrote: »

Nothing post Cuba works for me really.

Many share that opinion, and I've heard it a lot. Care to elaborate?
For me the movie ended with Bond going full Rambo in the forest and avenging Felix.

The way he avenged Felix reminded me a lot of FYEO's car kick kill. And I liked it because of it.

suavejmf

JohnBarry wrote: »

Did anyone else find the moment where Bond says 'Die Blofeld Die' really odd. I know they needed Bond to touch Blofeld in order to infect him, but it seemed very very forced and undid a lot of the great tension leading up to that moment.

It’s straight from the YOLT novel! I liked that n

bondboy007 wrote: »

When Craig burst onto the scene in CR, he helped breathe new life into the series. It was a reimagining of Bond in a sense, but at the same time - it still felt like a Bond movie. But it was a gritty, more realistic take.

QOS doubled down on that - and then some. It had its issues with the writers strike and script, but it still functioned as a movie that moved Craig’s Bond’s story along. It was billed as the first 007 direct sequel, but in reality, I don’t feel like that was ever that big of a deal. Other than Bond, M, Mr White and Mathis - there was no carryover.

SF is admittedly a good film. But it’s where the Craig era went off the rails IMO. Him being old and over the hill after 2 movies of him “becoming Bond” felt so odd and misguided. But it ended with him back in M’s office and in his role as 007.

Then came SP. EON getting the rights back to Blofeld and SPECTRE prior to this film was the worst thing to ever happen to this film franchise. I was initially hugely excited to see Mr White back, see the continued Quantum storyline, and how it all fit together. But instead it felt like awful fan fiction. They retconned the 3 previous films into a single storyline, gave Blofeld and SPECTRE nothing interesting to do, and then ended with Bond retiring with Madeline (in a relationship that made next to no sense to me).

In the time before Craig announced his return, I hoped like hell he would move on. Not because I didn’t enjoy him in the role, but because I did not want to see Bond 25 have to continue on with the plot threads left over from SP. Move on, new actor, clean slate.

To me, NTTD confirmed all of my fears about where Bond 25 would go after SP. They (again) gave Blofeld and SPECTRE nothing interesting to do, continued to force the Bond & Madeline relationship down the audience’s collective throats, and they yet again could not figure out the tone they wanted to strike with Craig’s films.

CR and QOS are identical in terms of tone. SF is similar. But with SP, it’s like they couldn’t figure out if they wanted to make a Craig Bond film, or a Bond film of old. NTTD has the same issue, which is only further compounded by the needless emotional arcs - not to mention a sci fi plot straight out of a video game.

I didn’t love seeing Felix or Blofeld brought back only to be killed off. Same as I didn’t like seeing Mathis killed off. But killing off Bond is a whole other thing entirely. I understand that killed off or not - Bond 26 is going to feature a new Bond, new tone, new MI6 crew, etc. But Ian Fleming himself never penned a true death scene for Bond. The crew that ultimately penned this film shouldn’t have been afforded that chance.

It’s been said in years past that Barbara Broccoli didn’t like that in GE 007 64, you saw Bond die in a 3rd person cam in the game. It was also said that Boyle departed Bond 25 because he wanted to kill Bond. Were either of those two things true?

I also don’t understand the story where Craig says he thought his Bond’s story was done at the end of SP, but Barbara convinced him that there was more story to tell. Did she promise to kill off Bond if he agreed to come back? And what of the Boyle script? What was the idea behind that script snd did it have the same ending?

It just feels like after CR, they had no idea where to go with these films and they stumbled their way in the dark for 15 years and ended up with this mess. Craig’s era has no collective feel, is all over the place narratively, and with SP - and now NTTD - has negatively impacted the films that came before it during his run.

Great post. I agree with pretty much all of this. However, IMO the pre-title sequence of NTTD reverts back to the tone of CR. The infuriating confusion occurs when the lighter tone starts straight after!! But you are so right with your analysis of the tonal confusion of the Craig era in general.

Qba007

In the next movie, Bond should chase and kill people who came up with ideas: to kill Bond, the Bond daughter, to kill Felix Leiter and Blofeld so quickly after their reintroduction.

As a fan, I feel not taken seriously, to say the least. Do they plan to do a character and formula reset with each new Bond actor?

It seems that Craig was not able to say goodbye to the role with dignity and allow the change of Bond actor without compromising the image of the Bond character with such silly ideas that destroy the fun of the franchise legacy.

The character of Bond in movie is more important than the actor who plays him!

MakeshiftPython

In actually glad it will reboot. I’ve liked Craig’s run, but I don’t want to see another actor continue that timeline. At least with a reboot they could bring back characters like Mathis and hopefully treat him better than QOS did.

DoubleOhDalton

0iker0 wrote: »

Zekidk wrote: »

DiscoVolante wrote: »

Nothing post Cuba works for me really.

Many share that opinion, and I've heard it a lot. Care to elaborate?
For me the movie ended with Bond going full Rambo in the forest and avenging Felix.

The way he avenged Felix reminded me a lot of FYEO's car kick kill. And I liked it because of it.

Did anybody else make a quip up in their head?

“I had a brother his name was Felix Leiter, this however Ash, is going to really heavy”

Flips car.

bondywondy

sworddevil1 wrote: »

Birdleson wrote: »

imranbecks wrote: »

But Ian Fleming himself never penned a true death scene for Bond. The crew that ultimately penned this film shouldn’t have been afforded that chance.

It is that audacity that riles me as well.

Agreed. 68 years of tradition, and an inviolable rule breached. Who ultimately gets the blame for it? Is this the carrot that brought Craig back? From what I understand, he had quit. If Craig had said, “Ill come back, but you can’t off Bond,”...one has to believe that it would not have happened. He has too much stroke.

Well the guy said he'd only return for the money so it's not as if he cared about the character or the fans. (I'm not saying Sean Connery had inherent love for the character nor the producers, it's clear he didn't, but at least his Bond survived!). I'm assuming Craig gave his blessing to killing off Bond. It's not as if he said "I refuse to star in this film if you kill Bond."

I'm near certain it was the opposite reaction.

He was happy to see his Bond die because it stopped Barbara Broccoli pestering him to make more films. She wanted him to make more films. What better exit strategy than to say "I'll return and make my fifth film on the contractual condition James Bond dies."

Hopefully Barbara Broccoli or MG Wilson or Daniel Craig will give an interview in the near future and explain why they made the decision to kill James Bond. It will give some fans adequate closure on the topic. If the producers never address the topic I can't see how No Time To Die and Craig's era in general will unite the fanbase. Without adequate explanation from the producers, many loyal fans will regard the death of James Bond as a permanent blight on the franchise. The casual Bond fan won't care. The casual fan is the majority demographic EON/MGM rely on to keep the franchise profitable. The producers made a calculated gamble and assumed most Bond fans won't be too bothered the world's favourite secret agent died. The box office total will determine if their gamble paid off!

matt_u

The world’s moved on Commander Bond sounds like a message to some less open minded hardcore fans.

patb

Whilst SP forced them to tie up the ends, SF denied them the use of themes that would have been perfect. Many , including myself, pre NTTD, noted that SF should have been the last. (Not DC ending there but shuffled in order) We never even imaged what was going to happen. This has lead to something missing from NTTD. When Bond comes back into service (again) they never mention age and retirement. They can't because it was a key theme in SF and they cant repeat it. And yet, given the context of NTTD, it clearly is an issue (he's been gone for over 5 years) but they are forced to ignore it. SF was divisive but at a much smaller level and I'm guessing that those who object to NTTD;s ending would much have preferred SF or something similar? It re-enforces the fact that, over the DC era, there was just no plan and they were picking themes at ramdom for each film and not considering "knock on" effects for the whole series.

TotalBB

MakeshiftPython wrote: »

If Bond was unceremoniously killed by the villain and failed saving the world, THAT would have been awful. But that’s not the case.

I'm not even sure he's really dead. It wouldn't surprise me if he somehow survived and underwent plastic surgery to stay off the radar. Which would also be very convenient because of the new actor playing Bond.