No Time To Die: Why It Should Not Have Been Made (The Way It Was)

1202123252632

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    They briefly considered killing Bond for Craig‘s fourth film but it was dismissed pretty early on which is why it never made it to any outline/draft.

    Yeah, I can see it fitting a little better into SF thematically, but better to have him fake die in the opening.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    slide_99 wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The end of Spectre is another reason Bond had die in No Time To Die. They couldn't have ended Craig's final film with the same ending as Spectre.

    Bond ends nearly every movie with a woman in his arms but Craig can't have two movies with a similar ending?

    Have you seen NTTD @slide_99 ?? I'd love to read about what you thought about the film as a whole!
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,197
    I would say there are plenty of different options how NTTD could have ended differently without being to similar to the ending in SP. The ending of Spectre also left enough room for interpretation. It was not obvious that Bond had retired from MI6. All we saw was that Bond and Madeleine were driving away.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The end of Spectre is another reason Bond had die in No Time To Die. They couldn't have ended Craig's final film with the same ending as Spectre.

    Yes, absolutely. You’d had Bond end a film being “ready for duty” and you’d then had him leave the service in the next. You can’t really have him repeat either of those.

    I love that in SP his duty still belongs to Dench.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited February 2022 Posts: 16,383
    GBF wrote: »
    I would say there are plenty of different options how NTTD could have ended differently without being to similar to the ending in SP. The ending of Spectre also left enough room for interpretation. It was not obvious that Bond had retired from MI6. All we saw was that Bond and Madeleine were driving away.

    He has the choice of walking to M or Madeline on the bridge and then chucked his gun in the river- I think it's fairly clear! :)
    In NTTD he then rejoins MI6, so to have him just leave again would be a bit repetitious- also it wouldn't feel like the end, bearing in mind we've seen him leave and return once before.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,197
    mtm wrote: »
    GBF wrote: »
    I would say there are plenty of different options how NTTD could have ended differently without being to similar to the ending in SP. The ending of Spectre also left enough room for interpretation. It was not obvious that Bond had retired from MI6. All we saw was that Bond and Madeleine were driving away.

    He has the choice of walking to M or Madeline on the bridge and then chucked his gun in the river- I think it's fairly clear! :)
    In NTTD he then rejoins MI6, so to have him just leave again would be a bit repetitious- also it wouldn't feel like the end, bearing in mind we've seen him leave and return once before.

    Not so sure about Spectre. Retrospectively, it became clear that Bond retired since that was the way they presented it in the beginning of NTTD. But it would not have been so inconsistant if Bond had been back on a mission in the PTS of NTTD like in Skyfall. Throwing away the gun in Spectre was also a sign for not killing Blofeld. Bond retiring and then coming back to MI6 is also quite a frequent phenomenon in the Craig era. It happened in almost every film so that it would not have been so out of place if they made him retire from the job just another time.
  • One of the biggest disappointments with NTTD, aside from the fact it felt incredibly stale, was too long, had a weak baddie and had an inexplicably poor ending, was the fact that Bond gives up.

    When I was drawn to Bond as a young boy, the huge appeal of Bond was he has a never say die attitude, always believes he'll come through and never quits.

    I had a real problem with the fact he just quits at the end NTTD. "I love my wife and daughter but can never have contact with them so I'll just finish this mission, cos it needs done, but then give up and just get blown up". The Bond I fell in love with gets off that island by the skin of his teeth and then challenges Q and his team to remedy the nanobot situation, he doesn't just quit.

    James Bond always coming through is at the core of the character for me, this NTTD Bond is alien to me. I'd actually put NTTD down as an anomaly amongst the movies. It's like the 1967 CR to me, a movie with a James Bond character in it but not THE James Bond. NTTD remains erased from my collection.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    GBF wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    GBF wrote: »
    I would say there are plenty of different options how NTTD could have ended differently without being to similar to the ending in SP. The ending of Spectre also left enough room for interpretation. It was not obvious that Bond had retired from MI6. All we saw was that Bond and Madeleine were driving away.

    He has the choice of walking to M or Madeline on the bridge and then chucked his gun in the river- I think it's fairly clear! :)
    In NTTD he then rejoins MI6, so to have him just leave again would be a bit repetitious- also it wouldn't feel like the end, bearing in mind we've seen him leave and return once before.

    Not so sure about Spectre. Retrospectively, it became clear that Bond retired since that was the way they presented it in the beginning of NTTD. But it would not have been so inconsistant if Bond had been back on a mission in the PTS of NTTD like in Skyfall. Throwing away the gun in Spectre was also a sign for not killing Blofeld. Bond retiring and then coming back to MI6 is also quite a frequent phenomenon in the Craig era. It happened in almost every film so that it would not have been so out of place if they made him retire from the job just another time.

    Hmm.. no it’s clearly him leaving. Q even says “I thought you’d left”. And Bond & Madeline talk on the train about what would happen if Bond stopped- she also leaves him because she can’t take that life any more. He most certainly leaves MI6 at the end of it, and that was the impression at the time too.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    Yeah he's definitely out the door of MI6 at the end of Spectre when you consider his previous conversations with Madeleine.

    "I'm not going to ask you to change."

    Bond tossing the gun is him making the choice himself without being asked. It's quite cheesy (I think the final scene of Bond and Swann driving off is particularly bad), for my liking, but it's there. And it leads to Bond's pissed off behaviour in the PTS of NTTD nicely. He chose to be there, to take a chance on living, and it feels like a came back to bite him despite his best efforts.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,588
    I really thought the injection of the Smartblood would have been a discovery of a possible counteraction of Bond being infected with Heracles. Like an oh crap I've been infected but Q stating that the nanobots from Smartblood could fight off the nanobots from Heracles. Therefore not putting Madeline and Mathilde in danger.

    It seriously could have ended with the actual YOLT novel ending with Bond escaping the island at the last possible moment, he's actually alive but the blast and a hard fall/landing messes him up. Everyone thinks he's dead but is just injured and develops amnesia. Then we get the next film with TMWTGG opening with a new actor.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    I think it would've been a bit of a cop out for Bond to find out a way out.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,588
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think it would've been a bit of a cop out for Bond to find out a way out.

    Yeah but personally still better than watching him die.
  • Denbigh wrote: »
    I think it would've been a bit of a cop out for Bond to find out a way out.

    Yeah but personally still better than watching him die.

    And certainly better than watching him give up and then die.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited February 2022 Posts: 16,383
    He doesn't give up: he knows if he leaves then Madeline and Mathilde will die- he will gamble with his own life but not with theirs.
    It wasn't very nice watching it but that's the point of a sad ending sometimes. It's like complaining that Bond should have had the bulletproof glass in OHMSS.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,297
    mtm wrote: »
    He doesn't give up: he knows if he leaves then Madeline and Mathilde will die- he will gamble with his own life but not with theirs.
    It wasn't very nice watching it but that's the point of a sad ending sometimes. It's like complaining that Bond should have had the bulletproof glass in OHMSS.

    +1

    After Safin infected him, Bond killed everyone on the island he came across, but he wouldn't risk Madeleine and Mathilde's lives by continuing to exist in the world.

    That was the meaning of the almost-title: A Reason to Die.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited February 2022 Posts: 3,152
    Yeah, but you'd already seen him tarnish his legacy by letting Madeleine go on top, then riding on the back of a lass's scooter, making breakfast, getting in the passenger seat of the DBS, letting a girl fly the plane, grovelling to a whackjob and playing with Dou Dou- what's a missile to the face after all that? He had to die because the secretaries would've pointed and laughed and wiggled their little fingers at him if he'd gone back to MI6 after such deep humiliations. Or that's what some people seem to think, anyway. I've seen little incidents like this being made out to be a deliberate litany of woke emasculation and I just don't see it at all. And did he just give up? Really? There's a difference between 'giving up' in hopeless defeat and conscious sacrifice for a higher cause, no?
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    Venutius wrote: »
    There's a difference between 'giving up' in hopeless defeat and conscious sacrifice for a higher cause, no?

    Huge difference.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited February 2022 Posts: 5,970
    I'll also take Bond dying over Roger Moore in the shower with Tanya Roberts any day.
  • Venutius wrote: »
    Yeah, but you'd already seen him tarnish his legacy by letting Madeleine go on top, then riding on the back of a lass's scooter, making breakfast, getting in the passenger seat of the DBS, letting a girl fly the plane, grovelling to a whackjob and playing with Dou Dou- what's a missile to the face after all that? He had to die because the secretaries would've pointed and laughed and wiggled their little fingers at him if he'd gone back to MI6 after such deep humiliations. Or that's what some people seem to think, anyway. I've seen little incidents like this being made out to be a deliberate litany of woke emasculation and I just don't see it at all. And he did he just give up? Really? There's a difference between 'giving up' in hopeless defeat and conscious sacrifice for a higher cause, no?

    Agreed, he never would have looked twice at Madeleine, another problem I had with the movie though, technically, that's a SPECTRE flaw.

  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited February 2022 Posts: 3,152
    EDDIEVH wrote: »
    he never would have looked twice at Madeleine, another problem I had with the movie though, technically, that's a SPECTRE flaw.
    Every woman's a step down after Eva Green, man. Ok, that's today's simping out of the way... ;)

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    If this movie upsets some people that much, they kind of deserve seeing their childhood hero die in front of them on the big screen.
  • Posts: 1,394

    Yeah he's definitely out the door of MI6 at the end of Spectre when you consider his previous conversations with Madeleine.

    "I'm not going to ask you to change."

    Bond tossing the gun is him making the choice himself without being asked. It's quite cheesy (I think the final scene of Bond and Swann driving off is particularly bad), for my liking, but it's there. And it leads to Bond's pissed off behaviour in the PTS of NTTD nicely. He chose to be there, to take a chance on living, and it feels like a came back to bite him despite his best efforts.

    This is exactly why Bond quitting the service for Madeline made no sense to me.He learned a hard lesson at the end of CR that he can never have a normal life.The PTS of NTTD plays out like the climax of CR.He really should have known better.

  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    I think the idea of him leaving the service for a peaceful existence was covered well enough in the early stages of SF, also. He accidentally found a way out but was clearly miserable despite the idyllic surroundings he was inhabiting, and felt compelled to return to active service.

    But I guess love was the missing element there, and that's where Swann comes in.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Yeah he's definitely out the door of MI6 at the end of Spectre when you consider his previous conversations with Madeleine.

    "I'm not going to ask you to change."

    Bond tossing the gun is him making the choice himself without being asked. It's quite cheesy (I think the final scene of Bond and Swann driving off is particularly bad), for my liking, but it's there. And it leads to Bond's pissed off behaviour in the PTS of NTTD nicely. He chose to be there, to take a chance on living, and it feels like a came back to bite him despite his best efforts.

    This is exactly why Bond quitting the service for Madeline made no sense to me.He learned a hard lesson at the end of CR that he can never have a normal life.The PTS of NTTD plays out like the climax of CR.He really should have known better.

    You could say the same of Fleming’s Bond after CR. What a fool, Fleming’s Bond!
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited February 2022 Posts: 13,978
    If Bond had been shot 3 times, why did he even need to be poisoned? Or if he were poisoned, and the missile strike was imminent, why did he need to be shot? It's almost comical how overkill his death is. Why not have Bond strangled and crushed, along with shot, poisoned and blown up? Go the whole hog.

    And yes, I am aware that the poison wasn't lethal to Bond, but still...
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited February 2022 Posts: 5,970
    Well I suppose if Bond had just been shot, he would've at least have attempted to escape, whereas knowing he can't be with Madeleine or his daughter, it'd be too big a risk.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited February 2022 Posts: 8,183
    If Bond had been shot 3 times, why did he even need to be poisoned? Or if he were poisoned, and the missile strike was imminent, why did he need to be shot? It's almost comical how overkill his death is. Why not have Bond strangled and crushed, along with shot, poisoned and blown up? Go the whole hog.

    And yes, I am aware that the poison wasn't lethal to Bond, but still...

    If Bond hadn’t been poisoned he would still try to escape, no matter the odds. Being infected with poison that would kill those he loved was the only thing that would make him stop and accept that death finally came for him.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    If Bond had been shot 3 times, why did he even need to be poisoned? Or if he were poisoned, and the missile strike was imminent, why did he need to be shot? It's almost comical how overkill his death is.

    Well he's Bond. We know he dies hard: folk around here would have been complaining if it had been easy because we've seen how he can escape death and bullets usually pose no obstacle to him.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    If Bond had been shot 3 times, why did he even need to be poisoned? Or if he were poisoned, and the missile strike was imminent, why did he need to be shot? It's almost comical how overkill his death is. Why not have Bond strangled and crushed, along with shot, poisoned and blown up? Go the whole hog.

    And yes, I am aware that the poison wasn't lethal to Bond, but still...

    If Bond hadn’t been poisoned he would still try to escape, no matter the odds. Being infected with poison that would kill those he loved was the only thing that would make him stop and accept that death finally came for him.

    I could accept that, if he hadn't been shot. But it was a struggle for Bond to climb up the ladder. Was he really going to be able to haul ass back through the submarine pen, while bleeding out and the missiles already on the way? His fate was sealed once Safin shot him, but that wouldn't make for a grand death scene.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Bond’s death also had to be his decision to make. If he simply got shot and died, that wouldn’t be meaningful.

    “You only live twice, once when you are born, and once when you look death in the face”.
Sign In or Register to comment.