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
Seriously, no matter how outlandish the series became, it was always grounded in realism. It's not sci-fi and never has been. To start using different 'universes' and 'alternate timelines' this far down the pike doesn't work for me at all. If it works for others, that's great.
I understand the concept of alternative timelines. I'd just rather they hadn't used that concept for the Bond series.
Because it's daft,
What's daft is to try to build a rigid continuity into this series and imagine that the Bond who fought Elliot Carver is the same bloke who got involved with the Afgan resistance, trashed an Indian marketplace in '83, went into space with a giant with steel teeth and jaws, and slept with half the girls at Piz Gloria. The tonal difference between these films is in itself enough to defy any sense of continuity whatsoever. The Craig Bond is the only one that brings full continuity, and within its own boundaries, it can have a Bond Begins and a Bond Ends. It has nothing to do with Sci-Fi; the series isn't saying that multiple Bonds exist at the same time or whatever. I just don't get this obsession with drawing parallels to comic book multiverse stories that are something else entirely.
Killing off James Bond had absolutely no dramatic value, because if they can just 'reboot' the series, then they can kill him again, and again. It means nothing. There's no dramatic weight behind it, because it doesn't work in any true-life scenario.
What other true-life drama movie series have they killed off a character and said at end "he's not dead really, we're going to re-boot". This is why I keep mentioning super-heroes and sci-fi. Because that's where this ;reboot' idea comes from.
It's dishonest. How is the viewer expected to care about the character when they can kill him, reboot, kill him, reboot. What daftness! He's either dead, or he's not. Killing him and making another 'timeline' so they can make more movies is narratively dishonest.
It'd never happen in novels. Any author with any integrity would find a way to bring back the character that makes sense (as Conan Doyle did), or set any future novels before the death of their character. You'd never have them killing off a major character, then writing another book saying "it's okay, it's a different timeline".
The next movie will feature James Bond. It'll be a different character than the one Daniel Craig played. But it'll also be the same character. He is. . . and at the same time, he isn't. Asking people to accept that is far more barmy than asking them to accept Pierce Brosnan played the same person who snogged Sylvia Trench.
In.
My.
Opinion.
NTTD needed to be a dark adventure to fit the dark ending. It should have been a more focused streamlined story on Bond and his final mission.
The ending would have had more impact, if it had been set up more throughout, it felt like it was written as shocking moment, rather than a heartbreaking moment. Ultimately it was neither for me, I was just disappointed they went for that ending
Craig sold it, not Seydoux, she's not just believable.
Craig sold it, you really feel his emotions, hence why it worked in CR, but Seydoux, I just don't believe her actions.
"Spectre is a donut with a bigger hole and your donut, doesn't even have a hole at all!"
Exactly! I never felt the tragic atmosphere they were aiming for, because unnecessary and unfunny jokes were sprinkled here and there. If they wanted a dark Bond film, then it should have stayed dark throughout.
What makes Bond having different continuities “sci-fi”? Do you view all the different incarnations of Sherlock Holmes as fitting in the same continuity? If Bond never rebooted with CR, how the hell would it be grounded if a 30 year old new actor today could conceivably be the same guy that fought in the Cold War?
I think the idea of trying to imagine cinematic Bond as being the same guy across different actors only worked up to Roger Moore. At least from DN to AVTAK, it could conceivably be the same guy since Connery and Moore were close in age. But then it started to get muddy with Dalton, who was only 16 when DN came out. And then with Brosnan, who was only 9 in ‘62. But at least with Dalton and Brosnan you could still label them as a “Cold War relic” since they were both grown adults in the 70s and 80s.
For what it’s worth, Michael G Wilson had already expressed in the early 90s that he viewed the different Bond actors as existing in their own bubbles, as opposed to being the exact same guy. Even if CR had not been an overt “Bond Begins” story, Wilson probably would have still treated it as a clean slate rather than a continuation. Felix would have all his limbs intact.
I wished they kept Lea/Madeleine a baddie, that makes the trailer seemed more interesting, it centered around her supposed betrayal, but it turned out to be a bait.
I'd even go so far as to contest the alleged continuity from DN to AVTAV on the simple basis of having several films that play by different rules and are tonally very different as well. We have madmen trying to instigate a war with a rocket that swallows other rockets in space, returns to a hollowed-out volcano base, gets a refuel, and can move back upwards. We also have a tough, down-to-earth spy thriller that has politicians all worked up over a little piece of electronics aboard a sunken ship. (Almost symbolically, that film throws a decocted version of the other one's villain in the trash, as if to welcome us into a totally different 'world'.) A Bond who is perfectly trigger-happy in one film, now lectures a girl on the cost of taking a life? A Bond who eats henchmen for breakfast in one film, allows an armed henchman's wound to be taken care of?
What about the big news that James Bond is dead -- "It was in all the newspapers" -- but somehow people forgot about that right away? He can introduce himself as Bond, James Bond to lots of bad guys and not create suspicion right away? His picture was in the obituary, yet seeing the man doesn't set a few alarm clocks off? Even Blofeld in the very next movie allows him more than a healthy amount of freedom to roam around his clinic, not recognising him, having to chat with the other spy before unmasking the man behind the odd voice? Come on... A few spoken references to previous films cannot mend a continuity that was broken almost from the start.
1. He introduced himself using his own name, but I doubt many people knows that he's a spy, they might know of him as someone else.
2. It makes sense considering that Bond was in a disguise (cover).
Than what about poor Tiffany? You just killed James Bond? I mean, you can't kill James Bond and wait for the cops to arrive. If not as a spy, he appears to be known as some hotshot you don't want near you when the idea is to take over the world. ;-)
“The name is Bond. James Bond.”
“What of it?”
NTTD - many complain, but I think it was done well. They were determined to have him die as a tragic hero, and that is the end of the arc of a tragic hero's story. Oh, it could have been cool had Bond switched vials in the fight with Safin. Then Safin says "gotcha !" and Bond says, "Oh, this vial ?" showing it is not the one Safin expected. So then Safin has it and is a goner, and Bond would not hurt anyone anywhere he were to travel. And Bond leaves - perhaps by Balloon, a la the book of YOLT - and, later, as the Aston rounds a corner, slowing as it enters a town, Matilde and Madeline see Bond ahead of the, standing at the side of the road, smiling at them, right as Matilde says "Bond, James Bond !"...But, they wanted to go the tragic hero route. Any weaknesses ? The whole bit was more complicated than necessary...and the lingering waste of Blofeld. Killing Blofeld was not necessary and he always should be kept on, precarious though his position may be when last seen.
SPECTRE - GREAT ending and feels like it should have been the wrap for Craig's Bond, and NOT just because I don't want to see Bond die. I'm OK with Bond passing. Just that SPECTRE was right there, right on.
SKFALL - Brilliant
QOS - Quiet and subdued, and right on
CR - Brilliant
DAD - awful pun damages a Bond ending, again
TWINE - awful pun damages a Bond ending, again
TND - slow motion does not belong in Bond films
GE - Freezeframe and awful song damages it. Also - location was right to get the ending on the water, as should have been done, but it was not done.
LTK - The childish jealousy sub-plot spoils the ending, as well as the earlier scenes concerning it...and the stuuuupid winking fish statue, ugh.
TLD - Ending weak. A shame since it stood in stark contrast with the Excellent PTS
AVTAK - Ending in the shower is NOT the same as ending on the water, a shame since an on-the-water ending was SO feasible, given the climactic fight and its location. Also - dumb robot and catching-Bond-in-a-moment-of-intimacy played poorly
OP - On the water, as should be done. Good one, and a fun film with a resurgence of spirit.
NSNA - Water ? Yes, though a swimming pool is not nearly the same as the ocean. Then again, that was Domino in the water with Bond and, once again, a spectacular lady portrayed her. The faux last minute threat turning out to be a humorous character -- not funny. Connery, of course, rescues it all with his wink. A MUCH better wink than the one by the fish statue a few films later. Thinking it over, had the last-minute-henchman-threat been real, it would have spoiled the scene for Bond and Domino (eg. dead body in the lovers' pool ? Yuck) and would have been too jarringly contrasted with that perfect wink at the very end. So, on balance, it came out well.
FYEO - On and IN the water ! Excellent. Even the parrot - for, um, humor ? - did not spoil it.
MR - Awful...dumb joke, interrupting Bond-in-intimacy, again, and, once again, not funny
TSWLM - Weak ending, to a great movie that rejuvenated the franchise. It was such a hit that I think the producers thought everything that was in it was a good thing. It had the Bond-interrupted-in-intimacy-ending-with-an-awful-pun, and that became a fixture for a while.
TMWTGG - instead of a genuine post-climax threat, they tried to be cute/funny. It was not.
LALD - GREAT ending !
DAF - GREAT ending !
OHMSS - GREAT ending !
YOLT - ugh...once again, Bond and his amour get interrupted by the Royal Navy. Enough already ! Although, seas off Japan would not be so warm and comfy as off Jamaica, so perhaps just as well, eh ?
CR (1967) - Why did everyone get so upset about Bond's death at the end of NTTD ? It was done already, years ago ! The ending suits this wild mish-mash of a film, I'll say that.
TB - Really ? Leave Bond and Domino alone ! That bit with the real-world pick-up technique would have fit in better in a PTS for a later film.
GF - great film spoiled by a non-water ending.
FRWL - GREAT ending !
DN - GREAT ending ! Bond and Honey are interrupted, but not for long.
CR (episode of tv show "Climax !", 1954) - in just the very next year after publication ! And that tv show's name - my goodness, how did they get away with THAT in the 1950s ? The ending ? Meh. The only interesting thing about the entire production was the casting of Peter Lorre.
You’d think that such a monumental sequence in a franchise that prides itself in world class production values and practical effects would’ve found a way to shoot that sequence more convincingly.
As far as the best ending in the franchise? That’s Skyfall for me.
How anyone thinks this is the best ending ever to a Bond film is rather mind blowing.
In all seriousness, discounting any major issues the film has, I do love Pierce's tenure ending in bed with a gorgeous Bond girl and a stupid amount of diamonds.
NTTD could be called the greatest ending. Greatest, as in the most.
If only the dialogue had been goooooood... especially when it was baaaaaaaad. ;-) But you're right. It was an uncomplicated, out-with-a-joke ending that most films in the series have always provided.
The best ending, for me at least, is in CR. Craig's Bond, James Bond always makes me want to hit the play button again as soon as the film is finished.
Classic Bond
Modern Bond
Based on my vintage I lean more into the classic film endings. I am not a fan of NTTD but that's been beaten to death so I will merely leave my list and comments and let them speak for themselves.
I agree with pretty much all of this, although I do like the ending to TMWTGG too.
You remember the watch that Bond got from Q? Q said – be careful – it’s not tested. Well suppose it was more powerful than Q thought. Suppose it could actually diffuse or disable a bomb – or maybe even deflect an approaching bomb/missile?
OK, so they opened the silos (to destroy the nano bot farm) – but remember they said that the base was a bunker so strong that the missiles would just bounce off unless the silos were opened. Bond wasn’t in a silo. He was in a bunker/watchtower. He has an instinct for survival, and he could get back below as the missiles got closer, there was a blast proof door, to protect him from any blasts below.
Either he tries to actively use the watch or – maybe the watch actually operates somehow without him knowing. Eventually he passes out. But he wakes up and, at first, can’t believe he’s still alive. He’s somehow survived the missiles. But, he still thinks he has the nano bots. How does he get rid of them? Two possibilities?
1) Straight away. Supposing the destruction of the nanobot farm somehow also affects nano bots in the locality - even ones in Bond. That’d be a quick solution. But he would not know this yet.
2) Later on - An antidote exists developed by Spectre, which he has to obtain.
So – he has a look around the ruins and finds some gold coins from a broken safe. He goes down to the shore and finds a boat – or maybe he hails a local fisher man and goes to a nearby islands and lives as a recluse knowing that he can’t touch anyone. He lives using the gold coins he found. The islanders talk about a strange guy who never emerges from his house and he has food delivered to the door. He might even take in a new girlfriend (to keep him company), who will then be infected (or not).
Q meanwhile has picked up some signals that he can’t quite believe. He establishes that somehow the watch has moved to the new island. He tells M that the watch should be retrieved as it has secret technology that they don’t want to fall into the wrong hands. They might even speculate that the watch could have saved Bond. Anyway, an agent is despatched. The Agent tracks down and confronts Bond.
Various possibilities:
1) They have a fight and in the process , Bond hits the agent. Bond escapes. The agent returns to London (with maybe the nano bot infection).
Q tests the agent and , if Bond’s nano bots are already removed – then the agent is OK and they know that Bond is free and without nano bots. But Bond still doesn’t know that .
If Bond still has the nano bots – then MI6 are also looking for the antidote. Whatever, they have to track Bond down and tell him what’s happening.
Then there’ll be some other plot developments:
Somehow they find an antidote – or maybe (if its not needed ) they can tell Bond that he’s is ok and can return to Madeleine. Or maybe the girl that Bond met on the island is jealous and touches Madeleine knowing she’ll be lethally infected (if the continued infection scenario is being used).
I actually consider the endings of QOS and SP to be pretty good too.
CR is a banger of course. And for all the things I do not like about SF, the ending is excellent.
So that means, for me, NTTD has the worst ending of the Craig era.
Supposedly it was originally going to be Bond saying “we have all the time in the world”. That would have been great, because it would have given the ending a sense of dread! Is it a happy ending or is there something down the road that’ll end their happiness? Would have been a good segue to NTTD.