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
I hope to hear from some of you soon. Giving a shout out to some folks: @NicNac @BeatlesSansEarmuffs @Birdleson @delfloria @CommanderRoss
First impressions, overall opinions wanted. Please report for duty, Originals. B-)
All members invited to participate (see my posts) but if you think you qualify as an Original (again, see my posts above) then please say so here or DM me. Cheers!
I was very, very impressed by No Time to Die. It went a long way towards redeeming the mess that was Spectre, no mean feat in my eyes! I totally bought the romance between Bond and Medline this time around, and also Bond's sense of betrayal...and finally, his sense of devotion towards both Madeline and Mathilde. Blofeld also came across as more believable in his motivations this time around. I wish this writing team had been at the helm for the previous movie -- I expect it would have turned out to be a far more satisfactory entry in the Bond canon.
The scene in Cuba could have been extended to be a full Bond film in its own right. I totally hope that Eon will bring back Ana de Armas as the lead female character for Bond 26. (I don't care if she plays the same character, or they give the actress a new character to play, as has been the case for several other under-utilized performers in the past.)
The science fiction device of the nanobots was classic Bond as far as I'm concerned -- just a few steps beyond science fact, just the way Bond should be. The deaths of Blofeld and the upper ranks of Spectre was effective and powerful. The use of a Garden of Death definitely pleased my need for Fleming content... and that Ending. Well! ......
Some people don't like the ending. I get that. They want a Bond film to end with a big Fist Pumping moment, and this movie just didn't provide that. Quite the opposite, really. I understand that. But the thing is: (1) Craig's films really haven't ended that way. "The bitch is dead." "I never left." Etc. This ending is largely in keeping with Craig's desire to make our lead character less of a Superman -- and let's face it, Superman died too. And came back (much later.) Which brings me to point (2) -- All the best, most iconic characters have both a beginning and an ending to their sagas. King Arthur pulls the sword out of the stone... and many years later, throws that sword into the lake, to see it caught and pulled under by the Lady of the Lake. Robin Hood, Heracles, Beowulf -- we know how their stories begin, and how they end. Before Craig, we didn't know either Bond's origin nor his ending. Now we know both -- and as far as I'm concerned, the Bond saga is substantially stronger for that knowledge. James Bond WILL return. James Bond is dead; long live James Bond.
My thoughts will be put down here in several more hours. But you did cover several things quite well. I love this movie - it was NOT easy for me, this ending, upon first viewing. I was stunned. Yet at the same time - and I mean by the time I bought my next ticket, which I did the moment I left the screening room and then walked out into sunshine and cold air hitting me like a slap in the face - I was emotionally satisfied, moved, and appreciative that EON gave this particular James Bond such a fully earned (since Casino Royale), noble, heroic, and superbly acted, well written ending. It fits Craig's Bond. And as you said, visually it is a gorgeous, stunning Bond movie. I will have more to say later today about my first impressions (of the film, of different characters, etc).
I think Bond had seemed untouchable before. Of course he was. No wonder most fans are in shock at first. Your points about heroic figures in literature meeting their demise and mythology about them is valid. I understand why Bond fans would be upset with the ending actually happening. But I hope most would be able to get some acceptance of it, in order to fully enjoy the rest of this very fine Bond film. It not accepting no matter what, I hope they would watch at least once more, savor the things they do like, then simply set it aside. Because that set of stories is now done. Bond 26 will, undoubtedly, be something more acceptable for fans who have a truly difficult time with NTTD.
I am very pleased that NTTD waited for a cinema only release - Bond films deserve that. And I am glad it is doing so very well globally; during a pandemic, no less.
No Time To Die will remain controversial for some time ... but WHAT a Bond movie! Beautifully made, superb acting by all. I look forward to other Originals' first impressions. Cheers! B-)
Hey, whenever you're ready!
I was delayed at more than an airport. ;)
All Originals - as well as all members- welcome to just post initial thoughts, a few sentences, bullet points, or essays here. Full reviews will be later. I hope everyone, Originals and ALL members, are about to have a great weekend. Cheers! B-)
Have a wonderful weekend, all! I look forward to many shared opinions...
Yes.
Far, far more to it than to "surprise us and make us cry and maybe get awards."
Nothing wrong with all three of those things, by the way. But it makes it all sound simplified and shallow. I don't think NTTD or EON or Daniel Craig are shallow. I think what they did throughout his era was purposeful - and finally for his final film, they pulled it all together to make a most memorable, beautiful, great Bond movie. Do I hope NTTD wins awards? Yes, considerably. B-)
Comparing NTTD with OHMSS ~
I really only think of the ending, and the use of music, when comparing the two to see if they have anything really in common. Because NTTD is not about pursuing and winning Tracy (who did not remind me of Madeleine), getting married, and having her killed right after the ceremony. Shock ending, yes (to those who had not read the novel, huge shock). Downer of an ending, yes. But NTTD is quite different, including being more than a "downer" of an ending.
It is not about a menacing Blofeld filling the screen and being a strong focal point. Both films have gorgeous cinematography, but that is the only other thing I think they have in common. OHMSS is about love, and the loss of the love of Bond's life. But it is also a rollicking Bond movie that hits the points that fans like. (The opening nods to previous Bond films was quite "in your face" when it was released; unsure how many fans liked that, having just lost Connery in the role.) But back to NTTD. NTTD is about love and family (in layered ways; even more than Madeline and Mathilde) and the loss of Bond himself as he is the one who dies; a noble, heroic death.
Comparing them as movies in general? The consensus these days is that OHMSS is one of the best Bond films. I am one of the few who differ on that. But it is considered very highly regarded now (it was not when released). It is a treat to view cinematically and with very good acting indeed (except in my opinion, by Laz). Diana and Telly are superb. And I think No Time To Die will be considered also very highly as a truly great Bond movie, not just a very good one. Again, with great acting and wonderful, memorable scenes, including Bond doing the formulaic Bond things we love (action, quips, attitude, the MI6 crew). Time will tell, but I do feel strongly NTTD will be highly regarded for decades to come.
So what about the OHMSS influences in NTTD? Please tell me all the ones you noticed. I am interested in reading members' comments on that.
I think Cary, in an interview, mentioned that NTTD did use OHMSS as a reverse of that movie. I think he used that word. But really just the ending is the reversal. And he said it was also used to redirect the viewers, like a red herring, into thinking possibly Madeleine would die at the end. Ok back to my musings, not Cary's ...
So that as the story unfolded, having planted OHMSS in the viewers' mind, the ending of NTTD still needed to unfold naturally with the story being told - but having OHMSS hovering over everything played a dual role, in my opinion. Yes, planting the seed that it may mimic OHMSS and have the love of Bond's life die at the end that would keep the real ending fresh enough, not a given (even though foreshadowed). Because Bond never dies in the movies; this was a huge break from formula. So any nods to OHMSS and using music from that film was also misdirection, though fitting the ambience of love, romance in general.
Second, I think the OHMSS connections gave immediate heft to the importance of the romance and loss, and the entire deeper meaning of love and family that outweighs everything else in NTTD; certainly including the villain. Safin is not the main focus, and I was glad by my 2nd viewing that he was not a stronger villain. The inclusion of music from OHMSS really went to Bond fans' hearts strongly (love it or hate it). It was definitely woven in and kept the emotional tone in that vibe, in our subconscious as well as when obvious. So the use of music from OHMSS fit like a glove because of the overarching meaning of NTTD, as well as being misdirection, while still reinforcing the theme of love. I think Barbara, Michael, Cary, and Daniel are all on record saying that using some of the music in OHMSS was appropriate for NTTD. For me, it was used purposefully and I am happy with it being included.
Just my opinion. So those are some of my first musings on NTTD. I'd like to hear others comparing OHMSS with NTTD, especially Originals. As well as first impressions after seeing NTTD. Cheers! :-bd
(P.S., my opinion on Bond films usually do not shift much after my 2nd viewing. OHMSS is an exception; I have come to appreciate it more, thanks to Diana's performance and the cinematography.)
As I'm sure anyone that knows me would assume, given my immense love of Dan's Bond, I come away from the film and the Craig era as a whole very, very positive and sentimental. I knew the movie would make me emotional, as it would be the last film of who is without a sliver of a doubt my favorite Bond in light of what the film is able to pull off, but I really underestimated just how much it would take the wind out of me.
I finished my first viewing in absolute shock, as I think many did. The ending didn't feel real, and I felt in pain, like I'd lost an old friend. Because, to me, Dan's Bond has felt like a friend. He has brought so much humanity to this character that he felt so real, and it was just an absolute honor to be able to follow almost the entirety of his journey since I got on this crazy train around 2009. As the credits rolled I sat there with my mouth open, tears lightly rolling down my eyes, not full-on sobbing only because the shock made it not seem real. I drove home mostly in silence, absorbing it all, as if I was grieving the death of a real life loved one. It was a couple weeks full of a lot of ruminating before I saw the film again, and was much more cemented about how I felt about the film. In short, I loved it even more.
I'll talk more about Bond's death and what it all means to me in my review, and don't want to repeat myself too much, but the second viewing was somehow even more powerful. Without being on edge about what was going to happen, I knew all the twists and turns in the movie and was just able to relax and settle in to enjoy it with all my anxieties and excitement from the first viewing reigned in. By the time we reached the climax and Bond prepared his final assault of the base to open the doors and allow the missiles to destroy the virus, I was already emotional because of the pride I felt for a man that I had grown to adore in every sense of the word. Seeing him take on all those men by himself as Zimmer's take on the Bond theme blared was just something else, truly. As Bond's death came, I was absolutely sobbing, full-on ugly crying, out of a mixture of my pride for his heroism, my depression for him being dead and the immense happiness I felt having been able to enjoy a movie I'd waited forever for without it being spoiled for me.
It has been a genuine privilege to see this Bond grow over time from his rough origins to where he ends up in NTTD, so complete as a man and so assured of what he must do, and he is such an inspiration to me, as corny as that may sound to some. Bond's death was just so wonderfully presented, so perfect. He knows he's going to die, but instead of acting out in anger, being bitter, demanding more time, wallowing in sadness or becoming an emotional wreck, he stands firm and strong until the very end, at peace because he knows his mission has been completed and that those he loves are safe and sound through his sacrifice. He has come full circle, the absolute best at what he does, the pinnacle of what a man is.
People like James Bond because he's fun to watch, he says suave lines and does cool things, gets hot women, blah, blah, blah. I don't mind that stuff either, but it's the kinds of things in this movie, the kind of man that Daniel Craig's Bond is, that makes me the fan I am of the character. Beyond the tropes, the cliches, the Bond persona, Bond is a complicated man who overcomes his own human frailties and rises to the occasion when he's called upon in a time of need. Craig's Bond has solidified a perfect fusion for me of the cinematic allure of the movie Bond and the raw humanity of Fleming's Bond and the sentimentality that is so prevalent in that characterization. Watching NTTD I was reminded of the moment in Moonraker when Bond is preparing to blow himself to smithereens in order to stop Drax from killing untold masses, comparing himself to "the boy on the burning deck" as he does so, signaling how much he looks up to that symbolic figure representing duty over all. That is Craig's Bond to me, in a nut shell. A man who gave his all and refused to do less, fully prepared to die to save those in harms way because that was his obligation.
I get the impression that some people will never get over Bond dying, and will let it soil everything about this wonderful film, and that's a real shame. Because what Bond's death represents, and how he goes out, is the perfect example of why we love him and why we're all here. He's a remarkable character, a true hero, and this movie not just wrapped up all the loose ends of the Craig era I could imagine in wonderful fashion, it cemented in my mind that Daniel is the best to ever do it, because he is the only Bond that takes me to such emotional levels. If I ever see Dan in public I'll genuinely have to resist the urge to charge him and hug him after all he's done. His work has meant so much to me during some dark points in my life, his movies have been an absolute blessing and joy to watch, and he finishes his era in as strong and fitting a way as I could have ever possibly imagined.
What a man, what an accomplishment. How very far he's come...
I've only seen NTTD once so far -- I'm sure there will be others eventually -- and although Connery will always be my favorite Bond, I have to admit that Craig has probably "done the most" with the role out of all the actors to portray 007. I can't imagine Connery in the torture sequence that Fleming envisioned for Bond in Casino Royale...and somehow, I suspect Sir Sean would never have considered allowing "his" Bond to die.
The one thing that I feared from the close of SP to the opening of NTTD (a much longer time than anyone had expected!) was a "We have all the time in the world" moment. I didn't want Madeline to take a path that mimicked Tracy's -- and thankfully, she didn't. I suppose I'm a bit hardened in my response to the climax of this film. Once Madeline, Mathilde, and Nomi escaped the island while Bond was left behind to make sure the place was destroyed, it became obvious to me that, "Oh, they're going to kill Bond this time around." My response from then on has basically been, "Well, that's a different way to go! Let's see how they pull this off!" There's been very little sorrow on my part over this move, mostly just a curiosity to see how exactly they propose to bring him back. Perhaps I've just seen too many comic book deaths & rebirths to be terribly alarmed by this one... and please let's don't get started on the topic of how many actual people we've all loved & lost; bottom line here is that fictional deaths just don't hold a candle to the real thing. I'm entirely satisfied with Daniel Craig's take on the character of James Bond, from beginning to end -- now let's not take another decade or so to bring up the curtain on the next performer to portray the role, okay?
I've seen NTTD 4 times now and it gets better each time. The amount of layering and call backs to the other films and novels is a treat. In addition to that, it is a film that requires at least two viewings to piece all the information together, such as the importance of Bond bushing his teeth. After this viewing I came away with the feeling that once the dust settles with fans regarding Bond's death, in the Craig/Bond alt. universe, and there is a new Bond/actor with a new take on Bond that NTTD will be eventually be regarded as an almost perfect way to have said goodbye to Craig's portrayal of Bond.
I have read more than a few very well written posts on NTTD and I hope to gather some nuggets here. This thread has always been about thoughtful discourse, shared humor, shared memories (especially with older fans, as established by our founder, SirHenry; but also for all members of this forum).
I am heartened to read your words here, @delfloria. Yes, it is such a layered movie. I knew from reading some of your other comments on other threads that you had enjoyed the film and value it. I have seen NTTD 3 times in the cinema, and my 2nd and 3rd viewing were both more enriching, moving, and enlightening. I did enjoy it more each time. I cannot stream it or pay on demand here, but I now await the DVD more than any other Bond film's DVD release.
I hope other Originals join us here soon. Initial impressions - feel free to make it brief or lengthy. What a journey Craig's Bond has taken us on. It is historic.
B-) And just so folks here can get an idea of where this thread is headed over the next 2 months, here is what I have planned for main topics. But we will linger as long as we want on each, and other things will inevitably get mixed in. That's all good.
1) Initial impressions (through November, add any time)
2) Reviews of the film and I ask that Originals write their own any way they want, but also plug their rating and thoughts (even if brief) into the same format used on this thread when Originals reviewed the older films. I will give that example later, before we start on full reviews. I think we will be able to have reviews also started this month. I hope to have a few more folks chime in first.
3) Favorite moments from NTTD
4) Thesis discussion (as SirHenry did in the past; choice discussion points about the film) I will include background info and trivia.
Cheers! :-bd
I will have a whole lot more to say, and it has been hard to condense the essence of what I want to get across here, but the following will give you the overall feelings that I have about Daniel Craig's final turn as James Bond (and how I view Bond films in general).
I set aside Craig's tenure as a complete story, with gems in each of his films. A real gift for a great many Bond fans, including me.
No Time To Die
1) Straight off: I love the film. I have seen it 3 times in the cinema, and each time was more rewarding for me. The ending was difficult (of course) to get through upon first viewing. I was left feeling stunned, moved, emotional ... but also satisfied. Instinctively, from the first, I felt this was the right ending for this particular James Bond. It is appropriate and a worthy ending for Bond. And importantly, it is heroic and noble (not in any way "giving up" in my opinion, as people have mentioned elsewhere). I rate NTTD very highly. NTTD gives me everything I want in a Bond film, in spades, including an appropriate, moving ending.
2) My opinions on Bond films do not waver much over the years or even with months of subsequent viewings. However, I can understand why others are up and down, not settled yet with their judgment of this film. I also understand that some fans will not accept the ending in any way. I respect that is valid for them. My appreciation is at the other end of the spectrum. Also, I don't get into trying to put strong logic into timelines, connections, or is the science realistic enough. I just go with the flow mostly, for Bond movies. I enjoy them or I don't. But plot holes (unless wildly distracting to me and I cannot really think of any Bond film where that happens for me), I don't delve into much.
3) A reminder: All opinions on this thread are open for civil discussion. Nobody should be looking to simply argue their case with the anticipation to really try to dissuade others to change their minds to fit our own feelings and judgement about NTTD (or any Bond film). Mild snark okay within reason (we do tease each other here). Heavy snark that scoffs at others' opinions will not be tolerated.
Anyway, here are additional musings from me, so you can get a better sense of where I am coming from regarding this Bond movie. Come along for the ride that is this thread, and please share your thoughts and feelings here (especially Originals; but all welcome).
No Time To Die is about this particular James Bond. That matters to me and shapes my entire feelings about Craig's tenure. NTTD is his own story arc, his development, his character. It is about this James Bond coming full circle to accepting and giving in a more mature love relationship, being open to it lasting ... embracing that he is a father, realizing he has a family now -and still being Bond. A Bond I have been thrilled with since Casino Royale. In NTTD, Bond gave his all to not only save Madeleine and Mathilde, but also to save millions of people and complete his mission.
Because he's Bond, through and through. But a Bond with depth we had never seen before his era. And as we rooted for him, and felt for him, from Casino Royale to the very end of No Time To Die, this journey felt far more personal to a great many Bond fans ... and that, I believe, was the purpose and meaning that Barbara, Michael, and Daniel finally molded together. For us to have a deeper investment emotionally with Bond and to see his personal story completed, for once fully, in the most touching and appropriate, Bondian way.
When Eon and Daniel discussed him being Bond, back in Casino Royale days, the apparently had plenty of talk about what they wanted his Bond to be and for sure Daniel had plenty of ideas where he wanted to take Bond - including the ultimate ending for Bond dying a heroic death. I have no problems at all with them discussing this so early on and deciding on a more serious, vulnerable, realistic approach for Bond during his tenure. I really appreciate what they have given me, as an older Bond who loves Fleming and enjoys hugely many other Bond movies. Daniel Craig's era is special to me. I am very glad indeed that he did not end his tenure with Spectre. NTTD is a most fitting, worthwhile finale for Daniel Craig's Bond. Everyone involved has a right to be very proud of this film.
Daniel Craig: He is what makes this work, after all. This was the one actor, the right actor, who could go the whole way with Bond, even breaking tradition and having Bond die at the end. They all knew he had the ability to make it real and to still retain Bond's character. His era went the route that Dalton could have gone, but it was not the right time for Timothy's Bond to continue on that more realistic path.
This time, the timing was exactly right. EON knew had to get the script right, and that was surely a monumental task. It is not perfect, but I have only small quibbles. And for sure, this ending had to be very well done or not done at all.
This rule-breaking, challenging, yet spectacular Bond movie definitely exceeded my high expectations. Also, hiring Cary was huge and exactly the right call. He is not only a great, multi-talented director, but he is also a great storyteller. Fantastic cinematography by Linus Sandgren (I want him back!). Bringing in Phoebe was a smart move. Also, there are plenty of Fleming touches, and nods to previous films that I appreciated.
But it still takes the right actor playing Bond to get something this different - this monumental and historic - right. Daniel Craig really did. B-)
I've made it known between you and others that I've talked to about the film how mystified I am to the reaction to Bond's death. It's obviously sad, but I've seen the conclusion objectively misunderstood, top down. I don't know how anyone can come away from the movie thinking that Bond just "gave up." It's clear that strong emotions are in play with some fans, and it stops them from assessing things for what they really are. With time I think many will come around, when it's not so fresh. It honestly didn't take me long to come around to Bond dying, because I was able to look past my emotions and appreciate the story that the film was going for, which was served well by that choice.
The way I see it, Bond was going to die no matter what. Outside of the missiles coming at him, he was shot up badly, and bleeding out. He could barely muster the strength to stand, until the very end. There truly was nothing he could do, and he knew that. So he used what spare time he had left to give his final goodbyes to those he loved, and then that was that. I find it as you do, a very noble and heroic thing, for him to stand up, wounded and facing death, and be so at peace with everything. No bitterness, no regret, no bargaining. He couldn't make it out, but he saved millions of people, and kept to the duty that he swore to uphold and protect, like Judi's M molded him to. He sacrificed so that Felix didn't die in vain, and so that not a single vial of the virus could survive to go on to be mass produced and cause more harm. And he did that because he's James Bond.
The ending, and Bond giving himself up, is about as Flemingesque as it gets, in my opinion. It's not only an ending that feels true to how the original character would've liked to go out (Moonraker comes to mind, as I've said), but it's also something that has been in the making from the beginning of this Bond's journey. I'm not saying that they planned from jump to kill Dan's Bond one day, and knew it for certain. What I mean is over the course of multiple films this era has perfectly recreated the kind of spy world that Fleming crafted, one where you can die at any time, and there isn't much ceremony in death; it's just another day on the job and the world has to move on without you. We see this Bond lose a lot of people, and each impacts him greatly. We see the cost of his job, and how close he comes to being another body on the pile. It's fair to assume that his time would run out sooner or later, as the literary Bond also reflects, knowing he is destined to die while on the job. But he serves because that's who he is, knowing that when he does die it will be for something greater than himself. And I think Dan's Bond accomplished this and more. He left behind a legacy, not just in having a child, but in showing everyone how a life is to be led, and how one is supposed to die. You do the best you can with the cards you've been dealt, you try to leave things better than how you found them, and when it's your time, you look death straight in the face and accept your fate, with no regrets.
I know for some the idea of Bond dying stings, or is an outright line you feel can't be crossed, but for my money it is the most Bondian thing imaginable. That he would give himself up to serve the greater good is exactly why he's a remarkable character, for all his faults, and it's something that should be appreciated and celebrated. I wondered for a long time if they'd have the balls to kill Bond off one day, and was certain it could only happen with Dan's era because it's been the only time they've been willing to take risks like that in decades now. And I'm really glad they dared to do it, because his performance throughout this era sold that ending in a way none of the other Bonds could've. His acting chops, and his commitment to this character over such a long, near two decade journey, makes the ending land in a way it couldn't under anyone else. You feel every ounce of it, because you've been with him through it all. You've seen his origins, his heart break, you've seen him lose everything and rebuild, you've seen where he grew up and became the man he was destined to be. We've lived life with him, and when it's time for his to end, it feels like we're saying goodbye to a friend, because we are.
I come away from NTTD and the ending re-ignited, not disillusioned, because it reminded me of why I love the kind of man Bond is (and specifically this Bond), and gave me something to be inspired by. I don't imagine I'll ever have to die to stop a bio-weapon from eradicating the population, of course, but how this Bond lived his life does offer a lot to learn from. Bond is so much more than the drinks, the cars, the women and the suits. He's a true hero for any age, and Craig's Bond was the best example of that we've ever seen.
Thanks to you, @BT3366 ,@BeatlesSansEarmuffs , and @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 for your great comments here.
Also, @BeatlesSansEarmuffs you said: I'm entirely satisfied with Daniel Craig's take on the character of James Bond, from beginning to end -- now let's not take another decade or so to bring up the curtain on the next performer to portray the role, okay?
Man, am I with you on that! We have a whole new Bond movie to look forward to that will be different, and a whole new Bond actor to discuss, within the next 2 or 3 years (I do think so). Very exciting!
Meanwhile we will chat about, in detail and in general, No Time To Die. This weekend I will be writing some more, and I do hope to hear from more you members out there - no full reviews needed yet, but let us know your basic thoughts and feelings about NTTD. If there is one area you want to focus on, that's okay too. Yes, this thread is a special home for the OLDER Bond fan (who saw Connery as Bond in a first run cinema release) ... but we welcome everybody to this table. B-)
As time goes on, it does get harder not just to come up with worthy ideas to pursue with the series, but Bond is also a character who runs counter to our modern times in so many respects, which adds to the difficulty. I think his appeal is in how refreshing he is, as he has old fashioned values, and the magic comes in finding ways for his principles to clash with those of modernity. I think the Craig era really excelled at this, especially in SF, showing how out of place a man like Bond can be, but also showing the value his principles have as old fashioned as they are.
It's just a question of where the movies will go tonally from here. I don't imagine we'll get movies that push as hard as Dan's did, or be anywhere near as dark, so I figure (and hope) the tone will be somewhere around the Connery era, where the adventures could still be weighty and feel dangerous, but there was enough humor to balance it for audiences that enjoyed that. I like my Bond films with more of an edge, but given that the Craig era delivered so much of that tone, I don't see things continuing down this route. Especially with how dark NTTD is specifically, I think the next round of movies will try to give off a different feeling. Just hope it doesn't turn into a resurrection of Moore styled tones and humor, because then I'd have a hard time enjoying that.
So it means either they have started with other writers, which I doubt, or that they didn't use the COVID time to start development, which might figure as COVID in itself was putting NTTD in jeopardy, and all energies of the Barbara/MGW team being focus on that.
I think they will make the new announcement in 2022, and the earliest the film will arrive is 2025 or 2026. 2026 will make sense as it will have been 20 years since CR.
How the industry bounces back is definitely something to factor in when we're talking about the break between Bond films. Outside of the breather I think the series needs after that finale, and to prepare for a new face, the industry also needs to be in a better place to give the next 007 their best chance at success.
1) Start stock-piling ideas for storylines. I don't care where they come from; Purvis & Wade or your favorite bartender. A good idea is a good idea; if it doesn't get used this time around, maybe you'll use it a few years down the road. Unused Fleming is best, re-hashed Fleming can still be good. Just because "The Property of a Lady" was used as a throwaway line in OP doesn't mean it can't be a good title for Bond #27... Chapter titles like "Undertaker's Wind" are also worth considering.
2) I'm sure the search for the next actor to play Bond is already under way. Nonetheless, (A) Let's have somebody who physically reminds us of Connery, Dalton, or Brosnan (B) Somebody who's willing to commit for the next ten years is a must, and (C) My personal recommendation is that our next Bond actor should be an ACTOR, not an executive-producer-in-training.
3) I think most of us have had enough of Bond's own personal story arc for awhile. Let's have some one-and-done missions for a change. Let's embrace those aspects of Bond that have stuck in the public memory for good reason. Martinis shaken-not-stirred and a license to kill, NOT to BE killed should be the order of the day. M, Q, and Miss Moneypenny should be hanging around the MI-6 HQ -- if Bond needs some help out in the field, let him find some new allies out there on his own.
4) Bond has always been ready to change with the times and that's one of the reasons the franchise has done so well for so long. Still, I think the movie-going public of 2024 is going to be looking for some feel-good fare. So good luck, Eon -- and "don't muck it up."
Also, don't worry, they have a database of ideas that go back 50+ years.
They're not starting now.
Connery, Dalton, or Brosnan are the past. Let them stay in the past. They need an actor. His looks don't matter, as long as he can act and carry the film on his shoulders.
For sure, I don't think Barbara and Michael have taken until now, or even the last year, to start giving serious consideration to two key things:
a) the next actor to portray James Bond
b) the next story, in general - how to carry on the series
I think EON have indeed been stockpiling, perusing and making good notations of ideas ... since Spectre. I would bet on that. Barbara and Michael have their own ideas and feelings about where they want Bond to go next (in terms of personality, style, theme, etc.). I have trusted them for many years and still do. I'm not concerned.
After all, remember Cary was already in discussion with Barbara and Michael back when Spectre ended - and they were at that time talking about how move the series forward. Much thought has already put into this, no matter what public talking points they put out for the press. Bond is their baby - they take the responsibility very seriously, both have their own creative ideas and some firmer boundaries at this point.
We can ALL have our own ideas and opinions - and we sure do - about where we want the series to go. But we have no input; frankly, I am glad of that.
What I would like is basically what I have said before:
a) a talented actor
b) scripts that combine realistic, serious, thoughtful moments or story combined with a lighter overall touch and feel. That means a bit more humor and not as "heavy" an overall feeling.
Do I want the next Bond to be personal? Yes, I do, actually. Do I want some backstory? Yes, I do. Not a lot, but give me something fresh. I do NOT want a rookie 007 or family origins story in depth done again, not for a long time. Before people take my words the wrong way, let me assure you I mean smaller background, subtle enough. But I do not want Bond to show up, being Bond a la Roger Moore - or even Brosnan in GE. Both of whom I love, by the way. A great many other members on here do want those things; I don't.
Daniel Craig gave me that set of stories near perfectly; and I do NOT want EON to try to replicate Craig. I am not worried about that; they are too smart to repeat themselves utterly with the next actor. But Craig also spoiled me with his fine acting and the realism of his films. I DO want that: great actor, more realism, some serious tones at times. Just modified with a lighter overall tone. For sure, I do not want them to veer too strongly in the opposite direction after NTTD.
Single mission films? I actually appreciate a story arc over more than one film. So shoot me now; I am impervious at this point. A two film story arc, sure. I do not need single missions films. Out of let's say 4 Bond movies in the future, give me 2 with one story arc and two single mission films. Mix it up a bit. Each one a single mission? No thanks. I like the intrigue of having two in a row connected.
A continuance of a supporting character like Felix? That I would like. If we are talking 4 or 5 films for the next actor (would be nice; should be at least 2 or 3 if he is popular enough) ... then I would like Felix (or similar) to be in at least 3, not just two. Simply my personal whims.
Fleming touches, yes. And NTTD has plenty. They can still drop those into the next film, in various ways. It does not have to be heavy handed.
All new MI6 crew; yes, please. Oh and bring back Colin Salmon?
Yes, please - in any role. :)
So this post is NOT about first impressions, but what the heck do we want now? B-)
That's okay; we can digress a little here.
Still waiting on hearing from a few other Originals for the initial impressions of NTTD, then we will move on by end of November. Cheers!
Once again let me explain, briefly, what that means.
"Originals" are the older fans on here ... we mean older like experienced, fine wine kind of aging ... ;) The thread's criteria for being an Original means you saw Connery in a Bond film in the cinema during its initial run. I made it in with Diamonds Are Forever (I was about 15 yrs old).
SirHenry began this thread as a hang-out, comfortable home for all older fans ... especially those fitting that criteria. Because he passed away early 2014, this thread had wound down and was near dormant at times. But it is still a real treasure chest if you go back to the first 100 or so pages. AND I believe we have older fans on here still - just unaware that this thread is for them especially.
When the thread was in its early years, all Originals did their reviews of all the Bond movies. I think there were 6 of us that made it through all the films, using the same format for our review on this thread. We will begin to review NTTD on here in a couple of weeks and I will lay out that format at that time (it has simple categories like actor, music, etc.).
Using the same format made it clear and easy to chat about our opinions on the films.
And we tallied opinions as we went along. I will show that on here later on. But we are not doing reviews here yet.
So if you qualify with Diamonds Are Forever or earlier Connery films (NSNA does not count), you are an Original. If you don't make that cut, but you are still an older Bond fan ... LALD your first one? TSWLM? Octopussy? Please come join us here. This thread is still for you. We want to have the opinions and shared memories of older Bond fans here.
Also, this thread does not allow petty arguments, rudeness to each other, mean snark, or name calling. We don't argue trying to convince the other person we are right and they are so wrong. We will be discussing a great many different topics related to Bond over the next few years. With NTTD, it has reignited us and given us plenty to talk about as we wait for the next news from EON.
Thanks for joining us! All members, younger fans also of course, are welcome if civil discourse is your thing. I simply hope older fans discover this thread in the days to come. It just might be your cup of tea (or coffee) or vodka martini shaken, not stirred. Cheers! B-)