› › ›

The name's 25. Bond 25, or rather, it's NTTD.

1…139140142144145…149

Comments

  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,904
    Add to the layered meanings:
    N O ( M I ) _ T I M E _ T O _ D I E

    So the filmmakers reacted to public sentiment that a character other than Bond is OO7.
  • RyanRyan Canada
    Posts: 692
    At first I was somewhat disappointed with the title. It does seem a little "Bond by the numbers" but it has grown on me already. I think it's a smart move from a marketing standpoint to make a bold statement that this is Bond, especially after so much negative press. It could also mean we're in for a more classic, traditional Bond adventure which I am totally okay with for a last hurrah with Daniel.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 25,361
    RichardTheBruce wrote: »
    Add to the layered meanings:
    N O ( M I ) _ T I M E _ T O _ D I E

    So the filmmakers reacted to public sentiment that a character other than Bond is OO7.

    _sYSqaO1CWnmr2TbyurzbGGqS2EEeODBMoSAiGwEPPnZo-KzasnczMQaavqSHiTwCbabsiZywVRESa2u-dIFy7K34fbCIW_a9vwDSj8sPlMiuccQ0zMnC5hJmxOpblsrCbqJE5dA2RYay5aXKvkjQuEZ5jB2uovDTSAmKw0A7fUfEDloAocgEw2lO2UvcEIPUY1SfNdMNtjzqO4HjyEkZuB59u99mVrQ4GRhyw0Wa1_JjNeZPvQtqhyal1k_u2MgCuJd7Q_0wfF7wfn-LNoT_fuhuUtS64aYTHkGJZowrxm1w5fieZBX4DTOxJdb2E9rw7EAp9nYlzTQK2ADdDizJMWAt13K9NJLIXvJlxPb-667VIGD_7jOq6URlbflh1T5q0cnIY-9ci0aJN_MFTjeBPyNcVq9n16Ku9fP1z25ik776JokchfQmgHWqrlQwVbU1YmFg9S-EzimX8xj16pv0_p_iiTKTi7fIj4EnoydfEA6HezugAvenrGJQFv46va6dhzwI1D4D4iTXLukDKymCLd4D8CSuerIhmYprgxHhQuzIAkNDv1eMuSJHyKDQz6Mv6J2H5sMLybQkmbmY1N6FYjjjshgAHhGbEc2wlNb6EMLmi8VIL212awQzyC9PexQkMkVCt62Js__hMHn5FzRLRbkdKUCAKg=s250-k-rw-no
    Bizarrely I thought that yesterday, I am pretty much convinced Nomi will be a villain

  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited August 2019 Posts: 13,904
    That would get no complaint from me.

    Just a rumor that another agent could have the OO7 number is enough to predispose me to dislike her. So villain is good.



  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    RichardTheBruce wrote: »
    That would get no complaint from me.

    Just a rumor that another agent could have the OO7 number is enough to predispose me to dislike her. So villain is good.
    So we like bad storytelling when we don't want to see something new?
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,904
    What? What bad storytelling? Why don't I want to see something new?

    My natural reaction is to dislike a character that's shown to be in direct competition with Bond. Pretty straightforward approach until I'm proven wrong by what appears in the film, that it's a truly likeable character that earned respect.

    I'm not falling on my sword on any of these items. No one should.

  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited August 2019 Posts: 5,970
    RichardTheBruce wrote: »
    What? What bad storytelling? Why don't I want to see something new?

    My natural reaction is to dislike a character that's shown to be in direct competition with Bond. Pretty straightforward approach until I'm proven wrong by what appears in the film, that it's a truly likeable character that earned respect.

    I'm not falling on my sword on any of these items. No one should.
    I also say bad storytelling cause I think having Lashana Lynch be the new 007 and then have her fall into the trap of past sacrificial lambs would just rather reductive, and a cheap way to get out of an interesting storypoint and character dynamic. Plus I also think a lot of people want her dead to just retcon the whole idea of a female 007, even if she isn't James Bond (I'm not saying you personally @RichardTheBruce, I just mean in general). This whole concept is something new, so I just think we should embrace the unknown at this point, and try to look forward to what's going to happen and this 007 angle :D
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,904
    I'm actually not criticizing the creative decisions. I'm simply siding with Bond up front and going in.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited August 2019 Posts: 5,970
    RichardTheBruce wrote: »
    I'm actually not criticizing the creative decisions. I'm simply siding with Bond up front and going in.
    But why do you need to side with him? I don't get why it's a sudden competition between the two characters? Maybe if they had known each other before and had a rivalry but again I don't really see that happening, I think these characters will be new to each other and I imagine Craig's Bond would be skeptical about. I don't think this film is gonna be him pining for his old job completely, he might miss it partly, but I think it would actually be quite the departure from Craig's development as James Bond to even try to get his job back.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,904
    Well it's not sudden, it's automatic. So I expect a competition between Bond and any other capable agent he's around. Good-natured like it started with OO6. Or contentious like it ended with OO6.

    I'm entitled to my favorites and I'm gonna side with Bond straight up.

  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Good title. Definitely better than the other choices touted.
    Anyway, we can move on now and change the title of this thread. ;)
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,204
    4EverBonded wrote: »
    Good title. Definitely better than the other choices touted.
    Anyway, we can move on now and change the title of this thread. ;)

    I'd have thought this thread would be closed on account there's no more speculation.
    Or perhaps we could change it to the B26 title thread and get a 5 year start?
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,514
    B26 should kick off the next Bond actor with the title...

    007 in New York

    Not the best Fleming title (my least favorite in fact), but assuming every Fleming title will eventually be used, why not?
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,204
    FoxRox wrote: »
    B26 should kick off the next Bond actor with the title...

    007 in New York

    Not the best Fleming title (my least favorite in fact), but assuming every Fleming title will eventually be used, why not?

    I actually like

    THRILLING CITIES

    Especially if Blofeld devised a plot to blow up major cities in the world and Bond had to investigate each one.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,904
    Okay, so maybe it's too late (and too early) to launch a OO7 in New York campaign. For now.


    small_list_page_p5724_p_v8_aa.jpgsherlock-holmes-in-new-york.jpg150full.jpg4e453f6e06ecae7218163baa7e06fb38.jpg xqr8sts1gskt.jpg51aqC2xKLiL._SX198_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_.jpgArthur_In_New_York_t.jpg1770498915.jpg?maxheight=200&width=200&quality=85&sale=11&lang=enhercules-in-new-york-movie-poster-1970-1010413477.jpg3729_poster.jpg

  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,710
    Just rename this The name's 26, Bond 26 and get it out of this topic.

    We've got a killer new title, and that's all that matters for now, and for a long time. And we'll be discussing it in the other threads.

    Just a thought, anyway.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,009
    We don't even need a title thread for B26 for a long while, lest it turn into dozens and dozens of pages of joke suggestions and the same few titles mentioned page after page. Let's enjoy discussing this one now that it's finally been given a title and not get ahead of ourselves.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,904
    Redirect discussion from the BOND 25 title? Seems unnecessary at this juncture. A settled title deserves ongoing discussion as much as the earlier proposals. Discussion is the point.

    Or maybe I'm taking this too seriously.

  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Yes, actually this thread should be changed to Bond 26.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited August 2019 Posts: 13,904
    So the BOND 25/No Time To Die title discussion should end here over 7 months before the release of the film proper. That's odd to me.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,009
    RichardTheBruce wrote: »
    So the BOND 25/No Time To Die title discussion should end here over 7 months before the release of the film proper. That's odd to me.

    It won't.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,359
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    When Newman delivered his two Bond scores, people were screaming how so not "classical Bond" they sounded. They wanted Arnold back for "vintage Bond".

    He delivered two scores? ;)
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited August 2019 Posts: 12,480
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    RichardTheBruce wrote: »
    So the BOND 25/No Time To Die title discussion should end here over 7 months before the release of the film proper. That's odd to me.

    It won't.

    So ... I don't mind the thread staying open, but I'm surprised. As Bond 25? What else is there to say? The title is chosen. Why would people keep talking about it? I mean, what can people discuss about it? Other than like it, hate it, I guess. Carry on, but I just don't get it. The thread seems made for the next film, any film we don't have a title to yet.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    .
    barryt007 wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    DoctorKaufmann wrote: »
    I heard yesterday, that before NTTD was announced, that there were rumours about the title being GENOME OF A WOMAN. Just a silly, wrongish rumour?

    Apparantly Daniel wanted that title but I think its just another rubbish rumour.
    FoxRox wrote: »
    @Walecs Nice find about the DAD title I did not know before!

    What was that,i cant see the post about it ?

    https://www.mi6-hq.com/news/index.php?itemid=6071 (posted by @Walecs)

    Well I didn't know that either,looks like DAD IS actually linked to Fleming.
    Walecs wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    DoctorKaufmann wrote: »
    I heard yesterday, that before NTTD was announced, that there were rumours about the title being GENOME OF A WOMAN. Just a silly, wrongish rumour?

    Apparantly Daniel wanted that title but I think its just another rubbish rumour.
    FoxRox wrote: »
    @Walecs Nice find about the DAD title I did not know before!

    What was that,i cant see the post about it ?

    Apparently the line "Live to Die Another Day" was found in a letter written by Ian Fleming, thus meaning that the movie was titled after Fleming

    That will 'one in the face' for all the DAD knockers haha.
    Or it will 'one in the face' for all those insisting a title has to be Fleming ;-).

  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    4EverBonded wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    RichardTheBruce wrote: »
    So the BOND 25/No Time To Die title discussion should end here over 7 months before the release of the film proper. That's odd to me.

    It won't.

    So ... I don't mind the thread staying open, but I'm surprised. As Bond 25? What else is there to say? The title is chosen. Why would people keep talking about it? I mean, what can people discuss about it? Other than like it, hate it, I guess. Carry on, but I just don't get it. The thread seems made for the next film, any film we don't have a title to yet.
    @4EverBonded, you just need to take a peek at the production thread and the shooting thread to see how many people feel a need to discuss the title ;-).





    DarthDimi wrote: »
    When Newman delivered his two Bond scores, people were screaming how so not "classical Bond" they sounded. They wanted Arnold back for "vintage Bond".
    Did they though? I don´t recall a lot of people besides myself complaining about the SF score, and my complaints go into a very different direction. In fact Newman has some cues in SF that sound so classical Arnold couldn´t dream to come up with such stuff all his life (e.g. end of the scene where Bond hangs from the elevator).
    What I remember people complaining about is that the SP score recycles a lot of cues fom SF.
    @boldfinger, and what has this got to do with the title of the new film?
    Sorry.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,438
    RC7 wrote: »
    jetsetwilly wrote: »
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    LeonardPine wrote: »
    The title is naff, unimaginative and generic.

    John Gardner, although i'm not a fan of his books, came up with some pretty good titles.

    Nobody Lives Forever
    Brokenclaw
    The Man From Barbarossa
    For Special Services

    Raymond Benson had a couple of cool ones as well;

    The Facts Of Death
    Never Dream Of Dying

    I agree with your entire post. No Time To Die actually feels like a piss-take title. It's almost as if Eon had looked at online posts about the production problems of Bond 25 and said "**** it, let's come up with the most generic 'die' title we can think of, just to annoy the haters!"

    I doubt they thought like that, they're not that superficial or mean-spirited(!) but the title does feel so generic, so cookie-cutter, so unimaginative you can come to a prejudiced opinion that Eon/MGM felt like saying "up yours!" to some of the fans. This does happen for real. Last Jedi director Rian Johnson insulted or bemoaned some of the fans after ep 8 came out, Paul Feig of Ghostbusters 2016 did the same. The director of the new Terminator film went online and had a go at some fans when they accused the film of being too #metoo in tone. I'm not saying NO TIME TO DIE is a deliberate "screw the fans!" decision but it's possible. It's so unimaginative that it beggars belief why Eon didn't go with something more unusual. Put it this way, if you come up with another 'die' title you're just asking for some fans to moan. It's a self-fulfilling scenario. You're asking fans to dislike the very thing you want them to like.

    If the title was something abstact, no-one would say "it's so generic, unoriginal!"

    Like I said earlier, Shatterhand would have been perfect. It sounds like early 60's Bond (Dr. No, Goldfinger, Thunderball).

    But instead we get the most generic of generic titles possible, that even the lamest Bond fan fic would be ashamed of.

    And you really think they’d follow through with ‘Shatterhand’ faithfully? What’s better, a potentially great film with a title you’re unimpressed with, or a title you love but that brings with it a promise they can’t and won’t deliver?

    So what you're saying is the fact that the title is unimpressive is a positive for the movie? :-?

    Now I really have heard it all.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    jetsetwilly wrote: »
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    LeonardPine wrote: »
    The title is naff, unimaginative and generic.

    John Gardner, although i'm not a fan of his books, came up with some pretty good titles.

    Nobody Lives Forever
    Brokenclaw
    The Man From Barbarossa
    For Special Services

    Raymond Benson had a couple of cool ones as well;

    The Facts Of Death
    Never Dream Of Dying

    I agree with your entire post. No Time To Die actually feels like a piss-take title. It's almost as if Eon had looked at online posts about the production problems of Bond 25 and said "**** it, let's come up with the most generic 'die' title we can think of, just to annoy the haters!"

    I doubt they thought like that, they're not that superficial or mean-spirited(!) but the title does feel so generic, so cookie-cutter, so unimaginative you can come to a prejudiced opinion that Eon/MGM felt like saying "up yours!" to some of the fans. This does happen for real. Last Jedi director Rian Johnson insulted or bemoaned some of the fans after ep 8 came out, Paul Feig of Ghostbusters 2016 did the same. The director of the new Terminator film went online and had a go at some fans when they accused the film of being too #metoo in tone. I'm not saying NO TIME TO DIE is a deliberate "screw the fans!" decision but it's possible. It's so unimaginative that it beggars belief why Eon didn't go with something more unusual. Put it this way, if you come up with another 'die' title you're just asking for some fans to moan. It's a self-fulfilling scenario. You're asking fans to dislike the very thing you want them to like.

    If the title was something abstact, no-one would say "it's so generic, unoriginal!"

    Like I said earlier, Shatterhand would have been perfect. It sounds like early 60's Bond (Dr. No, Goldfinger, Thunderball).

    But instead we get the most generic of generic titles possible, that even the lamest Bond fan fic would be ashamed of.

    And you really think they’d follow through with ‘Shatterhand’ faithfully? What’s better, a potentially great film with a title you’re unimpressed with, or a title you love but that brings with it a promise they can’t and won’t deliver?

    So what you're saying is the fact that the title is unimpressive is a positive for the movie? :-?

    Now I really have heard it all.


    It's a drag, isn't it. :-?
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited August 2019 Posts: 12,480
    Well if they discuss the title here forever instead of the production thread, that would be great. :) Besides, we should still retitle this thread. Something like No Time To Die Title Chat. Or better: The Name's No Time To Die: Like It Or Hate It?
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    jetsetwilly wrote: »
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    LeonardPine wrote: »
    The title is naff, unimaginative and generic.

    John Gardner, although i'm not a fan of his books, came up with some pretty good titles.

    Nobody Lives Forever
    Brokenclaw
    The Man From Barbarossa
    For Special Services

    Raymond Benson had a couple of cool ones as well;

    The Facts Of Death
    Never Dream Of Dying

    I agree with your entire post. No Time To Die actually feels like a piss-take title. It's almost as if Eon had looked at online posts about the production problems of Bond 25 and said "**** it, let's come up with the most generic 'die' title we can think of, just to annoy the haters!"

    I doubt they thought like that, they're not that superficial or mean-spirited(!) but the title does feel so generic, so cookie-cutter, so unimaginative you can come to a prejudiced opinion that Eon/MGM felt like saying "up yours!" to some of the fans. This does happen for real. Last Jedi director Rian Johnson insulted or bemoaned some of the fans after ep 8 came out, Paul Feig of Ghostbusters 2016 did the same. The director of the new Terminator film went online and had a go at some fans when they accused the film of being too #metoo in tone. I'm not saying NO TIME TO DIE is a deliberate "screw the fans!" decision but it's possible. It's so unimaginative that it beggars belief why Eon didn't go with something more unusual. Put it this way, if you come up with another 'die' title you're just asking for some fans to moan. It's a self-fulfilling scenario. You're asking fans to dislike the very thing you want them to like.

    If the title was something abstact, no-one would say "it's so generic, unoriginal!"

    Like I said earlier, Shatterhand would have been perfect. It sounds like early 60's Bond (Dr. No, Goldfinger, Thunderball).

    But instead we get the most generic of generic titles possible, that even the lamest Bond fan fic would be ashamed of.

    And you really think they’d follow through with ‘Shatterhand’ faithfully? What’s better, a potentially great film with a title you’re unimpressed with, or a title you love but that brings with it a promise they can’t and won’t deliver?

    So what you're saying is the fact that the title is unimpressive is a positive for the movie? :-?

    Now I really have heard it all.

    I clearly don’t say that anywhere. Keep up.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Look familiar ?

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRyrxo-cY4Rd-ccxoT0YRfWHRGrra8kl1wYndqJXGazwVVsT_jC
Sign In or Register to comment.