Do you have any concerns or niggles about NTTD ,or are you full of confidence ?

1161719212245

Comments

  • edited December 2019 Posts: 6,709
    But I do find it amusing many are overlooking how often Desmond Lewellyn Q was out on the field a bunch of times, particularly during the 80s.

    Yes, and I’ve never liked that either. But that was Moore era comic relief shenanigans wasn’t it? For the most part, anyway. And then there was that LTK cringeworthy uncle Q in the field.
  • Posts: 6,709
    The drop-offs worked well on occasion, like in, say, TB or TND, or the other two you mentioned. But having workshops hidden in major cities (and minor) with massive projects and testing going on, or having Q actually be part of the action, is just silly, IMO.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,192
    Univex wrote: »
    But I do find it amusing many are overlooking how often Desmond Lewellyn Q was out on the field a bunch of times, particularly during the 80s.

    Yes, and I’ve never liked that either. But that was Moore era comic relief shenanigans wasn’t it? For the most part, anyway. And then there was that LTK cringeworthy uncle Q in the field.

    He was also on the field in TLD for helping Koskov defect.

    I don’t mind the MI6 crew being out on the field so long as it works for the film. In SP it really felt tacked on, especially since Moneypenny and Tanner were literally doing nothing but following M and Q who both at least had something notable to do,
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,223
    Univex wrote: »
    But I do find it amusing many are overlooking how often Desmond Lewellyn Q was out on the field a bunch of times, particularly during the 80s.

    Yes, and I’ve never liked that either. But that was Moore era comic relief shenanigans wasn’t it? For the most part, anyway. And then there was that LTK cringeworthy uncle Q in the field.

    He was also on the field in TLD for helping Koskov defect.

    I don’t mind the MI6 crew being out on the field so long as it works for the film. In SP it really felt tacked on, especially since Moneypenny and Tanner were literally doing nothing but following M and Q who both at least had something notable to do,

    It felt more prominent than it actually was because the story kept cutting back to London in the second act, too.
  • Posts: 6,709
    That’s all true.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    edited December 2019 Posts: 3,126
    All we need is Bond's pet dog and the scooby gang is set and a van.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,192
    Perhaps the bulldog that M gave him.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    Perhaps the bulldog that M gave him.

    Perfect
  • OOWolfOOWolf Savannah
    Posts: 140
    I've been saying this from the get go. Scooby gang and Bond don't mix. Every "introduction" in Skyfall was cringeworthy, especially Eve's. We never needed to know where any of these characters came from, only that they are there to aptly assist Bond when needed.

    I also have a theory that recurring themes, locations and physical objects are used to try to create a cohesive whole to a dastardly hodgepodge story arc. SPECTRE was a joke in regards to the plot and story, and sadly, but truly, 'NTTD' wouldn't have happened had Craig not agreed to accept a massive paycheck -can't blame him there.

    Now, if we go back and watch SPECTRE, the ending will feel corny. That was supposed to be the end. I just hope 'NTTD' will have enough standalone elements.

    So, at the end of the day, we're the ones who are drinking the Kool Aid.
  • Posts: 631
    ossyjack wrote: »
    Even the locations they are going to use just don't do it for me. Italian hill town - done to death in the Craig era in CR and QofS. Remote icy location - done to death. London - done to death. I miss the days of Rio, Tokyo, Cairo, San Francisco. Hopefully the Jamaica scenes will be decent.

    Yes this. I’ve had enough of London. It appears everywhere, not just Bond, it’s appeared in Marvel films, in Gerard Butler action vehicles, in MI, in Bourne, it’s even been in Tom Cruise’s The Mummy for goodness sake, it’s the current go-to in blockbusters (because of UK tax relief I suppose?) and it’s so uninspiring now.

    The world is a big place, there are loads of places they could set a new movie, something we have not seen before.
  • Posts: 1,680
    ossyjack wrote: »
    I was hoping to avoid seeing the trailer until nearer the release date but caught it between the football the other day and so have watched it a few more times since then.

    Honest opinion - this was a film I was concerned about having been let down by Spectre and everything I have heard going on since then hasn't inspired much confidence in the way it is going.

    Having seen the trailer my concerns have only increased. Watching it you can play Daniel Craig era bingo:

    Suspicion that Bond might be dead - check
    Bond not in active service/retired/disappeared - check
    Bond being considered as out of date, out of touch, the world has moved on etc - check
    Secrets and back-stories between Bond, Madeleine, Blofeld - check

    I agree with the earlier comments on here that there is far too much of this Bond going rogue, Bond settling old scores, personal angle stuff with Moneypenny and Q running around him.

    I yearn for a clean slate. Exciting pre-title sequence. Bond in London, receives a mission from M. Heads off to some exotic far flung location. Gradually unearths a masterplan or plot headed by a diabolical charismatic villain. Villain isn't a relative of Bond, or a traitor, or someone with a grudge. Just a psychopath or criminal genius who is thwarted by Bond's skills. Bond saves the world from ruin. The end.

    I'm now worried that this is going to be another big let down. The only parts of the trailer that remotely interest me are the return of Waltz as an incarcerated Blofeld and Remi Malek's decent looking villain.

    I suppose it is early days and it could turn out to be a good entry but this doesn't excite me at all. Another irritation is how long it has been since Spectre. If you are doing a sequel - which the presence of Madeleine and Blofeld suggests it is - then you don't wait 4.5 years to get it out - it needs to be done in 2-3 years maximum. Save the 4-5 year gaps between films for the relaunch with a new actor e.g. 1989-1995 and 2002-2006.

    Even the locations they are going to use just don't do it for me. Italian hill town - done to death in the Craig era in CR and QofS. Remote icy location - done to death. London - done to death. I miss the days of Rio, Tokyo, Cairo, San Francisco. Hopefully the Jamaica scenes will be decent.

    I don't relish a changing of the guard with a new actor playing 007 as I think stability in actors is important but I'm starting to look forward to a fresh start and hopefully ditch all this nonsense. Other than the second half of Casino Royale we can pretty much go all the way back to TND or TWINE for the last time Bond had a traditional mission and was sent out to do it free from going rogue or having a personal angle.
    OOWolf wrote: »
    I've been saying this from the get go. Scooby gang and Bond don't mix. Every "introduction" in Skyfall was cringeworthy, especially Eve's. We never needed to know where any of these characters came from, only that they are there to aptly assist Bond when needed.

    I also have a theory that recurring themes, locations and physical objects are used to try to create a cohesive whole to a dastardly hodgepodge story arc. SPECTRE was a joke in regards to the plot and story, and sadly, but truly, 'NTTD' wouldn't have happened had Craig not agreed to accept a massive paycheck -can't blame him there.

    Now, if we go back and watch SPECTRE, the ending will feel corny. That was supposed to be the end. I just hope 'NTTD' will have enough standalone elements.

    So, at the end of the day, we're the ones who are drinking the Kool Aid.

    When i read this it makes me wish sometimes Craig should have left after Skyfall.

    It’s almolst as if they were out of ideas after that film
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,192
    The “Scooby gang” as you disparagingly refer to only happens in SP. In SF, Q never leaves his lab, Moneypenny wasn’t assigned in office yet, M only went out on the field when Bond kidnapped her, and Mallory and Tanner stayed in their offices.

    The way many seem to gripe about how this Scooby gang became a staple in Craig’s run is very exaggerated.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,423
    Birdleson wrote: »
    royale65 wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    It's not just that they're in the field, it's that their insertion (I'm talking SP, not SF) often felt forced; like we have these actors we better use them.

    Then better go down the route of dependable, stock character for the MI6 posse, instead of having big name actors.

    Exactly my point. Or actors that have been around long enough to not need the spotlight and are looking for an easy gig (ie. John Cleese or Judi Dench, although that quickly got out of hand too).

    Never cared for Desmond in the field (but for the quick drop-offs: TB, YOLT, TSWLM).

    Indeed. A few solid, veteran actors, who'd be grateful of paycheck every few years.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited December 2019 Posts: 8,192
    I’m willing to bet the current MI6 cast would be content to minimal roles as they’re relatively easy to shoot, only a few days worth of work, and get to be associated with a mega franchise, it’s just that EON has felt compelled to use them beyond the minimum because of their successes outside of Bond. Like how Judi Dench’s role as M was only increased once she got an Oscar. Marvel does this well having heavily acclaimed actors in pretty minimal roles.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited December 2019 Posts: 2,541
    Univex wrote: »
    But I do find it amusing many are overlooking how often Desmond Lewellyn Q was out on the field a bunch of times, particularly during the 80s.

    Yes, and I’ve never liked that either. But that was Moore era comic relief shenanigans wasn’t it? For the most part, anyway. And then there was that LTK cringeworthy uncle Q in the field.

    He was also on the field in TLD for helping Koskov defect.

    I don’t mind the MI6 crew being out on the field so long as it works for the film. In SP it really felt tacked on, especially since Moneypenny and Tanner were literally doing nothing but following M and Q who both at least had something notable to do,

    Tanner was driving the car on the way to CNS while Moneypenny was shouting "they have seen us Reverseeeeeeeeeeee".
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,192
    Tanner is like the reliable designated driver you bring along on Fridays.
  • Posts: 3,327
    ossyjack wrote: »
    I was hoping to avoid seeing the trailer until nearer the release date but caught it between the football the other day and so have watched it a few more times since then.

    Honest opinion - this was a film I was concerned about having been let down by Spectre and everything I have heard going on since then hasn't inspired much confidence in the way it is going.

    Having seen the trailer my concerns have only increased. Watching it you can play Daniel Craig era bingo:

    Suspicion that Bond might be dead - check
    Bond not in active service/retired/disappeared - check
    Bond being considered as out of date, out of touch, the world has moved on etc - check
    Secrets and back-stories between Bond, Madeleine, Blofeld - check

    I agree with the earlier comments on here that there is far too much of this Bond going rogue, Bond settling old scores, personal angle stuff with Moneypenny and Q running around him.

    I yearn for a clean slate. Exciting pre-title sequence. Bond in London, receives a mission from M. Heads off to some exotic far flung location. Gradually unearths a masterplan or plot headed by a diabolical charismatic villain. Villain isn't a relative of Bond, or a traitor, or someone with a grudge. Just a psychopath or criminal genius who is thwarted by Bond's skills. Bond saves the world from ruin. The end.

    I'm now worried that this is going to be another big let down. The only parts of the trailer that remotely interest me are the return of Waltz as an incarcerated Blofeld and Remi Malek's decent looking villain.

    I suppose it is early days and it could turn out to be a good entry but this doesn't excite me at all. Another irritation is how long it has been since Spectre. If you are doing a sequel - which the presence of Madeleine and Blofeld suggests it is - then you don't wait 4.5 years to get it out - it needs to be done in 2-3 years maximum. Save the 4-5 year gaps between films for the relaunch with a new actor e.g. 1989-1995 and 2002-2006.

    Even the locations they are going to use just don't do it for me. Italian hill town - done to death in the Craig era in CR and QofS. Remote icy location - done to death. London - done to death. I miss the days of Rio, Tokyo, Cairo, San Francisco. Hopefully the Jamaica scenes will be decent.

    I don't relish a changing of the guard with a new actor playing 007 as I think stability in actors is important but I'm starting to look forward to a fresh start and hopefully ditch all this nonsense. Other than the second half of Casino Royale we can pretty much go all the way back to TND or TWINE for the last time Bond had a traditional mission and was sent out to do it free from going rogue or having a personal angle.

    Excellent post!

    My fears are that NTTD is DAD in disguise. It's the Craig era equivalent, the natural conclusion to his reign, when EON lose their way (as they have occasionally done in the past), when the trend has been to push the boundaries that little bit more. A bit more excess, a bit more action, a bit more gadgets, a bit more of everything overall, thinking this is the only way to go.

    Then the harsh backlash, the negative critics, the Fleming fans claiming Bond has lost its way, and then EON go for another reboot after excess - OHMSS/TLD/GE/CR style. New actor, and at the same time trying to somehow go back to basics again. Reign back what they have got carried away with.

    NTTD should have been that film, but this looks more and more like OTT generic action Bond again. SP part 2 at best, and DAD part 2 at worst.

    The warning signs were there right from the off with the new title. Now the trailer is starting to confirm those fears.








  • Posts: 1,680
    ossyjack wrote: »
    I was hoping to avoid seeing the trailer until nearer the release date but caught it between the football the other day and so have watched it a few more times since then.

    Honest opinion - this was a film I was concerned about having been let down by Spectre and everything I have heard going on since then hasn't inspired much confidence in the way it is going.

    Having seen the trailer my concerns have only increased. Watching it you can play Daniel Craig era bingo:

    Suspicion that Bond might be dead - check
    Bond not in active service/retired/disappeared - check
    Bond being considered as out of date, out of touch, the world has moved on etc - check
    Secrets and back-stories between Bond, Madeleine, Blofeld - check

    I agree with the earlier comments on here that there is far too much of this Bond going rogue, Bond settling old scores, personal angle stuff with Moneypenny and Q running around him.

    I yearn for a clean slate. Exciting pre-title sequence. Bond in London, receives a mission from M. Heads off to some exotic far flung location. Gradually unearths a masterplan or plot headed by a diabolical charismatic villain. Villain isn't a relative of Bond, or a traitor, or someone with a grudge. Just a psychopath or criminal genius who is thwarted by Bond's skills. Bond saves the world from ruin. The end.

    I'm now worried that this is going to be another big let down. The only parts of the trailer that remotely interest me are the return of Waltz as an incarcerated Blofeld and Remi Malek's decent looking villain.

    I suppose it is early days and it could turn out to be a good entry but this doesn't excite me at all. Another irritation is how long it has been since Spectre. If you are doing a sequel - which the presence of Madeleine and Blofeld suggests it is - then you don't wait 4.5 years to get it out - it needs to be done in 2-3 years maximum. Save the 4-5 year gaps between films for the relaunch with a new actor e.g. 1989-1995 and 2002-2006.

    Even the locations they are going to use just don't do it for me. Italian hill town - done to death in the Craig era in CR and QofS. Remote icy location - done to death. London - done to death. I miss the days of Rio, Tokyo, Cairo, San Francisco. Hopefully the Jamaica scenes will be decent.

    I don't relish a changing of the guard with a new actor playing 007 as I think stability in actors is important but I'm starting to look forward to a fresh start and hopefully ditch all this nonsense. Other than the second half of Casino Royale we can pretty much go all the way back to TND or TWINE for the last time Bond had a traditional mission and was sent out to do it free from going rogue or having a personal angle.

    Excellent post!

    My fears are that NTTD is DAD in disguise. It's the Craig era equivalent, the natural conclusion to his reign, when EON lose their way (as they have occasionally done in the past), when the trend has been to push the boundaries that little bit more. A bit more excess, a bit more action, a bit more gadgets, a bit more of everything overall, thinking this is the only way to go.

    Then the harsh backlash, the negative critics, the Fleming fans claiming Bond has lost its way, and then EON go for another reboot after excess - OHMSS/TLD/GE/CR style. New actor, and at the same time trying to somehow go back to basics again. Reign back what they have got carried away with.

    NTTD should have been that film, but this looks more and more like OTT generic action Bond again. SP part 2 at best, and DAD part 2 at worst.

    The warning signs were there right from the off with the new title. Now the trailer is starting to confirm those fears.








    Probably safe to say it’s not movie gold idea as Boyle stated

    I’m starting to agree. After multiple viewings of the trailer it’s looking more of the same

    I thought the trailer would be a tense espionage FRWL type.

    If I had to guess this will be 60-70% similar to Spectre. Looks to be more of the same. It’s too much of a sequel to garner critical acclaim

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,192
    There’s been a personal element for Bond in every Bond film since LTK, 30 years which is practically more than half of this film series’ existence. This conceit that it’s only been a thing in Craig’s run is false. For whatever reason, Michael and Barbara feel there always needs to be that personal element, that it can’t just be Bond on another mission like from DN-TLD.
  • SafinDuplessisSafinDuplessis the United Kingdom. Cornwall.
    Posts: 22
    I feel like I'm walking on bloody thin ice here, mate. Could be a disaster, or could be fun. Trailer looks fun but the behind the scenes turmoil is real and evident
  • Posts: 1,680
    I think if NTTD under performs the series may be shelved or a drastic turn will occur for the B26
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,223
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    I think if NTTD under performs the series may be shelved or a drastic turn will occur for the B26

    Define "under performs"?

    I think we're in store for a change regardless of how well NTTD does. The same way we have been for every other previous era.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,192
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    I think if NTTD under performs the series may be shelved or a drastic turn will occur for the B26

    Define "under performs"?

    I think we're in store for a change regardless of how well NTTD does. The same way we have been for every other previous era.

    Indeed. DAD was Brosnan’s biggest hit at the box office, and yet EON changed gears anyway with the next actor.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    I think there will be a lot of fresh take on this especially in which I am excited for- Cuba/Jaimaica/Saffin lair(it's Norway, Russia don't know yet).

    The shots that looks a bit familiar is London and matera one's.

    So It's a blend of both we are getting more fresh and less familiar scenes.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited December 2019 Posts: 4,399
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    I think if NTTD under performs the series may be shelved or a drastic turn will occur for the B26

    shelved?.. no - maybe a short hiatus, but never shelved.. the Bond franchise is going on 60 years and the series, and character have reached cultural icon status.. James Bond is never going away..

    i personally feel we are in for a drastic turn regardless with Bond 26 - or whenever 007 #7 takes over.. i dont think they'll try to duplicate the direction they went with Craig.. i think right now, the sensibility of the cinema going public would mean probably a Bond film that feels a bit more "light" in tone.. i am not talking about a return of campy fluff or anything like that - but perhaps something more akin to TND or GE more than these character study Bond films of Craig era.... but we'll see..

    i just want to get back to Bond films every 2-3 years, no more of this 4-5 year nonsense - thats too damn long.
  • Posts: 3,327
    HASEROT wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    I think if NTTD under performs the series may be shelved or a drastic turn will occur for the B26

    shelved?.. no - maybe a short hiatus, but never shelved.. the Bond franchise is going on 60 years and the series, and character have reached cultural icon status.. James Bond is never going away..

    i personally feel we are in for a drastic turn regardless with Bond 26 - or whenever 007 #7 takes over.. i dont think they'll try to duplicate the direction they went with Craig.. i think right now, the sensibility of the cinema going public would mean probably a Bond film that feels a bit more "light" in tone.. i am not talking about a return of campy fluff or anything like that - but perhaps something more akin to TND or GE more than these character study Bond films of Craig era.... but we'll see..

    i just want to get back to Bond films every 2-3 years, no more of this 4-5 year nonsense - thats too damn long.

    Whatever happens with NTTD, I seriously doubt the next film will be much lighter in tone. If anything it will go darker, back to basics, reigning it all back in again. This is usually what happens when EON get stuck with a new direction to go in.

  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    HASEROT wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    I think if NTTD under performs the series may be shelved or a drastic turn will occur for the B26

    shelved?.. no - maybe a short hiatus, but never shelved.. the Bond franchise is going on 60 years and the series, and character have reached cultural icon status.. James Bond is never going away..

    i personally feel we are in for a drastic turn regardless with Bond 26 - or whenever 007 #7 takes over.. i dont think they'll try to duplicate the direction they went with Craig.. i think right now, the sensibility of the cinema going public would mean probably a Bond film that feels a bit more "light" in tone.. i am not talking about a return of campy fluff or anything like that - but perhaps something more akin to TND or GE more than these character study Bond films of Craig era.... but we'll see..

    i just want to get back to Bond films every 2-3 years, no more of this 4-5 year nonsense - thats too damn long.

    Whatever happens with NTTD, I seriously doubt the next film will be much lighter in tone. If anything it will go darker, back to basics, reigning it all back in again. This is usually what happens when EON get stuck with a new direction to go in.

    true... i mean it also depends on who the actor will be too - as i think they will generally adjust the tone of the films to suit the sensibilities of the actor.
  • Posts: 3,327
    There’s been a personal element for Bond in every Bond film since LTK, 30 years which is practically more than half of this film series’ existence. This conceit that it’s only been a thing in Craig’s run is false. For whatever reason, Michael and Barbara feel there always needs to be that personal element, that it can’t just be Bond on another mission like from DN-TLD.

    LTK set the template for Craig's Bond, and to a lesser extent Brosnan's Bond too. It's just that with LTK, as a one-off stand-alone film (at that time) it felt fresh and new.

    Bond going rogue and personal missions has been to death since then, where we are all now tired of it. EON need to rethink after this film, and go back to the simpler, straight-forward, stand-alone missions again.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,192
    There’s been a personal element for Bond in every Bond film since LTK, 30 years which is practically more than half of this film series’ existence. This conceit that it’s only been a thing in Craig’s run is false. For whatever reason, Michael and Barbara feel there always needs to be that personal element, that it can’t just be Bond on another mission like from DN-TLD.

    LTK set the template for Craig's Bond, and to a lesser extent Brosnan's Bond too. It's just that with LTK, as a one-off stand-alone film (at that time) it felt fresh and new.

    Bond going rogue and personal missions has been to death since then, where we are all now tired of it. EON need to rethink after this film, and go back to the simpler, straight-forward, stand-alone missions again.

    I think two things can only change that: if NTTD flops hard or if there’s a change in guard. I think because the series has made big hits, particularly CR and SF, that it’s made EON comfortable to keep doing that until it backfires financially. As critically decisive as SP was, it’s still one of the highest grossing films of the Bond series. So it’s no surprise they’re not dropping it.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited December 2019 Posts: 4,399
    As critically decisive as SP was, it’s still one of the highest grossing films of the Bond series. So it’s no surprise they’re not dropping it.

    but probably one of the least profitable when you factor in what it cost to make and market.. if you believe the reports from Sony/Columbia

    SP's PD was $300m (est.)

    NTTD's PD is $250m (est.)

    it'll be interesting to see where NTTD's total box office ends up.. i think with what they've spent, only being around $50m less than SP - anything less than what SP took i believe is troubling.... bottom line, as long as it turns profit (which it should) everyone wins, everyone's happy, but thats a number i'll be paying attention to for sure.
Sign In or Register to comment.