› ›

NO TIME TO DIE (2021) - First Reactions vs. Current Reactions

1…78101213…298

Comments

  • StirredNotShakenStirredNotShaken Toronto
    Posts: 2,402
    foo_yuk wrote: »
    If fan hissy fits lead to the next Bond being the “Rise of Skywalker” of Bond films I’m going to bite into the cyanide capsule in my back left molar. Do you know what it does to you? Watching Rise of Skywalker? Look on your work, JJ Abrams.

    Thankfully I don't think EON tend to capitulate to the whims of crybabies on Twitter the way Disney do.
  • StirredNotShakenStirredNotShaken Toronto
    Posts: 2,402
    matt_u wrote: »
    StirredNotShaken wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    I love that Bond finds out about being a father seconds before facing his death.

    He doesn't. He knows right away. I don't know if you've seen the film but it's written on his face.
    Really? Oh, well. I read on Reddit that he doesn't know. She explicitly tells him?

    Just being curious... his death occurs off screen? I mean, do we clearly see him engulfed by the flames of the explosion?

    Re: the first point
    She doesn't explicitly tell him until those final moments, but his response combined with how he acts during the previous segments of the film show that he knew the entire time.

    Re: the second
    You should just watch the film. I don't feel right talking about the details of how THAT happens, even in this thread.
  • TR007TR007
    Posts: 1,165
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    No body? Check
    James Bond will return? Check
    Casting the 7th actor in 2022? Check
    Don't see what the problem is.
    No body?!? Did we even watch the same movie?
    I haven't seen it. Some people here said that there was no body.

    I saw it last night and once you watch it you’ll see him 110% definitely kick the bucket.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    StirredNotShaken wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    StirredNotShaken wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    I love that Bond finds out about being a father seconds before facing his death.

    He doesn't. He knows right away. I don't know if you've seen the film but it's written on his face.
    Really? Oh, well. I read on Reddit that he doesn't know. She explicitly tells him?

    Just being curious... his death occurs off screen? I mean, do we clearly see him engulfed by the flames of the explosion?

    Re: the first point
    She doesn't explicitly tell him until those final moments, but his response combined with how he acts during the previous segments of the film show that he knew the entire time.

    Re: the second
    You should just watch the film. I don't feel right talking about the details of how THAT happens, even in this thread.

    Thanks. No problem, I'm booked for tomorrow.
  • bondywondybondywondy Uk
    Posts: 373
    Based on all the reviews online, we're seeing a massive disconnect. Vaat majority of casual Bond films not caring if Bond is dead vs small minority of hardcore fans having serious reservations. This is the problem with franchises. They rely on the goodwill of a vast majority of casual fans. The minority is not important. Not one critic review has said "how dare they kill off a cinematic icon!"

    You'd think that would be a legitimate reaction from some reviewers but nope... not a peek of disapproval.

    Strange times.
  • patbpatb
    edited September 2021 Posts: 4,617
    I know people have discussed the likes of Spock, Stark, Sherlock Holmes etc etc and its all interesting stuff. But (this has come up before) Bond in the cinema is unique IMHO re different actors, timelines, cross over supporting actors, cross over references etc. There really is nothing to compare to Bond in this area and mainstrem audiences (so far) have been very accepting/non-questioning. I have no idea how they will react to NTTD re this area.
  • AgentM72AgentM72
    Posts: 842
    bondywondy wrote: »
    Based on all the reviews online, we're seeing a massive disconnect. Vaat majority of casual Bond films not caring if Bond is dead vs small minority of hardcore fans having serious reservations. This is the problem with franchises. They rely on the goodwill of a vast majority of casual fans. The minority is not important. Not one critic review has said "how dare they kill off a cinematic icon!"

    You'd think that would be a legitimate reaction from some reviewers but nope... not a peek of disapproval.

    Strange times.

    Particularly strange and ironic, because I can't recall a Bond film that was so thoroughly, consistently, and intentionally made for hardcore fans.

    I mean it. Even with the shocking choices. Whether or not you want to consider EON's message to be one of love or one of "hey, come with us on this, let us challenge you a bit," every frame of this film bleeds with self-awareness and nuances of intelligent fan service. From minor details to major choices.

    <Blofeld voice> Most odd...
  • Tobester95Tobester95
    Posts: 117
    All this talk about 'Bond is dead', none of you are asking the real question...

    DOES JOHN BARRY'S 007 THEME APPEAR AT ANY POINT DURING THE SCENE WHERE (I ASSUME) BOND IS GOING NUTS AROUND THE 007 STAGE?!

    Strange if Zimmer includes nods to 'We Have All The Time in the World', but omits the music that, once upon a time, signalled that JAMES BOND WAS ABOUT TO GO ON A MADNESS.
  • MartinBondMartinBond Trying not to muck it up again
    edited September 2021 Posts: 863
    Tobester95 wrote: »
    All this talk about 'Bond is dead', none of you are asking the real question...

    DOES JOHN BARRY'S 007 THEME APPEAR AT ANY POINT DURING THE SCENE WHERE (I ASSUME) BOND IS GOING NUTS AROUND THE 007 STAGE?!

    Strange if Zimmer includes nods to 'We Have All The Time in the World', but omits the music that, once upon a time, signalled that JAMES BOND WAS ABOUT TO GO ON A MADNESS.

    Reg. The "past music":
    ATTITW, OHMSS theme (barely noticeable), Vespers theme, 2/3 notes of Skyfall and that's it as far as calback music is concerned.
  • bondsumbondsum
    edited September 2021 Posts: 3,334
    I concur @bondywondy. I'm having serious reservations about this being a good idea. I realise that it brings closure to Craig's tenure, but it also worries me how the knock-on effect could damage the next Bond movie down the pipeline.

    PS. I'm going to leave it for now until I've seen the movie. So see you around Bondoholics.
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,710
    Why isn’t anyone speaking about the Jamaica scenes? Or particular Bondian momments? Or about the title sequence? Or Nomi as 007? Or...
  • MartinBondMartinBond Trying not to muck it up again
    Posts: 863
    matt_u wrote: »
    Just being curious... his death occurs off screen? I mean, do we clearly see him engulfed by the flames of the explosion?

    Reg. The literal last scene of Bond:
    he gets on the roof of a missile silo, and does your traditional "hero sacrificing himself" pose as the rockets come raining down, the first one landing in the first silo and the second pretty much at his feet, leaving no doubt. Then cut to a shot of Q looking at the vital signs-screenshowing AGENT: BOND, JAMES with a heart rate of 0 bpm, blood pressure of 0 etc. Etc.
    There's no single doubt CraigBond is gone.
  • foo_yukfoo_yuk Canada
    Posts: 26
    Even if you hate the ending, there is a positive you’ve got to acknowledge. Every time EON has the opportunity to go back to the drawing board, they nail it. OHMSS, LALD, FYEO, TLD, GE, CR…

    Never have they given themselves THIS much license to do that. If ever we were to get a period piece tenure set in the 60’s with real “back to Fleming” spirit, this is the time.
  • vasilismfvasilismf
    edited September 2021 Posts: 46
    MartinBond wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Just being curious... his death occurs off screen? I mean, do we clearly see him engulfed by the flames of the explosion?

    Reg. The literal last scene of Bond:
    he gets on the roof of a missile silo, and does your traditional "hero sacrificing himself" pose as the rockets come raining down, the first one landing in the first silo and the second pretty much at his feet, leaving no doubt. Then cut to a shot of Q looking at the vital signs-screenshowing AGENT: BOND, JAMES with a heart rate of 0 bpm, blood pressure of 0 etc. Etc.
    There's no single doubt CraigBond is gone.
    why this is happening? did safin won?

    so the title of the movie is "no, time to die" :P

  • JimjambondJimjambond
    Posts: 328
    Question, what music is played to close out the movie and end credits? Bond theme?
  • AgentM72AgentM72
    Posts: 842
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Question, what music is played to close out the movie and end credits? Bond theme?

    That's kind of a massive spoiler. I'd recommend not knowing, and letting yourself discover it in the moment. Very key to the emotional impact of the film's ending.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,233
    bondsum wrote: »
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    I think you underestimate audiences. They’ll obviously understand that this will be a new iteration of Bond, much like how there’s different iterations of Sherlock Holmes. The difference is that it’s coming from the same production company. When a new Bond is being introduced, EON won’t need to tell people “forget about Craig”. They’ll focus on the new actor continuing a legacy that was started by Connery and is putting his own stamp like his predecessors.
    The difference is that the Sherlock Holmes stories have been in the public domain and been made by many different movie studios and TV companies since 1916, so audiences are more accustomed to the century long changes over a protracted period. Not so with James Bond. The Bond movies have been exclusively made by Eon (apart from 2) and have remained consistent in their approach and style, beginning with Connery in '62 up until today. I honestly couldn't tell you how many different actors have played Sherlock Holmes, but I can tell you how many have played Bond and when. I also think you're confusing what I meant. This will be the first time in its 60-year cinematic history that the producers will be asking its future audience to forget what they've just seen in the previous movie (something that had never been done before), and go with their new resurrected Bond in the next. It's going to be like Bobby Ewing returning to Dallas. You just know that a large swathe of the public will asking how James Bond is still alive when they just killed him off in NTTD, and have they just turned Bond into Kenny from South Park. I can almost see the memes now.

    I’m not seeing the big concern you have.

    You’re acting like this is unprecedented for general audiences. Maybe for Bond nerds, but literally nobody watching the Spider-Man films had trouble understanding that each actor was played a very different incarnation from the other.
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,710
    2006-2021: The subversive years

    I'm fine with that :)
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,617
    Something I'm a little confused on. I completely get the idea that CraigBond is in a completely different/unique universe. But I have also heard that there are references to other "non-CraigBond" movies (therefore, accessing the emotions/heritage beyond the Craig universe) - are they trying to have their cake and eat it?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,233
    patb wrote: »
    Something I'm a little confused on. I completely get the idea that CraigBond is in a completely different/unique universe. But I have also heard that there are references to other "non-CraigBond" movies (therefore, accessing the emotions/heritage beyond the Craig universe) - are they trying to have their cake and eat it?

    They’re called Easter eggs for fans. You don’t have to overthink it.

    Also, is Nomi actually 007 or do they only refer to her as a 00 agent?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited September 2021 Posts: 41,011
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    Something I'm a little confused on. I completely get the idea that CraigBond is in a completely different/unique universe. But I have also heard that there are references to other "non-CraigBond" movies (therefore, accessing the emotions/heritage beyond the Craig universe) - are they trying to have their cake and eat it?

    They’re called Easter eggs for fans. You don’t have to overthink it.

    Also, is Nomi actually 007 or do they only refer to her as a 00 agent?
    It sounds like she's actually called 007 instead of just a generic 00 agent or some other number.
  • vasilismfvasilismf
    Posts: 46
    so as i understand the concept was to kill bond from the beggining, independently of the screen writer and the director
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited September 2021 Posts: 13,356
    In years to come, when there are say 100 Bond films, the first 20 films will be looked at as very old fashioned and of another time, a time when things were done very differently.

    Audiences now expect complete stories and understand different, separate interpretations of one character. This does make the world of Bond feel very small as the franchise will become separate pockets as opposed to one long series of one-off adventures but it is the future of filmmaking whether we like it or not.

    History and future generations will decide if this is another element of Bond's uniqueness, his floating continuality, which was stripped away.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,589
    I'm going to go back to the summer of 1985 and AVTAK. For some reason, all this talk of Craig's finale and Bond's death is reminding me of May Day, and a fleeting thought I had in the theaters way back then: when she sacrificed herself toward the end of that film, maybe that should have been Bond. Because the true hero of AVTAK is May Day. In terms of tone, of course, it would not have been a fitting end for Roger. But the more I consider it here, the more it makes sense for DC and the mythic appeal of Bond.
  • DoctorClatterhandDoctorClatterhand
    Posts: 162
    The film sounds very interesting. I'm not at all offended by its ending. I find the cringe-inducing CGI in Die Another Day more upsetting. Craig has been so good for this franchise. Long may the iconoclastic elements continue.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,525
    Samuel001 wrote: »
    In years to come, when there are say 100 Bond films, the first 20 films will be looked at as very old fashioned and of another time, a time when things were done very differently.

    Audiences now expect complete stories and understand different, separate interpretations of one character. This does make the world of Bond feel very small as the franchise will become separate pockets as opposed to one long series of one-off adventures but it is the future of filmmaking whether we like it or not.

    History and future generations will decide if this is another element of Bond's uniqueness, his floating continuality, which was stripped away.

    Maybe - if it goes on for that long or if the films are even still allowed to be around as they were, uncensored and all ha.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    TripAces wrote: »
    I'm going to go back to the summer of 1985 and AVTAK. For some reason, all this talk of Craig's finale and Bond's death is reminding me of May Day, and a fleeting thought I had in the theaters way back then: when she sacrificed herself toward the end of that film, maybe that should have been Bond. Because the true hero of AVTAK is May Day. In terms of tone, of course, it would not have been a fitting end for Roger. But the more I consider it here, the more it makes sense for DC and the mythic appeal of Bond.

    Good point.
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,710
    So, for those who've seen it? Do we get lots of Jamaica time and Bondian scenes in his retreat? Or are they just fleeting?
  • tqbtqb
    Posts: 1,022
    Why are fans so toxic?
    Univex wrote: »
    So, for those who've seen it? Do we get lots of Jamaica time and Bondian scenes in his retreat? Or are they just fleeting?
    Lots? No honestly. There's maybe 4 or 5 scenes in Jamaica before it moves to Cuba.
  • StirredNotShakenStirredNotShaken Toronto
    Posts: 2,402
    bondywondy wrote: »
    Based on all the reviews online, we're seeing a massive disconnect. Vaat majority of casual Bond films not caring if Bond is dead vs small minority of hardcore fans having serious reservations. This is the problem with franchises. They rely on the goodwill of a vast majority of casual fans. The minority is not important. Not one critic review has said "how dare they kill off a cinematic icon!"

    You'd think that would be a legitimate reaction from some reviewers but nope... not a peek of disapproval.

    Strange times.

    STOP TALKING ABOUT ME LIKE I'M SOMEONE WHO JUST SAW THEIR FIRST F#$%ING BOND FILM. "New member" my ass. You just joined these forums to be a troll.
Sign In or Register to comment.