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
As some have said maybe this is EON preparing to bow out for a big pay day and let Amazon take the character in a new direction, who knows?
But as a curtain fall for Craig it seems the curse of the final outing that always seems to be a poor effort with the exception of Lazenby who's one effort is exellent IMO. (DAF/Connery, AVTAK/Moore, LTK/Dalton, DAD/Brosnan & now NTTD/Craig all weak in the series)
Yes. Except I also think in this case because we've had an extra 50 years of cinema and of Bond, there will be stronger support out of the gate as well.
I appreciate the apology. All good points. We can definitely agree that we all want Bond firing on all cylinders. We want Bond to dominate and deliver. Let's bask in the glory of NTTD right now because, next year, we're going to be hyped for the next Bond actor and Bond film. Long live James Bond.
Re: final shot
Can't disagree with your analysis. problems with NTTD can be directly linked to SP.
Anyway, I think I need to watch this a second time at a regular cinema to appreciate it more and look out for flaws. Thoroughly enjoyed my first viewing of it though via the giant IMAX screen which was really impressive. Way better than Qos and Spectre, no doubt about that. I like that there were also some comedic, tongue in cheek moments in the movie.
But the ending still leaves me stunned. Can't stop thinking about the way the movie ended. Darn.
I get that James Bond will "return" in the next movie, but does anyone really believe it'll be a you-know-which-demographic in the role? I'd be shocked if so. But I don't see how they can subvert the Bond character too much without it all falling apart.
They're certainly always appreciated but we've gone several pages now with a mixed usage of them so don't feel obligated, I suppose. It definitely doesn't hurt though.
This may be one of my favourite reactions so far. Cheers.
I generally just try to use them for the ending or for ultra-specific visual/audio details. Even if someone is okay with learning the plot before they go in, I don't think anyone wants to lose the fun of a good easter egg, for example.
100% yes.
I'm not even sure it will go through a period where it's considered "disliked" except amongst the most hardcore fans who really, really just reject the central emotional idea of the ending.
And Rocky Balboa
Rocky hasn't died though...?
White having remarried is a plausible explanation, but not a very good one.
Though he was for Creed 3, maybe I’m mistaken
Though who wants the same film twice? The Bond films are formulaic, and it's a formula I'm addicted to but it's those slight variances in the formula with each film that keeps us coming back intrigued as always. As a Bond film NTTD doesn't have a plot that's especially original or a story which desperately needed to be told but as a finale for Craig it's very satisfying. Craig's Bond is more fleshed out here than we've ever had before and the dialogue such as his sparring with M a lot more palatable this time round.
Hard not to see this being a hit with the public as with CR and SF as it has a strong human interest story with some tragedy to tug the heartstrings. The action was fine but it's not truly the all out action blockbuster that some reviews have touted it as. I found the Matera chase sequence disappointingly brief. Some nice fisticuffs from Bond though and the EMP dispatch of a villain got the biggest laugh from the audience I was with.
I was actually impressed with Rami Malek, more underused than underwhelming. His first full scene in the film (after the pre-credit appearance) in Madeline's office is probably him at his creepiest. I'm undecided about Nomi. Fortunately not an irritating character trying to do Bond down as we might fear but the film would have worked just as well without her.
Hypocritically I'll say whilst Ana de Armas's Paloma is very much a shoe-in character too she's such a welcome appearance for her 12 minute screen time and terrific chemistry with Craig. If Craig had continued as Bond we could have had her as a recurring character whenever Bond was in that neck of the woods. I never had a problem with Madeline in SP, I liked how aloof she was, but she's well served and fleshed out here and gets in on the some of the action too. It was nice to see her back.
Other than the callbacks to Vesper's theme, SF, the OHMSS theme and We Have All The Time In The World I didn't notice much from Hans Zimmer's score. Some would say that's exactly how a score should be, unobtrusive, but whilst I'll still pick up the soundtrack tomorrow I wouldn't say he was especially any better than Newman to be honest.
I'm looking forward to seeing it on IMAX tomorrow and how that might change my perception of certain things such as the action sequences. It will be good to soak up Linus Sandgren's cinematography on a bigger screen. This truly is a lush and colourful looking film after the sepia SP.
Not a franchise best entry but still an exceedingly well made effort from EON. This deserves to be praised and do well and I applaud them for holding out until it got a proper theatrical release. I'm just so glad we got that one more film from Craig and that it's finally been released and didn't disappoint.
Madeleine also mentions "after the divorce" when they're at L'Americain so they've really whiffed on that despite retaining the detail about the bleach. Whoops.
On the plus side, one of the greatest villains of all time, Feathers McGraw, now appears in a Bond film.
On a different note, re: Kleinman's titles
I'd say that's compliments of not having a clear plan or outline from the beginning and sort of retroactively tweaking things and making stuff up as you go - the details quickly get muddled and contradicted. To me, it seems like an easy thing to catch and memorize for later scripts, though, but I'm no screenwriter myself.
Seems like they just threw that in there because "we're hip! we're modern"!