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 love everything about the Matera sequence.
I thought the Fleming inspired serious tone of CR and QoS was back.
But after the title sequence it was back to a lighter tone.
NTTD, especially from the London scenes onwards, struggles to fit the Bond character into a generic action movie rather than just being a Bond film in its own right.
Fleming had Bond investigate pirate treasure and fight a giant squid. And turn Japanese and have a statue come to life.
Then why didn’t he ever kill Bond off himself? I’m sure he knew that would have sold a lot of books?$$$. Could it be that he cared about the character too much to do it? That’s my bet.
Well, they could if they wanted.
Is that your only takeaway and summary of the Fleming novels then?
They did!! They did!! The coolest scene in the film, and they cut it. I thought I was the only one mentioning this. They changed it for the gun scene. Again, what a waste! See what I mean they can't do sexy anymore? Sexy or stylish or whatever. Funnily enough, the one scene from the reel that had me deciding I'd love the film, was cut.
But none of these plot points were light in tone in the novels.
My main issue is the uneven tone.
Yes!
Well, it's another Fleming homage. These films have been full of them. I was shocked and delighted to see that one!
Firstly reviews of NTTD are roughly love or loathe with not a lot inbetween as we British say a bit like Marmite. You could use the same reference for QoS. I think as has been said by others a lot of the issues with the Craig era is that they tried to tie all the movies together with SP & NTTD which is where the creativity went awry, IMHO it's very hard to tie up that many basically unrelated stories which is why a few on here have raised some continuity errors. If you think for a minute, the best of the Craig 5 were CR & SF. Though I have been critical of SF at times, I now appreciate it a lot more. Both these stand up well as stand alones which is why I believe they work well & the last 2 don't.
I totally agree with the opinion that the reboot needs to be a complete restart, new writers, actors everything & each film needs to be a stand alone it just works better.
Yes, I did recognise that and I do believe Bond strangles a few people in fits of range in the novels (Goldfinger too if I remember correctly). But there was something about Craig's performance or maybe the direction that just didn't work for me
Absolutely agree mate, it was one of the moments I was really excited about
I really hoped there would be more time spent with Bond in Jamaica as a wounded animal. I guess that wouldn't have further the narrative
@JohnBarry yeah mate I did find it odd. It felt like they popped the balloon. It was as out of place as Bond screaming turn it off in Spectre
Of course not. Fleming novels are a lot of things and have a lot of tones, and NTTD is no further from Fleming than CR06.
Had a similar conversation with my girlfriend (with a different thrust). We talked previously about how she has a problem with the depiction of women in the Bond films. You know, the usual stuff. We sometimes bicker about it but aren't really going to change each other's mind. It is what it is. Anyway, we leave the cinema and after a bit of top level discussion, I ask her, what she thought about the women and she goes: "Well it wasn't much of a Bond film, right? He doesn't even come on to anyone."
Now, in a way that just shows what my lovely girlfriend sees as the core of the franchise, but I thought it was an interesting glimpse at what a certain subset of a general public might think about this. But as you have shown, certainly not the view held by every woman.
Also, at least in the Brozza years he would have smoked a cigar on film, and not just between takes.
Because Campbell is the only person affiliated with the films today that actually gets Bond.
On another note, if ever there was a struggle between Connery and Craig as to who my favourite Bind is, NTTD vehemently confirmed that nobody and I absolutely mean nobody will ever take the top spot from Connery.
+1
Just wait until a journalist joins the forums and we get an article about how us Bond fans are all moaning infants based on the evidence of this thread.... :))
You've got a good one there mate 🍸
I was shocked by my girl's reaction truthfully, I thought she would be punching the air about the representation of females in the film but she thought it was a tad empty
She said it pandered to her as a woman rather than her as a Bond fan
I never thought there would ever be such an embarrassing and absurd Bond movie!
In DAD, the producers came up against a brick wall with a plethora of special effects, though the first half of the movie is great.
With the acquisition of CR rights and Craig's engagement, producers gained a unique opportunity to return to Bond Ian Fleming's roots. CR was a great harbinger of this concept. I thought with CR, the Bond series would gain a new breath of fresh air for the next Bond actors for many years to come.
But from QoS onwards, the psyche and life of Bond and the newly introduced characters were over-exploited, apparently due to a lack of new formula ideas.
As a result, in the fifth film with Craig, the producers again come up against a brick wall. The senseless exploration of the human psyche and the exploration of Bond's made-up family relationships, led the series into a dead end. But this time, unlike the DAD case, it has crossed the red line of self-destructing the entire franchise.
The 1967 CR was a Bond parody and is treated with a pinch of salt with such a label, but NTTD as a EON movie is something much worse. It is a betrayal of the legacy and fans.
Every minute of this movie undermines not only the sense of resetting the formula in CR, but most of all the sense of the entire series, the sense of being a fan ...
The film lacks panache, grace and softness. NTTD is a cluster of chaotic scenes that the film does not justify or justify in a childish way. The scenes are so fragmented that there is not a single solid sound track in the entire movie. And the references to John Barry's works are not accurate and seem to be an attempt to save the situation cheaply.
For example, there is a lack of a trademark of Bond movies: a solid uninterrupted action scene illustrated with a coherent piece of a soundtrack. In one of the interviews on the occasion of the filming of SP, Sam Mendes questioned the sense of this concept, although after all Pre Title Sequnece along with Newman's "Grand Bazaar, Istanbul" in SF is an example of the validity of it. Unlike the PTS of SP.
The actors in NTTD seem to be distracted, as if participating in some kind of chaos.
I think Daniel Craig contributed too much to the NTTD concept as a filmaker, a self-centered contribution that disrespected previous James Bond actors, the nuances and legacy of the franchise before CR.
Bond movies have gained popularity because give the opportunity to break away from everyday life for a moment and move to wonderful locations with
iconic James Bond and beautiful girls to experience fabulous action scenes with wonderful music.
It is a fact that today the exotic locations of Bond movies from the 60's or 70's are no longer so inaccessible and interesting, but is that why we get a movie in which James Bond peels an apple for a child and wears a plush mascot next to a machine gun? Where have we come?
I consider the idea of psychological development of characters in recent films to be right. However, at NTTD, this concept has come up against a brick wall. Paradoxically, by reducing the problem to absurdity, this movie admits wisdom of the makers of the older Bonds, to avoid this idea because you risk destroying the icon of James Bond character and the pure pleasure of entertainment.
A. Broccoli once advised his successors: "Don't screw it up". This concern has fully materialized in the NTTD, I am afraid.
Basic meaning hatred or contempt for women, Bond has neither of these traits, he loves women, he trys to protect them unless they're trying to kill him. I believe a lot of this misconception started after some moron thought it would be cool to put it in the GE M speech to Bond.
I actually laughed out loud out of disbelief to what I was watching when this happened. It was horribly executed.
I think once good will is lost, you nitpick far more. Im happy to admit that I overlook plot holes in other Bond movies but, well, they are better films. (IMHO)
For what is worth my show yesterday was sold out and at the end everybody cheered in excitement. Perhaps the film is garbage only to some hardcore fans.
Oeh!
xD
It's weird indeed. It's all based on way older films (other time), but keeps being mentioned if it is something that is still very much an issue with current films.