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
In the context of looking at what they did in NTTD I understand your point but I was really referencing the decisions EON had made over several movies to get us to this point.
In other words, they agreed to him being killed so they have to tie everything up around that hence you saying "What else could they have done?" but had they not killed him then they could still have giving him a send off that has the impact for the characters in NTTD but leaves the door open for the fans.
Add to this there are different generations of fans so their love of the character will be different. I know a lot of fans who don't have a problem with the ending of NTTD but on the flipside their first experience of Bond was CR.
Not all, but a lot of fans (like me) who are unhappy with the ending is because Bond movies have been part of their movie experience going back to the days of Moore etc.
I'm not saying anyone has a divine right suggest simply being older and seeing more Bond movies at the time of release gives them any more clout than anyone who has enjoyed Bond since Brosnan/Craig but you'd think they would take into account all the fans.
The simple fix for this for everyone is.....DO NOT KILL BOND!
A quick fix for NTTD could have been....
We never actually see the missiles hit and Bond at the same time. We just see them hit from a distance the same way Madeline sees it.
Everyone thinks he is dead.
At a funeral for Bond M says he bit and the camera pans away slowly and there is a silhouette who eventually walks out of shot and the end credits start with 'JAMES BOND WILL RETURN"
Then it's left to fan interruption. Did he die? Was that Bond? Something along those lines.
Even if that sounds like the same ending to TDKR I'm good with that because nothing is original. Everything is repeating. There are loads of movies that have had similar endings.
The point to take from this is Bond could be alive and I honestly don't think anyone would have remotely suggested "Darn it, I was hoping he was going to die!!!"
Personally I felt there is zero chemistry between Craig and Seydoux probably in part because he is 15 years older! Bond has been a victim throughout his tenure. Always been double crossed or mistrusted. Even his child was kept a secret from him!
Add to this the whole point of him visiting Vesper's grave is because it is clear to Madeline he still loves her.
Logan yes, The Last Jedi no. Same impact as above in a character such as Luke that was established as always trying to be better and even saw the good in Vader is hardly going to consider killing a child and becoming a miserable hermit.
The Last Jedi was a mess and because of that we then got Rise of Skywalker which was more of a mess as it tried to fix the previous mess. All we ended up with was a fantastic setup in The Force Awakens, much like we got with Craig in CR that in subsequent movies and stupid decisions ended up being a mess a dividing opinion amongst fans.
Now we have the same with Bond.
OHMSS is a top Bond film that had a shock ending. NTTD, Bond dying aside, looks fantastic but is average at most. IMO the only thing that raises it in the ranking is QoS and Spectre were worse.
“L’homme masqué”
French for : The masked man.
Ah ok. Makes sense. Thank you.
Does sound like Craig agreed to come back one more time on the understanding that they would agree to let Bond die. Also, coming back as a producer gives him a lot more clout and I don't agree this should happen moving forward. No one actor is bigger than the franchise.
Totally understand why Boyle left saying killing Bond was "ridiculous!".
However, it's done. Nothing is going to change this now but I believe they are thinking ahead about how to reimagine Bond for future generations and the simple fix is...
James Bond is the given spy name and 007 is the licence. Another reason why they cast a woman as 007 because had it been another male then they would have been known as 'James Bond'. It would also allow them to cast anyone with any characteristics in the role be them white, black or Asian etc.
This also allows them to keep the same cast for M, Q and Moneypenny and gives some familiar faces to the franchise.
Obviously I'm just guessing but I can't see what else they can do. We don't need another reboot. Don't want to see a younger Bond or a throwback to the 60s Bond.
For the record, I think the whole concept of 'James Bond' just being the spy name is frankly stupid and I hate it. I'm just thinking how they can move forward.
None of this would be an issue had they not killed him.
I think fans have this idea that their opinion carries that much weight, that is yours and others feelings, we'll see how the Box Office goes and it might prove your point.
Although I think you weren't happy with it so you want this to be so. Not all of us think this.
The loudest voices aren't always the majority but guaranteed the ones who object will no doubt be banging on about this long after the dust has settled.
So I'm saying this won't happen.
Yes. I agree with you. I emailed Eon with my plot idea how Bond survives the blast zone and then hired by the enemy to topple another enemy. M finds out Bond is alive (da da daaaaa! Lol) and sends Nomi and other 00s to capture Bond.
Madeleine and child have a new identity to protect themselves. M mentions that information. Madeleine and Mathilde are not in Bond 26.
At the very end of the film Moneypenny says to Bond,
"Don't you want to know where they are? Meet them again? She is your daughter, James."
And Bond says
"No, I've brought enough pain into their lives. They deserve a life without me."
Bond gives Moneypenny a sad looking smile and he leaves the room.
End credits roll.
That way you don't have to mention them ever again. Bond 27 and beyond can forget Madeleine and daughter Mathilde. No continuity issues. Also, by Bond abandoning Madeleine and Mathilde it shows he is Ian Fleming's Bond after all. Bond is the cold warrior that has to forget love and commitment.
😉
I feel this can work and you avoid the silly continuity nightmare of Bond actually dead in Bond 25 but alive in Bond 26.
Bond: Requesting a missile strike, on my location.
M: Bond, this was meant to be a surgical strike. Not the start of World War 3.
Bond: M, whatever happens, I’m not coming back... this is it.
M: The problem..
Bond (interrupts) Put this on my shoulders. You understand
Pause
M: Very well….thank you double o seven and good luck
Bond: Thank you, sir.
Yes, it's the same for me. I don't want to badmouth the movie, as i know there are many, who liked it. Maybe it's an age thing. When i was in my twenties, i witnessed in cinema, how Captain Kirk was killed and Jim Phelps became an antagonist only to die then too. I wasn't amused at the time, but it never hit me like this one. Maybe because i always had James Bond.
I know it's no religion and i don't want to sound like some kind of weirdo. But sometimes when it got difficult in my life, i looked to Bond. To the man, who never gives up, even when the whole world is going down. That's the point for me and the reason, why my love for this character and the movies got even stronger over the years. I saw this quality in Craigs Bond too. From the start. "Arm yourself because no one else here will save you." Be strong. Never give up.
Now they've changed that mythologie of the character, and that will stay with me, no matter which way these films will go in the future. The Craig era had too big an impact on me, to whipe that out. Because now they have told me: When you have no reason to live anymore, give up and die! That's not a message i can relate to.
Craig!Bond is as dead as the dodo. I even wiped some of his remnant dust off my car this morning ;) ... He's not coming back. Not as a new actor. Not anything. You then have to explain away the McGuffin and Madeleine/Mathilde and none of you will want to see them go around Madeleine/Mathilde ad nauseum either.
Also... the franchise isn't dead. That just comes across as hyperbole at this point in time. People are flocking to see it at the moment. Let's discuss whether that's a possibility IF B26 tanks (I don't think it will).
I still think given a few years time people will look at this film differently once Bond's literal dust settles and the franchise has also settled. Not all, of course. But some. I would totally understand why that might be a thing for you. We're in unknown territory and unknown waters.
The more I sleep on it, the more I'm starting to like the ending. I think at first it was just extremely hard to digest, a shock to the system and a need to try and explain everything away as some terrible mistake. I'm feeling less and less like that now.
Now the more people post about some of the symbolism, the full circles, the loose ends that are getting tied together... If you enjoyed the Craig era then this movie will satisfy you (uhm... except for maybe that ONE part we're still talking about and will be for a very long time!) ... I for one am thinking of more every single day that tied something together in some way and appreciate the movie a little bit more every time for it.
For me, plenty of the movie played out as a love letter to the fans. But for some of you it was clearly a Dear John letter and that's absolutely OK.
We could have been spared all this uncertainty and risk if they had recast for Bond 25. I wanted Craig to do 25 but not if it meant ending it like this.
Assuming Bond really died in the action, the final scene suggests that in the next movie we should hear: My name is Bond. Mathilde Bond ...
Exactly! I don't want to shit on anyones parade, I just need to ventilate my feelings here to get it out. I want to get over it and get on with my life, but I also need to speak up and that's what this forum is for.
Disagree. Did you see what happened to the Star Wars spinoffs? The diehard fans did that in. They can do it with Bond too.
Basically, there has always been the problem* in serialized hero-based stories, that you always know the hero will survive and therefore there are no stakes.
(* HUGE BUT: For a lot of people, it seems like this is not only not a problem, but the central appeal of the character. He will always pull through. He will always be there. I don't have to worry about him dying. I understand that people who feel this way are hurt by NTTD and please understand that I am not trying to put you down with this.)
Out of that narrative problem, we have seen a lot of "The Death of XXXX"-type of stories, which ironically often end with the character either not dying or being resurrected in some preposterous fashion later down the line, diluting the stakes even further. This is prevalent in comics, but I think has moved into other media as well. So now we have "The Death of James Bond". They never had the chance to do something like this, because even though the timeline was muddled there was some kind of thread from Connery through to Brosnan and they were never in the situation of knowing that this was the last film for the actor. So Bond just always trucked along and the stakes kind of degraded more and more. We all know he will survive, save the world, get the girl and James Bond Will Return. But then they snapped the first barrier, breaking the continuity in CR and setting Craig's Bond up as a new universe basically (even though some people seem to only now realize how far reaching that seperation was back then) and then after SP, which has the standard Bond Happy Ending, Craig decided to come back, but only for one. So now both barriers are broken and they decided to go for it (or maybe Craig said he'd only come back if the character dies. Will be interesting to find all this out.).
The interesting part is: On the one hand, we now have a story in which Bond dies and we can sit and process the emotions that brings us. We have an end to a Bond story unlike any Bond story before it. And it is final. They show him getting incinerated. There could have been many of the things being proposed here: We only see the rockets hit from afar; Dou Dou could have appeared somewhere; there could have been the suggestion of a trapdoor. All of that will not happen. James Bond is Dead. That is it. You may hate it, but from reading here, it sure gave people a massive emotional reaction and made a lot of people reflect on their connection to the character. That has value.
On the other hand we know that James Bond Will Return. They already have the resurrection built-in (after all, everybody needs a hobby...) without needing to explain anything. There is no explanation for why he is always 35-50 years old, there doesn't need to be an explanation for why he is alive again, if another actor plays him. So what's the point? Well, the point is that they have now established, that James Bond can die. He surely will not die in every movie. In fact, I hope they never do it again. But that is now more in the realm of possibility than it was a week ago.
Danny Boyle quit ‘Bond 25’ following ‘ridiculous’ idea of killing off 007
Now, it has been reported that the movie’s star – along with producer Barbara Broccoli – wanted Bond to die in a “spectacular finale” to bring Craig’s stint as the spy to an end. A source told The Sun that Boyle thought the idea was “ridiculous”.
“There were discussions about killing off Bond in dramatic fashion at the end,” an insider said. “It would also leave it open for a twist in the next instalment — either Bond hadn’t died or there could be a Doctor Who-esque regeneration with a new actor.”
The source also claimed that there were disputes over budgets, adding that “there’s pandemonium among crew with people leaving the production left, right and centre”.
Full article from 2018: https://www.nme.com/news/danny-boyle-quit-bond-over-killing-off-daniel-craig2371168-2371168
1 - Bond is not dead. At some point in Bond 26 we see the flashback of Craig's Bond surviving the blast. The only credible way (lol) to get round this problem is the missile strike is near to Bond, not right on him. All you need to do is show the missile strike from another camera angle.. and the explosion hits in front of Bond. The explosion propels Bond away from the blast area. The flames engulf the area but Bond survives. A few days later fishermen are trawling through the remains of the base and find Bond barely alive and take him to sanctuary. Meanwhile Mi6 surveillance drones scan Safin's base and find no sign of Bond.
2 - Few days later, Moneypenny is at Tracy's grave. M approaches.
Moneypenny says
"Do you ever envy the dead, sir?
M is surprised by her remark.
"What do you mean?"
Moneypenny says
"The pain is gone. The regret. The sadness."
M says
"Bond wouldn't want you depressed. He'd say "get a grip, woman. Life moves on."
Moneypenny smiles. M gives Moneypenny a hug and says
"Let's go back to the office."
So you establish Bond is dead in the eyes of the outside world.
3 - Then you have Bond recovering from his injury and the temporary nanobots antidote is injected. His memory is shattered. He is a freelance assassin out for work. He needs money. The new enemy is a resistance group of cyber terrorists. They find out Bond is an assassin and hire him. The new enemy want to topple the leader of the county and seizes control of the assets.
4 - There is a sci fi twist. The villain has developed AI robots to help his cause. This will give Bond 26 a futuristic quality. The robots can be cgi or models and they don't have to be used a lot in the film but AI robots is a natural progression from nanobots.
5 - Nomi and other 00s lead a mission to retrieve Bond. Bond is captured by the 00s just before the third act. He remembers his past and agrees to help Nomi. He leads Nomi and the 00s into battle to stop the villain, his AI robots and his crazy plan to take over the country and threaten the world! So the stakes are high.
6 - And as mentioned in a previous post of mine, at the very end of the film Bond says he doesn't want to see Madeleine and Mathilde ever again. That way you remove them from future films and avoid Bond with a family.
7 - Q division inject Bond with a vaccine to eliminate the nanobots. This means Bond is perfectly healthy at the start of Bond 27.
I think my idea has potential. If the escape from death scene is reasonably credible, I reckon film goers will accept Bond managed to survive the events of NTTD.
Bond is fantasy. Anything is possible.
To be honest, I got Covid in March 2020 and it wasn't touch and go, but it wasn't great either. Given that the film was made before the pandemic kicked off, I just felt really grateful to be sitting in a cinema at all and watching the movie. Bond could have sat in M's office reading out the phone book and I'd have been happy. Several of my friends won't be going to the cinema ever again after Covid, because they're actually dead, not fictionally dead.
It all happened at the end when he shot Mr White on the steps. It could have been left there but they didn't its like they didn't have any credible ideas and decided to run with the story arc of a shady organisation they couldn't really flesh it out or get it connected without it being stilted.
It's telling that the film in the middle, not connected to any of this 'arcing story', was Skyfall. The biggest grossing film of them all and a critical, fan and overall success. That says it all.
'To be honest, I got Covid in March 2020 and it wasn't touch and go, but it wasn't great either. Given that the film was made before the pandemic kicked off, I just felt really grateful to be sitting in a cinema at all and watching the movie. Bond could have sat in M's office reading out the phone book and I'd have been happy. Several of my friends won't be going to the cinema ever again after Covid, because they're actually dead, not fictionally dead'.
Sorry for your loss(es) and yes of course these things are matter of individual strength. I am rather sensitive and panoramic on i so took it rather badly. See, it's symbolic of where culture and film are 'at' imho. It's a trend. Iron Man, Han Solo, Bond and inevitably now Indiana Jones will all be dead, onscreen. Bit numbing. They could have tweaked it a bit, given the delay, maybe. Even Nolan gave Batman that note of optimistic ambiguity..
I'm quite glad the whole thing is over though.
Can we just go back to a bit of proper Bond now.
I miss that feeling where these films were their own thing if you know what I mean.
Even scenes like this... Just surviving Mr Chang, just surviving.
Agree. For example more chemistry with Moneypenny in this era than Madeline. Of all the characters in the Craig era if you had to run with a relationship storyline like they did it should have been her. The fact she shot him and it tore her up made for an interesting dynamic too.