› ›

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

1…112113115117118…298

Comments

  • sworddevil1sworddevil1 USA
    Posts: 526
    ertert wrote: »
    BMWTREKPSE wrote: »
    Listening to 'Final Ascent' (the final song) makes me sad all over again. So amazing!!!



    The beginning of the song playing while Safin tells Bond his fate is sealed and he is truly doomed is one of the most powerful scenes I've ever seen in a movie. The last 15 years converged on that moment.

    "You made me do this you see. This was your choice", and that evil smirk on Safin's face right before Bond coldly executes him hit me so freaking hard.

    Despite not really showing up until the end of the film I thought Safin was an excellent villain and a worthy adversary for this final chapter.

    Nicely said. Very powerful scene. I’m still far from over it.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Has everybody already seen these? On Cary's instagram - scroll thru for really great photos and brief clips, including from his own phone and marked up, etc.
  • AstonLotusAstonLotus
    Posts: 1,394
    9IW wrote: »
    Costuming isnt a huge deal to me, but I thought Bond looked like a hobo for half the film. Paloma’s dress made up for a lot.

    I thought he looked like a lumberjack once he took off his sweater during the climax.
  • phibes72phibes72
    Posts: 37
    Minion, has given the Bond film people an idea which would actually work & appease both of the warring sides on here.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    I hope we are not warring so much as disagreeing. All personal interpretations and feelings are valid. Accept the ending or not. I think viewing the movie twice, at the very least, is helpful for all of us. I would not change the film, but that doesn't mean I am bashing everybody else who wants a different ending.
  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,860
    IGotABrudder wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    It's been two days since I've seen NTTD and I'm still kind of shocked at how much this film seems to be designed for the hardcore fans (moreso than the general public)...all of the OHMSS film nods and the radical but strangely faithful adaptation of the YOLT novel.

    Yes, this. I have been waiting decades for the garden of death and now we have it.

    OK it’s not how I imagined it, and it’s not how Fleming did it, but I don’t care, it’s the garden of death and it’s still Fleming.

    Similarly all the OHMSS references too. I went in unspoilered and I was thrilled to see the OHMSS callbacks in the titles. Would any of the twenty-somethings in the cinema at the same time spot the reference? IDK, a few might, most wouldn’t. But it doesn’t matter, because I spotted them.

    And it should of been the title
  • MuddywMuddyw
    Posts: 198
    Love this movie. A stunning performance by Daniel, and an enrichment to the character of Bond. Also beautiful cinematography and a moving story.

    Anyone else thinks the moment Nomi took her wig off was a little nod to Rosie from Live And Let Die? Well, so much details from the books and other Bond films, and still updating the story, dialogues, dynamics between various characters, etc. Shocking but understandable ending. Ending on a high note for Craig Daniel.
  • bondsumbondsum
    Posts: 3,334
    You've probably already seen this, but it's always good for a giggle...

  • StirredNotShakenStirredNotShaken Toronto
    Posts: 2,402
    After four times through it, I have come to the conclusion that No Time to Die is...

    ...the greatest Bond film ever made.

  • bondywondybondywondy Uk
    edited October 2021 Posts: 374
    TripAces wrote: »
    So, this came to me via a colleague who saw the film and was not entirely convinced of Bond's death. Take it with a grain of salt. But according to him, it is "possible" that Bond survived this. I am NOT arguing that Bond survived, just throwing out this alternate theory.

    Bond is standing on a platform above the silo doors. Remember, these are smart bombs that are being launched, and they can hit their target with precision and with little destruction outside their target. The target is actually below. A couple of things to remember: according to Q, the concrete and steel of this facility would withstand the impact of the missiles (They'd just bounce off). So the platform on which Bond is standing might not get destroyed from below. In fact, the destruction will be inside and not outside. Instead, what Bond faced was large blowback of dust, wind, and a fireball--likely enough to kill him. But depending on how close he was, he could have been blown back off the platform; a helluva an impact, but if he survived the fall from the bridge in SF, he could survive that.

    Now, about the communications. Bond's "vitals" went dead right after the explosion. That would seem to make this case-closed. However, his watch was capable of disrupting that signal to Q, and upon the force of the explosion, the watch easily could have been activated, killing the telecommunications. Probable? No. Possible? Yes.

    So I thought long and hard about this. There were lines in both SF and SP that suggest some of this odd duality between life and death and existential choices:
    • Mallory said to Bond: Why don't you stay dead. Go live peacefully somewhere. Few field agents get to leave that cleanly.
    • Silva asked Bond what his hobby was. Bond said, "Resurrection."
    • The title card at the beginning of SP read: "The dead are alive."
    • On the train, Madeleine asked Bond if this life is what he wants, always living in the shadows, being hunted. Bond said he didn't have much choice. Madeleine said he always has a choice.
    • Safin makes a point about choices, and that Bond made choices that led him there. The film is about a struggle with choice and free will. It's existential. Bond's fate is about choice: but is that choice to accept death or to accept a life "after death."

    Again, I am not at all saying that Bond survived. But there have been enough clues in these films to suggest that life and death are not what they seem at all.



    A flashback in Bond 26 showing the missile strike from a different camera angle and the missiles hit in front of Bond but not on him is probably the way to cheat death. The explosions propel Bond away from the crater/blast zone.

    He survives, rescued a few days later by fishermen. He loses some of his memory and becomes a freelance mercenary. He's hired by the new villain. This gives M a reason to find and capture Bond.

    I think this is the only way forward for the franchise. If Eon go with a full reboot they never win back fans that hated Bond's death so why alienate a section of the fanbase? It's too counterproductive.

  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,944
    Seve wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    At the end of NTTD, I wish Bond had crawled into a dumpster before the missiles hit the island. Would've tied the scene nicely with Mathis' death.

    If you know what I mean?

    Lol

    Or a refrigerator.

  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    bondywondy wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    So, this came to me via a colleague who saw the film and was not entirely convinced of Bond's death. Take it with a grain of salt. But according to him, it is "possible" that Bond survived this. I am NOT arguing that Bond survived, just throwing out this alternate theory.

    Bond is standing on a platform above the silo doors. Remember, these are smart bombs that are being launched, and they can hit their target with precision and with little destruction outside their target. The target is actually below. A couple of things to remember: according to Q, the concrete and steel of this facility would withstand the impact of the missiles (They'd just bounce off). So the platform on which Bond is standing might not get destroyed from below. In fact, the destruction will be inside and not outside. Instead, what Bond faced was large blowback of dust, wind, and a fireball--likely enough to kill him. But depending on how close he was, he could have been blown back off the platform; a helluva an impact, but if he survived the fall from the bridge in SF, he could survive that.

    Now, about the communications. Bond's "vitals" went dead right after the explosion. That would seem to make this case-closed. However, his watch was capable of disrupting that signal to Q, and upon the force of the explosion, the watch easily could have been activated, killing the telecommunications. Probable? No. Possible? Yes.

    So I thought long and hard about this. There were lines in both SF and SP that suggest some of this odd duality between life and death and existential choices:
    • Mallory said to Bond: Why don't you stay dead. Go live peacefully somewhere. Few field agents get to leave that cleanly.
    • Silva asked Bond what his hobby was. Bond said, "Resurrection."
    • The title card at the beginning of SP read: "The dead are alive."
    • On the train, Madeleine asked Bond if this life is what he wants, always living in the shadows, being hunted. Bond said he didn't have much choice. Madeleine said he always has a choice.
    • Safin makes a point about choices, and that Bond made choices that led him there. The film is about a struggle with choice and free will. It's existential. Bond's fate is about choice: but is that choice to accept death or to accept a life "after death."

    Again, I am not at all saying that Bond survived. But there have been enough clues in these films to suggest that life and death are not what they seem at all.


    I think this is the only way forward for the franchise. If Eon go with a full reboot they never win back fans that hated Bond's death so why alienate a section of the fanbase? It's too counterproductive.
    It's not counterproductive or alienating at all. Like with any film, they just accept that some people aren't going to like it and move forward.

    It would actually be extremely counterproductive to try and please those fans because they'd be wasting their time doing that as opposed to just making a good James Bond fan with a new actor, and a reboot allows them to do without anything holding them back.

    I think people should just feel how they feel about the ending, whether they like it or not, and just look forward to a fresh new James Bond film with a new actor, whenever that'll be.
  • ertertertert
    Posts: 490
    StirredNotShaken wrote: »
    After four times through it, I have come to the conclusion that No Time to Die is...

    ...the greatest Bond film ever made.

    It’s very close between Skyfall and NTTD for me but after 2 viewings NTTD does take the top spot. Skyfall is a fantastically deep, character-driven drama and less of a traditional Bond film in my opinion whereas NTTD feels more like a classic Bond film but with everything dialed up to 11.

    My mind is thoroughly blown by how good this film is. It completely exceeds the stratospheric hype I felt over the last 18 months.
  • RyanRyan Canada
    Posts: 692
    StirredNotShaken wrote: »
    After four times through it, I have come to the conclusion that No Time to Die is...

    ...the greatest Bond film ever made.

    Four times? You're way behind. I decided that after only two. ;)

    Only kidding of course. It truly is a wonderful film and I look forward to my third time around this coming weekend.
  • ertertertert
    Posts: 490
    Did anyone else think Blofeld was so much better in NTTD? I did enjoy him in Spectre but he was a proper lunatic this time. On my second viewing I was listening more closely to his ranting at his birthday and it seemed to be all about how special of an event his birthday is. He was a total narcissistic megalomaniac and I really enjoyed it for the limited time he had.
  • 9IW9IW
    Posts: 59
    ertert wrote: »
    Did anyone else think Blofeld was so much better in NTTD? I did enjoy him in Spectre but he was a proper lunatic this time. On my second viewing I was listening more closely to his ranting at his birthday and it seemed to be all about how special of an event his birthday is. He was a total narcissistic megalomaniac and I really enjoyed it for the limited time he had.

    I thought he was very good. I guess I will always compare Blofeld to Hans Landa in Inglorious Basterds and feel like Blofeld could have been a lot more than he was, or was allowed to be.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 2021 Posts: 16,624
    Birdleson wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    HildebrandRarity wrote: »
    It's amazing that, even if he didn't star in as many iconic entries as Connery (I'd say that Casino Royale and Skyfall will stay as classics, and that NTTD will be about as divisive as OHMSS, and both QoS and Spectre are very flawed, in different ways), Craig has now sealed his place as the equal to Connery in being the definitive Bond, by having a clear arc to his character that people can relate to.

    Yep, I think you're spot-on there.

    Don't you think we need to wait 20 to 30 years to make that call?

    Not at all, no. I think (and I did specify that I think) he and Connery are currently the definitive Bonds. Maybe in 20 years there will be another, maybe there won’t. It’s not like the matter will suddenly be finally closed in exactly 30 years time so there’s no harm in talking about what the situation is right now.
    You are obviously free to think differently, but I’m just saying what I think, and I happen to agree with Hildebrand.
  • StirredNotShakenStirredNotShaken Toronto
    Posts: 2,402
    The one thing I will add though is a plea to everyone here: AVOID THE 3D SHOWINGS OF NTTD LIKE THE PLAGUE. Not only do I not think it added anything to the film, the odd item suddenly popped off the screen in a distracting way, and it actually made a lot of the movement in the hand-to-hand combat sequences seem juddery.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,624
    4EverBonded wrote: »
    Has everybody already seen these? On Cary's instagram - scroll thru for really great photos and brief clips, including from his own phone and marked up, etc.

    I hope the HSE don’t see some of those clips! :))
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 2021 Posts: 16,624
    StirredNotShaken wrote: »
    The one thing I will add though is a plea to everyone here: AVOID THE 3D SHOWINGS OF NTTD LIKE THE PLAGUE. Not only do I not think it added anything to the film, the odd item suddenly popped off the screen in a distracting way, and it actually made a lot of the movement in the hand-to-hand combat sequences seem juddery.

    Were the gunbarrel and titles at least quite cool? I wouldn’t mind seeing them in 3D.
  • RyanRyan Canada
    Posts: 692
    I was actually thinking of making my next showing a 3D one just for the sake of it.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,624
    Ryan wrote: »
    I was actually thinking of making my next showing a 3D one just for the sake of it.

    You probably won’t get another chance to ever see it again like that.
  • StirredNotShakenStirredNotShaken Toronto
    edited October 2021 Posts: 2,402
    mtm wrote: »
    StirredNotShaken wrote: »
    The one thing I will add though is a plea to everyone here: AVOID THE 3D SHOWINGS OF NTTD LIKE THE PLAGUE. Not only do I not think it added anything to the film, the odd item suddenly popped off the screen in a distracting way, and it actually made a lot of the movement in the hand-to-hand combat sequences seem juddery.

    Were the gunbarrel and titles at least quite cool? I wouldn’t mind seeing them in 3D.

    They didn't seem to really "jump" off the screen at all.

    Also, because 3D glasses have a tint to them, the entire picture was darker. It definitely compromised the magnificent cinematography.

    Honestly, The Force Awakens is the only film I've ever seen in 3D that felt like a truly magnificent usage of the medium. Right from the moment that first Star Destroyer blocks out that planet, it completely engrossed me.
  • RyanRyan Canada
    Posts: 692
    mtm wrote: »
    Ryan wrote: »
    I was actually thinking of making my next showing a 3D one just for the sake of it.

    You probably won’t get another chance to ever see it again like that.

    That was my thought. I'm not really into 3D as a whole, but it might make for a unique experience for what will be my third time seeing the film.
  • BenjaminBenjamin usa
    Posts: 59
    StirredNotShaken wrote: »
    After four times through it, I have come to the conclusion that No Time to Die is...

    ...the greatest Bond film ever made.

    I agree.
  • StirredNotShakenStirredNotShaken Toronto
    Posts: 2,402
    mtm wrote: »
    Ryan wrote: »
    I was actually thinking of making my next showing a 3D one just for the sake of it.

    You probably won’t get another chance to ever see it again like that.

    This is pretty much my entire reason for seeing it in 3D. I'm already seeing it so many times, I might as well try and bring some variety to the proceedings (Mallory would approve! :)) ), I just feel in retrospect that I should have acted on my initial gut desire to do another IMAX screening today .
  • BenjaminBenjamin usa
    Posts: 59
    I thought the 3D was okay. Enjoyed seeing it that way on my second viewing.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,237
    For 9 years I had SF ranked #3, with GF at #2 and FRWL #1.

    Now SF ranks at #2. It’s one of those rare movies where I cannot stop watching once I get it started. It’s that mesmerizing.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,589
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    For 9 years I had SF ranked #3, with GF at #2 and FRWL #1.

    Now SF ranks at #2. It’s one of those rare movies where I cannot stop watching once I get it started. It’s that mesmerizing.

    After seeing SF in 2012, I had it at #4. It is now #1. The production quality of that film was far beyond anything I had seen in a Bond film--it set a new standard. SP looked great too but lacked a good script. NTTD rivals SF on many levels.
  • ertertertert
    Posts: 490
    TripAces wrote: »
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    For 9 years I had SF ranked #3, with GF at #2 and FRWL #1.

    Now SF ranks at #2. It’s one of those rare movies where I cannot stop watching once I get it started. It’s that mesmerizing.

    After seeing SF in 2012, I had it at #4. It is now #1. The production quality of that film was far beyond anything I had seen in a Bond film--it set a new standard. SP looked great too but lacked a good script. NTTD rivals SF on many levels.

    I’m in the same boat too but NTTD does take the cake now.
Sign In or Register to comment.