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
This is such an interesting take on the character. While I agree that Safin was wasn't all that interesting of a character or imposing of a threat, I still liked Malek and he filled the role of "antagonist". He looked evil, his plan was evil, I guess sometimes that's all that's needed. But further elaboration, like maybe making him slightly aloof or a bit of an idiot would have added further dimensions to him. Maybe a guy who styles himself a god because he saved a preteen years and years ago? Then he goes on this crazy vendetta to avenge his family but he's still a bit of an immature idiot who doesn't know what he's doing and is over his head with all of this villain stuff? What I wanted to know is exactly how he has the means for all of this; eg. funding, hardware, gear, supplies, technical no how, etc? Was he an entrepreneur? Stashed his family's money away somewhere? Never explained or made much sense.
As for the movie, this was the first real concrete thing I've written on it after having been in somewhat of a state of shock for a few days now. Suffice to say I loathed the ending and felt that they ruined what was easily a top ten outing. Ruined the rest of the franchise? I don't know yet but how can they possibly come back from this? To me it seems illogical and silly to kill off your protagonist in a bid to be "bold", "daring", "different", whatever. I very much doubt Cubby would have signed off on this and don't really see the need for it. I've grown up on and with James Bond. Seeing him killed is not something I ever really needed or wanted to see. Did anyone?
This was an institution and I feel like Craig or Barbara or someone in charge is playing fast and loose with the legacy of the series. Honestly it felt like an insult to hard core fans and I can't see the justification for it. Every actor has a final film and then we move on to the next actor. An actor putting a final word in just to be different and shock the audience seems like it's putting the needs of the actor before the character. This is different from putting their spin on it and Bond was plenty humanized in every single other Craig film without the need of having to kill him off. We get it, Craig isn't coming back. Why does this need to be bold and italicized as if it's completing an arc? I don't need any profound statements on the nature of life and death in my escapist entertainment. My perfect ending would have just been the ending of Fleming's YOLT or just having Bond on a boat/at sea for the first time since TND.
Not sure if this was mentioned anywhere else, but can anyone confirm whether or not this is what Danny Boyle was fired for? He didn't want to kill Bond so MGW and BB found someone who would?
I know plenty of hardcore fans who weren’t insulted by it. I get that some people hate it, are furious even, but the hyperbole around it is getting tiresome.
So killing Bond is another way to keeping current with trends. It's not like he can't come back, as written here and there in other threads, there are multiple way they can follow up.
On other note, I think Primo stole a few things from me aka Stamper in TND. Remember I also have two different eyes. I don't remember what was the initial intention in TND though, apart that I was supposed not to feel pain, which they removed from the film and re-used instead in WINE with that little fellow Victor Zokas (Виктор Зокас) bad guy.
I mean, I can't confirm that as I wasn't in the room, but it seems to be the general interpretation that the major creative difference that lead to Boyle leaving the project was the question of the ending.
I am not going to try and dictate what you should think or feel, but just to explain my thinking: It's interesting that we now have a story in which Bond dies. To me that has no impact on the series going forward and having watched Moonraker and The Living Daylights after watching NTTD I can confidently say that it had no impact on the past of the series. At no point did it even cross my mind that some decades down the line a different incarnation of the character dies on-screen. Just like I didn't really think about whether Moore-Bond has died off-screen when real-life Roger Moore died. They are still very enjoyable films and to me the different actors had always been in seperate universes anyway.
But it's something interesting to depict, I think and it is worthwhile to grapple with it after almost 70 years of this character existing, 60 of those on film. What would it take to kill someone like him? How does someone who has survived so much face death? What will I feel, when I see it? To me, that is all interesting to ponder and they didn't do it for shock value, but for story reasons. They did it because they considered this a story worth telling and a good capstone to the story they have been telling for the last 15 years. If they had wanted to shock they would have gone full OHMSS and had Bond survive the island only to be shot in the head on a drive-by-shooting in that final scene with Madeleine and Mathilde in the car. Or had Safin execute him in the pool and Nomi come back and finish the mission. Or just have all of them fail altogether and the world ends. To me, this is actually a good and worthy ending for (one incarnation of) James Bond. He killed the villain. SPECTRE is destroyed. He saved all of the innocents, but to make sure they stay safe, he - the living weapon - has to sacrifice himself. So he takes the full brunt of a Royal Navy missile battery on the head and goes out as a superb meteor, every atom in magnificent glow. This is miles better then being killed by a villain or dying old and infirm in a care home somwhere.
I understand that you don't need this in your escapist entertainment, but the filmmakers clearly don't see it that way anymore and haven't for over a decade now.
That’s a nice touch, I had no clue! She was pretty solid in her very limited SP appearance. I wonder just how many others you’ll be able to spot once the film hits 4K/Blu-ray and you can pause with ease.
Are the movie's defenders also being hyperbolic in their praise? It seems to me that outrage is perfectly justified by the ending.
I’m not talking about praise/criticisms of the film. I’m talking about the insinuation by a number of detractors that this somehow alienating the hardcore, or that it’s somehow a demonstrably insidious move by Craig, the producers etc. Firstly, I don’t need fans to speak on my behalf and, secondly, let’s talk about what we know rather than hypothesising just to fuel the vitriol. If you’re actually ‘outraged’ by this film you really need to grow up.
So does Bond 26 buy all of that investment and we have someone else continuing Daniels journey with all the means. The washed up soul of Skyfall, the retired Bond the Bond finding love and surviving.
Answers to Norway on a postcard.
I am sorry but if as observer you have made that journey and lose yourself in that journey it is frankly inconceivable that you buy into even floating continuity.
If you look back on the thread about Daniels ending from 2019 I said his death was the only logical conclusion and a new wiped slate Bond is also the only logical conclusion.
No one can pick up Daniels story but someone can pick up the legacy.
Stop being so hyperbolic, you hyperbole.
Haha
I still can’t believe it. Two weeks later.
Ian and Cubby (and Harry too!) must be doing contortions in their graves. Poor things :(
They’re dead. So what they would have thought doesn’t matter. Even Cubby encouraged his children to make their own decisions and not wonder whether he would have approved or not.
"This never happened to the other fella... oh wait."
Fleming wouldn’t care.
Noooooooooooo! You're wronnnnnnng!
NOOOO!! Ian and Cubby were never wrong! About ANYTHING!!
He did however produce the young Bond animated series years later.
I think Michael treatment was about Bond young years, the military etc. not bond beginnings as 007.
Going by IMDB reviews, metacritic user score (6.5), comment sections on various websites, etc. it has alienated part of the fanbase.
Internet comment sections...please, anything but that! I'm sure Barbara is ready to throw herself into the Thames...
I hated it, though.
Though one should point out he was much less of a novice in CR than in the Bond Begins script, which was a complete origin story that included Bond joining the secret service from the Navy, being mentored by an older agent who he picks up many habits from, and so forth. Barbara and Michael G. Wilson in a way followed Cubby's wishes by not incorporating many concepts from this version into CR, which shows Bond early in his career but nowhere as green. Nor does the film act as a prequel to the entire series. NTTD has also proven itself to be a financial success, even if hampered by the pandemic, so Cubby's descendants have shown good judgment at the box office. No flops on their watch.
This is the proper attitude, in my opinion. Whether you like the film or not, the argument shouldn't be whether Fleming or the others would've approved of the choices it's made. 1) The context continues to change; 2021 and number 25 in the series isn't the same as 1963 and number 2 in the series. 2) We like or dislike a film; we don't have to be told to like or dislike a film. 3) What--respectfully stated--the dead would have thought about this film, is a highly speculative question at best. We will never be able to tell. People are fickle and unpredictable after all.
So would Ian Fleming have loved NTTD? We don't know, we won't ever know, it wouldn't really matter, and I don't care.
Like ... Stunts In Bond Films
Costumes & Set Design in Bond Films
Do we have any threads like that? I'd enjoy them.