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
On tonight's viewing, I still think it’s a very well made film. The pre-credit sequence is genuinely thrilling, and when Cyclops looks over the bridge and takes his glasses off it’s scary. I love it when Bond, after the explosion, reaches in his pocket and you think he’s going for his gun but it’s a phone.
I don’t like the bit where he acts like he doesn’t care that they’re shooting up the Aston Martin, and Maddy is pleading for him to do something. What is that about? Had he decided suddenly that he was going to let Spectre kill him? And didn’t it dawn on him that they were shooting at Madeline too, which they wouldn’t have done if she truly was a ‘daughter of Spectre’.
But I don’t mind the bad plotting of Bond instantly believing Spectre over Madelaine. It works for the film. Plot holes don’t spoil things for me like they do some people.
Oh yea, the ‘as your wife requested’ guy is straight out the Moore era.
I tell you what though, Daniel Craig is fantastic on screen. He’s my least favourite James Bond, but even I can see he’s an acting fool. He owns the screen whenever he’s on and he brings certain qualities to Bond that we haven’t had since Connery. Did they die his hair for the pre-credit sequence, to underline the five-year time jump? It almost looks red in some shots.
The stealing of Heracles feels very old-school Bondian, I like it. In the old days Bond would get his mission from M to retrieve it, but we’re in this different Bondverse now where it seems Bond is always rogue or choosing his own missions for himself. I do hope we get him back as a loyal servant in the next movie, however unfashionable that ‘murderous toff’ that might be.
Big Bond vibes in Cuba, the theme, the tux, the vodka martini. It starts shaping up like a real fun Bond movie at this point.
Killing Felix off, for me, was a major mistake. That whole sequence after, where Bond returns to Mi6 should have had an uplifting feel, and the “Bond, James Bond” line was a great gag, but we’re left in the aftermath of Bond’s greatest ally dying. And why kill him off anyway?
Bond is needling M again, and I do wish these scenes were more like the books where Bond respects M. At the end of SF I thought we’d get back to the Fleming type Bond, but Bond was needling him again at the start of Spectre (for no good reason that I could see).
Was Q’s “don’t touch that” line put in as a tribute to the DL Q? I think it was.
Safin isn’t a great villain. You can see Malik is really trying hard to be sinister. He’s got a great face though.
I like the Bond/M scene by the river and the OHMSS music. And I didn’t realise before, that Obruchev modified Heracles so it would infect families and whole races. So it’s not all on M’s shoulders as much as I thought.
Craig seems to be acting out of character in the Blofeld scene. I can’t put my finger on it. Then he goes apeshit and they kill off the second major JB character, Blofeld. Then we get the full on soap opera bit with Bond professing his love teary eyed and Maddy looking on as Bond gels with his kid and peels her an apple. But she's not Bond's kid yet.
The bit on the plane with Q briefing Bond also feels like an old school Bond movie. I wonder how the ‘007’ actress felt about her role, which really serves no purpose other than, well. I won’t go there, but it’s pretty obvious.
Safin threatens the kid, and I’ve said before how I don’t like this ongoing thing of how can we make it really really personal for Bond. It's not enough that the villain is a bad bastard anymore, they've got to have a personal slant.
The poison garden is a bit of a disappointment for anyone that’s read the YOLT novel I reckon. But I do love the whole Spy Who Loved Me (movie) vibe of the agents heading off to the villain’s lair. NTTD on this viewing, feel like a traditional Bond movie in certain places, which I’ve noticed more of this watching than other times.
So Bond finally meets Safin and Malik is pretty good here. We find out Safin is “in love with Madeline Swan”. Is he? Okaaay. Then Safin tells Bond that Matilde is his kid, and I don’t really get why he knows that, or why that big plot point just gets dropped in like that. Then Safin just lets the kid, his big bargaining tool, wander off. What’s going on there?
Then we get to James Bond’s demise, or CraigBond’s demise as I keep being reminded, (there are different James Bonds these days, apparently). I won’t bang on about it, I’ll just say it’s the last thing I ever wanted to see in a Bond movie and it spoils the film for me, and it even tarnishes the whole Craig era. Maddy saying “his name was Bond, James Bond” just makes me cringe at the end.
So, I do think it’s a good movie, even though it’s certainly not what I personally want from a James Bond movie.
Very good review!
I'm really not sure what the film was going for with the confusion around Bond being Matilde's father, but I personally never bought he wasn't.
Yeah, I got the sense Bond was processing it in a sort of angry way... to be honest, as terrified as Madeline seems, I think Bond himself knows that the DB5's armour will hold for a long time so getting killed isn't his main worry in that moment.
I must say, rewatching that PTS, it's incredible how contrived the whole thing is. So, Blofeld's plan was to kill Bond with the bomb at Vesper's grave... fair enough, but he decided to create this strange little contingency plan whereby he would make Bond think that Madeline was a SPECTRE agent too? Just seems a tad elaborate, even for a Bond film.
The weird reveal of Matilde being Bond's daughter I just put down to unclear writing/elaborate drama building. If anything it may have been more interesting if she wasn't Bond's biological daughter or if they had at least kept it ambiguous.
Perhaps if they'd just left it on the same line as they did in the film "she has your eyes". Just cut out all the previous explicit mentions of Mathilde being Bond's daughter, establish that another man was with Madeline after Bond and is now out of the picture, and there you go.
That certainly works better with the reveal of it being Bond's kid. But then, I suppose his sacrifice wouldn't hold so much weight if he didn't know that Matilde was his. So that kind of explains the fudged reveal; they needed Bond to make the ultimate sacrifice knowing she was his kid, but they still needed that final "she has your eyes" reveal moment.
As I've said before, you can kind of see how they've worked backwards from the big death scene when plotting this movie.
It's still a lot more elegant/dramatically satisfying than what we got in the finished film I'd argue. If they wanted to have been more ambiguous they could have changed that last line to 'you would have been a great father' or something.
Anyway, I'm personally of the opinion that if they were set on introducing a child in NTTD, then it shouldn't have been Bond's. Again, it comes off as less selfless (to me anyway) seeing Bond trying to save someone who isn't his own flesh and blood.
The "confusion" over the child is comic relief pure and simple.
Surely you mean more selfess? How does Bond saving someone who is a stranger make him more selfish?
To me, the scene also works as a kind of meta-commentary on the "Bond... James Bond" tradition-- the obligation of having to sneak that line in there somewhere, reflected by Bond's reluctance to say it.
The actor who plays the guard is funny.
My opinions of it have not changed: great film. I still have qualms about how the Madeleine-Safin relationship was dealt with. It always seemed too convenient that she is thinking about him in the PTS and then, as if on cue, he shows up in her life again at just the right moment. To me, it would have made better sense if he had been around all along--not all the time, but occasionally, in a creepy sort of way. So when he is at her office, their exchange should have started with something like this:
M: I haven't seen you in a while. I was beginning to wonder what happened to you.
S: You were?
M: In a sort of curious way, not a sentimental one. You know me.
S: Indeed I do. But it's been a while, Madeleine. I think the last time we met was at the clinic.
M: Must have been.
S: I went back. I was told you were no longer working there.
M: My life changed direction.
S: So I learned. It took me some time to find you again.
This, to me, would have made a hell of a lot more sense, especially considering that she burns the "masked man" note in Matera. It's a part of her life she'd never escaped from, and it adds weight to Safin's deep affection for her.
I also think the nanobots were a macguffin that didn't need to be in the film at all. Creating a DNA-targeting virus is already a scientific possibility--so there was no need to get all sci-fi with the nanobots. To me, Bond's death should have been centered on the mission and making sure the doors were opened for the missiles. He also would have realized that as long as he was alive, Madeleine and Mathilde would always be looking over their shoulders. He didn't want that.
Nevertheless, I still love the film, especially the Jamaica and Cuba scenes. I loved the Norway sequences, as well.
Overall, I find it to be a fitting end for Craig's portrayal of Bond. And it has elevated SP's status, for me, as well.
I think it would have make sense (and more better), had Mathilde been Madeleine's daughter to another man but that man died and was just seen in the picture by Bond.
So Madeleine decided to take care of the child alone, until Bond arrived and he treats Mathilde as his real daughter because of him longing for a family that he would never have.
That would have make much more sense as it really shows that Bond already regrets his actions before and now paying it by pleasing Madeleine (who now moved on from him after she founds a new love), and being a father figure to Mathilde.
But later, it would be revealed that Safin killed the man that Madeleine loved to get her (at least to give his obsession such weight), then this would drive Bond to his grit, because Bond knows that this hurts Madeleine and made Mathilde fatherless.
Yes, it would make for a more and less selfish (selfless) turn, because despite of Mathilde not being his daughter, Bond chose to sacrifice to keep her from harm.
Yes, that's what I meant. I just mistyped.
Isn't there a debate in the field of ethics about selfless acts being sort of selfish too? ;-)
He fancies himself as this God-like dude but Bond isn't interested at all in his monologuing and schemes. He doesn't even look him in the eye when he kills him. He can't believe this little twerp got the better of him.
My favorite moment was when Safin smiles at Bond in his last moment despite having a gun pointed at his face. He knows he's about to die but he still won. That's a streak of true cruelty that really makes him a great character.
Despite him not really being the main focus of the movie and his plot really taking a backseat to the Bond/Madeline dynamic, I think the less-is-more approach really elevated him as a character.
I'm really curious what those two scenes were that were shown in the trailers but not in the film. The shot of Safin inside his helicopter, and then again pointing a gun at somebody in the tunnels of his base (looks like the same scene where he lets Matilde go). I would've loved to see whatever happened there and would love to hear if anyone has any theories about what those were any why they were cut.
I also wish we saw more of him in Norway, perhaps stalking through the woods to sneak up on Madeline and Matilde.
Makes sense. If it means not having to admit to my mistyping I'll go with it and ay it's what I was trying to evoke (how selfish of me, haha).
I reckon the deleted shots of Safin pointing his gun at someone was supposed to be at Mathilde. Likely it was deemed too upsetting in a commercial film with a 12 rating to include a villain threatening to shoot a child so they cut it perhaps. The result is very strange with Safin sort of letting Mathilde go...
Safin's a strange one. His motivation at the start of the film is actually very strong - possibly the strongest of any Bond villain. He wants revenge against SPECTRE. Simple. They should have just stuck with that for the climax - re-jig it to specify that Safin is planning to unleash the nanobots to target remaining SPECTRE agents around the world, but this would of course mean their innocent family members would die too (not to mention the fact that the technology could fall into literally anyone's hands if unleashed on the general public). No invisible God rubbish, just a broken ghost of a man hell bent on avenging his family. It would even have made him kidnapping Madeline more believable/opened up dramatic opportunities (I dunno, maybe the fact that he survived being shot by her made him feel invincible/inspired him to do all this, and now he has some sort of weird fixation on her... it's a Bond film so I can go with it, but that character consistency and believability has to be earned).
Smiling in the face of death, he basically wanted Death by Cop-- and he got it.
Once Bond fed him hot lead, he forgot about this pathetic bully.
It's interesting. I noticed in The Batman that the Riddler seemed similarly weedy, weak and rather 'incel' like too despite the damage he inflicts. I suppose films and in this case film villains have a tendency to reflect what we see as strange, unknown or even scary in society... as incels are.
Like I said, I think dramatically Safin would have worked better as more of a sympathetic villain. Still rather nasty but I don't think the addition of a God Complex in the character and the artificial raising of the stakes does the film justice.
Yeah it's fairly muddled and maybe I'm being biased and covering up bad writing because NTTD is easily one of my favorite films ever at this point but I kind of chalk it all up to him just being a weird little man-child of a dude who probably didn't even have it sorted out in his own mind (the frustrated looks on his face when Bond pushed back against his ranting lends itself to this idea), and who Bond was eager to swat like a fly so he could go live with his family...until Safin got the upper hand at the last second.
We would've seen Bond in full savage mode being borderline frightening and animalistic hunting down this man who's taken his child. Maybe that would be a bit much though but it sounds cool to me.
I have no idea what he meant with that line or the "this was your choice" but it was very well-delivered in the moment. And yes with Batman also, it's like theyre moving away from the stereotypical cackling, over the top villains. Even though Safin had all of those trappings his demeanor was very awkward and socially inept.
Like I hinted at before, I do think the idea of a weedy little villain who would not otherwise be a threat to the hero was done better in The Batman. You actually sort of get where Riddler is coming from. The film goes to great lengths to show how corrupt Gotham is/the uncomfortable similarities between Batman and Riddler's vigilantism. Of course, at the end of the film Batman decides to do the 'right thing', shift his priorities from anger/vengeance and ultimately protect the innocent.
There was potential to do that with Safin and Bond in NTTD. Both men have had their lives ruined by SPECTRE in some way. Both have even gone 'rouge' at various points to accomplish what they need to. Again, change the climax and you have something less straightforward and in the mould of 'Bond has to save the day'. Bond instead chooses to try and stop Safin because he could kill innocent people. It would have made the ending more meaningful.
Feels a bit like what they tried to do with Blofeld in the MI6 building at the end of SP, but it could have been done effectively. Personally I wish they'd have done something more with the Garden of Death. I dunno, if Bond had had to go through the garden or been forced to do so by Safin and have been poisoned I think that would have added more urgency to the lead up of his demise. But I guess it depends on how it would have been done in practice.
Yes true. I think the climax suffered a bit by what was rumored to be Malik's lack of availability due to also shooting Mr. Robot. It was kind of weird how he is entirely absent for long stretches but just pops up for a few scenes and then disappears again. Some more brief shots of him interspersed with Bond hunting down his goons would have been really cool . Like to see him waiting just out of sight at the top of the stairwell Bond was fighting his way up.
I get that. The film does an ok job for me of establishing Safin as this sort of lingering presence, but it doesn't help that we only really see him in the opening flashback and only again after the long time jump midway through the film.
They could have perhaps included him (albeit in his mask) in the Italy scenes before the SPECTRE attack during the PTS, presumably stalking Madeline or something. Madeline gets freaked out, not knowing if this masked figure was really there or not and acts strange before the unrelated SPECTRE assassination attempt happens. Again, it would have established Safin as this ghostly presence earlier on and have weaved him more into the finished film.
Please avoid double, triple, ... posting by using the edit button. (Move the cursor to the upper right corner and click the wheel when it appears.) Thank you.
Got it Sorry!