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
Constructing an entire Bond movie plot over the fact that Bond HAS to die at the end was ridiculous.
No one person makes a Decision for a three hundred million dollar film.
Craig may've said in 2006, or whenever, that he'd love for his tenure to end with James Bond dying, but every choice in a film, especially a huge and risky climax is vetted by the entire creative team, including the distributors who have to sell this film in the worldwide market.
If the creative team didn't think this was a viable and satisfying conclusion, they wouldn't have done it.
We already had a full circle, nicely wrapped up ending in SP. Maddy echoing Vespas's words from the original film, and Bond making his choice between the service and civilian life, throwing his gun away. Although it wasn't very Fleming, (I could never imagine the book Bond throwing his gun away in front of a villain), but at least it ended with hope.
For me, my problems or my issues with the film are a lot more bigger than the ending alone, even if the ending was different, I doubt this film would've been a lot better, there are so many issues with the film that I really have other than that ending alone, for me, the film in general needs a complete rewrite (in my opinion).
Actually, I'd rather have Bond die, than to have him be a family man really, that's probably the most un-Bondian thing that they could've ever done, I know it's just Craig's Bond, but he's still playing James Bond (the character) in general, so seeing him with his family would be a bit off (in character) and out of character.
I understand this feeling, however, I have the opposite experience: I find that his death elevated the other films, including Spectre, which I didn’t think possible. When I watch them back to back (one/night), it ends up being Joseph Campbell’s Hero Cycle. I love it, including James Bond’s resurrection, as told by Madeleine in stories, to Bond’s child (he will actually becomes something “bigger” in his death. He will become a myth).
I would rather have Bonds lover and daughter unfortunately die on the island and have Bond suffer injuries that leads to partial amnesia in which he becomes the 007 we know of living on the edge. Knowing he lost it all so he starts to develop a coping mechanism of living a hedonistic lifestyle to deal with the loss of his family. And there you have it. The true prequel of how the man became the 007 the world is accustomed to.
No Time to Die, you've got big cojones. You come here, to my theater, with a script like that, ending your story with Bond's death. But you should know something. I have yet to play you for my customers, so nobody has to see Bond blown up.
Isn’t your post the definition of trolling?
@Pierce2Daniel wasn't making this comment to gaslight. He means what he said.
Haven’t we learned yet; it’s been two years since this film was released.
Bond died.
Some ppl love this concept and how it was executed.
Others didn’t mind the idea of Bond dying, but didn’t like the execution.
And some fans hated both the idea and the execution.
No one is right.
No one is wrong.
But accusing someone of trolling because they happen to feel that this is the best ending, THAT is trolling…
… and this is why you will never be hired to write a Bond film, 😂….
I like how the beginning in Matera (when it looks like Bond is accepting death in the Aston) foreshadows the ending.
Craig never strayed too far away from a man with an unconscious death wish….
Holy sh*t you’re right. I haven’t played EON in years, but I completely forgot the plot of that game revolves around Nanobots. Plus now that I think of it, Primo reminds me of the protagonist from Goldeneye Rogue Agent with his modified eye. I really ought to play both those games then watch NTTD again after that.
Good spot mate. I love that moment but stupidly I've never made the connection to the ending. Nice foreshadowing there
love your witty retort but we will have to agree to disagree（ not something that ate me, another LTK reference）
This is correct. In fact, killing Bond was actually suggested for Bond 24, and Barbara immediately vetoed it in that instance. She and Michael weren’t incapable of saying no to Craig. It’s all about the timing and where everyone’s head space was. By the time Bond 25 was about to roll around, Barbara and Michael felt it was the right time to go for that story and went for it.
Fact is, there are a subset of Bond fans who were never going to like the ending of Bond dying no matter what. It doesn’t matter how well written, directed or acted Bond’s death could have been done. It’s simply a no-go as far as they’re concerned. That’s those fans’ problem, not Eon’s.
No, we won't have to, because it wasn't a retort, it was a joke/reference that isn't indicative of my opinion on the ending.
Casino Royale so *clearly* started a new continuity, more so than any other ‘first’ film for a Bond actor ever, and they can’t get their heads around the ending of NTTD works? How thee can be another Bond Film/Adaptation, and that will be business as usual to all intents?
With Eon Bond I tend to think of his world as being technologically a few years ahead. Sort of the not so distant future, rather than strictly our present like Fleming Bond seemed. In the grand scheme of the franchise, nanobots don’t feel as outlandish as previous films. IMO, of course.
They're both utter nonsense, to be fair.
You are reading way too much into that ending mate, and giving the writers far too much credit as well. That ending was a throwaway scene, something cobbled on, tacked on at the end to try and make sense at something which they all knew deep down they shouldn't be doing.
It was cheap and gimmicky, made even worse by tacking on the OHMSS song to it, probably to try and keep the older Bond fans on side by throwing in a retro nod to cover up the horror they were unleashing onto long term fans of the series.
This was again reaffirmed with the `James Bond will be back' at the end of the credits.
It's like Bond went through and survived what could be the most badass action sequence in the series to just be offed by Safin with a pistol in essence.
While I'm not a fan of the ending myself, I kind of appreciated what they were trying to do with Madeline telling stories about Bond to Mathilde. It reminded me firstly of Logan - of course another film in which a big franchise character dies - and how the title character's heroism lives on through the comic books that the younger mutants read.
Secondly, whether this was intentional or not, I also felt it wasn't a million miles away from what Fleming did with Bond's obituary in YOLT. You have that little aside about how Bond's adventures have been adapted as novels. It's a bit too tongue in cheek/indulgent on Fleming's part (I personally wish it hadn't been included) but there's a sense in that passage that 'James Bond lives on through these stories'. If anything I prefer how NTTD handled that idea and I think did it much more subtly/poignantly (and again, this is coming from someone who otherwise dislikes the ending).