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
And who is this latest put down aimed at I wonder? Same one as usual? ;)
I'm sure I'm the culprit.
I'm also sure that I wasn't putting anyone down. Every once in a while I just walk into a now three-year-old one-way discussion replete with "facts" (that aren't true), "the audience's opinion" (that is merely the poster's opinion), and Nostradamus-like predictions about release dates and whatnot that are based on, well, nothing. I then sigh, dribble my usual responses on the floor, turn around, and walk away before returning a few weeks later for more of the same.
But if that comes off as rude or me putting someone down, I sincerely apologize.
I would not be unhappy with more of that in the future.
Bond died. Okay, let's move on in another timeline.
It didn't at all.
I don't know if audiences would accept a darker movie.
Anyway, my problem with the movie is that it is boring (too long!) and that Bond's death is not up to par.
It is not epic nor is it sad. It's silly.
Yeah, EON knows more about filmmaking. But for me, I felt since Bond's going to die in this one, that makes it a unique Bond film. So my thinking was, go all out in making this the darkest Bond film yet.
Licence To Kill is a good example. A unique and very different sort of Bond film, that went all out to do exactly what it aimed for.
Bond films I feel can afford to stretch out that element of darkness in their stories to some degree. It makes their escapism more compelling. You don't want a Bond film to come off as too 'bubblegummy' or lightweight even if humour and thrills are so vital to them. It's one of the things that I think actually separates Bond from many other franchises.
I don't think LTK really followed it's hard edge through to the end. It should have been a ending that had Bond contemplating on his uncertain future. Instead we got a chipper Leiter (even though he'd been maimed by a Shark and had his new wife murdered) and that bloody winking Fish.
I think the tone in NTTD is pretty spot on. Yes, the Cuba scene is more jovial but it's not completely out of place.
Personally i think CR and QoS are pretty dark in tone, and follow it thorough to the end.
I don't think that was the sole purpose of NTTD (or any film), but whatever, to each their own. Bond films having stories that are consciously on the darker or at least more serious side aren't unheard of either - LTK being the major example.
I think there's a good balance in all of those examples, even QOS. Bond is a franchise where a film about a revenge driven protagonist can have scenes such as him harpooning a plane and water skiing without skis. It's the escapism and fun of it. NTTD fits in well with the other films for me in that sense.
Something like Logan would be too much. I can understand this.
But I don't like how the character dies. I think they didn't know how to do it.
Sort of like the old joke, "It hurts when I do this." "Then don't do it." Don't read posts from someone whose comments you believe lack credibility.
Agreed. I think LTK could have followed through on the darkness more. Maybe he leaves with Pam (I think this is in one of the drafts)...maybe he meets Leiter at Della's grave...maybe there's a question mark as to whether he'll get his license back, which would have been prescient given the hiatus that was about to come.
The ending, as it is, is a bit too tidy and upbeat.
The Craig films followed through on their convictions more. And overall I think they are better films for it.
Definitely.
I admired the producers for attempting something different with LTK, but unfortunately for me, it was a swing and a miss...
Yeah, I think LTK is a good example of balancing darkness and light in a Bond film. I'm not exactly saying I wanted NTTD to be entirely dark. But it seems it takes certain skills for a director to balance darkness and light in a Bond film. Because in GE, we got Boris, but it didn't affect the film's dark tone. Now in NTTD, we got Valdo and it didn't work like it did in GE. QoS also had Elvis, yet it worked.
The ending was necessary because nobody wanted LTK 2. Bond returns to being 007 to have more adventures.
Yeah. I agree. It's John Glen's love for animals, though. He couldn't help it.
Likewise. NTTD is a great film with a bold ending. Took balls to do that.
But also, I don’t see any wriggle room left in the character fwiw. Craig really did kill him off. We need a new hero, for Britain ;)
True, but the “TV like quality” of LTK doesn’t really bother me as much as it used too. I’m too invested in the story, characters, and action to notice these days.
I wish that I could say the same…
People say this but GE is the one with a TV director.
True. I noticed that before. But these days, Aesthetics doesn't worry me much when it comes to LTK, because the story is so intense. It has some of the best action sequences in the franchise. I worry whenever the villain is on screen. Great characters on screen. Yes, it might feel like a Telemundo show at times, but it's a good Bond film.
LTK could have put more effort into its aesthetics, but the budget most likely didn't allow it. Still, I have never felt any disappointment with this film's look.
No more Bond walking through the desert in a tuxedo.
Totally agree.
+1
And it doesn't take away from the fact it has a solid story, great characters and top notch action, and of course, a fantastic Bond 😁