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
No, I don't know that for sure, that's why I said "if the rumors are true."
NTTD was the time for his character to die. Now he's free of it. No coming back.
It was a job & a paycheck to him after he burned out on QOS.
Again, this is just how I see it now, your mileage will invariably vary.
There just seems to be a lot of vitriol in quoting rumours — as if the rumours will support your thesis of disliking this film, actor, ending, or whatever.
Who cares about rumours. You didn’t like whatever. That should be good enough.
Personally I flipping loved the film from beginning to end. That’s me and I’m not wrong, and neither are you for disliking what you dislike.
But bringing in rumours gleamed from click bait is just muddying waters and makes things too us vs them. And it shouldn’t be. You didn’t like it. I did . We can chat about the film and not assume motives of an actor or producer or director……
I've never heard Craig ever saying to the media that he wanted this ending!
Beyond that, my point was: no one is wrong, no one is right... But bringing in clickbait rumours will muddy waters and will never lend to a debate.
He's never stated to the media he wanted his tenure to end in Bond's death.
Also, you can both love the character and want to see them get a hero’s death. Wanting a character to die is not the same thing as hating Bond. That’s just silly. I’m sure Brosnan would have been game for that kind of ending. Actors love to depict death!
“Revealed by” who? @MakeshiftPython
Gregg Wilson There were three core elements from the original Purvis and Wade script that we wanted to keep. Since Bond retires at the end of Spectre we liked the idea of introducing a new 007; she’s competitive with Bond and represents the new guard at MI6. Secondly, the DNA-targeted poison was the core idea fr the threat. And lastly, we wanted a satisfying way for Bond to sacrifice himself at the end.
Daniel Craig When I started as Bond on Casino Royale, one of the early discussions I had with Barbara and Michael was that I would like to kill off Bond when I finished.
Barbara Broccoli We had considered killing Bond in Spectre, but decided against it.
One of the fun things about a Bond movie for me was the fact that he always came out on top, (often literally!). With the latest movie, we're robbed of that feeling and I think it's understandable that some people feel cheated after sixty years.
I'm not saying they 'shouldn't have done it', because it's their series and they can do what they want. What I am saying is I'm very disappointed they've done it. Not least because it makes no sense at all (seeing as it's not the last movie in the series).
But really, I never wanted to see him die. Let's be honest, it all boils down to the fact that I never wanted to go to a cinema and watch Bond die. A heroes death or not, it's James Bond. I just didn't want them to go there. As Iggy sung, it's no fun.
I don't think that people who wanted him to die are any less of a 'James Bond fan', but they certainly come at these movies a different way to me and the other 'vocal minority' here who have moaned about it.
Some people got the movie they wanted, but I certainly didn't.
Also does this thread maybe require an NTTD spoiler warning?
Stupid me. I had read that recently, and dismissed as being a little bit of “we were always going to do this” kind of thing.
But take them for their word: Craig said he wanted to do this back when he started and that was the plan all along, or it was close to happening in Spectre, fine, I accept what has now been written in history.
In the end, I find it difficult that an actor as wealthy as Craig and who had gigs already lined up, would come back to a series he disliked and didn’t get merely to pad his bank account and have his death scene. This sounds more like frustrated fans reading clickbait and then using it to justify their immense dislike for the film, the ending, the actor.
Yeah, I love the character and I still wanted to see him die once I knew Craig was coming back for a fifth. It felt like a fitting ending to me.
Craig is one of the most private and least media friendly actors to have ever played Bond. I don’t mean that in a derogratory way, I’d probably be the same in his shoes. But he clearly never enjoyed the celebrity that came with the role, which I don’t think has helped some people’s perception of him. But despite that, he did five films, happily staying associated with the role for 15 years, and he never once phoned it in.
So, he clearly doesn’t hate the role imo. If he did, why would he have wanted so much creative control? Why would he care? If he really didn’t like Bond, he’d just have phoned it in like Connery did towards the end.
This is where I am. Perfect completion, Craig being the only actor to make a Bond trilogy and origin story. End on an extreme high note. Craig’s Bond is my favorite movie character of all-time. Spectre, to me, is yet another soft reboot (like Skyfall). Honestly, did we really need that? It makes Craig’s Bond seem somewhat schizophrenic in character nature. So instead we get what I’ve dubbed as “The Madeline Swann Duology.” Forget Bond, let’s tell the story of Madeline Swann. Insanity. Swann is a top 3 all-time worst Bond character, imo. Makes for a great yarn, no? Would’ve preferred Hardy to Turner, but anyways...
Edit 1: Also, not to get too specific since this is a non-spoiler thread, but for me, the ending of NTTD is much more touching than the ending of Skyfall.
Edit 2: I would have even preferred Spectre as Craig's last Bond film than Skyfall.
I think it's a trend now, to have a separate 'timeline' within a franchise. If they'd have killed Roger Moore's Bong off at the end of AVTAK, and bought Dalton in without any explanation at all, it wouldn't have worked for the majority of cinema goers. These days, it seems to not be a problem for most.
He could have slipped in the shower when throwing the towel over Snooper, and knocked his head. Q would be to blame.
Personally, I don't need a definitive ending. I just want the actor to go out on a high. That said, a definitive ending is an interesting idea for these films to explore. There are pleasures to be had both in continuity-heavy and narratively independent films.
The only problem is that Spectre happened. But no one could've saw that trainwreck of a film coming.
Not everyone considers SP a train wreck though... ;)
It’s been separate since CR. Why is it only hitting you NOW after 15 years? Why are you having so much difficulty trying to grasp the idea that there can be different iterations of a character in FICTION?
I actually think the problems of Spectre could have been easy to predict.
Setting up a new evil organization and archvillain in the Craig era, suddenly getting the rights back to Spectre/Blofeld in 2012, using this newly regained IP to lure Mendes back... The Writing's On the Wall one could say.
And I'm with @chrisisall, if what he's saying is that he doesn't think the film is a trainwreck. ;)
Just like the first time I saw SP in the theatre- it's not spectacular, but it is a lot of reasonably pleasant fun, to ME. I rank it somewhere around FYEO.