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
As ridiculous as it sounds, it would have been almost like Bond and the series coming full circle.
The ending of Dr No mirrored in No Time To Die
I couldn't agree more. Nothing wrong with that ending. Even a dead-serious Bond like Dalton had: "You didn't think I'd miss this performance, did you?" & "Why don't you wait until you're asked?"...."So why don't you ask me?"
Well, the real problem lies in the fact that they put so many concepts in, that together with all the necessary action (hey, spies kill a lot!) the film, they ran out of time.
In OHMSS, he finds his love, marries and she gets killed.
In LTK, his friend is maimed and his friends' wife dies (allthough Felix apparently was either high on drugs or not thát much in love) and he goes for revenge.
QoS is alla bout Bond beeing so professional he is NOT going to avenge, although everybody around him thinks he is.
And then, NTTD:
- Blofeld need nearly kills Bond, Bond goes on to destroy Blofeld.
- Bond feels betrayed by his girlfriend and 8 years later finds out he has a daughter.
- He loses his best friend on a mission.
- He gets 'contaminated' and becomes a danger to his family
- He loses his job, and regains it after proofing his boss wrong
So, that's at least 5 films in one. So I understand that you felt left with half-stories, because there were too many. I don't think it was because the plot parts didn't get enough attentino in the film, but the attention was taken away by the sheer amount of stories that were beeing told.
not sure this is the right section for a proper review of it all but somehow wouldn't want to take half an hour telling it as we recall. If James Bond is (now) deceased and no more, what they gonna do? Re-boot the franchise again ? Seen some surprises at the movies but killing off one of the favorite icons of the screen, hell they went just a little too far in some estimation.
I know it were Craig's last outing but to kill off the character, even now it just doesn't total in any capacity. The child angle just didn't sit right also, and 007 is well, (now) not 007... Lousy way to end Craig's tenure. Such a fine (eventual) portrayal of the Fleming idea really deserved better.
There are many scenes in NTTD where Craig's acting took me out of the moment. The Bond v Blofeld scene, Craig's acting is abysmal here (far worse than anything Lazenby did in OHMSS). He is basically playing himself and not Bond anymore.
The 2 handers with M aren't that great either. And yes, the death scene at the end feels very contrived, written just to give Craig one last Bond movie outing.
Right now I have NTTD at the very bottom of my list rankings. It really is awful. That spot was reserved only for DAD, and I never thought it would be beaten.....until now. I really thought the producers would never stoop so low to create such a mess of a Bond movie ever again. Sadly I was proven wrong.
"OWDIDTHEYKNOWIWASEAR!?!"
The "Die Blofeld, Die" scene was just as bad.
Indeed, Craig was just acting like himself, it's even more 'un-Bond' than anything what Moore had done in his tenure (Lazenby still acted like Bond, at least, I still see the Bond character).
One of the worst acting done by a Bond actor, anything in that movie was basically Craig playing like himself, and it's really inconsistent, I don't know what Craig was supposed to trying to do in this film, it's more like an Action film starring Craig than a Bond film.
It's in my bottom 5 or maybe even bottom 3 (just lucky to be edged out by both TMWTGG and DAF), so NTTD should be thankful for the existence of those two mentioned films.
I can even say that SPECTRE (for all its flaws) was still better than this.
Contrived ending (it's a film that's written backwards with his death first, then wrote the plot backwards), it's a film that didn't know what it was trying to do.
It's overstuffed with so many characters and subplots that were undercooked or not developed.
Disjointed plot and storyline (it's like they have different ideas and they've all patched it one film).
Overcomplicated sequel to a film that's already given an ending before it (SP had been given a proper ending, so I don't know what knots that NTTD was trying to tie in).
It's a film that's unnecessary and no one needed or asked for.
Too many plot conveniences that literally didn't makes sense, too many fan services that also didn't makes sense and not utilized well.
It's like they've made a cake and eat it too kind of thing.
People really get fixated on Craig having the idea and thinking it's all a massive ego thing; people who make films do it to make good stories, not for their egos. And I'd say it's also a question of what other ending was left for his Bond? We'd done faked death, we'd done driving off into the sunset, we'd done retirement, we'd done coming back to MI6... what new and interesting ending was there for him?
Must admit I'm really puzzled by this. In what way is it bad?
Personally I think he could have dialled it back. I also don't think the music starting as Bond says 'Die Blofeld, die' nor the way that scene is written helps.
But if Craig had been playing himself, he'd've been effing and blinding every tenth word, wouldn't he? ;)
Killing Blofeld, getting a head injury, and living life as a fisherman suffering from amnesia, not knowing who he is, and then one day thinking he is from Russia, so sets off sail there. No Madeline, no daughter in tow, no Safin, no nanobots.
This ending hasn't been done before, even if an obituary was made when Bond went missing in SF at the beginning. In fact you could end this without showing an aftermath obituary in London, just in case anyone thinks this story has been done before (and just how many Bond stories are recycled without anyone getting bothered by it).
It's been quite a few years since Bourne did something similar to this. And the producers could have spinned this as `we are properly adapting a Fleming novel to end Craig's tenure, just like we did with his debut,' just so this is marketed correctly as the original spy story by Fleming, and it didn't copy Bourne. Fleming and Bond did it first....Bourne copied. Time to set the record straight!
I would be far happier with this ending instead of the garbage we got instead, and this would be a fitting way for Craig to leave. Tragic cliff-hanger, a very unique ending, but still alive.
Unless you know Daniel Craig personally, I just don’t know how anyone can say: he’s just playing Daniel Craig!
Maybe it’s simply that he made choices in scenes, as an actor, that you don’t like, rather than he’s “playing himself”.
I had the very good fortune of seeing Craig as MacBeth last year. We had front row seats, and no matter your personal feelings, the guy is a consummate professional, a true actor in every sense of the word (as in not a “star” who plays just one dimensions of a character, but digs deep to find his “truth” of the character he’s playing; perhaps his “truth” of where James Bond is at in NTTD doesn’t reflect where you think James Bond should be, and therefore these scenes didn’t work for you (I’m very happy I didn’t feel this way, and his performance, to me, breaks my heart with his authenticity)…)
I'm glad you found those scenes in question worked for you. There are many who have the same complaints I did about those particular scenes, so there is definitely something not quite right in terms of what Craig was hoping for when he performed those scenes.
One person having this opinion would be normal, but many people having the exact same issues I had? Something went wrong. He lost sight of the Fleming character and created something else instead that audiences couldn't identify with.
Honestly, I don't think the ending would have as many fans had it ended with Bond getting amnesia. Controversial as the finale is (and as much as I don't like it myself) it does have its fans. Personally I don't think we're going to see a direct adaptation of the amnesia subplot from YOLT/TMWTGG anytime soon. I'm sure ideas from it will be taken for a future film, but I doubt we'll see it done directly. It's a tricky ending to get right, and if the pieces aren't fitted together properly it can come off as very silly or weird.
Indeed, because the way Craig played the character here was so different, that it's hard to identify with.
Heck, even the clothes that he wore in the film, it's something that I couldn't see the Bond character wearing, but Daniel Craig himself might likely wear, it's a lot more worse than the different types of Safari suits that Moore's Bond had wore, the only one where those NTTD outfits is better was the clown suit/Mischka's circus suit in OP (and maybe that tracksuit in AVTAK).
Craig's portrayal of the character in NTTD was just different from the rest, even to his previous portrayals.
It's like Craig forgot that he's meant to be James Bond, and started playing himself like he doesn't care.
The only Bondian moment in NTTD was the Cuba sequence, but in the film's entirety, that scene felt like a mini short Bond film, like a Bond advert between a generic Craig Action Movie.
If one may remove that Cuba sequence, it's almost an ordinary movie starring Daniel Craig.
For me, it felt a bit similar to his other films like Defiance.
And out of the many, quite a few members wrote their thoughts on NTTD…. Dozens and dozens of individuals. But only what? 8 or 10 or 12 have written this complaint? Not saying that their feelings about these particular scenes are wrong, but perhaps it comes down to the choices he made as an actor that the 8 or 10 or 12 had issues with, rather than Craig “not caring” about the role, or “playing himself”.
I did get something more out of his performance, thankfully. I genuinely loved his portrayal through the entirety of this film. And I’m happy I did.
And I can understand your perspective, about him missing the mark on Fleming, but it kind of runs into my point of: Craig made a choice, as an actor, and he decided where Bond is at in NTTD, and specifically he made choices on how his Bond, in this present state of mind, would take on Blofeld. It really did gel with me, and it didn’t with you. Not one person is right, though.
Agreed. However, it occurs to me that--in an alternate universe--*this* is the gravitas that the 3rd act of SP desperately needed. Bond kills Blofeld at the base in Morocco, loses his memory, Madeleine (not Kissy) gets him to some sort of Mr. White safe house and nurses Bond back to health, discovers she's pregnant, Bond wanders off to Russia...
Then onto Bond 25...
I'd say the fake death thing was done in SF. For it to happen twice to the same Bond (and it didn't happen to any of the other five) might feel a bit repetitious.
I'd say there's a good chance we'd think he was going to die.
Well I'm with Peter: I can't see the issue. So if there's more than one of us thinking that way, by the same logic there's nothing wrong. Maybe it just comes down to personal opinion rather than fact.
Yes I think there's a reason why SF only adapted it so far: it's a pretty naff concept and hasn't dated well.
There's definitely a hokey side to it, at least when you read the synopsis on paper. I would say that the Fleming novels handle it quite well and it's thematically very relevant to YOLT in the sense that it's a novel about 'rebrith' (ie. him recovering from his PTSD throughout the novel and finally confronting a Blofeld who has essentially become mad).
It's there in SF - the idea of 'resurrection' and Bond learning to overcome his personal and physical obstacles. So I think it worked well there. Again, without the pay off of the brainwashing simply having Bond become an amnesiac wouldn't have really worked for NTTD and I suspect it would have had far more backlash for Craig's last film than the ending we got.
I'm sure the issue with that is they weren't sure whether Craig would be returning. But I certainly think that would have worked better than tacking on the ending onto NTTD.
I reject the notion there weren't other new and interesting endings for Craig's Bond. The end was driven by the script the writers produced. NTTD is not a bad film, but neither the best. Do I think I could have come up with a better ending? Yes, as I imagine lots of regulars on this site feel they could have come up with a better ending. Will I offer those ideas? No. When EON wishes to pay me to write for them, I will. That's ego speaking, which is at the heart of all creative effort designed to be consumed by the masses. One's desire to make good art involves ego.
I have to be honest and say that the more time passes since NTTD’s release, the more I agree with you. In fact in a perfect world, Craig would’ve bounced after SP and we’d already be at least one film into the next actors era by now. Sadly things didn’t go that way.
All I know is, had they taken a less controversial path (no Felix dying, no daughter, no Bond dying, etc.) I probably would have enjoyed the film a lot more, and would have rated it much higher than where it currently sits, bottom of my ranking list.
Either way, I now look back on Craig's tenure with sadness. It was a missed opportunity that showed so much promise in the beginning with CR, but then to be let down slightly more when each new film was released.
I know other people feel different, and Craig is often hailed as the best thing since Connery. I used to share that opinion, but I don't anymore. Craig now sits bottom of my Bond actor ranking too.
The concept of Bond dying was interesting yet risky, but again, the way they've wrote the script or the plot backwards to support the idea of Bond dying was really wrong and weak, it's inconsistent, full of contrivances and deus ex machina, it's the film that had no idea what it's trying to do within self.
I know it's often subjective, but that's at least how I feel about this film, it's too much pretentious that it tried to break from the Bond formula but it fell short in it, and in doing so, pushed the Bond trademark down the cliff.
I would probably accept this film had it been a standalone adventure without any references from the previous films, but no, they've made each things so overcomplicated.
It's too much over the top for me in a different way which that all of the things happened in the film are way too much for me to take (the overkill of Bond, notwithstanding).
I know some of you liked it, but here it is, my opinion.
I'm still fond of Craig, don't worry, he's still miles better than Roger Moore (probably my least favorite Bond actor, as of now), Skyfall is my favorite from him.
But it's just this film that I really couldn't take from him.