NO TIME TO DIE (2021) - First Reactions vs. Current Reactions

17980828485298

Comments

  • AgentJamesBond007AgentJamesBond007 Vesper’s grave
    Posts: 2,632
    From a technical standpoint, it’s a masterpiece. Fukunaga and Sandgren did an incredible job. Writing wasn’t perfect, but truthfully, Bond films rarely are (especially in the Pervis/Wade era).

    I’m gonna need time to come to terms with the ending. I know I don’t hate it. But I definitely shed tears. And it was certainly reassuring to see “JAMES BOND WILL RETURN” at the very end.

    Overall, I really enjoyed the film. Solid 8-8.5/10.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 526
    Ticket purchased. Friday at 1:10 pm and much deliberation. God help me. Opening day in the US. The 2 night showings are already sold out! Just to put into context how much I love DC as Bond: all 4 walls of my downstairs have his Bond posters on them. I have sand from CR, a poker chip, piece of his jacket, ...I’m sure you get the idea. I was a casual Bond fan before him, always liked it, but was not over-the-top about it. Never saw a Bond movie more than once in the theatre. Brosnan, no offense to anyone, but he lowered the franchise’s standing with me-and they didn’t help him with the scripts, I know. But when I saw Casino, I immediately bought another ticket for the next show, and the lady said, “you must have liked it!” I said, “that is the best movie I’ve ever seen!” And to this day, it still is. Seems like I saw a possible early spoiler about the end, but it was the Sun..maybe. Anyways, it kinda stuck in my head. And I thought, if that happens, I’m just gonna leave it at Spectre. I don’t think this will ever be viewed as an all-time great Bond because the fans are too divided over it. Just my opinion, and that’s worth about 0 cents lol. I think this movie, and the story arc about Madeline is very FORCED. Feels artificial. Skyfall, as someone said, would have been the perfect end to Craig’s Bond. Perfect. It’s open, the movie is fantastic (minus the Komodo dragon deal), and most are happy. I’d love to know the percentage of people that aren’t going to see this movie because of the ending. It will cost them money, and some fans. Feels like episodes 1-3 of Star Wars, love or hate deal. Sorry for the long rant, appreciate you guys. NTTD fans or not so : )
  • imranbecksimranbecks Singapore
    Posts: 984
    The true ending for Craig's era to me was in Spectre when Bond returned to Q's lab to collect his DB5. Afterwards he left with Madeleine and drove off in the sunrise. That to me was a nice ending to Craig's era.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited October 2021 Posts: 12,480
    Here are some of my thoughts. Not a full review yet, but I feel compelled to go on a bit. Especially as my American friends will be seeing this movie within 24 hrs.

    I rate NTTD very highly. I do believe that Daniel is the only actor who could have done this ending. If having Bond die a fitting death was to be told, Daniel Craig is the one to do that justice. I actually sensed that early on, with QOS, but I dismissed it.

    This ending fits Craig's Bond, and he did the role proud all the way through NTTD. As a viewer and lifelong fan, it hurts immensely to see this Bond have this particular final journey - but they gave him a noble death. They gave a fitting end for a great actor who poured every bit of himself into this role, especially in CR and NTTD.

    The final scenes are not over the top, not cheesy. The script is succinct and very realistic. I mean all the interaction between Bond and Madeleine and Q throughout the last part of the movie. It is simply heart-wrenchingly real.

    As I mentioned elsewhere, this Bond died as he lived - protecting his country, protecting his family. For EON to allow this particular actor to do this is a gift that is ultimately rewarding, finishing this story arc and giving Bond a heroic, selfless death. It is done right, in my opinion. Incredibly moving.

    NTTD will stay with split opinions among fans around the world, but I am very glad this story was told this way. It is meaningful. I don't have any negative feelings towards fans who disagree with me. How we feel is valid for each of us. I do hope that more could enjoy it over time, even if initially put off by his death.

    NTTD is such an outstanding Bond film. It is beautifully directed, gorgeously filmed. It positively glows with truly superb action scenes, and stellar acting across the board. Especially Daniel Craig.

    The future of Bond films is wide open. Everything feels fresh, things tied up correctly. We will have much to discuss and enjoy as the next Bond actor and Bond movie come into our sights. For now, I will continue to savor this one.
  • EinoRistoSiniahoEinoRistoSiniaho Oulu, Finland
    edited October 2021 Posts: 73
    Re: womanizing: In my opinion Bond thought that he'd be getting it on with Nomi but that went south quickly. There was a lot of flirty banter between Bond and Paloma in Cuba but they were there to do a job.
    Did anyone else noticed how quick Bond's memorial service at MI6 was? A few words, a toast and then right back to work? A wonderful touch of Flemingian cynicism.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 526
    imranbecks wrote: »
    The true ending for Craig's era to me was in Spectre when Bond returned to Q's lab to collect his DB5. Afterwards he left with Madeleine and drove off in the sunrise. That to me was a nice ending to Craig's era.
    It suits me as well. Certainly better than his death. It was like he finally got the life he deserved, and had been trying in futility to achieve. Remember Camille said, “your prison is in your mind,” -something like that at the end of Quantum.
    Either the Skyfall ending or SP ending would be much better than dying. Now every time I watch a Craig Bond film, it is going to enter my mind. I never could rationalize Bond getting close to any woman again after Vesper, hence him going back to his mindset toward relationships pre-Vesper. When I reflect on it, I guess I’m just not a fan of the whole Madeline-Bond relationship. I remember hearing that Sam Mendes and Daniel Craig didn’t get along well in SP...anyone else know about this? Don’t mean to go on a SP rant, but it really did overreach, as many have said-too many relationship/family entanglements. To me, Bond films work best when the focus is on Bond.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 12,466
    So much to say…

    I guess first and foremost I want to backtrack the negativity I put out about Bond’s death. Both the way the film handled it and the fact that the concept was in Ian Fleming’s mind and somewhat used with FRWL is good enough for me to not feel it as disrespectful. They certainly went all in on closing the chapter on Craig, and I’m ok with it.

    Daniel’s performance was extraordinary. The best he’s been since CR, maybe even better. He got so much to do this movie - genuinely funny, angry, hurt, intense, and everything in between. He himself is the big highlight - his legacy as an excellent Bond is more than secured in my mind.

    Lyutsifer Safin is an EXCELLENT villain. I will happily diverge from the masses on this one thinking he wasn’t that great. Malek’s performance was super good. He is the creepiest and maybe most evil villain of the series, from his gross romantic views of Madeleine to his unspeakably ruthless plot.

    Madeleine is 10000x better used here than in SP. Seydoux did excellent. Still would not put her above Tracy and Vesper, but she and the writers convinced me far more about her and her love with Bond here.

    Paloma and Nomi? Great characters, particularly the former. So quirky, funny, and beautiful. The whole “007” thing I thought was handled nicely, with some good comedy and also respect when Nomi wants to give it back. Nomi was very good - definitely liked her more than I thought I would.

    The MI6 regulars are in top form. There was some real literary Fleming stuff between M and Bond I thought, and Fiennes had his best turn yet in the role. Q, Moneypenny very good. Tanner is still Tanner, which is meh for me, but nothing terrible.

    Blofeld’s scene is far better here than anything he got in SP. “Die, Blofeld, die!” Was one of my favorite parts of the whole thing. They lifted from the YOLT novel wonderfully many times, with Bond’s child, a tragic ending, a poison garden (though I do wish it had been called “garden of death”), and Blofeld being strangled by Bond. Golden.

    The way the SPECTRE organization was handled is a bit of a letdown, but I get why it happened how it did. They wanted all loose ends tied up before Craig was out, even though it felt rushed. The biggest shortcoming of the Craig era is how SPECTRE was used.

    The action was marvelous, some of the best of the whole series easily. The PTS was god tier. The forest scene eerie and fun (epic FYEO callback with the car and Logan), the Cuba setpiece sublime, and all the finale stuff well done. Soundtrack top notch as I already knew ahead of time, and worked great in the film. Still a fan of Eilish’s title song, my third favorite of Craig’s behind YKMN and SF.

    The direction was awesome - big props to Fukunaga, a very inspired choice. The writing felt like a significant step up from SP (really, everything did for me). Title sequence was good, locations were good, cast was terrific…

    Overall, I’m highly satisfied. My misgivings were given too soon, and I’d encourage everyone like me who worried about certain elements to give it a chance first. It’s wrestling with QOS right now as my third favorite Craig film, which means it’s wrestling to be either just inside or outside my Top 10 overall. A sterling sendoff for one of the very best Bonds!
  • Posts: 526
    FoxRox wrote: »
    So much to say…

    I guess first and foremost I want to backtrack the negativity I put out about Bond’s death. Both the way the film handled it and the fact that the concept was in Ian Fleming’s mind and somewhat used with FRWL is good enough for me to not feel it as disrespectful. They certainly went all in on closing the chapter on Craig, and I’m ok with it.

    Daniel’s performance was extraordinary. The best he’s been since CR, maybe even better. He got so much to do this movie - genuinely funny, angry, hurt, intense, and everything in between. He himself is the big highlight - his legacy as an excellent Bond is more than secured in my mind.

    Lyutsifer Safin is an EXCELLENT villain. I will happily divulge from the masses on this one thinking he wasn’t that great. Malek’s performance was super good. He is the creepiest and maybe most evil villain of the series, from his gross romantic views of Madeleine to his unspeakably ruthless plot.

    Madeleine is 10000x better used here than in SP. Seydoux did excellent. Still would not put her above Tracy and Vesper, but she and the writers convinced me far more about her and her love with Bond here.

    Paloma and Nomi? Great characters, particularly the former. So quirky, funny, and beautiful. The whole “007” thing I thought was handled nicely, with some good comedy and also respect when Nomi wants to give it back. Nomi was very good - definitely liked her more than I thought I would.

    The MI6 regulars are in top form. There was some real literary Fleming stuff between M and Bond I thought, and Fiennes had his best turn yet in the role. Q, Moneypenny very good. Tanner is still Tanner, which is meh for me, but nothing terrible.

    Blofeld’s scene is far better here than anything he got in SP. “Die, Blofeld, die!” Was one of my favorite parts of the whole thing. They lifted from the YOLT novel wonderfully many times, with Bond’s child, a tragic ending, a poison garden (though I do wish it had been called “garden of death”), and Blofeld being strangled by Bond. Golden.

    The way the SPECTRE organization was handled is a bit of a letdown, but I get why it happened how it did. They wanted all loose ends tied up before Craig was out, even though it felt rushed. The biggest shortcoming of the Craig era is how SPECTRE was used.

    The action was marvelous, some of the best of the whole series easily. The PTS was god tier. The forest scene eerie and fun (epic FYEO callback with the car and Logan), the Cuba setpiece sublime, and all the finale stuff well done. Soundtrack top notch as I already knew ahead of time, and worked great in the film. Still a fan of Eilish’s title song, my third favorite of Craig’s behind YKMN and SF.

    The direction was awesome - big props to Fukunaga, a very inspired choice. The writing felt like a significant step up from SP (really, everything did for me). Title sequence was good, locations were good, cast was terrific…

    Overall, I’m highly satisfied. My misgivings were given too soon, and I’d encourage everyone like me who worried about certain elements to give it a chance first. It’s wrestling with QOS right now as my third favorite Craig film, which means it’s wrestling to be either just inside or outside my Top 10 overall. A sterling sendoff for one of the very best Bonds!

    Thanks for the review. Good input. I love QOS. It’s my second favorite Bond movie, and any movie period. Theme song is so cool-not for everyone, but I really enjoy it.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,711
    FoxRox wrote: »

    Lyutsifer Safin is an EXCELLENT villain. I will happily divulge from the masses on this one thinking he wasn’t that great. Malek’s performance was super good. He is the creepiest and maybe most evil villain of the series, from his gross romantic views of Madeleine to his unspeakably ruthless plot.

    I've come around to this after my third viewing. "I shall use my time" may be Rami Malek's motto too, because he really does a lot with his limited screen time. Every choice he made was compelling.
  • OOWolfOOWolf Savannah
    Posts: 140
    Saw it tonight. This is how I felt about it and Craig's run in total:

    To me, Daniel Craig's era is a separate entity, altogether. The films up to his reboot are a completely different series. That being said, I've come to accept that this is not the Bond with whom I've grown. It is neither the era for the Bond that I so fondly cherish. 'No Time To Die' is a fitting entry for the "Craig saga" and I hope that most will agree.

    My overall impression is that as a shell, it's a lovely looking piece. The locations and camerawork is stunning. Unfortunately, I'm a sucker for a tightly written screenplay. Yes, yes, I know that neither Ian Fleming's novels, nor the films, have ever been Shakespeare. They were never meant to be Shakespeare; however, it's important to lead the viewer with conviction and authority, and along the way, the story isn't delivered smoothly. It's sadly a direct sequel to 'SPECTRE,' a film that was so poorly written, that this film needs to exist to justify the shoddiness of its predecessor. There are a lot of "Bond elements" in 'No Time To Die', but the heart that's required to make those elements work, is barely present.

    Daniel Craig's crack at this character was apparently contingent upon Bond's total restructuring. He wanted to build him up from scratch, and eventually bring him back to the Bond from the days of yore, but it doesn't work for his iteration of the character. You just have to remember, that when the film ends, neither this actor nor this film are responsible for cementing Bond's place in celluloid history. It's a different Bond!

    I was neither impressed nor disappointed with 'No Time To Die.' It just reinforced my longing for the good ole quips, the sexiness, the standalone missions and so on. The film is the longest running Bond film, at 2hrs. and 45 mins., yet it goes by quickly as it feels like a long collection of fragments that are never fully developed. You don't even get a scene with Bond sharing a meal with the villain, as the evildoer reveals his plan for world domination.

    It wasn't a waste seeing this film, especially on the big screen, but it'll never be on my radar with the likes of the classics...
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Does anyone think they should have had a tribute to Sean and Roger in the credits?

    As somebody posted some pages ago, the only occasion EON included a tribute in the end credits, was in GE for Derek Meddings, who had worked at this and other earlier Bond movies, as he died before the film opened. And, of course, to Cubby in TND. No tributes to Harry Saltzman, Terence Young, Peter Hunt, Ken Adam, Lewis Gilbert, Guy Hamilton, Bernard Lee, Richard Maibaum, John Barry, etc.

    I would have liked a tribute, but beggars can’t be choosers.
  • Posts: 12,466
    FoxRox wrote: »
    So much to say…

    I guess first and foremost I want to backtrack the negativity I put out about Bond’s death. Both the way the film handled it and the fact that the concept was in Ian Fleming’s mind and somewhat used with FRWL is good enough for me to not feel it as disrespectful. They certainly went all in on closing the chapter on Craig, and I’m ok with it.

    Daniel’s performance was extraordinary. The best he’s been since CR, maybe even better. He got so much to do this movie - genuinely funny, angry, hurt, intense, and everything in between. He himself is the big highlight - his legacy as an excellent Bond is more than secured in my mind.

    Lyutsifer Safin is an EXCELLENT villain. I will happily divulge from the masses on this one thinking he wasn’t that great. Malek’s performance was super good. He is the creepiest and maybe most evil villain of the series, from his gross romantic views of Madeleine to his unspeakably ruthless plot.

    Madeleine is 10000x better used here than in SP. Seydoux did excellent. Still would not put her above Tracy and Vesper, but she and the writers convinced me far more about her and her love with Bond here.

    Paloma and Nomi? Great characters, particularly the former. So quirky, funny, and beautiful. The whole “007” thing I thought was handled nicely, with some good comedy and also respect when Nomi wants to give it back. Nomi was very good - definitely liked her more than I thought I would.

    The MI6 regulars are in top form. There was some real literary Fleming stuff between M and Bond I thought, and Fiennes had his best turn yet in the role. Q, Moneypenny very good. Tanner is still Tanner, which is meh for me, but nothing terrible.

    Blofeld’s scene is far better here than anything he got in SP. “Die, Blofeld, die!” Was one of my favorite parts of the whole thing. They lifted from the YOLT novel wonderfully many times, with Bond’s child, a tragic ending, a poison garden (though I do wish it had been called “garden of death”), and Blofeld being strangled by Bond. Golden.

    The way the SPECTRE organization was handled is a bit of a letdown, but I get why it happened how it did. They wanted all loose ends tied up before Craig was out, even though it felt rushed. The biggest shortcoming of the Craig era is how SPECTRE was used.

    The action was marvelous, some of the best of the whole series easily. The PTS was god tier. The forest scene eerie and fun (epic FYEO callback with the car and Logan), the Cuba setpiece sublime, and all the finale stuff well done. Soundtrack top notch as I already knew ahead of time, and worked great in the film. Still a fan of Eilish’s title song, my third favorite of Craig’s behind YKMN and SF.

    The direction was awesome - big props to Fukunaga, a very inspired choice. The writing felt like a significant step up from SP (really, everything did for me). Title sequence was good, locations were good, cast was terrific…

    Overall, I’m highly satisfied. My misgivings were given too soon, and I’d encourage everyone like me who worried about certain elements to give it a chance first. It’s wrestling with QOS right now as my third favorite Craig film, which means it’s wrestling to be either just inside or outside my Top 10 overall. A sterling sendoff for one of the very best Bonds!

    Thanks for the review. Good input. I love QOS. It’s my second favorite Bond movie, and any movie period. Theme song is so cool-not for everyone, but I really enjoy it.

    No problem, and thank you. There’s tons to talk about with this one. QOS is quite the underappreciated gem I must say. I do hope you end up liking NTTD more when you see it, I know it did better for me than I thought.
    FoxRox wrote: »

    Lyutsifer Safin is an EXCELLENT villain. I will happily divulge from the masses on this one thinking he wasn’t that great. Malek’s performance was super good. He is the creepiest and maybe most evil villain of the series, from his gross romantic views of Madeleine to his unspeakably ruthless plot.

    I've come around to this after my third viewing. "I shall use my time" may be Rami Malek's motto too, because he really does a lot with his limited screen time. Every choice he made was compelling.

    Oops, meant diverge haha time for bed! He was one of my most anticipated parts of the film and delivered fully for me. Safin is beyond damaged and screwed up, and is compelling to me in every moment. So glad to have him in the collection of great Bond baddies.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    I just got home. I quickly read through the most recent reviews and am glad that many found themselves liking it despite reservations. I will reply to others tomorrow. But tonight, here's my quick take.

    I loved it.

    My fist thoughts, at random:

    Plot, pacing, cinematography, art direction, performances, score...all great.

    I can't think of many flaws except that Safin's character and motivation are underdeveloped, but that is kind of in line with much of the series. So I bought into it.

    This film pulls us to and fro, through so many different emotions, across locales, that it feels like a damn mini-series. And that is not a bad thing.

    This was Craig's tour de force. And I get a sense, as with Ledger and Phoenix playing Joker, the Academy might be inclined to hand a golden statue for this powerful performance of one of the greatest film characters of all time. Malek is already pushing this.

    And about that ending...it worked, perfectly. I could go into all of the lines that foretell the ending and how it works thematically, but to me it comes down to one scene: the Norway chase. This is the first Bond film that places a child in harm's way...and this child actually experiences trauma that no child should have to go through. It was difficult for me to watch that young of a child being placed in Bond's universe, and from that standpoint, it makes perfect sense that he would sacrifice himself not just for the betterment of society but for the betterment of this child. The film explores childhood trauma that stems from parents who are spies, and it makes sense that Bond has no intent to place Mathilde in that situation. We want that child safe; this ending allows that to happen.

    Also, the film provides a twist on OHMSS. In that film, of course, Bond is met with tragedy and I sense that Bond would have given anything to trade places with Tracy. Here, thematically, that type of ending does a 180. And it's why WHATTITW works for me.

    My great fear was that the ending would cast a shadow over the previous four films. Turns out, it doesn't. While the films follow a narrative arc, they are all such different experiences. It really is a unique set of films, from that standpoint. There is much continuity in characters and storylines, but these movies are so tonally and structurally different, that they all still work as individual films.

    Going again Friday. Can't wait.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Craig’s performance surprised me. I always thought he was good, but there was really something particularly energetic about him in this one compared to all the other performances. It’s like KNIVES OUT brought something out and it never left. I can’t wait to see sequels to that.
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 575
    Would they dare nominate? That is the question. Surely it'd be some kind of a taboo for them.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    00Heaven wrote: »
    Would they dare nominate? That is the question. Surely it'd be some kind of a taboo for them.

    I think he has a chance, but I’m not getting my hopes up. Still, the Oscars have shown they’re not above awarding/nominating actors in genre films.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,711
    00Heaven wrote: »
    Would they dare nominate? That is the question. Surely it'd be some kind of a taboo for them.

    I think he has a chance, but I’m not getting my hopes up. Still, the Oscars have shown they’re not above awarding/nominating actors in genre films.

    They've given Oscars to two (!) Joker performances, so I think it could happen.

    And they do like giving Oscars to people or films that kind of represent a body of work. I think Craig has a chance.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    00Heaven wrote: »
    Would they dare nominate? That is the question. Surely it'd be some kind of a taboo for them.

    I think he has a chance, but I’m not getting my hopes up. Still, the Oscars have shown they’re not above awarding/nominating actors in genre films.

    They've given Oscars to two (!) Joker performances, so I think it could happen.

    And they do like giving Oscars to people or films that kind of represent a body of work. I think Craig has a chance.

    Yeah that gives him an edge.

    I’m still surprised by how he stepped up with this performance. Perhaps given it was his last film he really wanted to swing for the fences.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,711
    00Heaven wrote: »
    Would they dare nominate? That is the question. Surely it'd be some kind of a taboo for them.

    I think he has a chance, but I’m not getting my hopes up. Still, the Oscars have shown they’re not above awarding/nominating actors in genre films.

    They've given Oscars to two (!) Joker performances, so I think it could happen.

    And they do like giving Oscars to people or films that kind of represent a body of work. I think Craig has a chance.

    Yeah that gives him an edge.

    I’m still surprised by how he stepped up with this performance. Perhaps given it was his last film he really wanted to swing for the fences.

    I think he's been great every single time, but yeah, he really surprised me in this one. He added so much to Bond that we've never seen, without, in my view, taking anything away from it. Really stunning performance.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 625
    00Heaven wrote: »
    Would they dare nominate? That is the question. Surely it'd be some kind of a taboo for them.

    Nope. I don't think so.
    Craig is fantastic in NTTD, but there will be at least 5 more Oscar-worthy-peformances around. And after giving it to Anthony Hopkins this year, I think there will be an urge to not celebrate an "old-white-man" again.

    It will be Will Smith and Co as predicted here:
    https://variety.com/feature/2022-oscars-best-actor-predictions-1235020941/
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,119
    TripAces wrote: »
    And about that ending...it worked, perfectly. I could go into all of the lines that foretell the ending and how it works thematically, but to me it comes down to one scene: the Norway chase. This is the first Bond film that places a child in harm's way...and this child actually experiences trauma that no child should have to go through. It was difficult for me to watch that young of a child being placed in Bond's universe, and from that standpoint, it makes perfect sense that he would sacrifice himself not just for the betterment of society but for the betterment of this child. The film explores childhood trauma that stems from parents who are spies, and it makes sense that Bond has no intent to place Mathilde in that situation. We want that child safe; this ending allows that to happen.

    I have my reservations concerning the overly sentimental way they handled the scene, but this makes perfect sense. Thanks for that insightful comment, I might appreciate it more now on a second viewing.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Coming back here after work and very happy to read all your thoughts who recently went. Thanks for sharing right away! B-)
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,119
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Caring about Oscars and award shows seems as pointless as worrying about all of the public polls and ratings. The Oscars have always been political, going back to the '40s. Meaningless.

    Personally I care more about Venice, Berlin and, to a lesser extent, Cannes. Still not in a way that I’d feel upset about it though, but at least they look at cinema as a global phenomenon.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    I love how the gun barrel hints at Bond’s fate.
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 575
    matt_u wrote: »
    I love how the gun barrel hints at Bond’s fate.

    Ha! Interesting take on it.
  • LizWLizW England
    Posts: 30
    For heaven's sake, Paloma sparkled thanks to Ana and to Cary for putting her in this. Everything about her interaction with Bond was just right. And they left it with her happy for him to stay longer next time.

    If it had been otherwise, more in line with the old Bond girl instantly wants to undress Bond and makes that known clearly on the screen, I actually would have been slightly disappointed here. This film is never glaringly "pc" or "woke" (Both terms of which I am easily fed up with people harping on about - nothing in NTTD to complain about, in my opinion, on that territory; none at all). For me, as a female viewer who enjoys many of the incarnations of Bond girls in the history of Bond films, I found Paloma in every way to be just right in this film. It was spot on perfect and she served this story like a glowing gem in a fresh, appropriate way.

    As a female viewer as well, I completely agree. The allegations about 'wokeness' are a paper tiger: you'd have to be really knuckle-dragging to consider this an excessively PC film.

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    I think there’s enough implication that Bond has been having women over his place for the past five years. It’s just that for the purposes of the immediate on screen story, they didn’t want to deviate too much from the Bond/Madeleine romance.
  • edited October 2021 Posts: 346
    bondywondy wrote: »
    One of the bizarre, ironic aspects of Bond dying is it (sort of) vindicates the CraignotBond group. They can say "Craig's Bond is a loser. He dies. He's not the hero. Fans supported a loser Bond for fifteen years."

    Had Craig's Bond survived NTTD he is the winner. He can go off with Madeleine and Mathilde and have a family life or still remain an active 00. He retains his inherent heroic status.

    By ending Craig's tenure with Bond atomized (!) it plays into the hands of anti Craig Bond fans. "See, we told you he wasn't right for the role. Barbara Broccoli appeased him too much and you get a crappy, depressing ending."




    Except he was intoxicated by Safin with these nanobots, so happy family life would not really be possible. Or do you mean, Safin did not get Bomnd intoxicated? And either my eyesight is getting worse than I expected, but I did not see Bond getting atomized. Yes, there was the detonation, but Kananga being blown up and then in peaces (maybe the most ridiculous death of a Bond villain) was more expolicit.

    When missiles reign down on humans, they are incinerated in a ball of flame. So yes, your eyesight must be getting worse.
    slide_99 wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    km16 wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    But surely you can see how it dampens our enthusiasm for going into the theater and seeing a new James Bond film. I mean we’re sitting there knowing it is leading to his death. There’s nothing pleasant about it from this perspective. How are we supposed to enjoy everything in between? I don’t need some grand arc to define the Craig Era. I just wanted a fun Bond film. I’m so disappointed and, rational or not, angry.

    That about sums it up, yup. I've had enough death in my life this year. A coworker, a pet, my father taken by cancer. I was looking forward to an escapist Bond film to bring me out of my hole, not sink me further into it watching my favorite fictional hero get offed.

    Same here. This film doesn't exist as far as I'm concerned, especially after a six year wait.
    Eon should be paying the audience to sit thru this cop out dreck.
    Not interested. They just lost another fan, and I won't be going to see any new film at this point. It would only just get worse.

    I feel the same way. What a baffling decision, to make a movie like this at a time when everything is going to crap and the world specifically needs a hero who prevails instead of succumbs at the end. And it all seems like it was done because the actor wanted it.

    Yes. 100 percent agree. The film is perversely ironic.

    The title makes no sense or is intentionally ironic. No Time To Die but er.... Bond clearly has the time to die. Nice pi*s taking title, Eon!

    Barbara Broccoli says the film is a great way for people to come together to get over the coronavirus pandemic then gives the world a film where the most enduring and beloved action film hero of the 20th and 21st century dies. "Hey covid was depressing so let's continue the depressing vibe in no Time To Die. Enjoy!"

    Is that more irony from Mrs B? Yep.

    Not to mention the irony of many fans saying NTTD is a fitting way to end Craig's tenure. On my life I've read and heard reviews on YouTube and elsewhere refer to Bond dying as "fitting, a great way to end Craig's time in the role." So people think the hero of five films should get wiped out and that's great! What a cool thing to do!

    Riiiiiiiiight.🙄

    It's like a weird Bond nightmare. A glitch in the Matrix, perhaps.😉



  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    bondywondy wrote: »
    Barbara Broccoli says the film is a great way for people to come together to get over the coronavirus pandemic

    She was right. Everyone at my IMAX enjoyed this flick.
  • Posts: 1,314
    After my first viewing and initial disbelief at the creative decision at the end of the film I’m ready to watch it again.

    Have to say the word of mouth on social media from the man in the street seems to be overwhelmingly positive so hey, what do we know

    The early review stateside are mainly positive, bumping the Rotten Tomatoes percentage up a few points to 84% and the box office is stellar.

    Here in the uk my local cinema at the weekend is doing great business

    I might be pissing in the wind trying to like something I fundamentally disagree with, but at least it secures the franchise for at least the short term future.
Sign In or Register to comment.