No Time To Die (2020 Bond film)

Help Support Collector Freaks:

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Messages
30,722
Reaction score
1,528
Location
Florida/LA
It’s pretty obvious that he was initially going to be Dr No and the plot involving a virus is pretty nuts when you think about when it was made but at least they didn’t entirely alter that plot like Falcon and Winter Soldier did.

A Dr. No who was going to take over Spectre not join it.

I like the original Dr. No villain. One of the best Bond villains, imo.
 

jye4ever

ST > PT
Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
81,946
Reaction score
1,542
Location
Sublurgg
Damn 735 world wide so far largest box office for a Hollywood movie.

Dune hasn’t even hit 100 million domestic yet lol
 
Last edited:

a-dev

Super Freak
Premium Member
Rating - 100%
70   0   0
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
50,901
Reaction score
838
Location
Ireland
Saw it last night - better than QoS and Spectre for sure so I'll place it 3rd in the Craig rankings. And also better than Die Another Day as a send-off movie, granted probably no one knew at the time that DaD would be Brosnan's last one.

A long film like Spectre but it kept my interest better because of the new personal stakes they created for Bond. Craig himself was excellent and everyone else played their parts well.

As for the ending, yeah, it elicited the reaction they were aiming for - even though I had already spoiled myself on it by watching the Pitch Meeting a few weeks back. It was new for a Bond film and will thus have its place in Bond history. I doubt they'll make a trend of it so it could end up being unique.
 

Asta

Super Moderator
Staff member
Super Moderator
Lifetime Premium Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Messages
12,350
Reaction score
3,038
Saw it last night - better than QoS and Spectre for sure so I'll place it 3rd in the Craig rankings. And also better than Die Another Day as a send-off movie, granted probably no one knew at the time that DaD would be Brosnan's last one.

A long film like Spectre but it kept my interest better because of the new personal stakes they created for Bond. Craig himself was excellent and everyone else played their parts well.

As for the ending, yeah, it elicited the reaction they were aiming for - even though I had already spoiled myself on it by watching the Pitch Meeting a few weeks back. It was new for a Bond film and will thus have its place in Bond history. I doubt they'll make a trend of it so it could end up being unique.

It was an odd film, made even more so by the ending, and the misdirection at the beginning with Craig quoting one of the best delivered lines from any Bond film: Lazenby's, "We have all the time in the world."

Bond movies have become repetitive, and no longer feel like the 'event' they used to, because they've lasted so long. The ending was a bit like deciding to turn off the life support. Though it really only indicates imminent re-incarnation.

The thing that really stood out was the 'garden'. It was so bleak, so quiet, so absurd. An austere, monolithic structure so at odds with the natural implication of a garden.
 

Wor-Gar

Torturer of OCD
Premium Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Feb 3, 2006
Messages
74,870
Reaction score
2,441
Location
City of Angels
Though it real only indicates imminent re-incarnation.

Which is why it is so pointless.

Compartmentalizing must be different now. People seem to need closure -- even if pointless. Bring Bond to an end, even though we know the recasting process is already moving ahead. It's shallow, a bit like so many "Origin" stories that audiences seem to need. After a certain point, do you really need another Batman origin story?

So what are the Craig Bonds supposed to be? A separate volume? It's own complete era? Now we're ready for a redo -- new Bond, new M, new Moneypenny, new Blofeld...? Or do you just recast Bond and keep the others, but then how does that work from the other characters frame of reference? Do they all just have amnesia like Judy Dench after Brosnan?

Early Bond and Indy were great 'hero tales' because they just started in the middle -- no set-up, no end, just constant adventures.
 

matticus

Super Freak
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
6,125
Reaction score
1,781
Location
Missouri, Home of Star Lord
Which is why it is so pointless.

Compartmentalizing must be different now. People seem to need closure -- even if pointless. Bring Bond to an end, even though we know the recasting process is already moving ahead. It's shallow, a bit like so many "Origin" stories that audiences seem to need. After a certain point, do you really need another Batman origin story?

So what are the Craig Bonds supposed to be? A separate volume? It's own complete era? Now we're ready for a redo -- new Bond, new M, new Moneypenny, new Blofeld...? Or do you just recast Bond and keep the others, but then how does that work from the other characters frame of reference? Do they all just have amnesia like Judy Dench after Brosnan?

Early Bond and Indy were great 'hero tales' because they just started in the middle -- no set-up, no end, just constant adventures.
The black chick is the new 007. Just give her a few movies. MI6 movies. We don't need Bond - Just representation. :chase
 

Ropen

Super Freak
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Feb 16, 2012
Messages
3,766
Reaction score
107
Location
The Silent Mary
I mean, Bond films should go back to their roots, huge action sequence before the titles, villain plans/demands attacks, Bond investigates, Huge confrontation, Bond wins.

Some Craig films tried to mix it up a bit, but I agree the ending was a slap on the face to Daniel as a send off.

imagine Any prior actors dying like Roger Moore and now it feels weird. With that said it just feels like this is how you Re-incarnate, we all know 007 is just a number for sure but at the end of the day what if all bonds ended that way and we are just seeing their story through the ages.

life is a vicious circle
 

Asta

Super Moderator
Staff member
Super Moderator
Lifetime Premium Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Messages
12,350
Reaction score
3,038
The Craig Bond was always a separate entity though. It was a reboot, so from birth to death it's a self-contained series.

It was implied that previous Bonds were the same character, with a shared history in spite of looking completely different, and some of the other characters also looking different.

Ultimately it isn't a series that you're supposed to think too much about. It's more a vehicle for expensive action scenes and spectacle. The 'Bond' link acts as a seal of quality, informing the audience what they should expect.
 

a-dev

Super Freak
Premium Member
Rating - 100%
70   0   0
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
50,901
Reaction score
838
Location
Ireland
I dunno if I'd call it a slap in the face to Craig, I feel like he genuinely endorsed it based on things he said on the promotion tour.

I think he mentioned something about an idea he had all the way back with Casino Royale and if I were to guess I'd say the thread he wanted to pick up was from the line about Double 0s having a low life expectancy - i.e he thought there should be a definite finality to his Bond
 
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Joined
Jan 6, 2016
Messages
1,409
Reaction score
124
Location
UK
I really liked the ending. The film showed the grim reality of the double 0 business. You live as long as you are the best but once you slip up that mistake is likely to be fatal. As a-dev said it's not likely to be a long stint at the top.

The best a double 0 can hope for is the 'retirement' that Bond experienced at the beginning of the movie. A life of boredom and a lack of fulfilment until he eventually drinks himself to death alone, living as a ghost. There is very little chance of these agents being able to seamlessly insert themselves back into society after what they have experienced and what they are trained to do, they would always be a target for the information they have and because of what they have done before making them a danger to anyone who is close to them.

The only real chance for a true escape from that life (which is what the Bond of the books always wanted) is to find someone who knows and understands the lifestyle and can be that emotional anchor that Bond needs to get him out. For Craig's Bond he first thought he found that in Vesper (but she betrayed him) and then his last hope was Madeleine Swann, who he almost lost permanently due to his inability to trust. The regular series Bond had that only once in Tracy Bond and she died because of her connection to Bond.

Craig's Bond was gifted the perfect ending for a double 0 and it was the opposite of regular series Bond who, after Tracy, I imagine probably did eventually die an old drunk in Jamaica without anyone really knowing who he was (that or he was in the Rock with Nick Cage). Craig's Bond saved the world for Queen and country but he also saved it for his family. The family element and fighting to save his legacy through his daughter gave Craig's Bond the most personal of stakes. Once infected he knew that if he touched anyone then they would in-turn become another harmful carrier of the virus designed to kill Madeleine and his daughter. Bond could have escaped at the end but by sacrificing himself, he ensured that those he loved would be safe. I couldn't think of a better last mission for an aging spy. He went out in combat on his terms not only protecting his family but being loved as a man rather than just being a blunt tool for an agency.
 
Last edited:

a-dev

Super Freak
Premium Member
Rating - 100%
70   0   0
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
50,901
Reaction score
838
Location
Ireland
Once infected he knew that if he touched anyone then they would in-turn become another harmful carrier of the virus designed to kill Madeleine and his daughter. Bond could have escaped at the end but by sacrificing himself, he ensured that those he loved would be safe. I couldn't think of a better last mission for an aging spy. He went out in combat on his terms not only protecting his family but being loved as a man rather than just being a blunt tool for an agency.
Wow, I'm slow, I hadn't even thought of that. Obviously I knew he would be a direct threat to them, which alone deprived him of what he would have wanted for the remainder of his life, but I hadn't thought of him creating an exponentially growing number of threats to them even if he stayed away from them on the other side of the world.
 

Stront

Freaked Out
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 28, 2019
Messages
247
Reaction score
113
I really liked the ending. The film showed the grim reality of the double 0 business. You live as long as you are the best but once you slip up that mistake is likely to be fatal. As a-dev said it's not likely to be a long stint at the top.

The best a double 0 can hope for is the 'retirement' that Bond experienced at the beginning of the movie. A life of boredom and a lack of fulfilment until he eventually drinks himself to death alone, living as a ghost. There is very little chance of these agents being able to seamlessly insert themselves back into society after what they have experienced and what they are trained to do, they would always be a target for the information they have and because of what they have done before making them a danger to anyone who is close to them.

The only real chance for a true escape from that life (which is what the Bond of the books always wanted) is to find someone who knows and understands the lifestyle and can be that emotional anchor that Bond needs to get him out. For Craig's Bond he first thought he found that in Vesper (but she betrayed him) and then his last hope was Madeleine Swann, who he almost lost permanently due to his inability to trust. The regular series Bond had that only once in Tracy Bond and she died because of her connection to Bond.

Craig's Bond was gifted the perfect ending for a double 0 and it was the opposite of regular series Bond who, after Tracy, I imagine probably did eventually die an old drunk in Jamaica without anyone really knowing who he was (that or he was in the Rock with Nick Cage). Craig's Bond saved the world for Queen and country but he also saved it for his family. The family element and fighting to save his legacy through his daughter gave Craig's Bond a the most personal of stakes. Once infected he knew that if he touched anyone then they would in-turn become another harmful carrier of the virus designed to kill Madeleine and his daughter. Bond could have escaped at the end but by sacrificing himself, he ensured that those he loved would be safe. I couldn't think of a better last mission for an aging spy. He went out in combat on his terms not only protecting his family but being loved as a man rather than just being a blunt tool for an agency.
Awesome post
 

jye4ever

ST > PT
Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
81,946
Reaction score
1,542
Location
Sublurgg
Some say Logan and End Game but I do agree with the T2 “final chip” ending parallels being used to describe the ending of NTTD plus the obvious Nolan Batman trilogy call backs.

Also once you learn that Madeleine is pregnant the whole dynamics of their vehicle conversation in italy under pressure while being shot at changes.

I also like that the gun barrel opening has no blood meaning that it could be his family being the one that is taking him out.
 

Ropen

Super Freak
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Feb 16, 2012
Messages
3,766
Reaction score
107
Location
The Silent Mary
The Craig Bond was always a separate entity though. It was a reboot, so from birth to death it's a self-contained series.

It was implied that previous Bonds were the same character, with a shared history in spite of looking completely different, and some of the other characters also looking different.

Ultimately it isn't a series that you're supposed to think too much about. It's more a vehicle for expensive action scenes and spectacle. The 'Bond' link acts as a seal of quality, informing the audience what they should expect.
That’s how i always felt, Bond films were the pinnacle of Action films pre MCU, it always had the best sound, best picture and ideas outside the box. NTTD was fine until it’s final act, I think.
I dunno if I'd call it a slap in the face to Craig, I feel like he genuinely endorsed it based on things he said on the promotion tour.

I think he mentioned something about an idea he had all the way back with Casino Royale and if I were to guess I'd say the thread he wanted to pick up was from the line about Double 0s having a low life expectancy - i.e he thought there should be a definite finality to his Bond
I was a bit dramatic when I said that but I meant a slap on the face for Craig knowing damn well the franchise will continue on as a reboot. The biggest mistake was acknowledging the previous M’s in head portraits, meaning that it’s the same Bond at the end of the day. Similar to Die Another Day walking into Q’s Workshop and seeing his “previous” gadgets.
I really liked the ending. The film showed the grim reality of the double 0 business. You live as long as you are the best but once you slip up that mistake is likely to be fatal. As a-dev said it's not likely to be a long stint at the top.

The best a double 0 can hope for is the 'retirement' that Bond experienced at the beginning of the movie. A life of boredom and a lack of fulfilment until he eventually drinks himself to death alone, living as a ghost. There is very little chance of these agents being able to seamlessly insert themselves back into society after what they have experienced and what they are trained to do, they would always be a target for the information they have and because of what they have done before making them a danger to anyone who is close to them.

The only real chance for a true escape from that life (which is what the Bond of the books always wanted) is to find someone who knows and understands the lifestyle and can be that emotional anchor that Bond needs to get him out. For Craig's Bond he first thought he found that in Vesper (but she betrayed him) and then his last hope was Madeleine Swann, who he almost lost permanently due to his inability to trust. The regular series Bond had that only once in Tracy Bond and she died because of her connection to Bond.

Craig's Bond was gifted the perfect ending for a double 0 and it was the opposite of regular series Bond who, after Tracy, I imagine probably did eventually die an old drunk in Jamaica without anyone really knowing who he was (that or he was in the Rock with Nick Cage). Craig's Bond saved the world for Queen and country but he also saved it for his family. The family element and fighting to save his legacy through his daughter gave Craig's Bond the most personal of stakes. Once infected he knew that if he touched anyone then they would in-turn become another harmful carrier of the virus designed to kill Madeleine and his daughter. Bond could have escaped at the end but by sacrificing himself, he ensured that those he loved would be safe. I couldn't think of a better last mission for an aging spy. He went out in combat on his terms not only protecting his family but being loved as a man rather than just being a blunt tool for an agency.
I just think with the Craig films is that he legit got out of the 00 business TWICE successfully only To die a third time to save his family, granted he had nothing to live for afterwards but their mistake is barbara broccoli and Michael g Wilson retiring him multiple times.
At the end of the day the one saving grace of the Bond franchise is the fact that they adapt and overcome with the modern times and we can’t argue with that because the James Bond from the books is stuck in sexist, macho persona that was acceptable from that time period but of course won’t fly at all today and that’s a good thing.
Wow, I'm slow, I hadn't even thought of that. Obviously I knew he would be a direct threat to them, which alone deprived him of what he would have wanted for the remainder of his life, but I hadn't thought of him creating an exponentially growing number of threats to them even if he stayed away from them on the other side of the world.
If you are into video games it’s a live action Fox-Die virus from the Metal Gear Solid films hehehe
Some say Logan and End Game but I do agree with the T2 “final chip” ending parallels being used to describe the ending of NTTD plus the obvious Nolan Batman trilogy call backs.

Also once you learn that Madeleine is pregnant the whole dynamics of their vehicle conversation in italy under pressure while being shot at changes.

I also like that the gun barrel opening has no blood meaning that it could be his family being the one that is taking him out.
I concur 100%

The thing that sucks about the franchise going forward is the inevitable re-imagining or reboot of the franchise again But hey Casino Royale has been done 3 times and so has Thunderball maybe the future of the franchise will be reimagining old movies or books.
 

a-dev

Super Freak
Premium Member
Rating - 100%
70   0   0
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
50,901
Reaction score
838
Location
Ireland
That’s how i always felt, Bond films were the pinnacle of Action films pre MCU, it always had the best sound, best picture and ideas outside the box. NTTD was fine until it’s final act, I think.

I was a bit dramatic when I said that but I meant a slap on the face for Craig knowing damn well the franchise will continue on as a reboot. The biggest mistake was acknowledging the previous M’s in head portraits, meaning that it’s the same Bond at the end of the day. Similar to Die Another Day walking into Q’s Workshop and seeing his “previous” gadgets.

Sorry if I'm misunderstanding you here but those nods to the past shouldn't be taken as indicative that Craig's Bond is the same Bond as Pierce Brosnan and certainly not to suggest that Craig's Bond is the same Bond as Roger Moore who was in his 50s in the 1980s and therefore how can Bond still only be in his 50s in the 2020s. That quite simply cannot be the intention because it makes no sense at all continuity-wise. The past Ms in those wall portraits can be seen as just that, past Ms who James Bond never knew, they were all before his time. And this interpretation doesn't require that you subscribe to the idea of James Bond being a codename either - you simply ignore the past movies. They didn't happen as far as Craig's continuity is concerned. In this way the past Ms or the past Q gadgets are just incidental background details included for the benefit of the viewer only as tributes to Bond as a movie franchise.

I just think with the Craig films is that he legit got out of the 00 business TWICE successfully only To die a third time to save his family, granted he had nothing to live for afterwards but their mistake is barbara broccoli and Michael g Wilson retiring him multiple times.

Agreed, they played the 'too old for this ***t' card too soon and found themselves in a position of repeatedly bringing him out of so-called retirement - it was a bit silly.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Messages
30,722
Reaction score
1,528
Location
Florida/LA
I think Blofeld is the only Bond villain that's been played by different actors in multiple films, but that's understandable because he's Bond's Moriarty, so I get it. I'm not so sure I want to see a new Goldfinger or Dr. No. I definitely don't want a remake of the old films. Maybe Dr No, because the original is kind of boring and old enough that you can almost make a completely different film.
 
Top