Count me among those who like it, for a few reasons. I like that Bond 1 and Bond 25 are tied together with the word No, and I'll like it even more if we come full circle and the character No or elements from Dr. No play some role (in that sense the title has the potential to take on a terribly punny second meaning, ala No, Time to Die). It also has obvious thematic resonance with the purported structure of the film, as well as what we know of it from the summary that's been released. And yes, I'm also a fan of its relation to the classic NTTD film.
But what really sells me is that they're continuing the trend of Bond actors' final titles involving the unquestionably moribund words 'kill' and 'die' as a meta tie-in on their last outings.
No Time to DIE
DIE Another Day
Licence to KILL
A View to a KILL
and lest we forget,
DIEmonds are Forever.
I'll see myself out.
"Guns make me nervous!"
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
I'm quite certain this will be a line of dialogue in the film: "This is no time to die," "There's no time to die," etc.
I realize that it's tempting to condemn the recurrence of 'die' and 'kill' in the Bond film titles...but the Precious Classic FormulaTM is very much being observed here - in terms of at least paying tribute to Fleming's titling genius - and frankly I'm glad that it wasn't a third consecutive single-word title beginning with an 'S' To me, it's encouraging that none of the rumoured titles ended up being true, and I'll certainly settle for NTTD.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
After watching the title reveal the first time, I was sure I had heard the love theme from “Live and Let Die” faintly woven into the music. Upon second viewing, however, it has vanished. Must’ve been my imagination...
I step out the country for 5 mins and they give Bond 25 a name and I have to trawl through 5 pages of the AJB community being a fickle bunch )
Personally glad B25 has a proper title, it did remind me of the opening score for QOS for some reason but I think it’s rather cool and harks back to the early years. Sure Die is in the title but it is kinda inferred given Bonds job spec, so I will cut them some slack for that.
Actually find myself starting to re engage with Bond after some months of distraction so that’s not a bad thing in my eyes.
Bring on April 2020 i say. I am kinda looking forward to retiring from Bond collecting and just wearing out what I have until it’s thread bare
Cheers :007)
My name is Bond, Basildon Bond - I have letters after my name!
I can imagine the scene when they came up with the title. None of Eon's writing team could think up anything remotely fresh or exciting or with subtext and someone suggested "how about something with die in it?" And Babs said "yeah, let do that!"
They came up with the following titles:
A DAY TO DIE
ALWAYS LIVE TO DIE
NEVER SAY DIE
A REASON TO DIE
MG Wilson was getting bored and looked at his watch.
"I know, how about NO TIME TO DIE?"
Babs smiled and said "brilliant, Michael!" You're a genius!"
You obviously had a spy camera implanted in EON's office ceiling, because this is the most plausible explanation I've seen for the genesis of that feeble excuse for a title!
Imagine if there were internet forums in 1989, and LICENCE TO KILL came out two films after A VIEW TO A KILL? )
I don't think the complaints would be as harsh. Licence to Kill is a venerable phrase that has been associated with the Bond films and books since their beginning and forms a natural title. Plus having two films with Kill in the title is only half as bad as four with Die.
I’ll take “generic Bond title” over some of the atrocities that were tossed about any day. Stuff like of “Genome of a Woman”, or “James Bond” or even “Shatterhand” we’re all absolute rubbish. And although “die” is in the title, which brings obvious comparisons to mind, this title is actuallymuch better than TND or DAD.
“Shatterhand” = not rubbish.
P.S. I’ll be in my seat when the movie comes out, regardless of the title. :007)
Imagine if there were internet forums in 1989, and LICENCE TO KILL came out two films after A VIEW TO A KILL? )
I don't think the complaints would be as harsh. Licence to Kill is a venerable phrase that has been associated with the Bond films and books since their beginning and forms a natural title. Plus having two films with Kill in the title is only half as bad as four with Die.
In that proximity? People would lose their minds. And "Licence to Kill" was criticized as a bit unimaginative at the time; the internet would have torn it to pieces. It's the "Jack Reacher" of its day in terms of lazy titles.
I’ll take “generic Bond title” over some of the atrocities that were tossed about any day. Stuff like of “Genome of a Woman”, or “James Bond” or even “Shatterhand” we’re all absolute rubbish. And although “die” is in the title, which brings obvious comparisons to mind, this title is actuallymuch better than TND or DAD.
“Shatterhand” = not rubbish.
P.S. I’ll be in my seat when the movie comes out, regardless of the title. :007)
The problem with "Shatterhand" is that it sounds like "shat her hand". That's worse than rubbish. If it didn't sound like that I'd like it, and I think it would have been cool to have three consecutive single-word film titles all starting with "S", though I know some here don't care for that idea. It would have made a nice-sounding trilogy. But we don't need a film title about someone taking a sh!t on a Bond girl's hand. The press already have it in for the film.
Imagine if there were internet forums in 1989, and LICENCE TO KILL came out two films after A VIEW TO A KILL? )
I don't think the complaints would be as harsh. Licence to Kill is a venerable phrase that has been associated with the Bond films and books since their beginning and forms a natural title. Plus having two films with Kill in the title is only half as bad as four with Die.
In that proximity? People would lose their minds. And "Licence to Kill" was criticized as a bit unimaginative at the time; the internet would have torn it to pieces. It's the "Jack Reacher" of its day in terms of lazy titles.
I have to agree on Licence to Kill. But I still saw it. I had no desire to see Jack Reacher, and that is partly because of the title. But like Goldfinger and Octopussy, it could also be the title of a porno.
Slowly getting more used to the title. I think it was the initial shock really, because I did not expect a DC film to word a bond title like that. All the other DC titles have felt more unique, more arty, more character, whereas this one sounds more like a generic Brosnan era title, which I thought they'd moved on from (except for the awful AWTD song that is).
But I have been thinking, about the context of the title to the film, this could easily improve my liking of the title. For example, if this is a bond film covering bond's mental health problems (which I'd really appreciate, I'm a regular sufferer myself, and mental health issues are real and are killing people, so awareness being made would be great), then No Time To Die already sounds like a better title, as it sounds more like saying that there is No Time To Die, I have a mission to do, is bond's way of fighting his depression (in contrast to the more "giving up" vibe of A Reason To Die).
On the other hand, if it's just a situation where it's like a normal mission and there's no time to die just because, things are getting frantic, I'm on a dangerous mission etc... then I would find the title as generic as hell.
Overall I'm getting more used to the title, but I still think that it ranks either last or second to last (with DAD being its contender). I don't mind TND because Tomorrow is the name of the newspaper.
I have to agree on Licence to Kill. But I still saw it. I had no desire to see Jack Reacher, and that is partly because of the title. But like Goldfinger and Octopussy, it could also be the title of a porno.
) ) ) )
Hope you use private browsing or incognito
The comments about LTK are spot on, it's not a catchy or unique or interesting title. However, I think the film is one of the best of the series. So, like I always say, "What's in a name?"
I'll reserve judgment until I see the finished product. However, when I first saw the Insta post with the title I thought it was a fan creation, for whatever that's worth...
Imagine if there were internet forums in 1989, and LICENCE TO KILL came out two films after A VIEW TO A KILL? )
I don't think the complaints would be as harsh. Licence to Kill is a venerable phrase that has been associated with the Bond films and books since their beginning and forms a natural title. Plus having two films with Kill in the title is only half as bad as four with Die.
In that proximity? People would lose their minds. And "Licence to Kill" was criticized as a bit unimaginative at the time; the internet would have torn it to pieces. It's the "Jack Reacher" of its day in terms of lazy titles.
Yeah I was only ten at the time, but I remember it being less satisfying than the other titles.
I don't think the complaints would be as harsh. Licence to Kill is a venerable phrase that has been associated with the Bond films and books since their beginning and forms a natural title. Plus having two films with Kill in the title is only half as bad as four with Die.
In that proximity? People would lose their minds. And "Licence to Kill" was criticized as a bit unimaginative at the time; the internet would have torn it to pieces. It's the "Jack Reacher" of its day in terms of lazy titles.
I have to agree on Licence to Kill. But I still saw it. I had no desire to see Jack Reacher, and that is partly because of the title. But like Goldfinger and Octopussy, it could also be the title of a porno.
Jack Reacher is a brilliant film. It feels wonderfully like a 70s thriller, like Dirty Harry or something.
In that proximity? People would lose their minds. And "Licence to Kill" was criticized as a bit unimaginative at the time; the internet would have torn it to pieces. It's the "Jack Reacher" of its day in terms of lazy titles.
I have to agree on Licence to Kill. But I still saw it. I had no desire to see Jack Reacher, and that is partly because of the title. But like Goldfinger and Octopussy, it could also be the title of a porno.
Jack Reacher is a brilliant film. It feels wonderfully like a 70s thriller, like Dirty Harry or something.
Agreed. Cruise and Robert Duvall both give strong performances.
Lest we forget, License To Kill was originally going to be License Revoked (which would have been a great title)...but the producers were concerned that audiences in the USA wouldn't understand it 8-) .
A 1980s Bond comic book was called Permission To Die:
PERMISSION TO DIE (1989) In 1989, Eclipse would attempt to revive the long dormant world of James Bond comics with Permission To Die, an original James Bond "graphic novel" written and illustrated by Mike Grell.
I think there's something about the word 'die' that Bond fans/writers/ associate with the character and his world but it's a bit of a lazy connection. If any film franchise is associated with 'die' it's Die Hard, not James Bond.
No Time To Die is a sign of longevity leading to apathy or creative ennui. After 24 films and close to 60 years of the character the producers and writers can't be bothered to push themselves, no desire to spend time thinking of a different title. "Just stick 'die' in the title, that will do" is their mindset. It's a bit depressing. It's only a title but a title is there forever. If Bond lasts another 60 years Bond 25 will still be NO TIME TO DIE so titles do count for something. You only get one chance to come up with something vaguely fresh or original. One chance to come up with something memorable or different to what has been done before. It's a shame Eon failed to do so.
Comments
But what really sells me is that they're continuing the trend of Bond actors' final titles involving the unquestionably moribund words 'kill' and 'die' as a meta tie-in on their last outings.
No Time to DIE
DIE Another Day
Licence to KILL
A View to a KILL
and lest we forget,
DIEmonds are Forever.
I'll see myself out.
I realize that it's tempting to condemn the recurrence of 'die' and 'kill' in the Bond film titles...but the Precious Classic FormulaTM is very much being observed here - in terms of at least paying tribute to Fleming's titling genius - and frankly I'm glad that it wasn't a third consecutive single-word title beginning with an 'S'
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
The A-Team has a more typical slab serif-style stencil typeface. No Time To Die and The Prisoner is a geometric style instead.
I hope the film will be better than the title.
Personally glad B25 has a proper title, it did remind me of the opening score for QOS for some reason but I think it’s rather cool and harks back to the early years. Sure Die is in the title but it is kinda inferred given Bonds job spec, so I will cut them some slack for that.
Actually find myself starting to re engage with Bond after some months of distraction so that’s not a bad thing in my eyes.
Bring on April 2020 i say. I am kinda looking forward to retiring from Bond collecting and just wearing out what I have until it’s thread bare
Cheers :007)
You obviously had a spy camera implanted in EON's office ceiling, because this is the most plausible explanation I've seen for the genesis of that feeble excuse for a title!
-{ -{ -{
I don't think the complaints would be as harsh. Licence to Kill is a venerable phrase that has been associated with the Bond films and books since their beginning and forms a natural title. Plus having two films with Kill in the title is only half as bad as four with Die.
“Shatterhand” = not rubbish.
P.S. I’ll be in my seat when the movie comes out, regardless of the title. :007)
In that proximity? People would lose their minds. And "Licence to Kill" was criticized as a bit unimaginative at the time; the internet would have torn it to pieces. It's the "Jack Reacher" of its day in terms of lazy titles.
The problem with "Shatterhand" is that it sounds like "shat her hand". That's worse than rubbish. If it didn't sound like that I'd like it, and I think it would have been cool to have three consecutive single-word film titles all starting with "S", though I know some here don't care for that idea. It would have made a nice-sounding trilogy. But we don't need a film title about someone taking a sh!t on a Bond girl's hand. The press already have it in for the film.
I have to agree on Licence to Kill. But I still saw it. I had no desire to see Jack Reacher, and that is partly because of the title. But like Goldfinger and Octopussy, it could also be the title of a porno.
1967
1973
1985
1987 (LIVING, but the root word is there, discard it if you like)
1989
1997
2002
2020
No Time To Die is the first time in 18 years* one of the words has been used. Seems silly to get worked up about it given past frequency.
*The QoS theme song sneaks it into its title, but I don't think that should count here.
But I have been thinking, about the context of the title to the film, this could easily improve my liking of the title. For example, if this is a bond film covering bond's mental health problems (which I'd really appreciate, I'm a regular sufferer myself, and mental health issues are real and are killing people, so awareness being made would be great), then No Time To Die already sounds like a better title, as it sounds more like saying that there is No Time To Die, I have a mission to do, is bond's way of fighting his depression (in contrast to the more "giving up" vibe of A Reason To Die).
On the other hand, if it's just a situation where it's like a normal mission and there's no time to die just because, things are getting frantic, I'm on a dangerous mission etc... then I would find the title as generic as hell.
Overall I'm getting more used to the title, but I still think that it ranks either last or second to last (with DAD being its contender). I don't mind TND because Tomorrow is the name of the newspaper.
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
No Time to Diet
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Hope you use private browsing or incognito
I'll reserve judgment until I see the finished product. However, when I first saw the Insta post with the title I thought it was a fan creation, for whatever that's worth...
Yeah I was only ten at the time, but I remember it being less satisfying than the other titles.
Jack Reacher is a brilliant film. It feels wonderfully like a 70s thriller, like Dirty Harry or something.
Agreed. Cruise and Robert Duvall both give strong performances.
I think there's something about the word 'die' that Bond fans/writers/ associate with the character and his world but it's a bit of a lazy connection. If any film franchise is associated with 'die' it's Die Hard, not James Bond.
No Time To Die is a sign of longevity leading to apathy or creative ennui. After 24 films and close to 60 years of the character the producers and writers can't be bothered to push themselves, no desire to spend time thinking of a different title. "Just stick 'die' in the title, that will do" is their mindset. It's a bit depressing. It's only a title but a title is there forever. If Bond lasts another 60 years Bond 25 will still be NO TIME TO DIE so titles do count for something. You only get one chance to come up with something vaguely fresh or original. One chance to come up with something memorable or different to what has been done before. It's a shame Eon failed to do so.