I hope they don't use that as some subversive excuse to use a black actor. It shouldn't matter. The next actor should be chosen on merit and in their ability to fill the boots of James Bond convincingly, whatever the colour of their skin. Bond can be any colour, but I think somebody mixed race such as Rege Jean Page would be very apt and a great choice IMO. Fleming's Bond was mixed heritage coming from Scottish Father and Swiss Mother, so a having someone play him who is mixed race, is a modern interpretation of that. I do want him to be born James Bond but sadly I wouldn't put it past them to now go down the route of James Bond as a code name. They've already screwed it up enough..🤦♂️
Maybe the 1967 Casino Royale can be seen as a "sequel" to No Time to Die. Now Bond is dead, I wouldn't be surprised if the code name idea becomes practice. It allows for all sorts of actors to play Bond, even short or bald actors.
I hesitate to post this as I'm far from a regular in these parts (last post 7 years ago I think), but I felt compelled to (rather like Bond finding Dimitrios) since this movie seems to have set off a bomb under the Bond fan base.
First off, I have to say that while I read all the Fleming novels in sequence many years ago I'm really not immersed in the literary version of Bond. I've read one of the non-Fleming novels too (I think it was 'Devil May Care'). Personally I think that the books/short stories are a big distraction in reviewing or appreciating the films; they stand apart for me. The books come from a totally different time in history and all of the films have taken liberties with the source material to a greater or lesser degree. And herein lies the problem I think: Bond, like no other long-running film character I can think of, is weighed down not only by the literary canon but also the movie canon.
I'm not even going to attempt a detailed review of NTTD but for me this was a full-on Bond film - they threw the kitchen sink at it and pulled it off brilliantly imho. Was I entertained? Yes. Did I laugh? Yes. Did the story take me along for the ride? Yes. Was I moved? Yes. Is it perfect? No. I thought that unlike the other DC films it had more of the 'classic' Bond structure, e.g. a diabolical scheme and a villain that actually had a lair. The emotional aspects of DC's Bond arc were front, centre and dialled to 11 (not something you could ever really say about the other Bond 'eras'). Whether Eon and DC set out to make a 4 or 5 movie series with an overarching thread, they did it and brought it to a definitive (if controversial) conclusion. Oh and DC is by a country mile the best 'actor' to ever holster the Walther PPK - it's not even a competition imho.
Now it may sound like I'm a DC fanboy, but overall I'd actually take SC's first five movies over DC's five. The RM and PB films are weak and became, frankly, a bit daft - I ignore them mostly. OHMSS so-so and TD's two, meh. DC has for me been a solid success as Bond. He modernised and updated the character.
James Bond Will Return! How I don't know, but it'll be interesting. I could see Eon going for a full retro Bond. Not remakes, but missions set in the period of the 50s/60s. Henry Cavill anyone?
I think that was quite clever; normally the gun barrel of course signifies that the gun is trained on Bond - who suddenly turns and fires and the blood is that of his would-be assassin.
No blood here, but it's Bond that is 'fading from my picture' (Blofeld in FYEO). Implying, in this film it's Bond that gets it.
I've seen the film 5 times now, and during every single showing, nobody laughed at any of Nomi's jokes, whilst everyone was loving Craig's jokes. Just sayin'
I remember making a thread on here years and years ago discussing the possibility of bond dying. Everyone thought I was nuts, and said it would never happen. In the same thread I also discussed bond having a brother, and his brother killing him. I'm not making this up. But I can't find the thread, did all old threads get deleted when the site revamped?
The thread's title was something along the lines of 'Questions regarding the future of bond'. If a mod can find it, to prove that I am in fact an oracle, I appreciate it :D
Most people laughed at a few of her jokes. I thought it was a good character. Not Bonds match but they couldnt upstage DC. She was pretty cool though and good looking to boot. Be interesting to see the character develop, hopefully she'll get the chance.
I don't think Bond dying opens up the role to more types of actors than earlier. I simply don't see any connection unless one goes for the code name theory. Lee Tamahori suggested that stupid theory, but EON shot it down. I think there are still limits to what the producers will do, and a female Bond and the Code name theory Are among them. As far as I know BB never said Bond can never die, but she has said Bond will always be a man.
Looks like the brother stuff I mentioned is absent, but it must have been in an even older thread. Interesting to look back on nonetheless.
Regarding The Garden Of Death, I think that one was easier to predict because Blofeld came back. (Though ironically Safin has the garden this time). I loved the use of it in NTTD, there's just something about the creepy macabre stuff I love in Bond films, LALD is my number 1 afterall.
I think it's worth pitching in again with a thumbs up for what Barbara Broccoli has achieved with NTTD.
Earlier I suggested that Nomi is hardly a more progressive figure than Wai-Lin. But in two respects she is. There's no question of Nomi having sex with Bond and at no point does she need to be rescued. She's her own OO7.
It's Madeleine who's really signIficant. Madeleine is, metaphorically, the only cinematic Bond girl ever to have a womb. She's given birth. She's a mother, the mother of Bond's child.
True, some Bond girls of the past have been fleshed out in interesting ways, but the formal limitations of Bond as a genre have always, ultimately, constrained the girls' development; many are simply sex objects, receptacles of adolescent male fantasy. Typically, any Bond girl who promises, or threatens, to break free from bondage to the rules of the genre is killed off in consequence. Tracy has to die to keep the series' formula intact; her death is necessary to prevent Bond's resignation from the Service. (Connery's Bond probably does retire into a long-term relationship - with Domino - at the end of NSNA, but that's an 'unofficial' cul de sac.)
NTTD inverts a familiar solution to the 'problem' of the Bond girl who jeopardises the formula by aspiring to more. This time, she survives and it's Bond who's erased. She lives. Bond dies. Mathilde is a symbol of their release from bondage. Yet the idea of hard re-boots means having cake and eating it too. When hard re-boots are on the table (CR put them there), continuities can afford to end dramatically with a completed cycle of films - no holds barred - while a new Bond can always hit the ground running, the next time round.
Critics and material I don't need. I haven't changed my act in 53 years.
That was fun/interesting to to see again. Back in 2014 I wrote "No. I don't think they'll ever kill off Bond". I know it's a shock to everyone, but even I can be wrong. 🤣😉
Lots of foresight in posing those questions, Jarvio! It's fun to read them again, now!
When NTTD is available for home entertainment and I get a free day, I might watch again all five of the Craig-Bond films, back to back. I'm interested to explore how foreknowledge of Craig-Bond's death might affect the experience of watching those movies together, shading particular themes differently or nuancing interpretation. (Not that this cycle of five films was 'worked out' as some grand arc, years ago. Far from it. To adduce that level of coherence would be a retrospective imposition.)
Critics and material I don't need. I haven't changed my act in 53 years.
Great take on the impact of the previous films and how we'll view them differently after NTTD. Just saw the film and still reeling. Not sure how to feel. First impressions are the previous films will be changed for me now knowing Bond ultimately meets his end. Also, for some reason, Spectre all of a sudden becomes such a better film in my opinion. I hope this denial stage of grief morphs into enjoyment of the final Craig film.
Bond: I'm sorry. That last hand... nearly killed me.
I don't think they'll say he didn't die, they'll just avoid the elephant in the room and say this is still James Bond but a different timeline (or something like that), or avoid the question altogether. Worse still, they'll avoid answering the question because they'll reveal their way around it in Bond26, that going forward, James Bond is now a codename.
Well I've just returned from seeing the flick for a second time. I'm upgrading my score from 7/10 to 8/10. As I obviously knew the ending I decided to just sit back and enjoy it. It's actually a very good film and more moving than I thought during my first viewing.
The ending is the ending, nothing can change that now so I'm taking it with a pinch of salt, letting it slide etc etc. We all know they can do what they want next time so I'm not going to spend any time worrying about it. Bond is dead......long live Bond 🥃🍸️
I have my second viewing on Saturday and I'm hoping I can heed your advice and just try and enjoy it. Most are saying that it is better on the second viewing, so fingers crossed. After my first viewing I left thinking I'm actually not sure if I ever want to see this film again! Never thought I would ever think that. Anyway...🍸️
Yes after the first viewing I said that I'm going to wait until it comes out on home release for a second viewing. Over the next few days I thought there was so much to digest I needed to see it again in the cinema. That actually surprised me because the only Bond film I've seen twice in the Cinema before was Casino Royale.
Another thing I would say about NTTD is that on both viewings the time just flew by. I still can't believe it clocks in at nearly three hours.
The codename idea going forward is probably what they have planned. It will allow ethnic actors to play the role, which in these "woke" times will go down very well with the media. It will also allow for gay and trans Bonds.
No one is arguing that the Pierce Brosnan era is a reboot. Only the DC era is a reboot.
What do you mean by a 'Judi Dench stylistic make over' and in what was does it mean that Casino Royale, in which Bond gains his OO status, is not a reboot?
Comments
I hope they don't use that as some subversive excuse to use a black actor. It shouldn't matter. The next actor should be chosen on merit and in their ability to fill the boots of James Bond convincingly, whatever the colour of their skin. Bond can be any colour, but I think somebody mixed race such as Rege Jean Page would be very apt and a great choice IMO. Fleming's Bond was mixed heritage coming from Scottish Father and Swiss Mother, so a having someone play him who is mixed race, is a modern interpretation of that. I do want him to be born James Bond but sadly I wouldn't put it past them to now go down the route of James Bond as a code name. They've already screwed it up enough..🤦♂️
See Imaginary Conversations, Post 1586. 😁
And for my thoughts on the "code name" theory, see Imaginary Conversations Post 660.
Now that Bond has been killed off, the door is open to all actors to play him/her.
The code name theory couldn't have applied to Bond before his death, as he was "James Bond" biographically. But now he's dead, anything's possible.
Oh, I hope not "anything"....
Maybe the 1967 Casino Royale can be seen as a "sequel" to No Time to Die. Now Bond is dead, I wouldn't be surprised if the code name idea becomes practice. It allows for all sorts of actors to play Bond, even short or bald actors.
"I've got a bad feeling about this..."
I hesitate to post this as I'm far from a regular in these parts (last post 7 years ago I think), but I felt compelled to (rather like Bond finding Dimitrios) since this movie seems to have set off a bomb under the Bond fan base.
First off, I have to say that while I read all the Fleming novels in sequence many years ago I'm really not immersed in the literary version of Bond. I've read one of the non-Fleming novels too (I think it was 'Devil May Care'). Personally I think that the books/short stories are a big distraction in reviewing or appreciating the films; they stand apart for me. The books come from a totally different time in history and all of the films have taken liberties with the source material to a greater or lesser degree. And herein lies the problem I think: Bond, like no other long-running film character I can think of, is weighed down not only by the literary canon but also the movie canon.
I'm not even going to attempt a detailed review of NTTD but for me this was a full-on Bond film - they threw the kitchen sink at it and pulled it off brilliantly imho. Was I entertained? Yes. Did I laugh? Yes. Did the story take me along for the ride? Yes. Was I moved? Yes. Is it perfect? No. I thought that unlike the other DC films it had more of the 'classic' Bond structure, e.g. a diabolical scheme and a villain that actually had a lair. The emotional aspects of DC's Bond arc were front, centre and dialled to 11 (not something you could ever really say about the other Bond 'eras'). Whether Eon and DC set out to make a 4 or 5 movie series with an overarching thread, they did it and brought it to a definitive (if controversial) conclusion. Oh and DC is by a country mile the best 'actor' to ever holster the Walther PPK - it's not even a competition imho.
Now it may sound like I'm a DC fanboy, but overall I'd actually take SC's first five movies over DC's five. The RM and PB films are weak and became, frankly, a bit daft - I ignore them mostly. OHMSS so-so and TD's two, meh. DC has for me been a solid success as Bond. He modernised and updated the character.
James Bond Will Return! How I don't know, but it'll be interesting. I could see Eon going for a full retro Bond. Not remakes, but missions set in the period of the 50s/60s. Henry Cavill anyone?
I think that was quite clever; normally the gun barrel of course signifies that the gun is trained on Bond - who suddenly turns and fires and the blood is that of his would-be assassin.
No blood here, but it's Bond that is 'fading from my picture' (Blofeld in FYEO). Implying, in this film it's Bond that gets it.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I've seen the film 5 times now, and during every single showing, nobody laughed at any of Nomi's jokes, whilst everyone was loving Craig's jokes. Just sayin'
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
I remember making a thread on here years and years ago discussing the possibility of bond dying. Everyone thought I was nuts, and said it would never happen. In the same thread I also discussed bond having a brother, and his brother killing him. I'm not making this up. But I can't find the thread, did all old threads get deleted when the site revamped?
The thread's title was something along the lines of 'Questions regarding the future of bond'. If a mod can find it, to prove that I am in fact an oracle, I appreciate it :D
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
Most people laughed at a few of her jokes. I thought it was a good character. Not Bonds match but they couldnt upstage DC. She was pretty cool though and good looking to boot. Be interesting to see the character develop, hopefully she'll get the chance.
Here it is, Jarvio- The future of bond - 10 questions — ajb007
Plus a little bonus- Bond 25 - The Garden Of Death — ajb007
I don't think Bond dying opens up the role to more types of actors than earlier. I simply don't see any connection unless one goes for the code name theory. Lee Tamahori suggested that stupid theory, but EON shot it down. I think there are still limits to what the producers will do, and a female Bond and the Code name theory Are among them. As far as I know BB never said Bond can never die, but she has said Bond will always be a man.
Thanks Barbel.
Looks like the brother stuff I mentioned is absent, but it must have been in an even older thread. Interesting to look back on nonetheless.
Regarding The Garden Of Death, I think that one was easier to predict because Blofeld came back. (Though ironically Safin has the garden this time). I loved the use of it in NTTD, there's just something about the creepy macabre stuff I love in Bond films, LALD is my number 1 afterall.
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
I think it's worth pitching in again with a thumbs up for what Barbara Broccoli has achieved with NTTD.
Earlier I suggested that Nomi is hardly a more progressive figure than Wai-Lin. But in two respects she is. There's no question of Nomi having sex with Bond and at no point does she need to be rescued. She's her own OO7.
It's Madeleine who's really signIficant. Madeleine is, metaphorically, the only cinematic Bond girl ever to have a womb. She's given birth. She's a mother, the mother of Bond's child.
True, some Bond girls of the past have been fleshed out in interesting ways, but the formal limitations of Bond as a genre have always, ultimately, constrained the girls' development; many are simply sex objects, receptacles of adolescent male fantasy. Typically, any Bond girl who promises, or threatens, to break free from bondage to the rules of the genre is killed off in consequence. Tracy has to die to keep the series' formula intact; her death is necessary to prevent Bond's resignation from the Service. (Connery's Bond probably does retire into a long-term relationship - with Domino - at the end of NSNA, but that's an 'unofficial' cul de sac.)
NTTD inverts a familiar solution to the 'problem' of the Bond girl who jeopardises the formula by aspiring to more. This time, she survives and it's Bond who's erased. She lives. Bond dies. Mathilde is a symbol of their release from bondage. Yet the idea of hard re-boots means having cake and eating it too. When hard re-boots are on the table (CR put them there), continuities can afford to end dramatically with a completed cycle of films - no holds barred - while a new Bond can always hit the ground running, the next time round.
That was fun/interesting to to see again. Back in 2014 I wrote "No. I don't think they'll ever kill off Bond". I know it's a shock to everyone, but even I can be wrong. 🤣😉
Lots of foresight in posing those questions, Jarvio! It's fun to read them again, now!
When NTTD is available for home entertainment and I get a free day, I might watch again all five of the Craig-Bond films, back to back. I'm interested to explore how foreknowledge of Craig-Bond's death might affect the experience of watching those movies together, shading particular themes differently or nuancing interpretation. (Not that this cycle of five films was 'worked out' as some grand arc, years ago. Far from it. To adduce that level of coherence would be a retrospective imposition.)
Great take on the impact of the previous films and how we'll view them differently after NTTD. Just saw the film and still reeling. Not sure how to feel. First impressions are the previous films will be changed for me now knowing Bond ultimately meets his end. Also, for some reason, Spectre all of a sudden becomes such a better film in my opinion. I hope this denial stage of grief morphs into enjoyment of the final Craig film.
The Daniel Craig films are set within the Judi Dench sylistic make over that began with golden eye.
Desmond Llewelyn contined into the Pierce Brosnan era
With so much unhappiness at Bond seemingly!!!!! i dieing
the sooner they pick a new actor and say ann naa
rrr
he didn't really die the better.
I don't think they'll say he didn't die, they'll just avoid the elephant in the room and say this is still James Bond but a different timeline (or something like that), or avoid the question altogether. Worse still, they'll avoid answering the question because they'll reveal their way around it in Bond26, that going forward, James Bond is now a codename.
Well I've just returned from seeing the flick for a second time. I'm upgrading my score from 7/10 to 8/10. As I obviously knew the ending I decided to just sit back and enjoy it. It's actually a very good film and more moving than I thought during my first viewing.
The ending is the ending, nothing can change that now so I'm taking it with a pinch of salt, letting it slide etc etc. We all know they can do what they want next time so I'm not going to spend any time worrying about it. Bond is dead......long live Bond 🥃🍸️
I have my second viewing on Saturday and I'm hoping I can heed your advice and just try and enjoy it. Most are saying that it is better on the second viewing, so fingers crossed. After my first viewing I left thinking I'm actually not sure if I ever want to see this film again! Never thought I would ever think that. Anyway...🍸️
Yes after the first viewing I said that I'm going to wait until it comes out on home release for a second viewing. Over the next few days I thought there was so much to digest I needed to see it again in the cinema. That actually surprised me because the only Bond film I've seen twice in the Cinema before was Casino Royale.
Another thing I would say about NTTD is that on both viewings the time just flew by. I still can't believe it clocks in at nearly three hours.
This probably belongs in the Imaginary Conversations thread but I'll put it here in case there's an issue around spoilers:
The End...
of 'No Time To Die'
but James Bond will return...
in 'Another Hard Re-Boot'
The codename idea going forward is probably what they have planned. It will allow ethnic actors to play the role, which in these "woke" times will go down very well with the media. It will also allow for gay and trans Bonds.
We've been using spoilers there since the movie escaped.... er, was released.
No one is arguing that the Pierce Brosnan era is a reboot. Only the DC era is a reboot.
What do you mean by a 'Judi Dench stylistic make over' and in what was does it mean that Casino Royale, in which Bond gains his OO status, is not a reboot?