NTTD Alternate Ending - SPOILERS
The Red Kind
EnglandPosts: 3,336MI6 Agent
Please vote here;
"Any of the opposition around..?"
The Red Kind
EnglandPosts: 3,336MI6 Agent
Please vote here;
Comments
Can we have a poll on whether NTTD should have even begun?
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I voted for the dou-dou option.
That way you get the emotional ending AND not killing bond off alienating half the fan-base
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
I think that would have been the best ending too.
yeah it just lets the audience choose in their heads which outcome is more palatable for them - if we want Bond to be alive he can be, if we like the idea of sacrificing himself he can be dead
I still go with Fukunaga's idea that NTTD takes place in Bond's head while he's unconscious in SP. Which means that the third act of SP is the actual ending of NTTD. So there!
Given three different endings were shot, the lecture of the movie mainly depends on it. The one with the dou-dou is a possibility and it would make everyone satisfied: Bond survived but he knows he will never be "allowed" to live a normal life, which leads him to be back on active service once and for all, never forgetting about Madeleine and Mathilde. Great conclusion !
Where is the source evidence that 3 endings were shot? I've read press reports to the same effect, but they were around the time of filming in 2019 and incorrectly said that one of the endings was about everyone on a dance floor being gassed (obviously the Cuba scene). As these films are shot very much out of sequence, it's not surprising there was press confusion, as the Cuban scenes were the final ones on production.
I don't know how you'd work it, but given Bond is assaulted virtually a metre away from an exploding bomb in Matera and would be unlikely to survive, how about he lays up in a coma, eventually recovers but with selective memory loss and needing a ton of ground breaking plastic surgery to turn him into the next Bond. Then we can just forget NTTD.
He'll, I don't really care what they do so long as I get to enjoy Bond26 rather than admire it.
Bruh the dou dou option is soo perfect. I wish you were consulted on ending ideas
How about instead of the doll, the kid finds on her bed a hat with a feather in it?
Bookends the horror elements of the film!
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Dou Dou just brings to mind the infected doll from War for the Planet of the Apes.
Correct answer ☺️
There’s nothing online you can point too. But it’s a fact. They did shoot three alternate endings.
Indeed.
I’ll drink to that 🍸
Yes. Obviously Bond couldn't die from gonorrea or stepping in front of a bus because he was distracted by a hot woman.
So let's hope they make it to the BluRay release, to assuage those who cannot accept that Bond can die.
Personally, I think it was a brave and incredibly bold move to see the cinematic ending and I think it was the right thing to do, regardless of the theories on nanobots being rendered inert by OO7s watch etc. Heros die every day. Not many are mourned widely in real life. Bond, as much as I love the character and the films, which led me to the novels (which I read on a regular basis and love in equal measure to the films) would die at some point, indeed his creator penned it, only to bring him back again, after much pressure (from both the public and the publishers).
The creator then died himself, leaving the character for others to carry on the story. As Bond became such a cash-cow, he's been kept alive ever since, probably a little too long under the tenure of certain actors. Whether Craig was guilty of stringing things out for one chapter too far is debatable, but rest assured that due to financial pressure if nothing else, James Bond will return.
The how and why is for others to decide and if NTTD is indeed a coma dream in Blofelds laboratory chair, then fine. If we have seen the ultimate death which becomes canon in years to come, then there's still many adventures and missions which can be told in future films, which can be pasted onto the character's timeline in between the missions we already know about.
Considering Connery started making movies before Craig's own father started "pleasuring himself", I think it would be quite self-centered from both Broccoli and Craig to make NTTD the conclusion of Bond's cinematrographic timeline. I don't even think it would be relevant. I prefer the concept of having a "series within the series" offering a different vision of the character and his journey as a 00 agent (Tracy doesn't even exist in this version).
I need to know the next iteration of Bond will not have in common anything with the five previous movies. I need to know I can identify with Bond without even keeping in mind the heroe of my childhood will die one day indeed, especially the way it occurs in NTTD that I reject.
It's time to separate once and for all the last 15 years from the rest and to see this reboot as an alternate and independant entity produced by EON. Nothing more, nothing less. In other words, it's time to have the Bond many of us love and desperately miss back, with this inspiring feeling consisting in assuming he will survive at the end the mission, making the label "James Bond will return" fully part of the charm and the excitment.
Agreed- I would find it frustrating that Bond lives on and has adventures off-screen when we all know Craig Bond is never coming back. Best to draw a final line under it and then some years down the line, start again with a blank slate.
Not entirely sure that I grasp your meaning with the opening sentence of this post, unless it’s to serve as illustration of the prejudice against the (now deceased) father of the most recent actor to portray James Bond on the big screen?
As daughter of the original producer of the film franchise, Barbara together with MGW and a host of other co-producers, has the absolute right to take the cinematic Bond in whatever direction she chooses. She’s a savvy lady and has presumably made other films which you enjoy? So why the hate now, just because the story doesn’t tally with your preferences, hopes or wishes?
JB is a cash cow and it’s not going to be killled off now, so fear not and get a grip because James Bond will return.
I'm afraid there's a misunderstanding. The opening sentence was just some kind of tribute to Connery who was very keen on spicy words like these. Trust me, there was not any mark of disrespect to the memory of Craig's father. It's nothing more than a generic expression used to illustate something and it has nothing to do with the fact the person mentioned is deceased or not. It's the same for Barbara Broccoli. Why would I feel any "hate" ? This word is quite strong and inappropriate. I just don't really appreciate her artistic vision in general although she did some good things indeed.
Nevertheless, I must admit I'm very familiar with corrosive humor/expressions and I can understand some people here do not taste this way of sharing opinions. I respect that and I'm always open to clarify things like I'm doing right now.
So what was my point ?
Perhaps I'm wrong but in my own appreciation of the series, Craig is nothing but the latest iteration of a character portrayed on the big screen by five other actors before him and during a incredibly long time-lapse (four entire decades). From a cinematographic point of view, I don't think the man represents the legacy of Bond through the last 60 years. The thing is he got the opportunity to participate to the writing process, with the benediction of Barbara Broccoli. From TWINE, Brosnan also had ideas about the evolution of the character, but he was not treated the same way by the producers...
Bond doesn't belong to Craig, that's why I consider the death of the character is a selfish decision. He didn't seem to think about the legacy of the series and the impact it would have on the fans emotionally involved with it. I guess I'm not the only one here to be sad about the character's doom. Having Bond surviving at the end is part of the charm and the reason why I can identify with him. Cubby understood that.
Like you said, BB "has the absolute right to take the cinematic Bond in whatever direction she chooses", but it doesn't necessarily means some of the criticisms from people who expected something else from the Craig era, and especially from NTTD, shall not be taken into account. With this reboot, they tried to connect the five movies between them and saying there are disturbing plot holes and irrelevant elements is putting it mildly. I think it would have been so great to see Craig in a stand alone mission, a pure spy story based on the global geopolitcal context, instead of exploring the romance with a female character like Madeleine. I deeply hope the next movies will mainly focus on espionage, but I'm afraid it's just a personal wish.
You have the right to disagree, but at least, do you understand my point of view ?
I still don't understand your metric in the reference, spicy words or not, why use a yardstick like 'pleasuring himself' when referencing the era when Sean Connery started acting? It was for this reason, the perceived venom against Craig (junior and senior) that I used the word hate, as that's exactly what the connection came across as.
Bond doesn't belong to DC, true. He does in part though belong to Eon and BB/MGW/DC so they can and have written of 'a' death on Bond. NTTD is the 25th film in the franchise so I don't see what yet another stand-alone mission would bring that was fresh. It would be just another throw away mission in my view, which is why the franchise became less and less popular in the late 80s through to the start of DCs tenure. Like him or loathe him, DC reinvigorated the franchise, which will carry on, perhaps in the manner you desire, if such criticism is taken on board.
What Cubby B understood in the 1960s is relevant to how cinema was made and consumed then. It's less relevant now and the death of Bond can be explained away if need be, as a coma dream, as some have suggested.
I understand your argument but can't understand your view as I don't subscribe to it.
No argument from me on this.
@SeanIsTheOnlyOne
“In other words, it's time to have the Bond many of us love and desperately miss back, with this inspiring feeling consisting in assuming he will survive at the end the mission, making the label "James Bond will return" fully part of the charm and the excitment.”
I’m a bit confused…haven’t you already got 20 films and 14 books that already provide that comfort blanket for you?
Well, to be honest, just after my first watch of NNTD, I had this feeling with this ending that Craig's idea was: "I created my own Bond and now I leave with the character". The door is closed in some way. And that's what I consider a "self-centered" attitude, because thinking about the legacy and the furure, it's the first time an actor decide what his version of Bond will become. Even Connery, who was IMHO a far better Bond than Craig, a true legend, the man who created the myth and made the franchise successful while Craig was not even born, never ruined the legacy with convincing Cubby the character shoud be killed off. That was the meaning of the opening sentence.
Concerning the concept of "throw away mission", that's precisely what I love and what I miss so much with Bond ! I don't like at all this TV show format with a narrative thread to create a connection between the movies, which could explain why I have big issues with TV shows while I'm a cinema lover...
Does anyone have any idea of what the 3 alternate endings actually were?
I'll admit, I'm too soft and want one of them to be James, Madeline and Mathilde driving off in the V8.
As I was watching Madeline and Mathilde in the car, I was expecting them to park up with the camera following them closely. The camera would then pull back and we would see the DB5. Then the Bond music would play. Pretty blatant hunt but again, im too soft.
A nice bookend and twist to the Casino ending with Madeline getting the Bond. James Bond. moment.
What I say is I only hope it will be possible to come back to the classic formula in the future, because it's the way I consider Bond. Furthermore, one of the elements I miss the most is geopolitics. The Craig era is quite poor in terms of espionage. CR06 is the only movie dealing with pieces of geopolitics, and given the global context with some international tensions, I would have expected from the last 5th film something else than a story built on Bond's romance with Madeleine. I would have loved Craig to come back for one last run to bring his own spy fiction, like Connery with FRWL, Moore with FYEO, Dalton with TLD and Brosnan with GE. After CR06 as an opening, it would have been great to conclude the reboot with this kind of movie. That's why I'm curious to know what kind of plot Danny Boyle had in mind. Perhaps it was not satisfying at all, but I really want to know.
Once again, this is just a personal opinion. I don't expect anyone to agree with it but only to respect my feeling and the reason why I'm frustrated with the path EON has chosen since 2006.
DC didn't want to accept the role, it's widely known. Having accepted it though, he was given a lot more free rein to bring a new dimension to the character, possibly too much initially, but having said that, CR was widely seen as his finest portrayal, even by the DC haters, many of whom are now up in arms over the end of NTTD and saying "I told you so".
In a lot of ways, DC does leave with the character, or more right to say, that version of the character. Can you honestly see the next Bond being grittier, more physical and more real-world based than DCs Bond? There's been a certain amount of flip-flopping of styles over the decades - Connery to Moore (missing out Lazenby as he never really got his style out there) went from tough and physical to light and whimsical, then Dalton went back to a bit more bite and far more angst, before Brosnan took things back to more sophisticated and gentleman spy again.
It's interesting that you mention Connery not ruining the legacy - he came quite close though with the unofficial NSNA!
Single missions have been done to death - although not literally, it took DC to do the death part ;) and I have no desire to see that format return. The books have several times linked to one another, or at least followed on from one another, so I don't see why the films shouldn't either. I'd not want the bandwagon being boarded either by Eon - James Bond cannot and should not be anything other than a white male. Why not create an equally iconic role for the actors of colour, both male and female, rather than suggesting that James Bond is played by such talent?
As to the alternate endings being shot, I don't believe there were any, despite protestations to the contrary: I work in the broadcast industry and it's very rare that such endings are shot - cost alone doesn't allow for it. There's often the cover story of multiple endings put about and I think this is the case here. There could also be the possibility of different endings being made from the edit too, but not totally different setups, involving locations, turns and crew. As much as I'd love Bond to live and get the girl (or girls in this case) again, I respect the decision to seemingly end the character's life in NTTD and don't think it detracts from the last 59 years of cinematic Bond, the literature or future stories.
Fleming's novels are connected but not the way EON did with the five movies of the reboot.
I'm quite aware it's another means to watch movies. It's different times and for those like me who like the vintage way of working within the film industry, it's complicated to find the kind of enjoyment we have been desperately seeking for the last 20 years. Having said that, I hope some of the next Bond films will be independent, just to feel the pleasure of going to the theater and remembering my childhood enjoyment. I know it's not your case but we'll see what Amazon decide. Perhaps they can find a way to make everyone satisfied.
If it's vintage working you're after, the acquisition of MGM by Amazon spells disaster for your future desires. All that Amazon exists for is to make money for its share-holders and despite BBs statement that Bond will be released in theatres still in years to come, the big A will soon turn this around to get people to subscribe so they can watch the big new films.
More money being pumped into a production doesn't automatically lead to higher production values, but more ambitious effects, bigger salaries and so on. Dr No cost $1.1m in 1962, which is around $22m today. DCs salary for NTTD was more than this alone, and that's his basic, without bonuses. If it's vintage craft you're after, then you should be hoping for Eon to cash in their chips and allow a small independent film maker to have a go. When money is tight, that's when you get creative, but you can still put plenty of action on screen too, just hold back on the FX shots and post.
To say that's not what I want is incorrect - I loved TSWLM and went to see it 3 times as a 6 year old in the cinema (at the pictures as we said then). The opening stunt was perfection to me then and probably still ranks in the top 3 pre-title sequences ever, only because of that ski jump. When seen in restored condition, the Connery Bonds are all stunning films, they lack spectacle and the stunts leave a little to be desired (back projection car chases are never good!), but they hold up just as well today. I lost love for the films toward the end of Moore's tenure and couldn't get on with Dalton at all, then things got silly with Brosnan and it was high time for a change.
Rather than calling NTTD out because you don't like the ending, enjoy it for what it is and get ready to soak up Bond 26, in around 4 years time.