No Time To Die Spoilers

[Deleted]

Don't read if you intend to watch the film. Here's what I know:












Bond DIES.

Bond has a daughter.

We Have All The Time In The World plays during the end credits.


Bond went through 20 films without dying and yet Craig's version only lasts five films before kicking the bucket. I like the tribute to OHMSS, though. That's the best Bond film in my eyes.

[iank]

It's the perfect end to this pussy version of Bond.

[mott1]

When there's an inevitable sequel though isn't it going to be a bit like Crank 2 - "He died, but he got better"!?

[Deleted]

I'm actually going to see this on Tuesday.

[zarius]

I saw it on Friday

It's not bad per say, the black female 00 agent is unremarkable and not worth the internet outrage there's been about her...the character of Paloma on the other hand has grace, beauty, tows the line between intelligent and just a tad ditzy, and she's only in it for ten minutes. She'd have been a great lay, but Bond doesn't do much womanising at all in this one, he's very monogamous throughout the film.

He also is led on to think he's a cuck for some bizarre reason that isn't really justified in-story.

There's barely any presence from Malik, he only has about four or five scenes in the film and barely interacts with Bond other than a meeting and then a final confrontation. You see him chat more with Swann than you do Bond.

They try to make Swann interesting, but she's constantly miserable and woefully acted.

M is great, but Kinnear, Wishaw, and Harris really don't do much of anything.

Action scenes are really good though, and Craig isn't sidelined and gets to go out on a high note...though his death is ridiculously overcomplicated and it simply exists to say "there is no way Craig comes back after this".

[Brian MK.II]

Went to the 20:00 screening at my local and I'm in two minds about it.

It's an improvement over SPECTRE (Not that that's saying much mind), Craig isn't bad and even has a couple of decent Bondian moments, the action sequences especially the car chase with the Aston are well done plus the awful plot twist of Bond being Blofeld's brother is sort of retconned. And for a few brief minutes, you feel like they've remembered for the first time since 2006 how to make a Bond film with the Ken Adams inspired sets, gadgetry and an sense of humour.

But then just when that happens, they decide ''Nah. let's just go back to being miserable, devoid of fun and leaving the viewer thinking ''This was originally escapism right?''.'' Bond and Madeline's relationship woes is like something out of a fokking soap, The mere mention of Vesper's name induces a rolling of the eyes and we have the whole Bond is a dad which surprisingly is the least annoying.

The characters are mostly bland rather than offensively awful. Zarius is right that Raimi Malik, talented as he is, is wasted here and although he does good enough with the material, he still is about as threatening as wallpaper following his pretty good introduction and classic era inspired appearance. Madeline is still a plank of wood and I struggle to believe Bond was settle down with her. And finally Nomi, who despite being portrayed as obnoxious in the trailers is at best bland and just a knockoff Jinx. Paloma was alright though and you're left feeling cheated that she's barely in the fokking thing.

Billie Whatsherface song is yet another run of the mill sad sack whinging although compared to Sam Smith, she sounds like Shirley Bassey. Hans Zimmer score is another good virtue of the film, having more of a Bondian gravitas than the recycled Thomas Newman scores and Louis Armstrong's classic We Have All The Time In The World is lovely although reminds me I could be watching an better film.

Now for the focal point: the ending and tbh, I'm not fussed by it. It's convoluted, badly shot and reeks of shock value but I'm hardly saddened or shocked by it as others seems to be as it's not like it's the same as the 1962-2002 character and therefore lacks the emotional impact.

TL;DR: No Time To Die has a solid first act where it seems to be slightly regaining aspects of being a Bond movie but come the second act, it decides fokk that and instead goes into another navel gazing, smoke and mirrors pretentious boreathon with an lazy ending that becomes over egged for it's own good. Each to their own but I can't say I'll be rushing to see it again, buy it on DVD or watch the first of a million weekly ITV2 reruns . 5/10

[mott1]

I saw this yesterday, and having originally felt it was a solid 6 to 7 out of 10 I'm not so sure now.

Plus points: Craig seems more awake, perhaps because he knows it's his last one (and I imagine he requested he go out the way he does). I also commend the performances of Seydoux - far better than in the preceding movie - Whishaw and Fiennes, who get more screentime. De Armas has good chemistry with Craig but is curtailed too soon.

Middling points: Waltz is awkwardly shoehorned into the first half of the film which hinders the pacing and is oddly directed when he does appear, tho the actor does gift the film a bit of menace when he makes his 'cameo'. His subsequent disappearance is oddly anti-climatic. Lynch is a typical Bond female sidekick, when everything calms down - neither a dealbreaker nor particularly convincing as 007's replacement, tho she does have screen presence. Also Waller-Bridge's script seems far more geared for character humour than confrontations.

Bad points: Malek is quite frankly awful as the main villain - the dullest Bond villain yet, looking diminutive and aside from his opening appearance (where the child actor is excellent) utterly lacking menace, and I rated him in Bohemian Rhapsody, even if the film was a little safe, and he isn't helped by so little screentime. The Craig era, bar Bardem's Silva in Skyfall and Mikkelsen's Le Chiffre, has at times had some forgettable antagonists. The string-laden music at the end is Murray Gold-like - did the quietness of the conclusion to OHMSS hinder it's emotional impact? Speaking of which this film spends so long referencing the Lazenby film you'd think they felt hidebound to replicate its feel, but this movie has precious little espionage apart from a fleeting moment at a party where everyone already knows who Bond is. Finally the destruction of yet another classic Aston Martin - and in the opening credits! Been there, seen that...

[Bernard Marx]

Saw this two days ago, and I'm pretty much in complete agreement with everyone else on this thread. It is absolutely better than Spectre, for sure, and the first 30 minutes are genuinely quite good, but the film is structurally bizarre and often poorly paced, and yes, Bond pining over Vesper's death is ridiculous at this stage. She got killed off 15 bloody years ago- why can't the films move on? I don't actually mind Madeline in this film, contrary to the reviews above, and the opening sequence impressed me, but the soap subplot between the two of them did grate on occasion.

Rami Malek's villain in this is shite, and easily the worst thing in the film. We get next to no motivation for him whatsoever, and nothing distinguishes him for any archetypal Bond villain. And as I mentioned earlier, the film is structurally off, with the second act dedicated to what feels like awkward exposition. Blofeld is desperately made a pivotal yet contrived plot point, yet is only really there to be killed off. To be honest, that's essentially what I felt about every side-character in the film. The bulk of them feel redundant, either there for the sake of comic relief or exposition, but none of them are inherently bad, and the set-pieces during the first hour of the film are genuinely great.

As for the ending- Bond gets poisoned, shot, and blown up by shit loads of missiles. It's like an over the top Austin Powers death designed to dissuade the notion of any return. If he somehow survives and returns, they'll be taking the absolute piss, but I can see it happening anyway. The homage to On Her Majesty's Secret Service was a nice touch, although it does signify that the film doesn't feel comfortable in asserting its own identity and is instead preoccupied with callbacks, as is the case with so many contemporary sequels- Blade Runner 2049 being an obvious exception.

It's a frustrating film, because it's quite entertaining for particular sections, but it feels overlong and rushed at the same time, resulting in an irritating structural imbalance, and the villain feels utterly half-arsed and uninspired. Having said that, it isn't one of the worst of the Craig outings, and there are definitely strong points here. It's competently directed, featuring an infinitely preferable (and more Bondian) aesthetic and tone to the previous film, and the spectacle on display is great, but it's also bereft of any truly new ideas whilst also being characterised by an often awkward narrative structure.

A mixed bag, and pretty much average overall, but has its moments.

[Deleted]

I didn't mind SPECTRE when I sat down and watched it yesterday. Not the best, but not the worst Bond film by any means. As for the Craig era, I'm afraid I don't like his first two films and I feel the references to Eva Green's character is going to annoy me. I don't give a shit about what happened in Casino Royale. It was four films ago! It would be like if Bond started banging on about the events of The Spy Who Loved Me in A View to a Kill. This is why I prefer the self contained Bond films of old. That said, I don't mind Skyfall that much. I need to watch it again, but I remember it enough not to have to watch it before this film. I'm looking forward to the OHMSS homage and hearing the song in a cinema, that being the Louis Armstrong song not the Billie whoever one. I'm just concerned about the runtime. I'm screwed if I need a wee an hour into the movie. I guess I just won't drink any fluid from a certain point in the day. Still, I can't help but look forward to it. I love Bond and even if it is Craig I'm sure I'll get a kick out of the action sequences and the drama.

[Bernard Marx]

Oct 4, 2021 12:13:57 GMT @gusgorman83 said:

I didn't mind SPECTRE when I sat down and watched it yesterday. Not the best, but not the worst Bond film by any means. As for the Craig era, I'm afraid I don't like his first two films and I feel the references to Eva Green's character is going to annoy me. I don't give a shit about what happened in Casino Royale. It was four films ago! It would be like if Bond started banging on about the events of The Spy Who Loved Me in A View to a Kill. This is why I prefer the self contained Bond films of old. That said, I don't mind Skyfall that much. I need to watch it again, but I remember it enough not to have to watch it before this film. I'm looking forward to the OHMSS homage and hearing the song in a cinema, that being the Louis Armstrong song not the Billie whoever one. I'm just concerned about the runtime. I'm screwed if I need a wee an hour into the movie. I guess I just won't drink any fluid from a certain point in the day. Still, I can't help but look forward to it. I love Bond and even if it is Craig I'm sure I'll get a kick out of the action sequences and the drama.

To be fair, the pining over Eva Green is mainly confined to the first 10 minutes and it doesn't really crop up again after that. It's only frustrating because it's basically the catalyst for the whole plot kicking into gear in the first place! But the first act is the film's strongest as it is.

[Deleted]

This is a great tribute to John Barry.

[mott1]

There's another few points, and I apologise if any of these were clearly answered and I wasn't concentrating (I had just sunk a couple of martinis when I saw the movie):

* Why does Safin bugger off and leave 007 (the original one) to mow down all his henchmen at the end, until it's too late? Was he having a vape or something?

* If MI6 thought Bond was too open to be emotionally manipulated by Blofeld why did they pull down the hatch, letting him make physical contact with him if needed?

* How did Blofeld communicate thru' the eye when he was on CCTV/surveillance in jail 24/7?

* Was it ever really explained why Safin saved Madeleine, or why he even wanted to wipe everyone out (other than it's a Bond film and he has a facial disfigurement along with a private island, so a desire to kill millions comes as part of the package)?

You're 'Safin' a laugh!

[Deleted]

I am a bit disappointed the "Malik is Dr.No" theory is wrong. Many people including myself thought he was definitely Dr.No after watching the trailer.

[zarius]

Oct 4, 2021 13:19:28 GMT @gusgorman83 said:

I am a bit disappointed the "Malik is Dr.No" theory is wrong. Many people including myself thought he was definitely Dr.No after watching the trailer.

I'm still not altogether convinced he wasn't supposed to be Doctor No...the opening sequence specifically call back to the titles of that  movie and he's referred to as a "doctor" by his men. I smell rewrite.

[burrunjor]

Oct 4, 2021 10:47:47 GMT Bernard Marx said:

Saw this two days ago, and I'm pretty much in complete agreement with everyone else on this thread. It is absolutely better than Spectre, for sure, and the first 30 minutes are genuinely quite good, but the film is structurally bizarre and often poorly paced, and yes, Bond pining over Vesper's death is ridiculous at this stage. She got killed off 15 bloody years ago- why can't the films move on? I don't actually mind Madeline in this film, contrary to the reviews above, and the opening sequence impressed me, but the soap subplot between the two of them did grate on occasion.

Rami Malek's villain in this is shite, and easily the worst thing in the film. We get next to no motivation for him whatsoever, and nothing distinguishes him for any archetypal Bond villain. And as I mentioned earlier, the film is structurally off, with the second act dedicated to what feels like awkward exposition. Blofeld is desperately made a pivotal yet contrived plot point, yet is only really there to be killed off. To be honest, that's essentially what I felt about every side-character in the film. The bulk of them feel redundant, either there for the sake of comic relief or exposition, but none of them are inherently bad, and the set-pieces during the first hour of the film are genuinely great.

As for the ending- Bond gets poisoned, shot, and blown up by shit loads of missiles. It's like an over the top Austin Powers death designed to dissuade the notion of any return. If he somehow survives and returns, they'll be taking the absolute piss, but I can see it happening anyway. The homage to On Her Majesty's Secret Service was a nice touch, although it does signify that the film doesn't feel comfortable in asserting its own identity and is instead preoccupied with callbacks, as is the case with so many contemporary sequels- Blade Runner 2049 being an obvious exception.

It's a frustrating film, because it's quite entertaining for particular sections, but it feels overlong and rushed at the same time, resulting in an irritating structural imbalance, and the villain feels utterly half-arsed and uninspired. Having said that, it isn't one of the worst of the Craig outings, and there are definitely strong points here. It's competently directed, featuring an infinitely preferable (and more Bondian) aesthetic and tone to the previous film, and the spectacle on display is great, but it's also bereft of any truly new ideas whilst also being characterised by an often awkward narrative structure.

A mixed bag, and pretty much average overall, but has its moments.

That seems to be the general consensus I've heard everywhere that it's an average Bond film. At the very least it seems Bond has escaped the vandalism of other franchises like DW, Star Wars etc.

As for the SPOILERS killing off Bond, well I don't think that means they are going to replace him. They might just reboot it and give the new actor a clean slate? Or they may do a spin off with his daughter. To be honest that's still not as bad as Jodie or anything like that. At least it's a new character. Still obviously due to his iconic status, Bond will return at some point in some form.