I see your point, but what about going into complete medical isolation while they search for an antidot? This way he couldn’t touch his daughter but at least see her growing. Maybe for years, but so what? Better than to take her father away from her and loose his life.
If i remember correctly, Q says at one point, that you can’t fight nanobots. Why? What about using other nanobots to invert the process? Obruchev was not the only scientist working on it.
They want to tell us, that Bonds situation is hopeless. But for me, it feels constructed, only to sell us the end of the road for him. Like Kirk said in ST 2: There are always possibilities. That’s the spirit, that i loved about Bond. Till yesterday i thougt, it was in his DNA.
(Speaking of Kirk, don’t get me started on THAT film. At least he died not willingly there.)
Just an aside but in the same position given the choice I would die too. All the motivation in the world. It resonates with me as a father and that is honestly the first time that ever happened watching a Bond movie!
I’m not sure this was developed plausibly in the film. Or maybe I misremember it already. At any rate, the way I understood Heracles to work was, it jumps on anybody. Bond would have to stop touching anybody at all right from the start. And nobody would be allowed to touch him. At all. Even treatment of his wounds would have to happen under the most sterile conditions. It’s probably possible to do this for a given period of time. But how long are we talking about? Impossible to say.
The death of Blofeld demonstrates it jumps from person to person until it finds the target it’s been told to kill, and even death wouldn’t stop it, as demonstrated by what happened to the family who went to the funeral of the Spectre agent. No-one could go near Bond, or his body ever again as they would be immediately compromised. The only way Madeline and Matilde’s safety was guaranteed, was for Bond to die in that missile barrage.
Yes, being completely isolated would be the alternative, at least for a while. But for Bond there is no other way. He prefers to die, without really knowing his options.
I think, you can tell it one way or the other. Personally, I simply don’t like this take on the character in NTTD and also got a different impression from Craigs Bond in the previous movies.
Thought it was interesting that the trailers used wide shots of Bond and Safin sitting facing each other at his lair which were clearly edited to remove Mathilde.
Thought I’d gone mad at first, but just went back to check and sure enough, they definitely used shots where she should have been visible but wasn’t. Can’t remember a time they’ve done that before, but clearly understand why and am glad that they did.
Apart from that, no trailer shots jumped out at me as having been dropped from the film. Which is unusual.
I do think he initially had a spear gun. I remember thinking he must have returned to his boat where he stashed that Browning (not an ideal place for a gun, a ship).
Ideally leaving not even a body to bury. That was my reading too.
That’s what it really comes down to, whether you can find some kind of redeeming quality in this particular take or not. I’ve now seen people from all over the fanbase falling on both sides of the fence on this*.
NO TIME TO DIE undoubtedly is the most controversial Bond film in a long time, much more so than DIE ANOTHER DAY or CASINO ROYALE ever were.
*That goes really across all kinds, sizes and shapes of fans, apparently even outspoken Craig-bashers. And the very opposite, diehard fans of his since the first presser back in…2005!
And also: there might be the theoretical option that scientists may find a way to fight and eliminate the nanobots. Thing is: all the experts are dead. How long will it take to build new facilities? How long will it take to reach the level of knowledge again? And who knows if among those new scientists, there isn’t another one who’s willing to work for whoever pays most.
And given what a devious character Obruchev is, he may have left some traps and pitfalls.
That’s true. And in the past i loved especially the controversial Bonds. OHMSS, LTK, CR are top of my list. But i can’t fight it: Seeing James Bond die, leaves me deeply depressed. All the joy, that a Bond premiere usually brings to me is gone. I guess, i have to leave these films behind for the moment. Things are how they are.
Indeed, the joy is gone.
Bond movies are not fun anymore, and NTTD even more so. It’s sinister and depressing. It’s not entertainment. It’s gratuitous darkness.
Ok, so after the initial shell shock of seeing that the spoilers are true last night…
I think the death was handled well: it made sense and was actually pretty underplayed with little bombast or self importance. I had feared an over emotional/sentimental slow mo style death and they pitched it well and with restraint imho. I thought the 2 scenes after with Madeleine and then the MI6 team were similarly tasteful and avoided overdoing it. Tearful funeral scenes would have been a horrible mess I feel.
This said, it still just doesn’t feel right to have killed James Bond. Of those I watched it with, 3 were fans and one was ambivalent, but none approved of the death. I would have preferred the YOLT novel ending, but I guess they had already mined this vein in Skyfall. Probably my biggest regret of the Craig run is their using of great ideas at the first opportunity rather than waiting for the best time… jumping from the promising Quantum organisation to Spectre being a good example of this.
At least killing him off frees them to reinvent as they see fit in the future… Blofeld with no family ties please!
Apologies for the rambling nature of this post but I’m genuinely still getting my head round what just happened and trying to work out how I feel about it. I guess that it has provoked this reaction in me is indicative of the filmmakers achieving something special?
I’m seeing the concept from the perspective that his escape is now too late regardless, and the revelation about not touching Madeleine and Mathilde confirms in his mind that’s okay.
This is perhaps the key theme that decides our reaction to NO TIME TO DIE: Is entertainment, Bond entertainment in particular, always meant to be ‘fun’ for us?
If so, it’s probably harder for us to find much to praise in Craig’s tenure - and surely nothing in his final moments as Bond on screen.
If we’re able or willing to grant Bond entertainment the excursion into the field of tragedy, and if we’re willing to be entertained outside our comfort zone, or perhaps outside the drawer we usually put 007 in, then chances are we can accept this particular ending. Or even appreciate it as something unexpected but nonetheless adequate for this particular series.
Neither reaction is per se right or wrong, we all try to come to terms with the death of an old friend here.
Hello! As a Bond-fan since 1981 and long-time reader of this forum I had to join and rant: I think they took the easiest approach with the script and not in a good way. The Batman/Logan ending-
Bond dies, the code name theory, a female 007, Bond has a child, Bond retired…again, reversed OHMSS ending, using an old song, equal screen time for the female lead and,and,and. There´s everything in this film we laughed about the past 20 years…I really would like to see Danny Boyle´s film. Only could have been better imo.
Not having seen the film yet, I just want to thank all members–new and old–for their fascinating and deeply expressed opinions/reactions. Just as many were psyched by the trailers as they were released, my enthusiasm for seeing the film has increased in light of your passionate responses.
NTTD and the end of the Craig era: I’m not mad, I’m just disappointed.
If you’d have told me back in 2005 or so what was in store for the next couple of Bond films I would have been over the moon.
Bond is going to quit the service for a woman again? And then AGAIN?
Bond is going to go on a revenge mission again?
We’re going to delve into Bond’s childhood?
Blofeld is going to come back?
Bond is going to have a child?
They’re going to kill M?
They’re going to kill Felix Leiter?
They’re going to kill Bond?
It all looks amazing on paper. Unfortunately, it never leapt off the page for me.
I have no problems with most of the elements of filmmaking in the Craig era (save for the editing in QoS). The movies look great. The acting is great. The action is pretty damn good (although I’m struggling to remember many amazing stunts since CR).
I just have a problem with the writing. Not the dialogue, really. (PWB did a fine job with that in NTTD). But all the amazing moments I listed above… after Casino Royale, they never land with me. They’re never earned. I just don’t feel anything. I don’t care.
I know how hard writing is. I’m a failed writer myself. I have the greatest respect for what they tried to do here. I just don’t think it worked, ultimately.
NTTD was okay. It’s on the level of Skyfall and SPECTRE for me. It zips along pretty nicely for a 3 hour film. There are some really good moments in it. But ultimately, I don’t find anything memorable about it. And that’s too bad, for the movie in which Bond becomes a father and dies. The biggest problem perhaps is that I still don’t see why he loves Madeleine, and why we should too.
If you told me now that the next iteration of Bond is going to be pure fun escapism again without any character development, I don’t know how I’d feel. As long as it’s executed well I guess I’d like it. But I would also still like to one day see what the Craig era tried to be, done right.
I’ll point out there is nothing in that film that Fleming didn’t do. If anything Eon left an easier write out than Fleming did when it came to killing off Bond in the fifth one…
