Film James Bond: No Time to Die

A week or so ago, I taped a show on ITV called “being James Bond”… forgot and just watched.

It’s a recording of an interview with Daniel Craig, Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson (producer and/or exec producer in all Bond films since the late 70s).

The recording is overlaid with/interspersed by various clips… some from the actual films but plenty from behind the scenes.
Runs in chronological order from Barbara saying it was always going to be Craig, through all five films, upto shooting his final ever Bond scene.

A few things I didn’t realise/had forgotten .. the media abuse he got when first picked, the media turnaround after Casino Royale, the amount of stunts he did, breaking his leg in Spectre and carrying on, the writer strike in QOS and filming before the script was done (explains a bit about why such a mess?), why he intended to leave after Spectre. Also has some cool montages of memorable moments through his five films.

I’ve always loved Bond since I was a kid and I also like learning about films (how made, issues, etc) so I might be biased but thought really good.

Still on ITV Hub to view.
 
BeforeKeanetherewasRobson said:
A week or so ago, I taped a show on ITV called “being James Bond”… forgot and just watched.

It’s a recording of an interview with Daniel Craig, Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson (producer and/or exec producer in all Bond films since the late 70s).

The recording is overlaid with/interspersed by various clips… some from the actual films but plenty from behind the scenes.
Runs in chronological order from Barbara saying it was always going to be Craig, through all five films, upto shooting his final ever Bond scene.

A few things I didn’t realise/had forgotten .. the media abuse he got when first picked, the media turnaround after Casino Royale, the amount of stunts he did, breaking his leg in Spectre and carrying on, the writer strike in QOS and filming before the script was done (explains a bit about why such a mess?), why he intended to leave after Spectre. Also has some cool montages of memorable moments through his five films.

I’ve always loved Bond since I was a kid and I also like learning about films (how made, issues, etc) so I might be biased but thought really good.

Still on ITV Hub to view.
Click to expand...

Yeah I downloaded it a while back.

I have to admit, when he was appointed I hated it, but Casino Royale was fantastic and he had the strongest run of films compared to more modern Bonds.
 
lilcurt said:
I'm really disappointed with the ending, moreso now I have had two days to digest than I was in first viewing.

It almost seems selfish and self-indulgent to kill Bond. He has always continued to survive through the years and actors and this feels almost disrespectful to me.

I don't know where they go from here. Now we have been teased with the serial nature of the franchise I don't want to revert to each movie being stand alone. I also don't want to see a complete reboot.

All that being said, ignoring the Bond history I do this the Daniel Craig years have been fantastic.
Click to expand...
That's my feeling a little. The director/whoever decides this wanting their name in lights for daring to kill Bond, but having said that it's possibly the most powerful Bond scene in all 25 films. Also a bit of a poisoned chalice for the next film having to either ignore or explain away the ending of the last 20 years of films.


Either way a great film but not perfect. The story was a bit loose but the fast pacing and action made up for it, it felt almost like a collection of short film sections in a good way.

Craig was brilliant. I much prefer the Jason Bourne-ified vulnerable version of Bond he has portrayed. M, Moneypenny, Q and Felix Leiter were also excellent.

Ana De Armas could have been used better. It felt like a contrived way to get a hot girl on screen for a bit rather than adding anything to the film.

Nomi - what was the point other than ticking a box? She didn't add anything to the film. The one time he needed her in the forest she was nowhere to be seen until he was hitchhiking his way home afterwards. Safin was supposed to be following her to get to Bond/Mathilde, so how did she disappear in the middle of all that?
 
Last edited:
BeforeKeanetherewasRobson said:
A week or so ago, I taped a show on ITV called “being James Bond”… forgot and just watched.

It’s a recording of an interview with Daniel Craig, Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson (producer and/or exec producer in all Bond films since the late 70s).

The recording is overlaid with/interspersed by various clips… some from the actual films but plenty from behind the scenes.
Runs in chronological order from Barbara saying it was always going to be Craig, through all five films, upto shooting his final ever Bond scene.

A few things I didn’t realise/had forgotten .. the media abuse he got when first picked, the media turnaround after Casino Royale, the amount of stunts he did, breaking his leg in Spectre and carrying on, the writer strike in QOS and filming before the script was done (explains a bit about why such a mess?), why he intended to leave after Spectre. Also has some cool montages of memorable moments through his five films.

I’ve always loved Bond since I was a kid and I also like learning about films (how made, issues, etc) so I might be biased but thought really good.

Still on ITV Hub to view.
Click to expand...
This sounds like a good watch, will have to try to acquire it.

As for the bolded part, I think the writer strike was a massive issue for that film - it probably wouldn't have been amazing either way cos the overall plot was a bit weak, but the whole Vesper mourning part could've been handled so much better, more fleshed out. A lot of it felt very rushed, especially after a very good Casino Royale. I don't know how much in detail they go in the docu, but I remember seeing an interview at the time with Daniel Craig and the director (was it Marc Forster?) who were explaining they had pretty much no script for certain scenes, that they tried to write even though they knew it wasn't their role and they were doing a terrible job of it, etc. Just sounded like a complete mess.
 
Thought this was ok to fairly good and like most would rank it bang in the middle of the Craig Bonds behind Casino and Skyfall.

Again like others it seemed that the villains motivation jumped from something legitimate to wtf for no apparent reason.

I also thought the scenes that Phoebe Waller-Bridge penned stuck out like a saw thumb and came across really stilted and out of place.

Kudos for the ending as well. Didnt expect that.
 
CassiusClaymore said:
Yeah I'm guessing and because like I said they didn't fit the tone of the rest of the movie as is usually the case if you bring someone in to rewrite certain scenes. Problem?
Click to expand...
Not a problem, just that your initial post in its statement that "scenes written by PWB stick out like a sore thumb" is weird because you don't know which scenes they are.

I think that the female characters are much more fleshed out (with the exception of Paloma) in this one, which is great work from the writing team. I saw some people say Nomi was pointless, but I think she was only ever intended as a side character (the film being entirely centered around James and Madeleine), and is great in that regard. Wonder whether she'll be in the next ones now, and with a bigger role.
 
Rooney in Paris said:
Not a problem, just that your initial post in its statement that "scenes written by PWB stick out like a sore thumb" is weird because you don't know which scenes they are.

I think that the female characters are much more fleshed out (with the exception of Paloma) in this one, which is great work from the writing team. I saw some people say Nomi was pointless, but I think she was only ever intended as a side character (the film being entirely centered around James and Madeleine), and is great in that regard. Wonder whether she'll be in the next ones now, and with a bigger role.
Click to expand...

Yeah the female characters were much better I agree. I was talking more about the attempts at humour which didn't work for me and actually looking into it I can see it's had multiple rewrites so could have been anyone to be fair. The tone of it definitely veered all over the place for me.
 
Rooney in Paris said:
Not a problem, just that your initial post in its statement that "scenes written by PWB stick out like a sore thumb" is weird because you don't know which scenes they are.

I think that the female characters are much more fleshed out (with the exception of Paloma) in this one, which is great work from the writing team. I saw some people say Nomi was pointless, but I think she was only ever intended as a side character (the film being entirely centered around James and Madeleine), and is great in that regard. Wonder whether she'll be in the next ones now, and with a bigger role.
Click to expand...

Really? I thought she was plenty fleshed out. The thighs of her role was perfect…
 
I think the fact that it was the final Bond movie of Craig's tenure overrates it, when compared to Casino Royale or Skyfall.

The ending and everything that has to do with it, i.e. he has a daughter and she does not get to grow up with one around, but at least not an orphan, is the greatest ending to pretty much any Bond movie, ever. He was so close to getting out of the game and finally had something to live for beside himself, but it wasn't meant to be.
 
edcunited1878 said:
I think the fact that it was the final Bond movie of Craig's tenure overrates it, when compared to Casino Royale or Skyfall.

The ending and everything that has to do with it, i.e. he has a daughter and she does not get to grow up with one around, but at least not an orphan, is the greatest ending to pretty much any Bond movie, ever. He was so close to getting out of the game and finally had something to live for beside himself, but it wasn't meant to be.
Click to expand...

For me that was a real missed opportunity. There are certain things they could have done to ramp up that ending drama even more and create even more pathos. It was competent to good but we easily could have been seeing droves of near-universal holy-sh!t-omfg-best-movie-ever reviews with just a few tweaks and nudges.
 
I was disappointed with the end. I feel that it was disrespectful to the characters history of the other films. Also killing of Felix, Blofield, giving bond a child. All seemed to just be done for their own selfish reasons to cause talking points in that film alone, screw the history.

Another thing that was noticeable was the amount of times people shot at bond and he just stood still, it was like he was bullet proof, not sure if that was just me, but he just stared down the shooter as if to dare them to hit him :wenger:
 
hungrywing said:
For me that was a real missed opportunity. There are certain things they could have done to ramp up that ending drama even more and create even more pathos. It was competent to good but we easily could have been seeing droves of near-universal holy-sh!t-omfg-best-movie-ever reviews with just a few tweaks and nudges.
Click to expand...

I think the writers wanted to make the sacrifice of Bond's life the center piece of the ending...and having the audience pick up the pieces such as his life come full circle in Italy when visiting Vesper. He wanted to start a new life with probably one of four people he truly loved. But had to bury his past, yet it crept up on him. He conceived his daughter, not son, and had to leave his 2nd love in order to "save" her/them.

Him knowing he was a father killed the James Bond we all came to know and admire, especially Craig's Bond. The fact that he even noticed his daughter's stuffed animal and picked it up was abnormal. And then he died with it..alone, technically alone, died with a piece/symbol of his daughter. It was what comforted her and it was what was with him at his death.

And James Bond is now survived by a woman who knew of him decently well, in addition to a daughter who might as well been a ghost to him. Yet he protected her as his own, unknowingly, for the most part.
 
Motorman said:
I was disappointed with the end. I feel that it was disrespectful to the characters history of the other films. Also killing of Felix, Blofield, giving bond a child. All seemed to just be done for their own selfish reasons to cause talking points in that film alone, screw the history.

Another thing that was noticeable was the amount of times people shot at bond and he just stood still, it was like he was bullet proof, not sure if that was just me, but he just stared down the shooter as if to dare them to hit him :wenger:
Click to expand...

Did you not see how they killed off Blowfield last time?
 
edcunited1878 said:
I think the writers wanted to make the sacrifice of Bond's life the center piece of the ending...and having the audience pick up the pieces such as his life come full circle in Italy when visiting Vesper. He wanted to start a new life with probably one of four people he truly loved. But had to bury his past, yet it crept up on him. He conceived his daughter, not son, and had to leave his 2nd love in order to "save" her/them.

Him knowing he was a father killed the James Bond we all came to know and admire, especially Craig's Bond. The fact that he even noticed his daughter's stuffed animal and picked it up was abnormal. And then he died with it..alone, technically alone, died with a piece/symbol of his daughter. It was what comforted her and it was what was with him at his death.

And James Bond is now survived by a woman who knew of him decently well, in addition to a daughter who might as well been a ghost to him. Yet he protected her as his own, unknowingly, for the most part.
Click to expand...

Yes, all of that can be kept and enhanced.
 
Was okay. Nothing special. A bit too long and surprisingly quite low emotional or mental impact even with all the deaths.
 
Desert Eagle said:
Was okay. Nothing special. A bit too long and surprisingly quite low emotional or mental impact even with all the deaths.
Click to expand...
Completely agree with this , actually quite surprised by mostly positive reaction on here for the film when I found it just plain average as well.
 
What’s everyone’s opinion on Rami Malek’s performance? I found him a bit underwhelming as far as Bond villains go.
 
Nowhere near as good as Casino Royale and Skyfall which I feel are easily the best Bond movies of the last 30 years. It was a fun movie and I enjoyed it but it had room to be a better movie with a tighter plotline and more character depth for the interesting characters.

Klopper76 said:
What’s everyone’s opinion on Rami Malek’s performance? I found him a bit underwhelming as far as Bond villains go.
Click to expand...

I felt he was a bit flat and not really given enough scenes to work with. Too much time, IMO was spent on the whole let's kill of all of Spectre plotline when it really wasn't established how Malek's character suddenly had so much power and influence. It was really a waste of his ability as an actor IMO. Plus, the whole double agent that caused Felix to get killed screen time just seemed like a waste for the sole purpose of killing Felix Leiter. That character was just wack.

They should have just cut out that smiley guy and Leiter entirely and the movie could have had more time to really develop and explain Rami's character better. As is, he was just like this mish mash of "Bond Villain" tropes and not as compelling as Javier Bardem for example.
 
Klopper76 said:
What’s everyone’s opinion on Rami Malek’s performance? I found him a bit underwhelming as far as Bond villains go.
Click to expand...

Insipid, wasn't he? Not entirely sure why it was as pedestrian as it was. He's had many better performances than that; it seemed as if he was trying to hard to be a quintessential villain, and it didn't come across as natural.
 
It was ok ok. Some decent moments, other moments were pretty meh.
 
oneniltothearsenal said:
Nowhere near as good as Casino Royale and Skyfall which I feel are easily the best Bond movies of the last 30 years. It was a fun movie and I enjoyed it but it had room to be a better movie with a tighter plotline and more character depth for the interesting characters.
Click to expand...

It looked to me like as the last Craig film they went all out with as many locations, gadgets and explosions as they could fit in, and let the script and story take a back seat. Along the same lines, the ending was a bit unnecessary and over the top but will generate a lot of online chatter and clicks around the film.

It all makes for a very watchable film but not really a great one.
 
Personally I like that they've killed off Bond. It raises the stakes for whoever comes next because the character isn't necessarily invincible anymore.

But the film gets a point knocked off because it doesn't have Eva Green putting her makeup on in front of a mirror. Every Bond film except Casino Royale gets a point off because of it. Even the ones from the 60s.
 
Mr Pigeon said:
Personally I like that they've killed off Bond. It raises the stakes for whoever comes next because the character isn't necessarily invincible anymore.

But the film gets a point knocked off because it doesn't have Eva Green putting her makeup on in front of a mirror. Every Bond film except Casino Royale gets a point off because of it. Even the ones from the 60s.
Click to expand...
Not for me because it was ultimately a decision taken outside of the plot. Craig's contract was up and not going to be renewed so they decided to do what they did. Bond usually/always wins at the end and that will never change. It's the way action heroes are meant to be.

On your second point I think Eva Green would make a great 007 if they wanna go the female route.
 
Ladron de redcafe said:
Insipid, wasn't he? Not entirely sure why it was as pedestrian as it was. He's had many better performances than that; it seemed as if he was trying to hard to be a quintessential villain, and it didn't come across as natural.
Click to expand...

Problem was, he was clearly playing Dr No, however, they were adamant not to call him that, because they wanted to creat new villains, yet they used so much from Dr No, plus mixed in some other past bond film elements, plus some from the original novels, he basically became a victim of not being who he should have been, just because the producers wanted to show they could create a new villain.
 
I thought there was some good and some bad, but it was nice that they didn't make Bond useless to big up the new female 007, she was competent in her own right. Also the opening scene was very cool after a slow start.

However, I can't understand how anyone was surprised by the ending. It was painfully obvious 20 minutes into the film. I'm on mobile so can't put spoiler tags, so won't go into any detail, but I also thought it was a cop out.
 
Klopper76 said:
What’s everyone’s opinion on Rami Malek’s performance? I found him a bit underwhelming as far as Bond villains go.
Click to expand...
People will soon realise that he's a very mediocre character who has as much acting range as Christoph Waltz, which is to say not much. He was one of the most forgettable things of the film, which is saying a lot when you're starring in the same film as Léa Seydoux.
 
The Hilton said:
I thought there was some good and some bad, but it was nice that they didn't make Bond useless to big up the new female 007, she was competent in her own right. Also the opening scene was very cool after a slow start.

However, I can't understand how anyone was surprised by the ending. It was painfully obvious 20 minutes into the film. I'm on mobile so can't put spoiler tags, so won't go into any detail, but I also thought it was a cop out.
Click to expand...
FYI I always use mobile and I can do Spoiler tags
 
The Hilton said:
I thought there was some good and some bad, but it was nice that they didn't make Bond useless to big up the new female 007, she was competent in her own right. Also the opening scene was very cool after a slow start.

However, I can't understand how anyone was surprised by the ending. It was painfully obvious 20 minutes into the film. I'm on mobile so can't put spoiler tags, so won't go into any detail, but I also thought it was a cop out.
Click to expand...

Totally, as soon as they switched to Bond in the Aston Martin, they basically set up everything in that scene and music.
 
It was decent. Another bad villain. Some great action scenes, I particularly enjoyed Ana de Armas. A great scene, and a fun twist on the "Bond must come on to every woman who is both hot and good at fighting" trope.
 
choccy77 said:
Probably because we saw the beginning Middle & End.

Whoever takes over now, it will be very difficult for them & future films must now rely on new stories without duplicating the past.

It's gonna be another complete reboot after what we saw & you can't really keep any of the same actors either.
Click to expand...

It's extremely unlikely that the new films will avoid repeating the past. If there's one theme with Hollywood reboots, it's that they tread the same well worn paths of their predecessors, usually with a couple of shallow changes in an attempt to differentiate themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.