No Time to Die 4K UHD (2021)

[steve_dave]

Originally Posted by CompleteCount

Any excuse for a soft reboot rather than a from-cold restart, and they're likely to take it.

EON already did a soft reboot with Skyfall, after fan pressure caused the producers to finally introduce the Bond traditions that were missing in Casino
Royale and Quantum of Solace.

EON also used Skyfall and the canon video game 007 Legends to officially bin aka trash the “James Bond is a code name” theory. In the game as Bond is falling off the train and into the river, his “life” passes before his eyes. The player relives these “missions” with Craig’s likeness and voice in place of the respective previous actor. Essentially Casino Royale ‘06 is the beginning and Skyfall is set before Dr. No and also set after Die Another Day.

Lee Tamahori slyly tried to confirm the James Bond code name theory with Die Another Day where you see four cubbies in abandoned station for abandoned agents. The cubbies were representing the previous men to have the code name. But No Time to Die confirms that only the 00 code names can be transferred as needed. The agent/person name is their own.

[MuffinMcFluffin]

Originally Posted by steve_dave

EON already did a soft reboot with Skyfall, after fan pressure caused the producers to finally introduce the Bond traditions that were missing in Casino
Royale and Quantum of Solace.

EON also used Skyfall and the canon video game 007 Legends to officially bin aka trash the “James Bond is a code name” theory. In the game as Bond is falling off the train and into the river, his “life” passes before his eyes. The player relives these “missions” with Craig’s likeness and voice in place of the respective previous actor. Essentially Casino Royale ‘06 is the beginning and Skyfall is set before Dr. No and also set after Die Another Day.

Lee Tamahori slyly tried to confirm the James Bond code name theory with Die Another Day where you see four cubbies in abandoned station for abandoned agents. The cubbies were representing the previous men to have the code name. But No Time to Die confirms that only the 00 code names can be transferred as needed. The agent/person name is their own.

I mean, considering there can only be up to nine double-0 agents (ten if you count 000), then of course it's transferrable. What, in the history of the program there will only be those ten and no one else?

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by MuffinMcFluffin

I mean, considering there can only be up to nine double-0 agents (ten if you count 000), then of course it's transferrable. What, in the history of the program there will only be those ten and no one else?

They reference the fact in Casino Royale the life expectancy of a 00 isn't very long. And then they go and transfer 007 to Nomi after Bond retired. He was still James Bond after he retired! So this was addressed in the films themselves. I don't see why the "James Bond is a code name" farce perseveres.

Bond will be rebooted. Whether it's a new arc where Bond is starting out or already a seasoned agent on another mission is the question.

[vinncent]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

They reference the fact in Casino Royale the life expectancy of a 00 isn't very long. And then they go and transfer 007 to Nomi after Bond retired. He was still James Bond after he retired! So this was addressed in the films themselves. I don't see why the "James Bond is a code name" farce perseveres.

Bond will be rebooted. Whether it's a new arc where Bond is starting out or already a seasoned agent on another mission is the question.

Dont forget...he was also 007 again before the movie ended!

[levcore]

That was funny, i liked when Pitch Meeting made fun of that. "Change codenames right before the big mission? That's a fun idea!"

[jonam]

Can I ask. Who thinks this movie has been overlooked? One of the first movies to put bums back on seats theatrically and was a decent financial hit.

Superbly shot and as a Bond fan I accepted the ending, although it got me emotionally and shocked me like most people who saw it.

For me it's a multi-verse story and the opposite to OHMSS. I just can't understand why a lot of people can't suspend disbelieve and just accept that the Daniel Craig era were more experimental and emotionally challenging chapters within the Bond canon.

Hopefully the film makers do justice and bring Bond back in a clever way.

Personally an underrated movie?

[levcore]

I don't think it's been overlooked, I think it's been looked, plenty.

On a related note this thread has 92 pages, not many "overlooked" movies can claim that.

[Jbux]

Originally Posted by jonam

Can I ask. Who thinks this movie has been overlooked? One of the first movies to put bums back on seats theatrically and was a decent financial hit.

Superbly shot and as a Bond fan I accepted the ending, although it got me emotionally and shocked me like most people who saw it.

For me it's a multi-verse story and the opposite to OHMSS. I just can't understand why a lot of people can't suspend disbelieve and just accept that the Daniel Craig era were more experimental and emotionally challenging chapters within the Bond canon.

Hopefully the film makers do justice and bring Bond back in a clever way.

Personally an underrated movie?

For me NTTD follows the trend of all Craig films after Casino - a few good moments dotted amongst a muddled script with a good central performance from Craig.

What really lets it down is that Bond gets berated, undermined and humiliated and then finally

[Show spoiler]killed off and tossed on the same heap as Han, Luke, John Connor, Iron Man, Wolverine, He-Man and (according to rumours) Indiana Jones. It’s a nasty trend and really killed the fun that we want from Bond.

The additional deaths of Felix and Blofeld (who dies with an unceremonious thunk off screen) added to the careless misery.

Casino Royale got the mixture perfectly right. Emotional depth with a Bond who unapologetically enjoys the finer things, including women, in what must be a contender for the best action film ever made. The free running chase scene is still top class and flattens anything Craig did in his subsequent films.

Why Barbara Broccoli didn’t just stick with the winning formula that produced that film will remain a confounding mystery.

[jonam]

Originally Posted by Jbux

For me NTTD follows the trend of all Craig films after Casino - a few good moments dotted amongst a muddled script with a good central performance from Craig.

What really lets it down is that Bond gets berated, undermined and humiliated and then finally

[Show spoiler]killed off and tossed on the same heap as Han, Luke, John Connor, Iron Man, Wolverine, He-Man and (according to rumours) Indiana Jones. It’s a nasty trend and really killed the fun that we want from Bond.

The additional deaths of Felix and Blofeld (who dies with an unceremonious thunk off screen) added to the careless misery.

Casino Royale got the mixture perfectly right. Emotional depth with a Bond who unapologetically enjoys the finer things, including women, in what must be a contender for the best action film ever made. The free running chase scene is still top class and flattens anything Craig did in his subsequent films.

Why Barbara Broccoli didn’t just stick with the winning formula that produced that film will remain a confounding mystery.

Sadly the competition in this Action movie genre has got bigger so this 60 year franchise wanted to shake it up a bit. Even Tom Cruise's Mission Impossible series now borrows from Bond but with bigger stunts. The Bond franchise seems to be taking the stunts more cautiously now.

[jonam]

Originally Posted by levcore

I don't think it's been overlooked, I think it's been looked, plenty.

On a related note this thread has 92 pages, not many "overlooked" movies can claim that.

I suppose you are right. Probably because I see and hear so many negative reviews on the movie itself. I have to say the visual effects in this movie was top notch.

[jonam]

Originally Posted by Jbux

For me NTTD follows the trend of all Craig films after Casino - a few good moments dotted amongst a muddled script with a good central performance from Craig.

What really lets it down is that Bond gets berated, undermined and humiliated and then finally

[Show spoiler]killed off and tossed on the same heap as Han, Luke, John Connor, Iron Man, Wolverine, He-Man and (according to rumours) Indiana Jones

[Show spoiler]. It’s a nasty trend and really killed the fun that we want from Bond.

The additional deaths of Felix and Blofeld (who dies with an unceremonious thunk off screen) added to the careless misery.

Casino Royale got the mixture perfectly right. Emotional depth with a Bond who unapologetically enjoys the finer things, including women, in what must be a contender for the best action film ever made. The free running chase scene is still top class and flattens anything Craig did in his subsequent films.

Why Barbara Broccoli didn’t just stick with the winning formula that produced that film will remain a confounding mystery.

They are three dimensional characters and human beings afterall. It's the movie world we live in now. Lets get emotionally connected.

[deet]

Originally Posted by Jbux

For me NTTD follows the trend of all Craig films after Casino - a few good moments dotted amongst a muddled script with a good central performance from Craig.

What really lets it down is that Bond gets berated, undermined and humiliated and then

...Did you fall asleep during the last third of Casino Royale?

[Riddhi2011]

I personally think Cary Fukunaga did what he could to bring a respectable close to Craig's Bond saga. We have to remember that Craig wanted to be killed off so as to give closure to his character arc; so that he doesn't get tempted to return again. I think the personal touch with the family, the daughter was very tastefully done and quite emotional. Felix's death added a lot of emotional depth to the film for me, given his long-standing friendship with Bond. The movie overall, dived very deeply into the themes of "life" and "death" more so than the past films. The whole concept of old worlds dying, ceding the grounds to fresh life was done rather well. From the very outset, Bond's closure with Vesper was a hint at his own death. He had finally gotten over his unresolved trauma with Vesper by finally setting her free. It was beautifully done. Bond having a daughter is a perfect emotional closure. his deepest relationships were always with women - "M", a mother figure, Vesper, his great love, Madeline, his life partner and finally Mathilde, his daughter; a personal reason for him to live and for him to give his life. At the end, Bond dies having saved his country and the world, like a true soldier, and also dies saving the life of his daughter. He doesn't die in vain, but in peace. That's a great closure to me. I loved seeing this in scope 3D on the big screen and was left quite emotional at the end of it. Craig delivered a powerful performance as Bond and it'll be very hard for the next actor to match or top it.

[TheBondFan]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

I personally think Cary Fukunaga did what he could to bring a respectable close to Craig's Bond saga. We have to remember that Craig wanted to be killed off so as to give closure to his character arc; so that he doesn't get tempted to return again. I think the personal touch with the family, the daughter was very tastefully done and quite emotional. Felix's death added a lot of emotional depth to the film for me, given his long-standing friendship with Bond. The movie overall, dived very deeply into the themes of "life" and "death" more so than the past films. The whole concept of old worlds dying, ceding the grounds to fresh life was done rather well. From the very outset, Bond's closure with Vesper was a hint at his own death. He had finally gotten over his unresolved trauma with Vesper by finally setting her free. It was beautifully done. Bond having a daughter is a perfect emotional closure. his deepest relationships were always with women - "M", a mother figure, Vesper, his great love, Madeline, his life partner and finally Mathilde, his daughter; a personal reason for him to live and for him to give his life. At the end, Bond dies having saved his country and the world, like a true soldier, and also dies saving the life of his daughter. He doesn't die in vain, but in peace. That's a great closure to me. I loved seeing this in scope 3D on the big screen and was left quite emotional at the end of it. Craig delivered a powerful performance as Bond and it'll be very hard for the next actor to match or top it.

The movie destroyed 60 years : Bond killed, Blofeld killed, Felix killed, at the beginning of the movie M is considered as a villain... The first part is excellent but when Bond is in London, everything becomes bad.

Safin is a bad character, even worse than Dominic Greene. The first part was visually beautiful and in the second one colors are dull. (example : the island of Safin)

The Craig era had the best (Le Chiffre, Silva) and the worst villains (Blofeld, Safin) at the same time.

[Riddhi2011]

Originally Posted by TheBondFan

The movie destroyed 60 years : Bond killed, Blofeld killed, Felix killed, at the beginning of the movie M is considered as a villain...

I don't judge films with the baggage of what came before. Craig's bond is not the same Bond as the past ones. He is a complete re-interpretation, irrespective of the callbacks and nods (which are only done for fun). Characters exist to serve the story, the plot, themselves and other characters. For that, if they need to die, they die. That's all there is to it. Bond goes out as a hero. There's no greater honour for a soldier than to die in the service of his/her motherland or protecting his loved ones. I don't see Craig as the same individual as in those films. My feelings are the same for Felix or any other recurring character. They exist to serve the story of the film in question and their character arcs.

Originally Posted by TheBondFan

The first part is excellent but when Bond is in London, everything becomes bad.

Safin is a bad character, even worse than Dominic Greene. The first part was visually beautiful and in the second one colors are dull. (example : the island of Safin)

The Craig era had the best (Le Chiffre, Silva) and the worst villains (Blofeld, Safin) at the same time.

I quite like the London parts when they investigate Heracles and interrogate Blofeld.
Safin was indeed poorly written, but also performed underwhelmingly by Rami Malek. he was too young and I feel miscast for the part. He just didn't convey the cold gravitas that you'd need from a villain who wishes to destroy all mankind. But Craig's acting more than makes up for Malek's weakness.
I found the island of Safin to be quite engagingly bleak and apocalyptic. It had a melancholic and depressing vibe that complimented Safin's own disfigurement and his twisted ideas. It was quite the gloomy place and added character to the ending of the film.
As for Blofeld, again, it was the fault of the writing. I found Christoph Waltz quite engaging in No this film, despite his short stay.

[TheBondFan]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

I don't judge films with the baggage of what came before. Craig's bond is not the same Bond as the past ones. He is a complete re-interpretation, irrespective of the callbacks and nods (which are only done for fun). Characters exist to serve the story, the plot, themselves and other characters. For that, if they need to die, they die. That's all there is to it. Bond goes out as a hero. There's no greater honour for a soldier than to die in the service of his/her motherland or protecting his loved ones. I don't see Craig as the same individual as in those films. My feelings are the same for Felix or any other recurring character. They exist to serve the story of the film in question and their character arcs.



I quite like the London parts when they investigate Heracles and interrogate Blofeld.
Safin was indeed poorly written, but also performed underwhelmingly by Rami Malek. he was too young and I feel miscast for the part. He just didn't convey the cold gravitas that you'd need from a villain who wishes to destroy all mankind. But Craig's acting more than makes up for Malek's weakness.
I found the island of Safin to be quite engagingly bleak and apocalyptic. It had a melancholic and depressing vibe that complimented Safin's own disfigurement and his twisted ideas. It was quite the gloomy place and added character to the ending of the film.
As for Blofeld, again, it was the fault of the writing. I found Christoph Waltz quite engaging in No this film, despite his short stay.

I agree for Waltz, he was better in No Time To Die. I think the biggest problem of No Time To Die is that they didn't fix mistakes of Spectre :

- The chemistry between Craig & Seydoux has never been good in both movies. Craig & Green only had 1h-1h30 of screentime but their relation was way more powerful.
- The villain, Safin, is still weak. Blofeld was already weak in Spectre and they didn't fix that problem with Safin.

[NeilZ]

I love both Spectre and No Time to Die. Both are extremely entertaining and still managed to do things very differently than most Bond movies while at least bringing back a semblance of "Bond" back to the series after Skyfall tried everything to break apart from the roots. To me the worst Craig was without a doubt Skyfall. On its own it's a good movie but it went too far in trying to break a classic formula that fans loved for decades. One of my least favorite Bond movies and one of the most overrated films in years in my view.

[TheBondFan]

Originally Posted by NeilZ

I love both Spectre and No Time to Die. Both are extremely entertaining and still managed to do things very differently than most Bond movies while at least bringing back a semblance of "Bond" back to the series after Skyfall tried everything to break apart from the roots. To me the worst Craig was without a doubt Skyfall. On its own it's a good movie but it went too far in trying to break a classic formula that fans loved for decades. One of my least favorite Bond movies and one of the most overrated films in years in my view.

At least Skyfall didn't kill Bond.

"Both are extremely entertaining and still managed to do things very differently"
Spectre is the Bondest movie of Craig. It's not entertaining at all, the movie is too slow. Blofeld is weak. Bond has an aimbot (or the enemies are blind) when he leaves the complex of Blofeld. There's no chemistry between Craig and Seydoux. Bond destroys an helicopter with 3-4 bullets... so many negative aspects that I can say.

[philthehip]

Originally Posted by TheBondFan

The movie destroyed 60 years

So that is why I can't find my movies....

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

They reference the fact in Casino Royale the life expectancy of a 00 isn't very long. And then they go and transfer 007 to Nomi after Bond retired. He was still James Bond after he retired! So this was addressed in the films themselves. I don't see why the "James Bond is a code name" farce perseveres.

Canonically it is 100% not a codename. Absolutely correct. That said, you can fudge canon in your head if you want a make it a codename and ignore the (very few) times the movies outright contradict it.

I pretend X-Files ended on Season 8's finale, and I pretend Star Trek: Enterprise's finale doesn't exist, and Prometheus is not connected to Alien and all kinds of other things.