• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

No Time to Die, am I missing something

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bungle73

On Moderation
Joined
19 Aug 2011
Messages
3,040
Location
Kent
The IMAX is now showing screenings for subsequent dates. They're all at 8 or 8:30 pm though. That's a bit late and I don't know how my bro would feel about it. I've emailed him to ask.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
4,382
Location
Ely
I totally agree with this. I'm certainly an 'old School' Bond fan, who watches the films for a bit of entertainment, excitement and adventure. There are plenty of other films and franchises for an emotional story arc, and Bond provided a respite from all that. Sadly that is no more the case.

Having seen it last night, I've been trying to work out what I thought about it.

I think 'decent film, but not really a James Bond film' sums it up about as well as I can manage. I agree James Bond films should be more escapist then they've been recently.

Probably the best since Casino Royale though:
- Quantum of Solace was too Bourne-like - fine for Bourne, not for Bond.
- Skyfall is *very* overrated and has far too many plot issues.
- Spectre failed with its attempts to create/retrofit some sort of masterplan arc - ended up just irritating.
 

102 fan

Member
Joined
14 May 2007
Messages
769
I mean it was already known about as it was the reason Danny Boyle was sacked. Craig wanted that ending, Boyle didn't.

It's not the actor's job to demand that. It's not his franchise to demand an ending like that. Arrogance, pure and simple.
 

102 fan

Member
Joined
14 May 2007
Messages
769
True, but he was also an executive producer on this film.

Executive Producer or not, what he demanded and seemingly got is a slap in the face to every Bond fan. I think it's a process to facilitate a female Bond.
 

Berliner

Member
Joined
8 Oct 2020
Messages
399
Location
Edinburgh
Executive Producer or not, what he demanded and seemingly got is a slap in the face to every Bond fan. I think it's a process to facilitate a female Bond.

Barbara Broccoli has consistently ruled out a female Bond, thankfully. That said, I'm surpsied she allowed this film to get away with what it has done.

I never understood the arguments for changing Bond to a female. Why can't he remain a male? It's a fictionalised character, yes, but it's always been a man as it's based on books. Surely there are enough talented women out there who can write, direct, produce and act in a whole new franchise based around a female character, even one based inside the "Bond universe" that they don't need to lazily make her the new 007? Something original can be made and I'm sure if it's done right it'll be a success, but to just say "Bond is a woman now" will just cause more fans to become alienated from the franchise.
 

102 fan

Member
Joined
14 May 2007
Messages
769
Barbara Broccoli has consistently ruled out a female Bond, thankfully. That said, I'm surpsied she allowed this film to get away with what it has done.

I never understood the arguments for changing Bond to a female. Why can't he remain a male? It's a fictionalised character, yes, but it's always been a man as it's based on books. Surely there are enough talented women out there who can write, direct, produce and act in a whole new franchise based around a female character, even one based inside the "Bond universe" that they don't need to lazily make her the new 007? Something original can be made and I'm sure if it's done right it'll be a success, but to just say "Bond is a woman now" will just cause more fans to become alienated from the franchise.

Look what casting a female in a male role did in Dr Who.
 

Berliner

Member
Joined
8 Oct 2020
Messages
399
Location
Edinburgh
Look what casting a female in a male role did in Dr Who.

I think a lot of the downward trend had already been happening and it was to do with bad writing. Dr who becoming a woman didn't bother me one bit as the character is written to change every so often into any kind of humanoid being. The changes with Bond are supposed to be invisible, you're just supposed to accept it's the same man on a new mission. The Craig era introduced lots of challenges to that and it's confusing as to how exactly we are supposed to interpret this incarnation of Bond.
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,457
Location
Somewhere
I haven't seen the new Bond film yet but does it actually open up the possibility of Bond becoming a female character?
 

LOL The Irony

On Moderation
Joined
29 Jul 2017
Messages
5,335
Location
Chinatown, New York
I never understood the arguments for changing Bond to a female. Why can't he remain a male? It's a fictionalised character, yes, but it's always been a man as it's based on books. Surely there are enough talented women out there who can write, direct, produce and act in a whole new franchise based around a female character, even one based inside the "Bond universe" that they don't need to lazily make her the new 007? Something original can be made and I'm sure if it's done right it'll be a success, but to just say "Bond is a woman now" will just cause more fans to become alienated from the franchise.
This. I swear messing with established characters is done intentionally by some people as they're sad, pathetic individuals who want to take a massive dump on everyone's parade. That and it's easier to mess around with existing characters than to make new ones.
Look what casting a female in a male role did in Dr Who.
The problem there was the creative team not caring about the source material and then the lead cast member spewing their tosh.
I haven't seen the new Bond film yet but does it actually open up the possibility of Bond becoming a female character?
Opens up, yes. But as said upthread, Barbara Broccoli has said it isn't happening, although whether that stays true under Amazon control is another matter.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,025
Location
No longer here
Barbara Broccoli has consistently ruled out a female Bond, thankfully. That said, I'm surpsied she allowed this film to get away with what it has done.

I never understood the arguments for changing Bond to a female. Why can't he remain a male? It's a fictionalised character, yes, but it's always been a man as it's based on books. Surely there are enough talented women out there who can write, direct, produce and act in a whole new franchise based around a female character, even one based inside the "Bond universe" that they don't need to lazily make her the new 007? Something original can be made and I'm sure if it's done right it'll be a success, but to just say "Bond is a woman now" will just cause more fans to become alienated from the franchise.

The problem with Bond is he is a detached, neutral man whose main character traits are essentially a pastiche (or parody, even!) of masculinity! Heavy drinking, smoking, lack of self-regard, lack of regard for women, predisposition to violence, and so on and so forth. You can't import those properties onto a woman without it looking very strange, so you'd need to change the premise of the show entirely.

There could certainly be a very good film made about a female MI6 agent, but it would have a totally different theme to Bond.

Women should have stronger leads in films, but that's an argument to write better films for them, not to let a woman play James Bond.
 

102 fan

Member
Joined
14 May 2007
Messages
769
I think a lot of the downward trend had already been happening and it was to do with bad writing. Dr who becoming a woman didn't bother me one bit as the character is written to change every so often into any kind of humanoid being. The changes with Bond are supposed to be invisible, you're just supposed to accept it's the same man on a new mission. The Craig era introduced lots of challenges to that and it's confusing as to how exactly we are supposed to interpret this incarnation of Bond.

At the risk of derailing the thread, Time Lords regenerating into a different sex was only introduced in Capaldi's reign. For the 50 years prior to that it didn't happen, It was written in the 50th with the next Dr in mind. The two genre's have a distinct formula. One has an eccentric male alien accompanied by a younger, usually Earth female (representing the audience) & James Bond, a very much male risk taker, womaniser, drinker and smoker.

Once the formula is changed, the appeal dies.
 

Trackman

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2013
Messages
2,922
Location
Lewisham
3. Skyfall - Looked great, but a bit too brooding in parts, and the plot was just silly. The whole film was a revenge mission on M and MI6, and Bond didn't succeed in saving it. It also pushed them into a hole in terms of changing Bonds by giving them the same codename James Bond, whereas in this the character was clearly Bond from birth. I'm not sure how they are going to write their way out of it when the new Bond comes in.
There's loads on the Internet about this, the clues in the dialogue are there. It's all very complicated, I need to watch it again with this in mind.
Apparently James Bond is a codename, But James Bond doesn't know it as he's been brainwashed into thinking he is, hence is thinking it's childhood home plus he was brainwashed there; thus remembering some of it or something and throwing grenades etc at it.
 

Bungle73

On Moderation
Joined
19 Aug 2011
Messages
3,040
Location
Kent
I've booked the Odeon Leicester Square for Monday for just me. I've been keen to try it out since the refurb. I booked one of the posh recliner seats.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,025
Location
No longer here
There's loads on the Internet about this, the clues in the dialogue are there. It's all very complicated, I need to watch it again with this in mind.
Apparently James Bond is a codename, But James Bond doesn't know it as he's been brainwashed into thinking he is, hence is thinking it's childhood home plus he was brainwashed there; thus remembering some of it or something and throwing grenades etc at it.
This surely conflicts with what I had always thought to be true about James Bond - that when the lead actors change, and sometimes even from film to film, there is no continuity. Hence, Daniel Craig's Bond isn't in exactly the same "universe" as Moore's or Connery's for example.
 

Trackman

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2013
Messages
2,922
Location
Lewisham
This surely conflicts with what I had always thought to be true about James Bond - that when the lead actors change, and sometimes even from film to film, there is no continuity. Hence, Daniel Craig's Bond isn't in exactly the same "universe" as Moore's or Connery's for example.
That's my thinking too, just going on the Skyfall film I commented on and what people are thinking - I must watch it again.
They might clear this up on the next Bond film or skim over it, but it will give us clue.
 

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
4,382
Location
Ely
I've booked the Odeon Leicester Square for Monday for just me. I've been keen to try it out since the refurb. I booked one of the posh recliner seats.

I saw Skyfall there back in the day, and it was pricey enough then - but since the refurb, the prices are crazy there, so I've not been back (so far).

(In any event, I have a Cineworld Unlimited card, so it costs me zero to go across the square to the ex-Empire and watch stuff there instead :)
 

Bungle73

On Moderation
Joined
19 Aug 2011
Messages
3,040
Location
Kent
I saw Skyfall there back in the day, and it was pricey enough then - but since the refurb, the prices are crazy there, so I've not been back (so far).

(In any event, I have a Cineworld Unlimited card, so it costs me zero to go across the square to the ex-Empire and watch stuff there instead :)
I paid £10. I think Skyfall might have been the last film I saw there.
 

kristiang85

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2018
Messages
2,650
This surely conflicts with what I had always thought to be true about James Bond - that when the lead actors change, and sometimes even from film to film, there is no continuity. Hence, Daniel Craig's Bond isn't in exactly the same "universe" as Moore's or Connery's for example.

I've always thought the other way round. Especially when you see OHMSS and Lazenby says "this never happened to the other guy".
 

birchesgreen

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2020
Messages
5,041
Location
Birmingham
I'd always thought "Bond" was the code name for the top agent, who changed over time. Skyfall ruined that idea though!
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,025
Location
No longer here
I've always thought the other way round. Especially when you see OHMSS and Lazenby says "this never happened to the other guy".
Yes there are nods to previous iterations, but I always took it as the franchise breaking the fourth wall rather than being explictly canon.
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,262
Prior to the Craig era Bond continuity was all over the place. The films were pretty much self-contained with occasional nods to previous episodes. The idea seemed to be: it's the same guy, but don't think about it too hard.

Craig's films were a hard reboot and established clear continuity from film to film.

I suspect we'll now see the franchise rested for a bit, then another hard reboot, perhaps set in the past - the premise of Bond has become harder to sustain the further it gets from the 1960s.
 

Bungle73

On Moderation
Joined
19 Aug 2011
Messages
3,040
Location
Kent
Prior to the Craig era Bond continuity was all over the place. The films were pretty much self-contained with occasional nods to previous episodes. The idea seemed to be: it's the same guy, but don't think about it too hard.

Craig's films were a hard reboot and established clear continuity from film to film.

I suspect we'll now see the franchise rested for a bit, then another hard reboot, perhaps set in the past - the premise of Bond has become harder to sustain the further it gets from the 1960s.

I don’t want another reboot. I had enough of that with Spider-Man, where they kept repeating the same origin story again and again. I got fed up with it.
 

Tracked

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2011
Messages
1,242
Location
53.5440°N 1.1510°W
Craig's films were a hard reboot and established clear continuity from film to film.
Just been to see it, I liked it, it's a pity DC only got 5 films in over 15 years (or 14 years, non-covid).


(£6.99 afternoon ticket in the local cinema in town, incidentally, think it was £4.99 at the one at the other side of town to me but that's an extra 30 mins walk each way)
 

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
7,320
I can wait until/if it comes onto free to air TV.
I have never been a strong fan of the Bond stories. I find them too far-fetched to be convincing spy stories, nor original enough to be good science fiction. Anything by John Le Carre makes a much better spy tale.
 

C J Snarzell

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2019
Messages
1,506
Prior to the Craig era Bond continuity was all over the place. The films were pretty much self-contained with occasional nods to previous episodes. The idea seemed to be: it's the same guy, but don't think about it too hard.

Craig's films were a hard reboot and established clear continuity from film to film.

I suspect we'll now see the franchise rested for a bit, then another hard reboot, perhaps set in the past - the premise of Bond has become harder to sustain the further it gets from the 1960s.

For Your Eyes Only and Licence to Kill, both made reference to Bond's ill fated five minute wedding at the end of On Her Majesty's Secret Service, but since there is no indication to 007 being a widower. This appears to have been forget about over the years.

There has to be some flexibility of fiction with the Bond franchise - if we adopted a 'real time' attitude, the onscreen Bond would now be at least 90 given it is nearly 60 years since Dr No graced the cinemas.

I think the Bond series will simply be re-incarnated with a new leading actor. Given the time gap between each film, I doubt if we will see the next 007 offering until at least 2025. They do seem to be churning them out at a slower pace these days.

CJ
 

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
4,382
Location
Ely
I paid £10.

That's impressive! Is that a weekday afternoon price?

I think Skyfall might have been the last film I saw there.

Probably the same, though I've been a handful of times over the last 15 years. I remember Skyfall being rather too loud, but I think that used to be a generic problem with that screen...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top