Jump to content

James Bond: No Time To Die [OUT NOW - SPOILERS]


James Bond

Recommended Posts

On 10/9/2021 at 6:09 AM, James Bond said:

Funny how fragile little white egos can be in the grand scheme of things. There was no "woke" or PC agenda in this film or any such nonsense. Most viewers probably didn't give two shits at what was basically a throwaway line (Q) or Nomi's rivalry with Bond.

Uhm, but it was. Even women were commenting that to me. Whether Q was waiting for a female or male date was totally irrelevant to the story. No need to mention that. And considering that the actor is gay, people could have made of that whatever they wanted. That was put in there to appease someone/to tick a box. Same as the female 007. So to say there wasn't an agenda is a bit naiive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Crazyman said:

I sincerely hope the younger part of the cast (Q, Moneypenny, etc) return. Even though I like Ralph Fiennes as M they'll probably end up replacing him, too. Maybe they can make the female Bond like they've been talking about for years and keep them in their specific roles as a counter movie in the odd-Bond years. 

As much as I like them, I hope all of them get recast. That would make the most sense with a new Bond taking over. It always was odd that they kept on Judi Dench, when they switched to Craig. Previously it was alright to keep the supporting cast, as it never was a full reboot before, but now it would look stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PatrickS77 said:

Uhm, but it was. Even women were commenting that to me. Whether Q was waiting for a female or male date was totally irrelevant to the story. No need to mention that. And considering that the actor is gay, people could have made of that whatever they wanted. That was put in there to appease someone/to tick a box. Same as the female 007. So to say there wasn't an agenda is a bit naiive.

Exactly - whether Q is waiting for a male or female is irrelevant. That's why it's a non issue. If he had mentioned it was a woman people wouldn't give two shits. They're only bothered because it's a male. You won't convince me otherwise. Who gives two fucks if Q is gay?

As for the female 007 - there is no way that people would have been so pissed if it was a white male character as the replacement 007 or Ana de Armas. The fact that things like that make people so insecure is pathetic. As soon as you cast a black woman or a gay character it's suddenly "to fit an agenda."

Might be able to make an argument if Whishaw was still playing Major Boothroyd but he isn't.

Are Moneypenny and Felix also agenda driven casting? I found Wright to be inspired casting back in 2006. Perfect for a modern Felix to Craig's Bond. It'd be incredibly hypocritical to be bothered by Nomi - an original character with whom they can give whichever story - but be cool with Fleming's "straw haired Texan" being played by a black man.

They weren't forcing anything. Nomi is actually quite an insecure character, and it's not like any of that overtakes Bond in the film or threatens his masculinity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose it's just astounding to me that out of an (almost) three hour movie that a fleeting line from Q while he's quite obviously making dinner for someone or like four lines from Nomi where she tries to get under Bond's skin for having the number is what the takeaway from the film is for a select vocal group on the Internet.

I guess I'm just not remembering the scenes where Nomi constantly overpowered Bond or where it was confirmed that the franchise is continuing with her in the role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, James Bond said:

Exactly - whether Q is waiting for a male or female is irrelevant. That's why it's a non issue. If he had mentioned it was a woman people wouldn't give two shits. They're only bothered because it's a male. You won't convince me otherwise. Who gives two fucks if Q is gay?

As for the female 007 - there is no way that people would have been so pissed if it was a white male character as the replacement 007 or Ana de Armas. The fact that things like that make people so insecure is pathetic. As soon as you cast a black woman or a gay character it's suddenly "to fit an agenda."

Might be able to make an argument if Whishaw was still playing Major Boothroyd but he isn't.

Are Moneypenny and Felix also agenda driven casting? I found Wright to be inspired casting back in 2006. Perfect for a modern Felix to Craig's Bond. It'd be incredibly hypocritical to be bothered by Nomi - an original character with whom they can give whichever story - but be cool with Fleming's "straw haired Texan" being played by a black man.

They weren't forcing anything. Nomi is actually quite an insecure character, and it's not like any of that overtakes Bond in the film or threatens his masculinity.

Yes. People don't give a shit, whether Q is gay. So why mention it all? To tick a box. To fit an agenda. To squeeze another woke/sj/minority/whatever you want to call it moment in there. The actor is gay. They could have just left it at that.

As for people complaining about the made up female 007 character being black... I think you're extremely reaching/making things up there. Who cares if a newly introduced character is black? If they have an issue it's because some may think they want to turn the leading man 007 into a woman. There wasn't any uproar about minor characters Moneypenny and Leiter being black. And yes, those decisions were agenda driven. The only issue people might have, is that they have made yet another minor character black. Why black? If they want to be diverse, why make 3 previously white characters black? Why couldn't either Moneypenny or the female 007 not be british-indian?

1 hour ago, James Bond said:

I suppose it's just astounding to me that out of an (almost) three hour movie that a fleeting line from Q while he's quite obviously making dinner for someone

That line just sticks out like a sore thumb. It was absolutely unnessessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PatrickS77 said:

Yes. People don't give a shit, whether Q is gay. So why mention it all? To tick a box. To fit an agenda. To squeeze another woke/sj/minority/whatever you want to call it moment in there. The actor is gay. They could have just left it at that.

As for people complaining about the made up female 007 character being black... I think you're extremely reaching/making things up there. Who cares if a newly introduced character is black? If they have an issue it's because some may think they want to turn the leading man 007 into a woman. There wasn't any uproar about minor characters Moneypenny and Leiter being black. And yes, those decisions were agenda driven. The only issue people might have, is that they have made yet another minor character black. Why black? If they want to be diverse, why make 3 previously white characters black? Why couldn't either Moneypenny or the female 007 not be british-indian?

They added a character trait. Does it take away from the film? No. Does it add anything? Also no. Therefore its a non-issue. It should be possible for gay characters to be in films just because and not immediately jump on this ridiculous bandwagon of "it's gone woke" or whatever. I can't honestly imagine being bothered by it. The thing is - if people truly didn't care that Q was gay, then it wouldn't be an issue that it was mentioned. People are taking issue with it being mentioned, so as much as they might like to pretend they don't care, clearly they do.

How am I reaching or making things up? Literally ever headline was "Lashana Lynch becomes first black female 007." I am not making that up at all. None of that was EON's doing. What made it amusing to me is that yes, people were actually believing the sensationalist headlines - many of which could be argued were rooted in agenda pushing (I'd give you that). Then it ends up being played mostly for laughs in the film and resolving itself anyways. Total non-event based on those headlines from early on. End credits roll - James Bond Will Return. Barbara Broccoli confirms Bond will stay male and they will reboot again. So again, where is the agenda?

I'd like to think that most people wouldn't have an issue with "yet another minor character" being black, as you put it. It's a nicely diverse cast in this film, and I'd like to think that it may very well be they hired Lashana Lynch because she's talented and fit the role they were going for.

I had my skepticism ahead of the film, don't get me wrong - mostly that she'd be another Jinx - but certainly not "oh my God they cast a black woman, there goes EON pushing that agenda again!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just saw it for the second time, sat a lot better with me on a repeated viewing also. The writing is still clunky at times and the plot is overly complicated, but I really don’t have any major criticisms. Still sits behind Casino Royals and Skyfall for me on the Craig rankings though. SPECTRE is the odd one for me when it comes to rankings - I was overwhelmingly positive about it upon release but my feelings have mellowed a bit over the years. I do still really like it for the most part, if only they could’ve dropped Blofeld’s whole “daddy loved you more than me” motivation. I don’t even have a problem with Bond and Blofeld being “related” - just the motivation felt too heavy-handed. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Powerage5 said:

I just saw it for the second time, sat a lot better with me on a repeated viewing also. The writing is still clunky at times and the plot is overly complicated, but I really don’t have any major criticisms. Still sits behind Casino Royals and Skyfall for me on the Craig rankings though. SPECTRE is the odd one for me when it comes to rankings - I was overwhelmingly positive about it upon release but my feelings have mellowed a bit over the years. I do still really like it for the most part, if only they could’ve dropped Blofeld’s whole “daddy loved you more than me” motivation. I don’t even have a problem with Bond and Blofeld being “related” - just the motivation felt too heavy-handed. 

I agree. I also don't mind the brother thing all that much. The problem is that I never get the sense from the performances (or the script) that these guys actually grew up together. Waltz's performance in particular is very one-note. I feel that he was going for cool, calm, and collected - but we never see a real difference between the jealous ridden Oberhauser and the insane SPECTRE leader. He always acts the same. If they're going to do the foster brothers thing, at least go all in on it!

Otherwise I find it's Quantum that I've done a complete 180 on. I rather enjoy it these days after being completely underwhelmed at the time. It took a long time to grow on me.

  • GNFNR 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, James Bond said:

I agree. I also don't mind the brother thing all that much. The problem is that I never get the sense from the performances (or the script) that these guys actually grew up together. Waltz's performance in particular is very one-note. I feel that he was going for cool, calm, and collected - but we never see a real difference between the jealous ridden Oberhauser and the insane SPECTRE leader. He always acts the same. If they're going to do the foster brothers thing, at least go all in on it!

Otherwise I find it's Quantum that I've done a complete 180 on. I rather enjoy it these days after being completely underwhelmed at the time. It took a long time to grow on me.

I’ve always enjoyed QOS for what it is - a thin-plotted, fast paced action flick. It’s a worthy successor to CR, and does a nice job of fleshing out some of the characters, but it is still my least favorite Craig film at the end of the day. That said, it’s probably still inside my top half of all Bond films best to worst, even if just only. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Powerage5 said:

I’ve always enjoyed QOS for what it is - a thin-plotted, fast paced action flick. It’s a worthy successor to CR, and does a nice job of fleshing out some of the characters, but it is still my least favorite Craig film at the end of the day. That said, it’s probably still inside my top half of all Bond films best to worst, even if just only. 

Same here. Despite being my least favourite Craig film it falls roughly in the middle of my overall ranking. I like that it's short and to the point. Easily one of the more rewatchable Bond films.

  • GNFNR 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've kinda had a soft spot for QoS ever since it came out. It was almost always certainly going to be the lesser of the first two, but if the writers strike didn't happen we might live in a different timeline where it's viewed similarly as CR. That and the Cloverfield-era edits are so fucking annoying. They won't ever do it, but I hope they re-cut it for a future edition and let some of those action shots play out slightly longer. 

The Opera scene is still possibly my favorite of not only the Craig-era movies but for Bond overall.

I'd probably rank it above Spectre, even though I haven't seen either in a few years so I couldn't say it definitively until I do a rewatch to rank them again.

Edit: I keep seeing people say that Ana de Armas should be the next Bond now...why not just make a spinoff with her character (and don't make it a carbon copy of the Bond franchise) like they were gonna do with Jinx? I'd watch a series of that...

Edited by Crazyman
  • GNFNR 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Crazyman said:

I've kinda had a soft spot for QoS ever since it came out. It was almost always certainly going to be the lesser of the first two, but if the writers strike didn't happen we might live in a different timeline where it's viewed similarly as CR. That and the Cloverfield-era edits are so fucking annoying. They won't ever do it, but I hope they re-cut it for a future edition and let some of those action shots play out slightly longer. 

The Opera scene is still possibly my favorite of not only the Craig-era movies but for Bond overall.

I'd probably rank it above Spectre, even though I haven't seen either in a few years so I couldn't say it definitively until I do a rewatch to rank them again.

Edit: I keep seeing people say that Ana de Armas should be the next Bond now...why not just make a spinoff with her character (and don't make it a carbon copy of the Bond franchise) like they were gonna do with Jinx? I'd watch a series of that...

If only Martin Campbell had directed Quantum...

In retrospect, considering it was Forster and Craig polishing up the script it's amazing it didn't end up a total disaster. It's good for what it is! Writer's strike and shaky cam be damned.

If they ever went went Amazon spin off route I would totally watch a Paloma show. She was fantastic in the film. The Cuba scene is a highlight of the film and a scene I feel like I'll keep going back to.

  • Like 1
  • GNFNR 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Crazyman said:

An underrated "what if" in the Bond franchise.

Maybe they can convince him to do a third newbie in a row with Bond 26?

Campbell recently said he'd be down:

https://collider.com/bond-26-director-martin-campbell/

I know he's starting to get up there in age but as long as he's healthy and willing I'm all for it. He may not be a flashy name but he definitely gets the job done. Reminds me of the old school Bond directors who got promoted from within and therefore took a more workmanlike approach to the films.

I'd be happy for him to complete the hat trick of new Bond introductions.

  • GNFNR 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ZoSoRose said:

Did I watch the same movie as everyone? Glad Craig goes out on a critical high, but I just thought that was bad. Fuck :angry:

What did you think was so bad, or what didn't work for you? Minus the ending. I realize that is bound to be polarizing.

I've just yet to see anybody who just flat out hated it so I'm curious on your thoughts!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, James Bond said:

What did you think was so bad, or what didn't work for you? Minus the ending. I realize that is bound to be polarizing.

I've just yet to see anybody who just flat out hated it so I'm curious on your thoughts!

I’ll type it out tomorrow, it just did not land at all for me . I don’t want to say I hated it and even thought I liked it as soon as it was done, but with every hour my opinion sours more

Edited by ZoSoRose
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/14/2021 at 3:13 AM, James Bond said:

They added a character trait. Does it take away from the film? No. Does it add anything? Also no. Therefore its a non-issue. It should be possible for gay characters to be in films just because and not immediately jump on this ridiculous bandwagon of "it's gone woke" or whatever. I can't honestly imagine being bothered by it. The thing is - if people truly didn't care that Q was gay, then it wouldn't be an issue that it was mentioned. People are taking issue with it being mentioned, so as much as they might like to pretend they don't care, clearly they do.

How am I reaching or making things up? Literally ever headline was "Lashana Lynch becomes first black female 007." I am not making that up at all. None of that was EON's doing. What made it amusing to me is that yes, people were actually believing the sensationalist headlines - many of which could be argued were rooted in agenda pushing (I'd give you that). Then it ends up being played mostly for laughs in the film and resolving itself anyways. Total non-event based on those headlines from early on. End credits roll - James Bond Will Return. Barbara Broccoli confirms Bond will stay male and they will reboot again. So again, where is the agenda?

I'd like to think that most people wouldn't have an issue with "yet another minor character" being black, as you put it. It's a nicely diverse cast in this film, and I'd like to think that it may very well be they hired Lashana Lynch because she's talented and fit the role they were going for.

I had my skepticism ahead of the film, don't get me wrong - mostly that she'd be another Jinx - but certainly not "oh my God they cast a black woman, there goes EON pushing that agenda again!"

Maybe you just reread what you wrote. It wasn't that there weren't headlines about there being a female black 007, it was your claim that: "there is no way that people would have been so pissed if it was a white male character as the replacement 007 or Ana de Armas. The fact that things like that make people so insecure is pathetic. As soon as you cast a black woman or a gay character it's suddenly "to fit an agenda." ". Your claim that supposedly people (only) had an issue with her being black.

As for Q, as usual a discussion like this that gets boring quick and goes in circles, making me repeat myself. But really there is nothing more I can say, except yes, it should be possible to have gay characters, but just create new characters. Don't make old characters gay in a throw away line, just to tick a box and appeal to someone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/14/2021 at 7:09 AM, Crazyman said:

Edit: I keep seeing people say that Ana de Armas should be the next Bond now...why not just make a spinoff with her character (and don't make it a carbon copy of the Bond franchise) like they were gonna do with Jinx? I'd watch a series of that...

As long as Eon/the Broccoli/Wilson's are the chiefs of Bond that will never happen. They are not a film studio that constantly pumps out movies. They do Bond. And when they don't to Bond they recuperate and spend the money made with Bond. ;) They are not in it to constantly produce movies without a break. And I don't think they will license out the Bond universe for someone else to play in without their involvement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Went to the movies last night to watch it. Really enjoyed it mostly and it certainly didn't feel like nearly 3 hours. The only real criticism I would make is that it seemed to be a little less grounded than we've come to expect from the Craig era.

The whole nanobots and island lair thing was a little overly fantastical and to the point that I was half expecting an invisible car to show up. :lol: Much more in keeping with the Connery /Moore Bond movies than the more realistic take of Casino Royale etc.

I'm not even sure that's a criticism to be honest, only that I found it a little jarring vs the grittier tone of the earlier movies.

In all I think it was a decent end to Craig's tenure and the ending though controversial was fitting. This is the first series of Bond movies to have a continuity between films so I think they needed to have a defined end to the story to properly bookend things before the inevitable reboot.

  • Like 1
  • GNFNR 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2021 at 7:39 PM, PatrickS77 said:

Maybe you just reread what you wrote. It wasn't that there weren't headlines about there being a female black 007, it was your claim that: "there is no way that people would have been so pissed if it was a white male character as the replacement 007 or Ana de Armas. The fact that things like that make people so insecure is pathetic. As soon as you cast a black woman or a gay character it's suddenly "to fit an agenda." ". Your claim that supposedly people (only) had an issue with her being black.

As for Q, as usual a discussion like this that gets boring quick and goes in circles, making me repeat myself. But really there is nothing more I can say, except yes, it should be possible to have gay characters, but just create new characters. Don't make old characters gay in a throw away line, just to tick a box and appeal to someone.

First up - I owe you an apology. Re-reading our bit of discussion made me realize that it seemed as though I was directing things at you specifically rather than the general demeanor surrounding the film on some other ends of the Internet. While I disagree about the Q line standing out, my secondary response was rather crass so I'm sorry for that.

I think I just poorly explained what I was trying to get at. In my first post after seeing the film, I couldn't help but mention that it was funny what a non-event the whole "other 007" angle was in the film. In particular, the people who had a problem with it and who still seem to be convinced that it is going to be Lynch in further entries in the franchise astounds me. The film doesn't hint that at all. Rather, I find that those old headlines presented a package deal - this is the "black female 007" and thus some people are unable to escape that mindset. Granted, I probably shouldn't give so much credibility to YouTube and/or Reddit comments but it does some to be rooted in it being that she is both black and female. From the "making of" book it seems pretty clear that this was a Fukunaga idea (stripping Bond of the number, though that itself is an indirect lift from the You Only Live Twice novel). That's why I don't think it's fair to consider that Lynch was only cast to "tick a box" because if it wasn't her, that plot point would have remained. I thought she was excellent in the role. Jinx done right. I think the sensationalist headlines created a lens that people went into the film with and held onto.

For the Q thing - it's true, we could go around and circles. While I agree that, generally speaking, it is better to create new characters instead of this sort of "hand me down" process of changing existing characters, to me Q is very a much a new character in the Craig timeline. Whishaw is his own Q and not Boothroyd - just as Fiennes is Gareth Mallory and not Sir Miles. In Spectre we explicitly see Moneypenny's boyfriend and he even has a line. I don't recall anybody having an issue with that. We saw Dench M's husband in Casino Royale and reference to him in Skyfall. Q is just another MI6 regular getting some more traits explored, and in the context of the scene I see no issue with him telling Bond/Moneypenny to hurry it up because he has someone coming for dinner. I suppose I just don't see how that is different from Moneypenny in bed with some guy in the last film.

Thus, to me, the only variable of difference is that Q is gay. A non-issue, so I'm not sure why it stands out so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2021 at 11:47 PM, Dazey said:

Went to the movies last night to watch it. Really enjoyed it mostly and it certainly didn't feel like nearly 3 hours. The only real criticism I would make is that it seemed to be a little less grounded than we've come to expect from the Craig era.

The whole nanobots and island lair thing was a little overly fantastical and to the point that I was half expecting an invisible car to show up. :lol: Much more in keeping with the Connery /Moore Bond movies than the more realistic take of Casino Royale etc.

I'm not even sure that's a criticism to be honest, only that I found it a little jarring vs the grittier tone of the earlier movies.

In all I think it was a decent end to Craig's tenure and the ending though controversial was fitting. This is the first series of Bond movies to have a continuity between films so I think they needed to have a defined end to the story to properly bookend things before the inevitable reboot.

I suppose Craig kind of earned his one more fantastical Bond after some serious tone for a while, but I know what you mean! I find it helps if you look at it as an updated version of Blofeld's allergy clinic virus spreading stuff from OHMSS. I mean, minus the nanobot business. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, James Bond said:

I suppose Craig kind of earned his one more fantastical Bond after some serious tone for a while, but I know what you mean! I find it helps if you look at it as an updated version of Blofeld's allergy clinic virus spreading stuff from OHMSS. I mean, minus the nanobot business. :lol:

Like I said it's a very minor criticism as I really enjoyed it but I think they ended it at the right time before things started to get silly. Don't know how I'd feel about a sequel with Daniel Craig windsurfing down a tsunami. :lol: 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...