No Time to Die - Spoiler Free Reviews

On the horror front ... Safin's first appearance in NTTD's pre-credits sequence at the window of Madeline's home is certainly meant as a 'jump-scare', and the effects of the Heracles bio-weapon are pretty nasty.

Blunt Instrument wrote:

On the horror front ... Safin's first appearance in NTTD's pre-credits sequence at the window of Madeline's home is certainly meant as a 'jump-scare', and the effects of the Heracles bio-weapon are pretty nasty.

Good examples.

Sarai wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Sarai wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Sarai wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Sarai wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

I saw NTtD after having read all the spoilers. It is still, IMHO, very much worth viewing. Not going to lie--I cried like a baby.

Oh good. You know just today I was going to log on and tell you to just go see the movie already you cheap bastard but I couldn't think of a more polite way of saying it. That and I didn't want my user account suspension mentioned in the blades section so it all worked out.
 I hope you write a bit of a detailed review of why you liked it and what clicked for you as I remember us discussing Spectre and I thought at the time we felt the same about it. You mentioned that Spectre felt cold, sterile detached or something like that and I felt the same about it. The difference here obviously I feel the same about the newest film as well and it just seemed like Spectre 2.
so either I was wrong about your thoughts on SP or you liked NTTD much better?

either way glad you enjoyed it and who knows I did hate LTK for quite some time so maybe I can dig this one at some point too

I'm going to see it again--mebbe Sunday--and then I will write a proper review.

"Enjoy," I'm not sure, is the proper word. NTtD is good in many ways, but truly enjoyable? Not so sure.

And yes, it does feel a bit like SP and a bit like QoS.

but you must have really liked it, absorbed in the story and buying into it if you were crying right?

you are a complex man

Yes, it grabbed me. And it shook me. It affected me. But it didn't necessarily please me.

It occurs to me that, beginning with DAD--and with the possible exception of CR--Bond films have been edging toward the horror genre, with all that entails.

OK I think I see where you are coming from. The movie def worked for you, hit the nerves and emotions so you consider it a good film just not necessarily a good Bond film? I had the opposite experience in that I felt nothing really beyond boredom so I find the contrast in our experience with it interesting and maybe enough to watch it again someday. I'm not sure how I feel about the Craig films in general anymore. I really liked CR and QoS. I thought Skyfall was decent but overrated and somehow felt like it should be the last movie in that stage of the films. SP and NTTD feel like a reboot with the same actor in a way for that reason and a bloated messy unfocused last two films.

by horror I assume you mean the all around darker tone? I don't mind that all that much and think it will age well or at least much better for me if they stop doing it now. One thing I have enjoyed about the whole franchise is the changes in tone as I felt it kept it from getting monotonous like by the time I am through the Connery films I am really looking forward to the Moore flicks so I do hope they change it up. I don't want Von Trier directing the next one.  

Oh, I consider NTTD to be very much a Bond film. I'm just saying that, although I think it's a good film and a good Bond film, it isn't a particularly pleasant film. (I could say much the same of Midnight Express, for example, although it obviously isn't a Bond film.) And this ties into the developing horror tone of Bond films. Until I saw The VVitch, I loved supernatural horror films. They were aesthetically and philosophically fascinating, and were thrilling in their way, but they were hardly pleasant. How could terror be pleasant unless you're a masochist, which I'm not? Now obviously, 21st-century Bond films are not terrifying, but they tend to be fairly creepy, and NTTD may be the creepiest of the bunch.

That witch really got to you man. I think we agreed it was a good movie with unpleasant characters but I didn't feel any real sense of fear in it. Their behavior creeped me out but that was offset for the most part by their environment and surroundings. I found that comforting and don't think I would have any problems surviving that situation and life. I'm the opposite and feel terror at the idea of ever having to live in a city.
Oh and terror could be pleasant if you are a sadist as well and always root for the killer.

I really am trying to feel the creepy in the new Bond but I'm just not getting that. I wish I knew what parts you were referring to or if it's just the overall mood. I agree the tone is darker but even then only in ways mostly superficial and the paint job in Goldfinger is as shocking as anything in the Craig era.
CR works for me as a tragic love story but nothing after that outing really. I was thinking about this and some of the comments KKBB has made about the unearned love stories which I mostly agree with but I am still solid on CR. I think it's because I can buy it once that he could fall in love so fast and while it's true they hardly know each other and spend half of the time arguing you do see that all the time in real life. love quite often is that fast and irrational and the charm of Eva Green in that movie doesn't hurt at all either.
but to try to do this all over again with Madeline and their total lack of chemistry...it just all feels so forced and falls flat for me
makes it difficult to care about the characters


 

I could write a very long article on the horror elements in DAD, QOS, SF, SP and NTTD. Just off of the top of my head, there's Diamondface and the torture sequence in DAD, the especially ghastly murders of Slate and Fields in QOS, Silva and his false jaw in SF, the blinding of the SPECTRE agent and the drill torture in SP, and Safin the character in NTTD. Furthermore, the title credits in DAD, SF, SP and NTTD all have visuals that would fit perfectly with horror films, and they set the tone for the film that follows. Moreover, these films all have a cold, wintery look, so they're literally dark as well as figuratively. I could go on and one, but you get my drift.

Interesting horror thesis, PK. Do you attribute this to anything in particular? Is it a crutch?

Sarai wrote:

That does make sense and I think the reason I haven't gotten it down right is that I am still pretty new to them all so don't have a ton of re-watch experience.
top of my head would then prob be something like,
DAD
TMWTGG
Moonraker
Dr.No
Octopussy
AVTAK

Most of these are the ones I throw on often, too. Aside from TMWTGG and OP, but as I mentioned elsewhere I have started to turn around a bit on TMWTGG in the last year. And I used to watch OP far more than I do now. I'd also add at least DAF which I honestly never tire of.

Blunt Instrument wrote:

Not sure if a movie that had its release delayed for 18 months and was regarded as one of the year's most anticipated's run being over in the UK after 4 weeks tells us something about how its box office haul has been or not.

Usually I think the length of the box office run is the best metric (demand) but in these times I'm not sure. Demand is very wonky at the moment, I think. Seems like everything is destined to be graded on a curve.

AMC Hornet wrote:

In the spring I like to watch Dr. No, TB, LALD, TSWLM and Octopussy, as they get me motivated to get out into the fresh air.
In December it's OHMSS, DAF, TMWTGG, NSNA and DAD, in an effort to relive those heady Christmas holidays of yore.
The rest I'll watch any time, although I think my NTTD dvd - once I have it - will collect dust until we see what #26 is about.

I agree with the seasonality thing. On the whole these are summer films to me. I partook in the usual holiday marathons which makes them seem appropriate at those times, too, but I spent most every summer night for a couple years with a Bond playing in the background.

Xenia93 wrote:

Found the evolution of Craig's performance interesting. He's much looser and more expressive in this film, whereas previously he was known for being very curt/short/withdrawn etc.

In many ways, he's almost unrecognizable to his earlier performances, but I interpreted it more as his Bond entering late-middle age and letting go of some of the tightness or whatever that marked his earlier years.

His performance was one of the things that threw me. He is more expressive on the whole and that is open to interpret in a narrative sense, certainly. But I also feel like he was inconsistent within the film itself -- in SP he was noticeably more loose than in SF but it wasn't noticable on a scene to scene basis. Dunno. It'll be one of the things I watch for on the next viewing. (I do feel he was at his best where it mattered most, though.)

It actually seems I was a little premature ... the Odeon site now has single evening screenings of NTTD listed from 29th - 31st.

Somerset wrote:

Interesting horror thesis, PK. Do you attribute this to anything in particular? Is it a crutch?

Sarai wrote:

That does make sense and I think the reason I haven't gotten it down right is that I am still pretty new to them all so don't have a ton of re-watch experience.
top of my head would then prob be something like,
DAD
TMWTGG
Moonraker
Dr.No
Octopussy
AVTAK

Most of these are the ones I throw on often, too. Aside from TMWTGG and OP, but as I mentioned elsewhere I have started to turn around a bit on TMWTGG in the last year. And I used to watch OP far more than I do now. I'd also add at least DAF which I honestly never tire of.

Blunt Instrument wrote:

Not sure if a movie that had its release delayed for 18 months and was regarded as one of the year's most anticipated's run being over in the UK after 4 weeks tells us something about how its box office haul has been or not.

Usually I think the length of the box office run is the best metric (demand) but in these times I'm not sure. Demand is very wonky at the moment, I think. Seems like everything is destined to be graded on a curve.

AMC Hornet wrote:

In the spring I like to watch Dr. No, TB, LALD, TSWLM and Octopussy, as they get me motivated to get out into the fresh air.
In December it's OHMSS, DAF, TMWTGG, NSNA and DAD, in an effort to relive those heady Christmas holidays of yore.
The rest I'll watch any time, although I think my NTTD dvd - once I have it - will collect dust until we see what #26 is about.

I agree with the seasonality thing. On the whole these are summer films to me. I partook in the usual holiday marathons which makes them seem appropriate at those times, too, but I spent most every summer night for a couple years with a Bond playing in the background.

Xenia93 wrote:

Found the evolution of Craig's performance interesting. He's much looser and more expressive in this film, whereas previously he was known for being very curt/short/withdrawn etc.

In many ways, he's almost unrecognizable to his earlier performances, but I interpreted it more as his Bond entering late-middle age and letting go of some of the tightness or whatever that marked his earlier years.

His performance was one of the things that threw me. He is more expressive on the whole and that is open to interpret in a narrative sense, certainly. But I also feel like he was inconsistent within the film itself -- in SP he was noticeably more loose than in SF but it wasn't noticable on a scene to scene basis. Dunno. It'll be one of the things I watch for on the next viewing. (I do feel he was at his best where it mattered most, though.)

No, definitely not a crutch. The horror elements actually trace back to Fleming's source material. They are part of Bond's literary and filmic DNA. I do believe, however, that the horror is being emphasized this century considerably more than in the 20th. Whether this is a positive development depends, I suppose, upon one's personal tastes. I haven't really made up my mind how I feel about this. But I'm pretty sure I don't want to see even greater emphasis on the horror elements, and in fact, I might actually prefer they be reduced somewhat in whatever future Bond may have.

NBC used to show LALD late in October every year.
Don't the Voodoo elements help it qualify as 'horror'?

AMC Hornet wrote:

NBC used to show LALD late in October every year.
Don't the Voodoo elements help it qualify as 'horror'?

Absolutely. And Fleming's LALD had lots of that stuff. If Eon remade LALD today it would likely be a full-on horror flick.

LALD seems overall to be inviting us to regard voodoo as a load of hooey that Kananga/Mr Big is using to keep superstitious locals in check (see also Dr No and the 'dragon'.) But then there's that closing, fourth-wall-breaking shot of the (apparently impervious to snake venom) Baron Samedi perched on the back of the train and heartily laughing at us ...

They never discounted Solitaire's ability to interpret the Tarot. That was treated as genuine, or at least unexplained ('face value').

I also regarded Baron Samedi's reprise as merely a motif - as if it was his spirit still riding along, ready to inhabit the next generation of ne'er-do-wells.

...And he was on the front of the train.

S' funny how her powers didn't extend to knowing Bond was playing with a rigged deck, as it were.

And my apologies, Captain Pedantic. lol.

That's Professor Pedantic, peasant.

*Tugs forelock deferentially*

That's more like it.

Hey gang, been a while. :)

So NTTD was the first movie I saw in theaters for a very long time (for obvious reasons).

I can't say it lived up to my expectations.
As a conclusion to the DC era, I found it a bit lacking. I wasn't expecting another Skyfall for him to bow out on, but I think I could have been forgiven for expecting slightly more than this.

Rami Malek can be an interesting actor but he was badly miscast in this. Likewise Léa Seydoux is a wonderful actress but she never really sparkled as Madeleine Swann (in neither of her turns). I found much of the screenplay messy (perhaps a case of too many cooks?).
I would say the Cuba segment was the most enjoyable, in a sort of old-fashioned, fun Bond kind of way. But I don't think the movie ever earned the gravitas it tried to convey in the third act.
At least Daniel Craig looked slightly more interested this time around - after finding his body language throughout much of Spectre to be rather appalling. Perhaps he was helped by the knowledge that this would indeed be the last time (and the very generous paycheck).

Overall I think the Craig era has to be deemed a disappointment, if judged over five films? One good Bond movie, one interesting but flawed one in CR... I guess NTTD might be the third best, but that says more about the quality of both QoS & Spectre.

Good to read your thoughts Salomé. Seems the Cuba part of the film is virtually universally praised while everything else seems to have mixed opinions.

CJB, any non-spoiler thoughts?

Mr. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang wrote:

CJB, any non-spoiler thoughts?

Overall, a mixed bag that I liked about as much as I expected to like it.

Good

- The action was largely done well. The Matera sequence was very good, notwithstanding the fact we saw so much of it in umpteen trailers over 2.5 years. There's a particularly tense bit involving the Aston's bulletproof glass getting a workout. Norway Jeep action and follow up was also good. The climactic shootouts were well executed, but I'm not big on James Bond being a one-man Seal Team Six given he's theoretically a naval commander and not in the SAS (granted I think Cregg-Bond may be ex-SAS)?

- Bond living it up in Jamaica was good.

- Wright as Felix had a bit more life to him compared to CR/QOS. It was good to see some sort of bond (hehehehe) between the two spies, even if it does feel like it must have been built up offscreen and not in their brief encounters in CR and QOS.

- Cuba/Paloma bit was fun enough.

- While the movie sagged in the middle, it did go by quickly and I otherwise wouldn't have guessed that it ran for nearly three hours.

Mixed

- Shame I had to put it under 'mixed' because I did like Zimmer's work (great use of the Bond Theme plus a particularly stirring piece during the climax) but I have to mark the score done for lazy callbacks to a previous film (suppose I won't mention which one to keep it spoiler-free). Thought it was unwarranted and took away from that music's unique attachment to that one film.

- I liked that they tried to inject some humour but I felt the humour itself was of that sarcastic, deliberately awkward style everyone is doing now and not at all befitting the dry wit of Old Bond. One glaring attempt to chuck in a Bondian "death quip" felt more like a spoof of Connery/Moore and Craig doesn't really pull it off IMO.

- While I like the more OTT elements of the plot and villain's lair etc. it just does not gel with Craig's Bond. I keep hearing that this movie is a capstone to the story arc that began with CR, but this movie may as well be set on a different planet to the comparatively grounded world of CR. I just don't think you can mix the zaniness and absurdity of a YOLT or MR while doing the deep n' gritty personal stuff. To some extent, I'd rather they drop the fan service and be tonally consistent.

- I initially disliked the song, but I listened to it a second time yesterday and thought it was a bit better. Still far from the best.

- There's some great cinematography, but there's also a liberal use of Abrams-esque lens flairs and, often, a very saturated and fake look to everything.

Bad

- Rami Malek was terrifically dull.

- Nomi is there as a political statement and nothing else. You could've cut the character completely and had a shorter running time.

- Bond-Madeline chemistry is still lacking.

- Blofeld's return was basically pointless.

- Speaking of fan service, several elements from a certain Fleming novel featured heavily and all fell flat for me (though you'll need to read the spoiler-ful review to know why).

- Bad Russian scientist character was stupid and seemingly (without giving away too much) they wanted a "fuck whitey" moment for the NPCs to cheer on.

- Daniel Craig was playing himself in this, not (CR-SP) James Bond. Chalk it up to the writing and what I was saying about the "humour" but his speech and mannerisms were not the character's.

- The ending was what it was because Craig thought his ego was more important than making way for a new actor in the same, unremarkable manner the five men who preceded him managed to do. As I alluded to when I mentioned the fan service and whatnot, I find it jarring that Craig's Bond is meant to be a radical departure that exists in his own timeline and yet so often his movies rest on Fleming and Cubby's laurels, often in a hamfisted fashion.

All in all, not a bad film in its own right but as a Bond film I think there's some very questionable choices that were made simply for the benefit of Craig and Babs rather than the institution itself. If I had to give it a generous score out of 10, perhaps I'd give it a 6.

Thanks for posting this. I did read it without logging in because I just didn't have time to reply. Now that I've seen it:

CJB wrote:

There's a particularly tense bit involving the Aston's bulletproof glass getting a workout.

Wasn't a fan of that. Pretty reckless.

CJB wrote:

Wright as Felix had a bit more life to him compared to CR/QOS. It was good to see some sort of bond (hehehehe) between the two spies, even if it does feel like it must have been built up offscreen and not in their brief encounters in CR and QOS.

Yeah, it didn't really sit right with me. It felt forced. Like much of the film, I feel a lot of it happens off screen, as you say.

CJB wrote:

I liked that they tried to inject some humour but I felt the humour itself was of that sarcastic, deliberately awkward style everyone is doing now and not at all befitting the dry wit of Old Bond. One glaring attempt to chuck in a Bondian "death quip" felt more like a spoof of Connery/Moore and Craig doesn't really pull it off IMO.

Agreed. Too much of a set up for that particular punchline to land.

CJB wrote:

...there's also a liberal use of Abrams-esque lens flairs and, often, a very saturated and fake look to everything.

Yes! Much of it looked computer-generated, even non-action sequences. I'm not sure why.

CJB wrote:

Bad Russian scientist character was stupid and seemingly (without giving away too much) they wanted a "fuck whitey" moment for the NPCs to cheer on.

Yeah that moment came from nowhere. Was that his and Safin's end game?

CJB wrote:

- The ending was what it was because Craig thought his ego was more important than making way for a new actor in the same, unremarkable manner the five men who preceded him managed to do. As I alluded to when I mentioned the fan service and whatnot, I find it jarring that Craig's Bond is meant to be a radical departure that exists in his own timeline and yet so often his movies rest on Fleming and Cubby's laurels, often in a hamfisted fashion.

...I think there's some very questionable choices that were made simply for the benefit of Craig and Babs rather than the institution itself.

100%! Hopefully the experimental phase is out of Eon's system and it's business-as-usual for Bond 26. Surely the scripting issues for an 'overarching story' caused enough headaches. Even for a film that supposedly takes place right after Spectre, there are a few continuity problems in a film that was supposed to tie up loose ends.

I'm pessimistic about a return to normal. Babs is making these for the critics and not for the fans. There's no way she's going to overlook the adulation (and praise for Bond being sexless and

Spoiler:

in NTTD) and do a pure Connery/Moore tribute act.

If the next James Bond is a straight, white British male in a by-the-numbers standalone movie, I will consume my headwear.

CJB wrote:

I'm pessimistic about a return to normal. Babs is making these for the critics and not for the fans. There's no way she's going to overlook the adulation (and praise for Bond being sexless and

Spoiler:

in NTTD) and do a pure Connery/Moore tribute act.

If the next James Bond is a straight, white British male in a by-the-numbers standalone movie, I will consume my headwear.

Exactly. You'd have to be incredibly naive to think there will be a turning back. Bond is through the looking glass and he won't be Bond anymore.

are you still thinking they go with the black trans woman angle?

Sarai wrote:

are you still thinking they go with the black trans woman angle?

God only knows. The only thing that would surprise me is if "Bond" is a straight, white, male from the Commonwealth.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Sarai wrote:

are you still thinking they go with the black trans woman angle?

God only knows. The only thing that would surprise me is if "Bond" is a straight, white, male from the Commonwealth.

I think they will keep him a straight white male so they can continue to degrade the character.

Why Modern Movies Suck - They're Destroying Our Heroes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qY-GLeHS0Ik

I doubt they will allow Babs to mess with the money-making machine to the extent of casting a non-male Bond.
We might see a non-white Bond, which depending on who they cast I wouldn't have a great deal of problems with. If the objection against Idris at the time was that he did not look like the literary Bond, well that same criticism can be leveled against several Bond actors, including the most recent one.

If they go non-white, I do hope they get someone suited to the job. I have seen people suggest Dev Patel, an idea I like very little. I think Patel had matured into a rather fine actor but he is not a James Bond style actor. It's not even about race, it's about the type of characters I can see him playing. In the same vein, I would hate to see Tom Hiddleston in the role.
We need someone who can exude a certain level of danger, something even DC only rarely achieved imho.