No Time To Die | October 8 2021 | 82% on RT | RIP Sean Connery

[Chicago]

1 hour ago, Menor said:

Do you mean 6? 

Yeah lol

[Chicago]

35 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

 

Being a sequel to Casino Royale is the least of Quantum's problems(its got the storytelling of a direct to DVD action movie), and while Spectre does attempt to connect all the movies, its not exactly a direct sequel to Skyfall or any of the others in the way that Quantum was to Casino Royale.  I do agree though in the future that Bond movies should be standalone entries.

 

I am a little worried though that the next iteration of Bond is gonna be a cinematic universe of sorts with spinoff's(probably female 00 agents) since everything is a cinematic universe now.  Bond is one of the last old school IPs that still feels special, unique, and even eventful.  For instance, Disney has completely over-saturated Star Wars with bad uninspired movies to the point where I never even bothered to see Rise of Skywalker.   Never in my life would I thought I'd skip a Star Wars movie but here I am.  I hope that doesn't happen with Bond.

 

Yeah I hope they stay away from spin offs and tie ins. Having a Bond movie every year would eventually make it feel less eventful and I don't see any evidence of any other studios managing to pull this off as well as Marvel have. Bond wouldn't suit it but I wouldn't mind a return to OTT villains with crazy plots and gadgets if done right. 

[Ronin46]

8 minutes ago, Chicago said:

 

Yeah I hope they stay away from spin offs and tie ins. Having a Bond movie every year would eventually make it feel less eventful and I don't see any evidence of any other studios managing to pull this off as well as Marvel have. Bond wouldn't suit it but I wouldn't mind a return to OTT villains with crazy plots and gadgets if done right. 

 

Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson (half brother)have final say in the direction of the Bond franchise. They already resisted rumored deals for 600M to buy NTTD by various streamers. They have said they dont want a tv show spin off. So a movie every 2 to 4 years with a new Bond will likely happen for quite a while. 

 

Its a family business as Cubby Broccoli started the franchise back in the 1960s. So clearly its about money but its something the family love and will hold onto and dont want to sell for a quick buck. If they did they would have blinked already.

[Eric Atreides]

55 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

 

Being a sequel to Casino Royale is the least of Quantum's problems(its got the storytelling of a direct to DVD action movie), and while Spectre does attempt to connect all the movies, its not exactly a direct sequel to Skyfall or any of the others in the way that Quantum was to Casino Royale.  I do agree though in the future that Bond movies should be standalone entries.

 

I am a little worried though that the next iteration of Bond is gonna be a cinematic universe of sorts with spinoff's(probably female 00 agents) since everything is a cinematic universe now.  Bond is one of the last old school IPs that still feels special, unique, and even eventful.  For instance, Disney has completely over-saturated Star Wars with bad uninspired movies to the point where I never even bothered to see Rise of Skywalker.   Never in my life would I thought I'd skip a Star Wars movie but here I am.  I hope that doesn't happen with Bond.

 

15 minutes ago, Chicago said:

 

Yeah I hope they stay away from spin offs and tie ins. Having a Bond movie every year would eventually make it feel less eventful and I don't see any evidence of any other studios managing to pull this off as well as Marvel have. Bond wouldn't suit it but I wouldn't mind a return to OTT villains with crazy plots and gadgets if done right. 

Barbara Broccoli said they weren't planning to do any streaming shows or spin-offs with the new Bond titles. Of course I'm still not convinced she'll keep to her word. You know Bezos is breathing down Eon's neck to make a Moneypenny show for Amazon or whatever.

[AJG]

Saw it.

Frist half is great. Second half is... something. The ending is done so poorly that it's best described with a shrug emoji.

 

I truly do not know how this will play in America. The movie starts out strong. Great action. Bond is full of life and humour. Watching him slowly get back into the fold is fun. Great music. Good comedy. Bond does come across as a bit Archer-ish but I dont mind. It's a beautiful movie and I'm not upset i paid to see it on the big screen.

 

It's everything that relates to the central mystery and the villain that's the problem. Its bog standard and its sadly not we'll paced. Shit just kinda happens. New characters come and go. There's obvious double crosses etc. It's fine to look at, it's not terrible but it is quite dull.

The main villain isn't interesting. It's some new guy with facial scaring and an accent with a normal everyday Bond scheme. Theres gaping holes in this guys background and scheme (he's an evil botanist that makes flower poisons but also nano-machines???). It's disappointing considering all the callbacks to other films in the franchise in the first half. It's like watching The Avengers come together after several movies to take on the ultimate threat of... The Lizard.

The film begins with a flashback to try and make the villain seem more interesting than he is and more connected to the franchise players but it doesn't really work.

(There's also a side villain comic relief character like the weasel guy in the third Hobbit film that says something so bizzare towards the end I heard people gasp out loud).

 

The ending is bad. Like watching an accident. I wish I could go into it further.

 

LOW MATINEE. Do not be shocked if you see a B+ Cinemascore in this films future.

[CJohn]

10 minutes ago, AJG said:

Saw it.

Frist half is great. Second half is... something. The ending is done so poorly that it's best described with a shrug emoji.

 

I truly do not know how this will play in America. The movie starts out strong. Great action. Bond is full of life and humour. Watching him slowly get back into the fold is fun. Great music. Good comedy. Bond does come across as a bit Archer-ish but I dont mind. It's a beautiful movie and I'm not upset i paid to see it on the big screen.

 

It's everything that relates to the central mystery and the villain that's the problem. Its bog standard and its sadly not we'll paced. Shit just kinda happens. New characters come and go. There's obvious double crosses etc. It's fine to look at, it's not terrible but it is quite dull.

The main villain isn't interesting. It's some new guy with facial scaring and an accent with a normal everyday Bond scheme. Theres gaping holes in this guys background and scheme (he's an evil botanist that makes flower poisons but also nano-machines???). It's disappointing considering all the callbacks to other films in the franchise in the first half. It's like watching The Avengers come together after several movies to take on the ultimate threat of... The Lizard.

The film begins with a flashback to try and make the villain seem more interesting than he is and more connected to the franchise players but it doesn't really work.

(There's also a side villain comic relief character like the weasel guy in the third Hobbit film that says something so bizzare towards the end I heard people gasp out loud).

 

The ending is bad. Like watching an accident. I wish I could go into it further.

 

LOW MATINEE. Do not be shocked if you see a B+ Cinemascore in this films future.

People were fucking BAWLING on my screen, I had all the tissues in my hands cleaning my manly tears, what movie did you watch?

[AJG]

7 minutes ago, CJ Sarandos said:

People were fucking BAWLING on my screen, I had all the tissues in my hands cleaning my manly tears, what movie did you watch?

 

Looks like we have a controversial movie on our hands. I thought that ending was a flop. 

It's like watching one of those alternative scenes for a TV show a studio would film in order to hide the true ending from leaking (like when Smithers shot Mr Burns)

 

It had no impact. No weight. It wasn't earned.

[fmpro]

46 minutes ago, CJ Sarandos said:

People were fucking BAWLING on my screen, I had all the tissues in my hands cleaning my manly tears, what movie did you watch?

The same movie i did. That was a horrible final act

[fmpro]

31 minutes ago, AJG said:

 

Looks like we have a controversial movie on our hands. I thought that ending was a flop. 

It's like watching one of those alternative scenes for a TV show a studio would film in order to hide the true ending from leaking (like when Smithers shot Mr Burns)

 

It had no impact. No weight. It wasn't earned.

i really agree with you all the way and i love the Simpsons compare. 
MANY Bond fans will hate this movie and MANY will surely love it. But it wont`t go down in history as one of the good ones. This will not age well IMO

[Eric Atreides]

 

[SchumacherFTW]

6 minutes ago, Eric Soprano said:

 

Nice bit of synergy

Edited October 1, 2021 by SchumacherFTW

[fabiopazzo2]

I loved this movie

 

way Better than Spectre.

 

thank you Craig ❤️

Edited October 1, 2021 by fabiopazzo2

[John Marston]

Reactions on the James Bond Reddit page are definitely polarizing 

[Menor the Destroyer]

I have seen Skyfall and Spectre but not Casino Royale or Quantum. Are the latter two important for this one or just callbacks? 

[Pinacolada]

4 minutes ago, Menor said:

I have seen Skyfall and Spectre but not Casino Royale or Quantum. Are the latter two important for this one or just callbacks? 

From my understanding, Casino Royale is callbacked to with a certain character

 

That being said, PLEASE do yourself a favor and watch Casino Royale. It is spectacular. Quantum you can do without. But you should absolutely watch Casino Royale

Edited October 1, 2021 by Pinacolada

[Pinacolada]

21 minutes ago, Eric Soprano said:

 

King

[Eric Atreides]

6 minutes ago, Menor said:

I have seen Skyfall and Spectre but not Casino Royale or Quantum. Are the latter two important for this one or just callbacks? 

No spoilers, but the Craig films work best if you see Casino Royale prior. And either way, Casino Royale's one of those movies that's so amazing that it's good to watch whenever. Easily my favorite of the Bond films I've seen so far.

[Menor the Destroyer]

2 minutes ago, Pinacolada said:

From my understanding, Casino Royale is callbacked to with a certain character

 

That being said, PLEASE do yourself a favor and watch Casino Royale. It is spectacular. Quantum you can do without. But you should absolutely watch Casino Royale

I have been intending to, but not sure I'll be able to before next weekend. 

[35MM-18]

Watched Casino Royale last night before I went to see this one. Remembered enough of Spectre that I didn't feel I needed to rewatch it.

 

CR is still Craig's best Bond film, though this one wasn't too far behind (definitely better than Spectre, that's for sure).

[AJG]

Let’s rank this shit

 

1. Casino Royale (the best Bond movie PERIOD)

2. Skyfall (overhyped but fun)

 

 

 

3. NTTD (It is what it is)

4. Spectre (a disaster)

5. Quantum of Solace (a bigger disaster)

Craig is sitting pretty with 2/5 good Bond films which beats out Brosnan’s 0.