Where is Report Post on mobile? We've made a slight change, see here
Have your say on the future of the 'Save Draft' feature in this poll
MODs please see this information notice in the mod's forum. Thanks!
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards

No Time to Die **Spoilers from post #1449 onward**



  • I enjoyed it but did feel it was long. I think it would have been a bit more interesting if they expanded the storyline between Madeline snd saffin. Did she end up living with him after etc? The felix storyline and the Logan ash guy served very little purpose.

  • Saw it last night too and enjoyed it, although it could have been done in less time.

    Don't get me wrong, there was some cringey moments in the film and can understand why DC wanted no more of Bond.

    If your going into the cinema to expect to see a masterpiece you will leave disappointed.

  • Just seen this last night.. film for me was a 4 out of 5. good Bond film, good action, Lynch was a good character, went in cold so end was a surprise. My take on it and being a big bond fan is a hard reboot. James Bond 007 will be back in a new film with new M, Q, Moneypenny etc... Lynch will NOT be a new Bond... she maybe a good 00 but Bond she is not. Also before the woke brigades take pot shots.. A black women should not take over as James Bond... However if you want a black female 00 agent working for MI6 flying all over the world to fight crime then develop and write a dam good story, I defo would see it but Bond is a Male, he can be white, black, asian but he is a male so leave it there.

  • i mean in fairness would we expect a male wonder woman? i agree james bond is man.. 00's can be anything. Just fluting about on youtube last night watching craigs US interviews and the hollywood star presentation.. clip from 15 years ago when he was revealed as bond was there.. picture quality terrible but interesting to look back.. looking forward to seeing how they reveal the next bond. The movie should have been out 18 months ago so you'd wonder if they have already been working on the next iteration

  • Unfortunately there are some people out there who would like to see a Wonder “Person” and a Super”Person” and a J Bond - it beggars believe but there ya go

  • Advertisement

  • Saw it last night. Thought it was awful. Set up for a female Bond. Baddie with no back story. More a romance than a proper Bond movie. Loses his love, gets her back, turns into sensitive Bond, saves the world. ZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Shoehorned black 007 killing the scientist after dragging him for miles through tunnels avoiding getting shot etc, the constant "what 00 is he?" when she finds out he's reinstated, is she a spy or a child? The best behaved child in the world, who sits quietly as her mother and a stranger go off-roading whilst being shot at, doesn't cry, whinge or fuss when removed from her mother etc. And henchmen who are as good a shot as white storm troopers.

  • Ah here, I didn't like the movie either and I have nitpicks with the story but everyone knows henchmen can't aim for ****.

  • I wonder if the Lashana Lynch and Ana De Armas roles were swapped, would anyone complain about another 007 agent being "shoehorned" in?

  • Whoa edgy!! The female Ghostbusters were the same ethnicity as their male predecessors, was still shite and complained about shoehorning women into male roles.

  • i have to say i'd like to see De Armas more so than lynch in any future iterations... might be an interesting choice of character to live on in the next cycle of films... the next felix?

  • Advertisement

  • I've spoken to a few friends who went to see it and 2 said they enjoyed it and the other 2 said it was terrible rubbish/expletives.

    One friend who is in his 60's and a huge Bond fan said it was the worst Bond ever and a waste of a tenner.

    The 2 people who liked it are younger and wouldnt be as big Bond fans .

    Its very divisive.

  • You either buy the Lea Seydoux character here or you don't.

    That's how it falls basically.

    I didn't care for her in Spectre so was expecting to dislike this movie but unexpectedly found her much more compelling here.

    She might have drawn me in from that scene walking around in just a shirt or cashmere top or whatever it was in the hotel in Italy!

  • The thing is, this seems like users trying to push a cultures war narrative in on it. Most haven't come away with the conclusion you have.

  • Can't disagree with the above. The Swan/Bond relationship didn't not work for me in Spectre, but in NTTD actually gave the story depth and stakes. (Other opinions available).

    And the cashmere top did the experience no harm of course.

  • There is alot more to it than Lea Seydoux I'm afraid.

  • I mean if you buy into the relationship arc you will like the movie overall (and not start niggling on minor plot points)

    if you don't you won't

  • Well, just back from No Time to Die.... (no time? You took 3 feckin' hours.. grumble..)

    It was ....OK.

    I'll spare you the nit picks (verisimilitude and Bond have never been friends and thus neither have I) but I do have one big bone to pick with that ending, OK two.

    Firstly, never, and I mean never give an actor that has no desire to play a role again a say in the script. It never works out. It didn't with Sigourney Weaver in the Alien franchise and you just knew when Harrison Ford was all smiles during his Force Awakens interviews what was coming. Actors are narcissistic pricks and should be told to shut up and hit their mark and never let anywhere near a screenplay.

    The Craig era stormed out of the gate with a home run in Casino Royale, by far my favorite Bond movie because, verisimilitude. The stakes were refreshingly no higher then F'ing over an arms dealers money laundering scheme and it was great.

    This would have been a middle of the road Bond movie for me, with it's dumb McGuffin and tiresome end of the world stakes, if it didn't insist on ending with a wet fart. And the reason it's a wet fart of an ending is because, if you're gonna go there, if your gonna play that hand, you had better have a top tier villain to justify that. That's my main bone of contention. Safin is just so unmemorable that he does not in any way shape or form justify that ending.

    Now if they had an actual arc for the character of Bond thought out they would never have killed Vesper Lind and would have had her disappear instead with the money in Casino Royale and then subsequently reprise her role instead of the charisma and chemistry free Lea Seydoux (anybody saying that character is reprieved in this is just nuts) and of course had a better villain, then you could have made this film work. Instead you have miserable Craig making narcissistic choices and a wet fart of an ending.

    It will probably make a billion dollars though so what do I know.

  • I think, to be fair, the entire point is that NTTD is more so about Bond and his own personal journey above all else, certainly far more so than it is about the, or indeed any, villian.

    It is completely fine to not like that take, or to feel the take was done poorly, but it is what it is. You have the classic locations, the villians, the gadgets, the call-backs, and of course, the women, so in one sense it ticks a lot of boxes some previous Craig movies have not.

    But fundementally it is a story about James Bond, the entire narrative is built around 007 as an actual human being, flawed and imperfect, emotional, capable of love as much as hate, rather than a simple stereotype that has typically dominated the titular role.

    It's also perhaps an attempt to put that traditional "dinosaur" to bed on the best possible terms, not that Spectre or NTTD are subtle about the characters sell-by-date.

    It worked for me personally, and I am a big Bond fan in general and think Craig's Bond has proven to be really up there. Even with the misfires, like Spectre, he carries hard with sheer presence.

    Not to say I liked everything about NTTD - it definitely has flaws, but the overall direction and aim of the movie resonated with me. For me, it was a genuinely magnificent Bond movie and I'd almost be content for the franchise to end there.

  • Agreed, apart from the train scene, it’s a fantastic movie.

  • Advertisement

  • That was a flipping horrendous watch. Really really didn't like this movie.

    Villain had no menace - was more like a pantomime figure than a proper Bond villain. His main henchman was terrible - totally forgettable.

    The plot was pretty much nonsensical - the whole family thing was tacked on rubbish and makes absolutely no sense to try pin that to the character of Bond. Trying to soften up a man that's supposed to be a hardened killer doesn't work IMO and even worse than trying to shoehorn in that storyline was using Lea Seydou as the linchpin for it because she's a useless actor. Monotone with no emotion she has to be right up there with some of the worst Bond girls ever.

    Bringing a child into Bonds world doesn't really sit right with me either I have to say. If it was going to add something to the series I'm sure writers would've done it a long time ago - with the amount of casual sex Bond has had over the years he must have 10 or 15 kids running around!

    The "new" OO7 was quite frankly brutal. She was ineffectual as a field agent and to be honest not believable as any kind of operative. The praise for de Armas is baffling to me for a couple of different reasons - firstly because she's only on screen for a matter of minutes and secondly because like Lashana Lynch she's just not believable as a field agent. The writers had her take out three fully grown men at the same time in hand to hand combat which is ludicrous really. Her appearance was pretty much just a cameo - was she even required? I think myself she could've been written out entirely with little or no difference to the story.

    Bond himself should've been dead a few minutes in and also near the end. Like I know a certain amount of suspension of disbelief is required but when someone is within a couple of feet of a bomb or a grenade going off you'd fully expect them to die. Bond is supposed to be a good agent but not immortal!

    The running time was mammoth in length and really you could have shaved a half an hour off this film with no issues.

    As regards what I enjoyed - the cinematography was beautiful the action set pieces were pretty good and for the most part well executed and the cars were sublime. Especially really nice to see the Vantage back - love that car ever since I first saw it in The Living Daylights!

  • I agree about the immortal thing- keeping your hero alive throughout an action movie is a skill you need to perfect as a director- there’s a very small line between a close shave or a series of believable coincidences well presented onscreen that keeps audience engaged and your hero on the right side of death and downright “Terminator” territory where nothing will kill JB- of course we suspend reality when we go to see a JB film but we don’t expect to do it at a Marvel comic level

  • A guide to the recurring actors in all 25 movies of the James Bond series -

  • Was Lea Seydoux the ( permanently sulky) female character in Spectre ?

    Hated her

  • I very much disliked her character in Spectre myself but bought the story in NTTD

    Your mileage may vary but if you don't go in with the attitude of giving it a chance you'll definitely get the result you expected

    And this movie should be seen in the cinema (for reasons of spectacle and due to the modern smartphone-induced mass ADHD that its running time does not go well with!)

  • Much as I surprisingly bought in to the romance in NTTD, I watched Casino Royale last night on ITV4 and saw a Bond love interest how it should be written. Vesper is sexy, smart, vulnerable and has an actual secret. She should have been the one to crossover Craig's movies, in more than just a picture or a reference.

  • I was listening The Filmcast and one their criticisms (a fairly common one) is that despite obviously wanting to do an overarching story, they never actually planned one. One of the guys suggested that if they had they could have given Vesper an "is she really dead" exit and brought her back for this.

  • Funny enough when he was going to her grave that thought did enter my head

  • Sounds like the recent Star Wars trilogy. No coherent plan.

    But to be fair, Casino Royale was brilliant, so you can forgive them for winging it after. It was always going to be hard to follow up Vesper.

  • Advertisement

  • All I'll say is nanobots and electro magnetic pulse watches, surely they don't mix well?