Why has no one pointed out the massively obvious flaw in this film - that there’s a moment where a child gets put to bed and they just go to sleep. It’s the most unrealistic thing to ever happen in a bond film
@@CriticsCupofficial Yeah, he did it twice though didn't he? Spared a little girl. He was quite random but there was a detached humanity in there. He was a monster, but not wholly monstrous.
I'm surprised Kermode didn't pick up more on how weak Safin's motives were. For me, a film like this is typically only as good as the villain - Skyfall being a good example of a great villain (supported by a magnificent Judi Dench). In this film, does anyone know what the boats Safin planned to meet at the end were for? Wouldn't HMS Dragon destroy them anyway? Why did he bother to kidnap Madeline after she killed Blofield as requested? Was he in love with her? Why the sudden urgency?
*Spoilers* I do like the film but I agree. It seemed his goals were achieved once Blofeld was dead and from that point onwards he wanted to destroy the world “just because”. It’s a shame cause I thought his first scene with adult Madeline was great.
It's a real shame, because it was really the only major problem with the film for me! If they'd just made Safin a more fleshed-out, logically motivated villain then this would have been one of the best bond movies ever.
Yep, I watched it when I was young as I watched all the bond films but it shocked me when Sanchez put that guy in the compression chamber and he exploded. It was ahead of its time i think.
His chiseled features made you forget how funny the man is. He fully got the silliness of Bond, something I still miss. Dalton is brilliant in Hot Fuzz for example.
@@margotperez7162 So what, i dont care what he earned, and i dont care if he cares, i care about having good Bond films instead of third rate Bourne films.
As others have said, the first 40 to 50 minutes of this are amazing, but the massive pit of exposition in the middle ruins the momentum for me. Also felt like Sabin's motivations were a bit confused
I’m remind of TDK with Sabin: “...some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.” I find if you view him through that lens, it’s infinitely more satisfying.
@@MaxDeeley I bought into that a lot more with someone like Silva from Skyfall. In this it feels like Safin has a set of goals that he accomplishes by about the hour mark and then decides to just kill millions of people because he’s a Bond villain.
@Léon Rififi The explanation is both implicit (he has a twisted view of the world and an egomaniacal personality), and explicit (he is damaged by the murder of his parents & hates humanity: “we both eradicate people to make the world a better place”). Any more exposition would have been pointless and boring.
The physical disfigurement is a film trope theve been doing it since the silent version of the phantom of the opera it represents the mental disfigurement of the villains mind
@@sixonesix9429 familiarity breeds contempt and " for the sake of variety" it's good to mix things up and keep things fresh in order to continue the franchise. Keep your dumb comments to your own post you plumb.
Having just seen it, I can say that for me it was the most moved I've ever been by a bond film. I really loved what they have done to break the mould with these films, and this conclusion to Craig's tenure is testament to that. They made James Bond a real human being with scars to carry. I do think the main "mechanical plot" was cliched, but really it took a backseat for the character driven story that this film is. Honestly loved it, and left the theatre teary for the first time ever at the end of a bond film.
@@THOMAS2910able tricky , cause it does feel very different in tone. Out of his I think I'd put it 3rd in terms of the overall quality of the film(1st being casino royale and 2nd being skyfall) but it's a close call, I've really enjoyed all his films. This one is a more personal and emotional story imo
@@THOMAS2910able Yea, I honestly would recommend seeing it in theatres. For me it was the first thing I've seen since the start of the pandemic at the cinema (i work in healthcare) and it was a really fantastic experience to come back to. It has all the stunning Craig-era sweeping landscape shots and a lot of the lighting work was amazing to see in IMAX.
Most people say Skyfall is their favorite but it has The Dark Knight overtones but I would say mine is Casino Royale cuz it was more original and Bond learning to be that iconic spy by Vesper showing him how to tailor his tux and getting his martinis right to his signature. I dont want to see Bond moping and burnt out , I have enough of that myself and come to see a Bond film for escaping for 2 hrs and applauding his wit .
It felt like two different plots forced into one film, with the result that it felt disconnected and messy. The "killer nanobots" plot was more Mission Impossible than Bond. The definitive has become the derivative.
The Bond franchise has become so boring and clichéd over the years, it is not even funny anymore. Just retrograde nonsense. Seen this latest one too and not impressed either.
Times have moved on since the 60s. Technology introduced into fiction was a foregone conclusion. The nanobots didn’t stand out any more than the EMP watch.
@@RS-jb1lf Yea im so sick of these terrorism plots. That's all the bond films seem to be doing now. 2006 casino casino royale 5 years after 9/11 I get that. A plot about funding terrorism. Goldeneye about a satellite that will cause a worldwide financial meltdown. Goldfinger gold smuggling and a licence to kill drug smuggling. Far more interesting bond films I would rather watch.
I felt similarly. It seemed quite incoherent to me and although i thought that it started well and might be going in a darker,more horror orientated direction,it quickly went into the action scenes.More style over substance for me.I don't think it's bad,just that it feels quite laden and generic for the most part in my opinion. The ending was unexpected,which I quite liked,but I failed to see the humour that Mark mentioned,which felt quite absent throughout .I often felt that interractions with "Q" showing off gadgets to be quite fun in past films ,but there wasn't any of that here.
@@oliverbeard7912 Agreed though even the action sequences for me felt very "by the numbers" and uninspired. Decent looking, but nothing daring or visually exciting as say the Spectre opening. Perhaps at this point we've seen it all before. But I also saw the ending coming as soon as the nano-bot DNA weapon became evident.
@@FromTheFens219 he achieved his motive which was to kill Spectre. He let himself be influenced by Valdo Obruchev who wanted world domination but his heart wasn't really on it. Rami wanted Madeline's love at the end.
The Craig movies are an interesting "What if" as in what if Bond had a definitive beginning and end. Anyone saying they weren't shocked by that ending is a damn liar...it paints the production in a real corner going forward and is by far the ballsiest thing a Bond movie had ever done.
@@stevechandler4607 No, Barbara Broccoli the last word on film Bond had said multiple times and recently that Bond will never be a woman...as for say a black Bond so what? You can't tell me Idris Elba for example wouldn't nail it. And the credits literally say JAMES BOND will return.
@@stevechandler4607 You anti-woke folk are genuinely one of the most reactionary, annoying and consistently factually inaccurate groups in the world today.
Yeah. It feels like the producers actually listened to the negative feedback on Spectre and made some deliberate corrections: more humour, better written female characters, beautiful to look at, Daniel giving a more engaged and energetic performance.
@@skywalkies77 this is very fresh in my memory as I re-watched the first 4 Craig films last week. I absolutely love Casino Royale (9/10) but Skyfall just pips it for me (9.5/10). Both films have superb plots, action, acting and cinematography and both revealed part of Bond’s backstory in ways we hadn’t seen before but a few appealing aspects of Skyfall spring to mind… the return of the DB5 (my favourite car of all time), the trip to the Scottish Highlands (I’m a Scottish landscape photographer), one of the best Bond villain performances and the emotional ending with Judy Dench. Look… it’s splitting hairs for me as both are superb films but I have a slight preference for Skyfall, at least for now!
@@shelbyvillerules9962 there were reports that it was because of the ending. Ironically the movie does have the same ending as stated in these reports…
I thought it was a bit unfocused personally. Tried to tell too many different stories. Malek just about holds it together with his superb skills though.
I agree. I saw the film a few hours ago and I wondered if I had dozed off and missed something. I didnt understand Malek's character and I got lost when it came to his garden of poison. I felt lost towards the end of the movie.
The first 50 or some minutes are absolutely fantastic until a certain character dies, from then on the film completely loses all of its pace as the convoluted plot takes over and leads to an anti-climactic ending. Remi Malik’s villain started off like a character from The Strangers and finished as Leto from Blade Runner 2049. Moments of greatness but also underwhelming disappointment
@@Onmysheet - I'd go as far to say that the MI series has eclipsed the Bond franchise now. The writing in Bond looks tired and dated compared to the MI series.
That doesn't make much sense, he didn't even appear in Skyfall or Spectre and they were just fine. It was nice to see the character in NTTD but I wouldn't have cared if he didn't appear.
An anti-climatic ending? Clearly we watched 2 completely different movies.😅 I thought it was phenomenal. But then again, I'm not the biggest Bond Fan...
@@williamdoyle1108 Why would the villain wait 30 years to visit Madeleine after he rescued her? At least the writers were sensible enough to not explain something that couldn't be explained.
I've grown up on bond Sean Connery, and oddjob, roger Moore, and jaws, pierce Brosnan who upgraded the character with the fantastic dame judi dench, Daniel Craig in my eyes has been superb through all his bond appearances, theirs more action ,more emotional content, he has brought bond into the 21st century, so sad to hear that's Mr Craig final adventure as 007,but who knows, never say never.to you Mr Craig thank you for your artistry.
Connery is Bond .Looks the part and is the part. Meaning he doesn't have to act the part like Daniel has to . For me he doesn't look the part . He has to act it . There not much humour there also. I love Roger Moore sense of humour in all his Bonds . Piece was good also . I enjoyed Die another Day. After that I didn't bother going to see Bond films . Each to there own .
For me not so much. The stealing of OHMS quotes and score felt cheesy and misplaced, and this underpinned the various other now enormously well worn Aston Martin and disfigured villain cliches and focus-group pleasing plot. I left the cinema emotionally unruffled (in major contrast to OHMS) and really wishing Boyle and Hodge had done it after all.
So did I. No we know what the "creative differences" were with Doyle. He was not going to go down as the director who killed an icon. Good call, Danny.
@@mikeshirleyforever OHMSS is the peak of the series, or a Top 5 alongside Casino Royale, Goldfinger, Goldeneye and FRWL. They're going to have to get ghostbusting now, in order to tearjerk on the level of those blockbusters.
Dalton was the first realistic Bond and I loved the high personal stakes. Craig is awesome too. I like when Bond is vulnerable. Makes it more real. I hate to admit it but i cried when Lazenby's Bond kept talking to his assassinated wife. Ouch. Such a defining moment for the character and why he became the eternal bachelor. And I'm looking forward to Ana de Armas' one kickass scene in No Time... Craig and de Armas reunited!
False. The first realistic Bond was Sean Connery. The only Bond was Connery. Dalton tried hard but not a patch on Connery. Lazenby was horrendous - the worst Bond ever. And Moore was far too lightweight, he should've stuck to The Saint and the Persuaders.
I personally can't get over exercised by Bond's psycho-drama with Bloefeld. I prefer the more two-dimensional Bond and the air of surrealism of the earlier Bond movies.
I saw it when I was a wee kid and yes it was scary but I feckin loved it. Probably my favourite Bond film for sentimental reasons, also has a brilliant song.
Live and Let Die has one of the best title credits with all the skulls and fire. Played out to one of the best themes by Wing. I always forget George Martin did the music for this film..
A far better Bond film than I had expected to see. It had a story arc, and many of the people around Bond had dimensions rather than just one dimension. There was humour and excitement but that wasn't the only emotions played with. I liked the harking back to all the previous bond films and classic music and dialogue from those previous outings. It was a good end to Mr Craig's innings for me. A story about a little more than just the baddy wanting to blow up the whole world or become the ultimate cat stroker.
Great review, thank you for not a single spoiler for those of us in countries that still can't get to the cinema yet. Can't wait to see this, and hope I can in a cinema.
I think that review was spot on. My only criticism was I wasn't sitting there thinking who wrote what part of the script. I just enjoyed the script, I totally enjoyed the film and it certainly didn't feel long to me. Daniel Craig is and was a fantastic bond and will be missed.
Well... I saw him in layer cake and came out of the cinema saying "he'll be the next Bond", I shouted at myself for not placing a bet when it was announced..
@Léon Rififi That is the shelterin emoji - on some UA-cam accounts, there's an emoji button underneath the space where you type. There are other new ones too:
I would put it above Spectre and Quat-the-hell-were-they-doing obviously, but in my head it's battling with Skyfall for 2nd place beneath Casino Royale.
When I saw Skyfall at the cinema I thought it was serviceable and entertaining enough - but not a patch on Casino Royale. However, Skyfall gets so much love that I should probably give it another watch.
The "family" moment got me. I laughed and cried simultaneously. this movie is more profound than the usual bond film. It provides answers. A pastiche to itself. Beautiful.
@@passiveagressive4983 Skyfall is thematically interesting and visually compelling and well-directed but its script has a ton of post-Dark Knight cliches like the villain planning for every possible outcome or getting captured just to break out again (just to trigger an impossible sequence of events while escaping, like the train going through the hole) as well as having some weird pacing in the first half of the film
@@bengejuknowit3048 some good action in the opening ruined by Bonds fall into the water. Dude would be dead from that height and impact. I know it’s a Bond film but that made me cringe.
Thank you for an honest review. There's a lot of click bait out about this film; but I do think your review is the best I've seen. Extra points for staying spoiler free and still accurately conveying what works and what doesn't.
The important thing with films like this is to avoid any spoilery trailers/revviews so I stopped after Mark said it was ok. The reason I like Spectre more than Skyfall is only because I didn't watch trailers for Spectre. For certain genres of film surprise is a huge amount of the enjoyment and, ironically, this shouldn't be a surprise.
I hated spectre because I was so hyped and watched all the trailers and ended up being so disappointed. Skyfall is better by a point or two but Casino Royale is basically a masterpiece to me.
As someone who likes slow burn films, Spectre is beyond boring, too long for no reason and the villain did NOT feel like he's capable of putting together such a wast plan, the film just has no energy no matter how hard they try, and it feels like most films these days, style over substance, even the wounds look sterile.
Great review Mark. A flawed film in some ways - confusing bits and slightly silly villain - but the emotional connection between Bond and Madeleine (and the child), and his team, totally hit home for me. Craig is the only Bond that is more than just a character.
@@garycoburn1617 ERMM.....Was JAMES BOND meant to be a.....COMEDY?? LOL...Here I was thinking he was serious SPY/SECRET AGENT who keeps BLURTING out his Name to whoever will listen. Not even once but TWICE...My name is BOND...JAMES BOND!!! CRETIN!!!🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Kermode's knowledge of Bond history is brilliant - nods back to Dalton/Lazenby and especially Johanna Harwood's involvement in the early Bond films as well. Would certainly watch a documentary about the franchise with him presenting it.
@@JackChurchill101 I've never heard Johanna Harwood talked about in official pr releases or mentioned alongside Pheobe WB though? I can understand the Dalton/Craig comparison but Kermode here is doing a decent job for the casual viewer and fan alike
@@petepritchard he doesn't care at all just cause you don't like his reviews. Oh please he clearly likes the bond franchise you just disagree with his opinions
Mark K sat firmly on the fence in my opinion ….”a solid film”? Having settled down at the Cinema on Saturday with my Good Lady to enjoy Daniel Craig’s Bond Finale …..it just felt not like a “Bond Film”. It felt disjointed, trying to nod left/right/back through the franchise and most of all, it felt like Daniel got to make the film that “He wanted” to make. For both myself and my Good Lady, Daniel Craig is the best Bond, however NTTD was not really a Bond Film. Even now it’s only memorable for …….? That was the talking point. Oddly it didn’t feel overly long however it plodded to its end, and watching the Cinema Goers leaving …..we all seemed pretty underwhelmed apart from ……? Sure, best seen in the cinema however I don’t envisage buying the DVD to re-watch …..and that is a crying shame for this finale. Whatever, go see it if you haven’t and make of it what you will. My opinion …and the many, many other opinions are just that …..”personal opinions” …..what matters is what you think having actually watched NTTD. Enjoy 👍
I have seen every bond film (bar a couple) a minimum of 50 times each. My first words as the lights came on were "what a pile of sh%t". Everyone pretty much had the same opinion. I would say though that it was an older bond savvy audience. A younger or non bond crowd would probably have a different opinion. I know I won't be downloading it, buying it, watching it when it's on TV. It's just not very good and certainly not bond. It took everything that is bond out of bond. Some may see that as refreshing, but to me it's like saying its great to see superman evolve into not flying and not wearing a cape. Watching an emotional bond wearing jeans and plimsolls isn't bond. I'm still not even sure what Safin's motive was, nor how his plan fitted into it.
I'm glad to see the comments section agrees that Casino Royale was the best. I always remember the Matt Damon explanation about how Bond is a chauvinist pig etc. Casino Royale was the first film not to endorse Bond's character, but to show him as the flawed anti-hero he was. Something I think slowly slipped away in the sequels.
"Casino Royale was the first film not to endorse Bond's character..." In GoldenEye, M disendorses Bond's character to his face - "...a sexist, misogynist dinosaur, a relic of the Cold War..."
@@redlightmax I felt it was more like lip service during that time. It was in Casino Royale that he seduces a woman for information and basically gets her murdered and then shows no remorse when presented with her dead body.
I do hope that the end of the Craig era doesn’t lead to a full reboot with a whole new cast. Moneypenny, q, even post dench m are so good together. I hope they carry on like they did post brosnan even though the films actually went back to the beginning of bond
Bond didn't die. He will re-emerge in the next movie as an amnesiac and had plastic surgery to change his appearance thanks to the explosion so he will now look totally different.
Not a very memorable villian and a silly plot as far as Bond movies go. The villian wants to kill all Spectre agents and then wants to finish off the world. Why not just do it in one? Worse still is the finale. A franchise ruined.
With bond actually doing some spy work on a local leve, not saving the world, or dealing with personal issues, right? This made Casino Royale a fantastic movie, imo.
I was very disappointed in this film. I came in with low expectations, which was even worse. The villain had no motivation. I felt that having Bond feeling betrayed and discovering a child, was a very circuitous route to reach a place that would have been more interesting: Bond having something to lose. We've seen him "come back" before, in Skyfall. Here, we have an opportunity to see something I can't recall in any Bond movie: Bond with a family, with something to protect, something that he could be dared to protect. We saw him betrayed with Vesper, fine, let's see him finally love someone, finally allow himself that opportunity, and see the nightmare of having it threatened. (*Spoilers! Spoilers ahead!*) It was clumsy to make Blofield his step-brother, but the entire character of Safin could have been Blofield himself, both Waltz and Malek were criminally misused in their Bond appearances, with weak villains. Because the stakes were so ridiculous with Safin, and Spectre was never fully fleshed out, what could that organization truly do? Why would Safin want to destroy Spectre? This entire situation is created by a group of people who could have grown up together. How do you lose sight of your step-brother who turns into the evil head of a massive organization, when you're in the intelligence industry? Mr. White's daughter, is intertwined with Safin, who did what for the last 20 years? It makes no sense. If Safin was working with Blofield, that'd make more sense, but it doesn't, and none of the villains have motivations, and by removing motivation from characters and replacing it with massive stakes, it is poor writing, and lazy. Skyfall worked because the villain made sense. He was a former agent, was betrayed--traded by M for other prisoners--and he was James, before, well, James, and he wanted to destroy the organization that gave him up for dead. The stakes were clear, it was M, the mother-figure of Bond, and we go and see Bond's origin, his family home, we get to see that, a dimension we've never been able to see. His childhood, his pain, and of both reclaiming his birthright, symbolized through using his father's gun, while also discarding the gun because nothing of that past means anything, M represents his reality, the closest thing he has to family. Now we have the opportunity to see Bond have a family, and what do we do? We make it so that he only gets to taste that for a few hours. For Raoul Silva, Bond is the barrier to his goal, the stakes aren't world-ending, they're personal, even if they are done under the guide and within a world of spies and intelligence, security, etc. It seems that the only reason why the stakes of the world ending are so high, is because we have to justify Bond's death. This movie felt corny, it just did. It felt like a 90's Bond film that was updated for today. That tonal shift was jarring. It also meant that I was disappointed at the predictable death of Bond. I would have rather given him a happy ending and simply rounded out the cheese of corny lines over deaths, filled with puns and all that. Without a villain who has motivations that make sense, larger stakes are boring. The accented evil scientist was funny, kinda, but he wasn't Boris from Goldeneye. I would've liked to have seen Nomi fleshed out a bit more, I would've loved to have seen Paloma more, de Armas is beyond charming in this--but absent true motivations from villains, the movie follows a predictable send-off for characters we've grown to love. Whether it's Logan, Iron Man, whatever, the formula seems to be the same. At least the end of Nolan's Batman films had the beautiful moment with Bruce Wayne and Alfred, which we don't get here. It was a frustrating movie, especially with how highly I rate Fukunaga and Waller-Bridge.
If Dalton’s 3RD Bond film had come to fruition, and then followed that with Goldeneye as his 4th, he would easily be a contender for best Bond. I love TLD and LTK equally
@@Casual_Sadism no, there was a story outline done for a 3rd movie that would have taken place partly in China, you can look it up. Goldeneye would have been 4th, and there may have even been a 5th. I also believe that in the original Goldeneye story outline, 006 was supposed to be an older character, more of a mentor to Bond instead of one of his peers
@@allthingsclassicrock I know Goldeneye is great but it would have been interesting to see Dalton in a movie with a little bit more amped up action and a female villain. Tomorrow Never Dies, the second half at least, is decent, from the HALO jump on, the Saigon motorcycle chase and I think the stealth ship is a well done action set-piece. The World Is Not Enough is very boring, overlong, and by-the-books for me, and Die Another Day it is what it is
Wanted to see more Rami, thought his villain and performance was great and enjoyed it everytime he was on screen he just wasn’t on screen enough and yeah I wish his motivation was explained more at the end
@@leighsherval1023 yeah, his motivation was clear but just wanted more of him. Cause his performance was great. We just learned the character through Bond and Madeliene which was a bit disappointing cause I wanted, and alot of people as well, to see more of his character. That's why I said he wasn't fleshed out even though the motivation was very clear.
He was at his best in the opening. Overall he did nothing except speak softly and look weird. Terrible non threatening villain with no charisma whatsoever.
~Heavy spoilers~🍿 ~Long Read~📖 I think the overall problem with this movie is that they are trying to pick up the pieces left behind from spectre, and none of whats in that movie landed or felt legitimate or earned. I Actually like Lea Seydoux as an actress who played Madeline and was excited that she was the new bond girl in spectre, but the execution of their love story was so contrived, that in the end I really didn't care or believe it was a legitimate romance. Even the people who made that movie knows what's wrong with it. Why would they double down on it? The writing and execution in the first quarter of the this movie was pretty good up to a point but the basis for the characters just weren't there for me, again cuz it so heavily relies on spectre. You could call this spectre 2 tbh The concept of Bond having a child and the fact that it's a daughter on top of it Is actually a genius move as a concept on paper, its kinda like poetic justice for him. The idea that he has to really commit and care and actually be responsible for someone more than yourself. Having that character be his daughter could have been deeply profound in that way. They could have also addressed his relationship with women through the daughter character. That would be addressing the misogyny and faults in his character. Maybe even could address the vesper Lind history that made Bond unable to commit to any real relationships with women because of how his heart was basically ripped out of his chest by Vesper. I'll give Daniel Craig this, he knocked it out of the park with this movie in terms of his acting, especially in a few key scenes. He made me really feel like he realises his life has just turned upside down the moment he saw his daughters eyes. He genuinely made me tear up couple times in the film if I'm being honest. Any scene with Bond and his daughter was elevated by Craig's acting, and almost made up for some of the lackluster writing in the film. He made me really feel Bonds urgency and angst from her safety being in jeopardy. The daughter aspect, if it was utilised more and written better, could have had the potential to make this something really special and powerful. You could potentially really disect Bond through the daughter character, break his character down, address his issues and still feel like everything organically came together, cuz there could be a central focal point for it all, his new daughter. Come to think of it, it's actually not that dissimilar to the concept of what they did for wolverine in Logan. Ok...Ana de armas was a total smoke show in this role! Goddamn she was good. Her character was badass, playful and intrigueing and that made her even sexier. I didn't think she could get more attractive but this role definitely did it. She should have been Bonds sidekick throughout the movie and become friends with him instead, moving away from a potentially cliched romance. Maybe there could have been a throughline in the film with him becoming sort of her mentor along the way since he's pretty much the most seasoned agent and she's insecure with how good she is. You can even still have the "saying no" scene later in the movie as their partnership grows and maybe some awkwardness leading to a back and forth conversation. Maybe he tells her about Vesper. Wnatever. Something like that would have felt organic, served as character development for Bond and some more three-dimensional depth to her character. Makes the "saying no" moment maybe actually mean something in the movie rather than a throwaway comedic jab at Bonds character. LaShawna Lynch was fine. The hate for this movie for her being 007 and ppl just assuming that this is more of her movie than James bonds or she's taking power away from Bond and she's taking over, screw feminism, PC agenda pushing bitches, etc etc... I never subscribed to any of that nonsense. It's almost like people are trained and groomed these days to react like that without ever giving anything a chance....hey wait a minute🤔. I like her as an actress, was looking forward to see her performance. Problem is I never understood her character's initial hostility with Bond, I was like why is she going undercover and manipulating him into bringing her back to his place just to stick it to him and show him up. Could of had the same conversation in a different way maybe in a conventional way, idk doesn't matter. I have a feeling that her character doesn't like Bond for his history of misogyny and filandering, but nothing about him as an agent. So the writers prolly decided they should have her characters main reason for not liking bond to actually be a general critique of men in society??? not cuz she has a grudge against him, or he always sucked at his job, or from some personal altercation with him. That's the type of shoehorning of PC agendas that sane ppl of the audience are talking about. Give her a real reason not to like Bond and you can still have her give him shit about his relationship with women. Also you'd think they would have just started out as platonic competition instead of trying to one up and literary sabotage each other's missions when they both have literally the same goal, especially when the stakes are potentially so high. You think maybe she would look up to bond a little, wouldn't the new agents and recruits look up to bond? Wouldn't they all want to secretly be like him, not as a person, but as an agent? Since when is going by the book and putting down your legendary predecessors an interesting character trait. Aren't you supposed to like her by the end of the movie? They didn't give any real scene or event that gets them to respect each other to follow through on squashing the animosity, so what was the whole point? At least Naomi Harris's character didn't have all this nonsense. No newcomer is just going to give a middle finger to the previous guy when he's freaking James Bond, he should be a legend amongst new agents. This whole thing of Bond being out of his time and too old was addressed in Skyfall and spectre so that stuff felt tired. I have no problem with the ideals that were being pushed to be PC and give Bond some me too'ing, but the execution is too forced. At least itsl not as bad as Disney's Star wars tho. There is a way to do this people, organically, where it doesn't feel like a soapbox. Side note, felt the action was a bit underwhelming in this movie. It peaked with the scene in the first half with that goon shooting away at Madeline's window in the car and James just letting it happen while he deliberates wether to trust her or not. Great Bond moment and was narratively creative. This whole scene is totally Bond and badass. You believe Bond would be an asshole and do something like that. For the most part though this series has lost its edge especially in the action scenes, starting with some parts of Skyfall and heavily with spectre. They just came across as made to look pretty and expensive and putting more effort into the camera work trying to get everything in one one shots rather than making the action actually exciting. You guys remember the parkour scene leading to the shootout at the embassy in Casino Royale?! Those action scenes have so much edge to them, you feel the danger bond is in. Editing is one of the most important components to action scenes and these just feel like constantly unnecessary long takes. Now we even have parts where he is just walking right out in the open, firing his gun vaguely in bad guys direction, on a set that probably costed 1/4 of the movies budget. Even holding his gun from the hip at times and still casually just hitting his mark every time. All the while with the bond theme blaring in the background. Did the same thing in spectre at the desert scene. Just seemed like a total waste and honestly a bit lazy. The SUV Chase was ok I guess but it has Bond literally nudging his car into the bad guys cars just once and they go flying in to some convenient obstacle or hit a ramp that launches them into a flip. A lot of the action is like this and it comes off as just lazy even though they spend hundreds of millions of dollars making these movies. All that being said I didn't hate the movie, if you watch it just as a spy drama it's not that bad. I didn't get bored really that much even tho it's almost 3 hrs. So take that for what it's worth. There's annoying bits of comedy and one liners that come off as awkward rather than funny. Always thought that kind of stuff didnt fit for Craig's films. Rami Malek was good, but underrutilized. His characters ultimate goal was not really clearly defined, at least to me, but I think he served his purpose in the movie. Nothing more nothing less. For me I didn't mind bond dieing, and the film for the most part earned it, was done decently enough. It's certainly better than quantum of solace and spectre. A serviceable end to Daniel Craig's era. Although, I have noticed things about these last 3 films and they make me feel that ever since The Dark Knight came out, the people behind these films have been trying to copy Chris Nolan's aesthetics, that should stop. But that's a whole nother conversation. Thanks for reading.
@@lukasfil I am still so gutted and annoyed by that. They MUST have known what they were doing - any professional with any cop-on would know not to post that - and in a headline too!
Just got home from the cinema. I feel like the only person who didn’t enjoy it...Casino Royale and Skyfall aside, there’s something about Daniel Craig’s Bond that doesn’t quite hit the right note, for me.
Due to circumstances, I saw the movie 2 days in a row, which totally changed my opinion, I wasn’t keen at first view, but the second viewing showed me the depth of emotion contained within, kind of blew my socks off. I also felt Daniel Craig had got to the natural end of his tenure as Bond, if I’m not mistaken, he made more of them than the other Bonds actors. He can go with his head held high, he ushered in an intelligent read of what could have become a cartoon character. I still love Skyfall it will always be my favourite for it’s poignancy. I am now looking ahead and wondering who our next Bond will be!
@@mickeypye2593 rewatched it a couple of months ago along with most of the other films. It’s definitely one of the best. I admire it’s grittiness and still being able to be a lot of fun. It’s got a great villain too in Sanchez. I also love The Living Daylights. I’m very happy that more people are starting to appreciate Dalton as Bond. He deserves it.
It was a particularly nice touch, seeing the 'Living Daylights' Aston turn up in the second act, as the middle of the 'three Astons' auto motif in the film. I did like that.
@@mickeypye2593 I remember the newspapers in the UK doing a massive story on the fact that Dalton's Bond got all beat up and bled! After previous outings,where he didn't really get a scratch, that was a big thing!
I just saw No Time to Die here in the states. While I have to commend the film on how well made and acted this film is, this film just felt so out of place. Even with its ending and surprises along the way, I was sitting in the theater thinking of Bonds such as Thunderball, You Only Live Twice, Octopussy, License to Kill, Goldeneye, Skyfall and many more and this film felt like it wasn’t even in the same universe as those films. I guess the Game of Thrones/Avengers every ending/plot has to be controversial trend and maybe unexpected trend finally caught up to James Bond…
In a series where, within four films, they managed to do-arguably-the best Bond in Casino Royale and _also the worst_ in *SPECTRE,* it’s nice to hear they don’t go out on a sour note but manage a better-than-average overall run.
The departure of Judi Dench from the franchise as M in Skyfall is a lot more meaningful and emotional than Craig's departure as Bond, the ending scene of NTTD where M and the rest of the team gathered in M's office for a toast to Bond is just so cheesy lol.
As much as I like Craig's Bond, I have not been happy with the storyline of his Bond series. It's basically been about using bits and pieces of the Connery's Bond series and rehashing them for a new generation. Craig's storyline has been one long episodic storyline with No time to Die being Its conclusion. It also presents the producers of the film a conundrum on how to reboot the series after Craig's departure. A problem I foresaw after seeing Casino Royale back in 2006. It was quite obvious at the time, the Bourne Identity heavily influenced Casino Royale. From the casting of a blonde Bond to giving him an origin, the absence of witty humourous quips and Bond gals. Basically a revamp of Bond for a new modern era. But rather than just sending Bond on his next mission without any real consequences as usually was the case previously. The new Bond's mission was closer to his heart- his emotional core. This is seen throughout the Craig series. And this where the problem of continuity presented itself. Before I had seen the new film, I had already suspected Craig's Bond's fate. Knowing this would be his final outing as Bond. A character whose creator envisioned as the ultimate male fantasy - a man who could have almost any woman he wanted, no wife, no children A man who lives a life of no responsibility money being no problem. What happens when you give him a revamp and make him human? And how do you continue the series once you conclude his journey?
Loved the film, right up to the last 10 minutes and thus came out of the cinema, unsatisfied and disappointed. That's exactly the opposite of how you should feel at the end of a Bond film!!!
@@LeethLee1 Casino Royale was really impressive considering how different it was in tone and style to Brosnan's last film. I can't stand Skyfall actually. The entire 'Home Alone' sequence at the Scottish house is ridiculous.
I absolutely love Casino Royale, easily the best Daniel Craig Bond film by far. Quantum of Solace was also a somewhat decent follow up to me. Then all downhill from there.
@@LeethLee1 As much as the performances are good the ending set piece of Skyfall is so shoehorned into the film it unleashed the logic pedant in me and the film falls apart when you do that, just try make sense of what the fuck the villains plan is given what takes place. I agree Casino Royale is the only truly good Bond film.
Mark sounded like he felt it could've been much more. It has it's problems Spectre had, full of plot holes and bad writing. The new villain is just in it to advance the plot, with the kidnapping cliche.
The story is illogical and borderline ridiculous to believe at times like for example when blofeld is bonds brother plus it lack action sequences and the ones there is are no we’re near as good as sky fall no time to die and casino royale and the Bond girl is badly written but she’s much better in no time to die.
I think Mark was very fair. Not perfect but solid. So much to love about it. I have all the Bond films on DVD. My personal favourite is The Spy Who Loved Me, so I'm not a Connery/Dalton purist. I have have a massive soft spot for Goldeneye. But this was the sequel to OHMSS, which is perhaps the best Bond film if you've read the books. The clues are slapping you in the face! Once the hype has died, history will be very kind to NTTD.
Mark can't understand why people don't like spectre, for starters when a bond film is ripping off ideas from the 3rd Austin powers movie that's a bad sign
That and trying to tie all of Craig’s films into a cinematic universe is stupid. In fact I’d even say that making Dr Evil behind each of the schemes almost taints those other films. Bond has always been more episodic. Plus Lea Seydoux had no chemistry with Craig.
The first hour is very good. After that it loses its sense and perspective. There's much to like about the film, but overall it's meandering, melodramatic nonsense played more for an emotional close than a sensible one. It also straight up lifts its plot from Metal Gear Solid and previous Bond titles, with a twist.
@@timdurgan Clandestine badguy working behind the scenes to extort the world's official bodies creates an island base of operations. Our main hero infiltrates by sea. A target-specific virus is loosed upon our protagonist adding a degree of finality to his actions. Nanomachines are the delivery method.
@@KrillLiberator When you consider the scientist is Sokolov (he even looks like him) and Q is Major Zero on the plane, both from MGS3, it gets weirder. Nomi could be seen as a Raiden-like character too. I think someone got wind of the upcoming MGS film and it was reported that Fukinaga would often be late to set because he was off playing games. No doubt getting inspiration.
You are correct about Skyfall--great film. But No Time is not. I can't tell you how hyped I was for NTTD and how disappointed I was when I left the theater. Plodding, absurd, and murkily shot. This was "The Last Jedi" of Bond films. It made me not care if I ever see another one. And judging but the disappointing U.S. box office, many Yanks agree.
Casino Royale is the best Bond film ever so obviously that’s the best Bond film of the Craig era… but this film, despite its flaws, gives us the best on screen portrayal of Bond we have seen, I highly doubt anyone will ever portray Bond on screen better than Daniel Craig in this film. He’s superb and deserves an academy award nomination
Wasn't a big fan of the idea of Danny Boyle directing Bond, until I saw trainspotting 2. The pub fight between Ewan and Johnny-Lee is one of the best on film.
Made for the wider audience (that's where the money is) rather than longtime fans of bond. Poorly cast villain and the ending was terrible. It'll make money because it's James bond, but can you imagine watching this on Christmas day?!
I think No Time To Die (2021) will divide a lot of people and most James Bond Fans will absolutely hate it. I personally like it. It wasn't perfect but it was a very good conclusion to the Daniel Craig/James Bond Era and a BIG improvement over Spectre (2015).
The whole ending is essentially lifted from the novel You Only Live Twice. As was the Blofeld scene which would of replaced the scene with Safin just prior to the end. In the novel Bond falls into the sea and is rescued by a Japanese fishing woman with whom he has a daughter. He also doesn't know who he is or remember anything. Upon seeing the word Vladivostok he decides to head there as it is familiar to him. In the following novel he returns to Mi6 and attempts to assassinate M having gone to Russia and been brainwashed by them. I believe that this will possibly be the beginning of the next movie somehow and they'll retcon the ending to having him survive somehow. Remember that the Russians were heading for the island just prior to the missile strikes. IF they go with that scenario it'll also mean that Madeleine and daughter won't be required as he can't go near them. He may also have the amnesia he does in book. OR they will just forget all about NTTD and make a standalone story like the pre Craig movies and not reference it at all. I think that's more likely as having him brainwashed by the Russians not only diminishes the ending of NTTD but would also mean continuing this story arc. Personally as a lifelong James Bond fan i don't know where they can go now and have sort of dug themselves into a hole. Also as a lifelong James Bond fan i also think maybe it's time to just leave James Bond off the movie screen now and THIS really was the end.
I think they will treat it like doctor who as the show has a fresh slate for a new lead actor to put their stamp on the franchise but the core characteristics stay the same
Absolutely loved it; so much so that we went back to see a second time after rewatching all 4 of the previous Daniel Craig films to catch all the references. Loved the music reference from the Lazenby film, great respect there. So easy to spot Phoebe’s touches! Three hours goes in a flash, you hardly notice…. didn’t want it to end. Now planning to see it a 3rd tune, and guess what’s on my Xmas list?!
I agree, it's a masterpiece that is both a homage to the franchise and a fitting end to Craig's Bond storyline. I don't find any of the criticisms valid. Maybe they are watching it on cell phones.
I initially hated Spectre for trying to lean into an overarching narrative similar to the likes of the MCU; Skyfall's "Lots to be done" epilogue with the classic office, the formal introduction of Moneypenny etc hinted at moving on to the old episodic formula. Then Spectre trampled all over that - not just with the Even Bigger Bad connecting all the previous Big Bads but doubling down with the fact they were adoptive brothers. It has grown on me a little (though I still find the head-drilling scene far too OTT even for Bond). However I found that NTTD tied everything off with a neat little bow and I'm excited to see how the franchise will develop now. As for the film itself I largely agree with Mark - very competent, excellent set pieces (the cross-country car-chase and subsequent mist-shrouded shootout was a particular highlight) and enough nods to feel nostalgic without diving into the call-back fest of Die Another Day. The 'family' aspect was handled very well, too - be it close professional ties or actual blood relatives. A fitting send-off.
I thought it was a fantastic film and great send-off for Craig. Malek was weak but still a decent enough villain . Casino Royale Skyfall No Time to Die Spectre Quantum of Solace
Agree with your ranking Casino Royale and Skyfall are brilliant and I enjoyed No Time To Die but could have been better and Spectre and Quantum Of Solace weren't great imo ofc
I left the theatre uber disappointed with this film - the plot is all over the place, the baddy has no motivation, Felix Leiter gets topped (again) and Bond has his bollocks removed. Can anyone tell me, without looking it up, what Lashana Lynch's characters name was? AND, worst of all, Blofeld dies because Bond touches him. The most bad, badass Bond baddy ever gets an end like that. Pathetic.
Why has no one pointed out the massively obvious flaw in this film - that there’s a moment where a child gets put to bed and they just go to sleep. It’s the most unrealistic thing to ever happen in a bond film
facts!
I thought it was weird how the villain just let her go guess he didn’t want to kill a kid face to face idk
@@CriticsCupofficial Yeah, he did it twice though didn't he? Spared a little girl. He was quite random but there was a detached humanity in there. He was a monster, but not wholly monstrous.
More unrealistic than a double taking pigeon?
@@sandersson2813 oh 100%. Pigeons can be dumped 1000’s of miles away from home and find their way back. Children can’t even find their shoes to go out
I personally like Casino Royale better than Skyfall. Funnily enough, the same director made Golden Eye, which for me is Brosnan's best bond movie.
Personally still think it’s the best Craig film even after No Time To Die
Agreed. Casino Royale is still the best Craig film.
Skyfall is pants, Martin Campbell did a fantastic job of Goldeneye and Casino Royale, two of the best Bonds since the early dasy
I mean.... Goldeneye being the best isn't really saying much (though I do like tomorrow never lies)
Yup, the two best films from the last two Bond franchises. Pretty solid track record.
I liked the film, I just thought we needed a bit more of Safin's backstory. I don't think I really believed/understood his motivations as a villain.
Tbh I didn’t think he was a memorable villain and very bland
I'm surprised Kermode didn't pick up more on how weak Safin's motives were. For me, a film like this is typically only as good as the villain - Skyfall being a good example of a great villain (supported by a magnificent Judi Dench).
In this film, does anyone know what the boats Safin planned to meet at the end were for? Wouldn't HMS Dragon destroy them anyway? Why did he bother to kidnap Madeline after she killed Blofield as requested? Was he in love with her? Why the sudden urgency?
Exactly what I was left thinking.
*Spoilers*
I do like the film but I agree. It seemed his goals were achieved once Blofeld was dead and from that point onwards he wanted to destroy the world “just because”. It’s a shame cause I thought his first scene with adult Madeline was great.
It's a real shame, because it was really the only major problem with the film for me! If they'd just made Safin a more fleshed-out, logically motivated villain then this would have been one of the best bond movies ever.
Dalton is criminally underrated as Bond. License to Kill is one of the grittiest and most brutal of the Bond films.
Yep, I watched it when I was young as I watched all the bond films but it shocked me when Sanchez put that guy in the compression chamber and he exploded. It was ahead of its time i think.
His chiseled features made you forget how funny the man is. He fully got the silliness of Bond, something I still miss. Dalton is brilliant in Hot Fuzz for example.
spot on.
Dalton IS Ian Fleming's 007 - Period
Yep. It's probably why I rate Dalton then Craig as my favourites.
For all his complaining, I like that Craig left it all on the field, so to speak, performance-wise, for this final film. A true professional.
I really like his performance here because it’s a lot less miserable like quantum but instead was really funny and had great puns like moore
He's more wooden than Sherwood Forest
@@sandersson2813 He's taken home approximately $110 million for all five films... I don't think he cares.
@@margotperez7162 So what, i dont care what he earned, and i dont care if he cares, i care about having good Bond films instead of third rate Bourne films.
@@sandersson2813 You could say the same of Clint Eastwood. It's the tough guy school of acting. People should be used to it by now.
As others have said, the first 40 to 50 minutes of this are amazing, but the massive pit of exposition in the middle ruins the momentum for me. Also felt like Sabin's motivations were a bit confused
I was still engaged throughout the middle portion but I definitely feel like that part will probably sag for me in subsequent viewings.
I’m remind of TDK with Sabin: “...some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.” I find if you view him through that lens, it’s infinitely more satisfying.
@@MaxDeeley I bought into that a lot more with someone like Silva from Skyfall.
In this it feels like Safin has a set of goals that he accomplishes by about the hour mark and then decides to just kill millions of people because he’s a Bond villain.
@Léon Rififi The explanation is both implicit (he has a twisted view of the world and an egomaniacal personality), and explicit (he is damaged by the murder of his parents & hates humanity: “we both eradicate people to make the world a better place”). Any more exposition would have been pointless and boring.
@@MaxDeeley v true
The evil bond villain with heavy accent and facial scarring is a bit cliche overkill now.
Blowfelt broke the mould.
The whole of Bond is a giant cliché thats half the point
Ermmm. That's a Bond movie you plumb. Might as well be any other spy movie without the cliche villain and the womanising. That IS Bond's character.
The physical disfigurement is a film trope theve been doing it since the silent version of the phantom of the opera it represents the mental disfigurement of the villains mind
@@sixonesix9429 familiarity breeds contempt and " for the sake of variety" it's good to mix things up and keep things fresh in order to continue the franchise. Keep your dumb comments to your own post you plumb.
Having just seen it, I can say that for me it was the most moved I've ever been by a bond film. I really loved what they have done to break the mould with these films, and this conclusion to Craig's tenure is testament to that. They made James Bond a real human being with scars to carry. I do think the main "mechanical plot" was cliched, but really it took a backseat for the character driven story that this film is. Honestly loved it, and left the theatre teary for the first time ever at the end of a bond film.
If you had to rank it against his other movies, where would you place it.
@@THOMAS2910able tricky , cause it does feel very different in tone. Out of his I think I'd put it 3rd in terms of the overall quality of the film(1st being casino royale and 2nd being skyfall) but it's a close call, I've really enjoyed all his films. This one is a more personal and emotional story imo
Agree. The Safin story isn't great, but that's just a subplot for what this film really is about.
@@timothyd3339 So definitely worth going to cinemas and not waiting for it online ?
@@THOMAS2910able Yea, I honestly would recommend seeing it in theatres. For me it was the first thing I've seen since the start of the pandemic at the cinema (i work in healthcare) and it was a really fantastic experience to come back to. It has all the stunning Craig-era sweeping landscape shots and a lot of the lighting work was amazing to see in IMAX.
Better than QoS and Spectre, but not as good as CR or Skyfall.
Blofeld was wasted in Spectre and NTTD.
But out of the two CR is the superior (my opinion)
I first read that as Question of Sport.... ??!! 🤣
QoS is worse than Austin Powers, so ...
I thought Blofeld died in Thunderball ?
Most people say Skyfall is their favorite but it has The Dark Knight overtones but I would say mine is Casino Royale cuz it was more original and Bond learning to be that iconic spy by Vesper showing him how to tailor his tux and getting his martinis right to his signature. I dont want to see Bond moping and burnt out , I have enough of that myself and come to see a Bond film for escaping for 2 hrs and applauding his wit .
Glad someone else saw TDK overtones as well. I still loved Skyfall but Casino Royale and No Time to Die are my favorites
It does not hold a candle to TDK imo.
The excellent Madds Mikkelson made a brilliant villain
It felt like two different plots forced into one film, with the result that it felt disconnected and messy. The "killer nanobots" plot was more Mission Impossible than Bond. The definitive has become the derivative.
The Bond franchise has become so boring and clichéd over the years, it is not even funny anymore. Just retrograde nonsense. Seen this latest one too and not impressed either.
Times have moved on since the 60s. Technology introduced into fiction was a foregone conclusion. The nanobots didn’t stand out any more than the EMP watch.
@@RS-jb1lf Yea im so sick of these terrorism plots. That's all the bond films seem to be doing now. 2006 casino casino royale 5 years after 9/11 I get that. A plot about funding terrorism. Goldeneye about a satellite that will cause a worldwide financial meltdown. Goldfinger gold smuggling and a licence to kill drug smuggling. Far more interesting bond films I would rather watch.
I felt similarly. It seemed quite incoherent to me and although i thought that it started well and might be going in a darker,more horror orientated direction,it quickly went into the action scenes.More style over substance for me.I don't think it's bad,just that it feels quite laden and generic for the most part in my opinion. The ending was unexpected,which I quite liked,but I failed to see the humour that Mark mentioned,which felt quite absent throughout .I often felt that interractions with "Q" showing off gadgets to be quite fun in past films ,but there wasn't any of that here.
@@oliverbeard7912 Agreed though even the action sequences for me felt very "by the numbers" and uninspired. Decent looking, but nothing daring or visually exciting as say the Spectre opening. Perhaps at this point we've seen it all before. But I also saw the ending coming as soon as the nano-bot DNA weapon became evident.
The villains motives just don’t justify the result to me
Just a stereotypical villain with facial disfigurements who wants world domination they could have done so much more with rami
I agree far too cliche.
What were his motives? I enjoyed the film, but I have a hard time working out what his plot actually was
@@FromTheFens219 he achieved his motive which was to kill Spectre. He let himself be influenced by Valdo Obruchev who wanted world domination but his heart wasn't really on it. Rami wanted Madeline's love at the end.
Agree, it was so contrived and rushed.
My son as the credits rolled ‘ I can’t believe you’re crying at a Bond movie.’ Yup it happened.
Good to hear Mark shout out On her Majesty Service - my fav bond movie too.
The Craig movies are an interesting "What if" as in what if Bond had a definitive beginning and end. Anyone saying they weren't shocked by that ending is a damn liar...it paints the production in a real corner going forward and is by far the ballsiest thing a Bond movie had ever done.
I found it genuinely moving.
“Bond” is no more… all ‘007’ films from now on will have different 007s , from different sexes, genders, sexuality and race…. Guaranteed
@@stevechandler4607 No, Barbara Broccoli the last word on film Bond had said multiple times and recently that Bond will never be a woman...as for say a black Bond so what? You can't tell me Idris Elba for example wouldn't nail it. And the credits literally say JAMES BOND will return.
@@stevechandler4607
You anti-woke folk are genuinely one of the most reactionary, annoying and consistently factually inaccurate groups in the world today.
I thought they ended the Daniel Craig era really well. I was suprised how good it was, more darker than the other Bonds. Which I really liked.
The way this film is shot with the colours being so vibrant and fun just shows how fkn depressing Spectre looked
Yeah. It feels like the producers actually listened to the negative feedback on Spectre and made some deliberate corrections: more humour, better written female characters, beautiful to look at, Daniel giving a more engaged and energetic performance.
Casino Royale
Skyfall
No time to die
Spectre
Quantum of Solace
Rami needed more in this movie.
Switch Spectre and QoS around and I think I'd second that.
I’m the same exact I’d switch Skyfall and Casino Royale.
@@ashraile really? I literally remember nothing from QoS
@@JamboLinnman Why do u like Skyfall more?
@@skywalkies77 this is very fresh in my memory as I re-watched the first 4 Craig films last week. I absolutely love Casino Royale (9/10) but Skyfall just pips it for me (9.5/10). Both films have superb plots, action, acting and cinematography and both revealed part of Bond’s backstory in ways we hadn’t seen before but a few appealing aspects of Skyfall spring to mind… the return of the DB5 (my favourite car of all time), the trip to the Scottish Highlands (I’m a Scottish landscape photographer), one of the best Bond villain performances and the emotional ending with Judy Dench. Look… it’s splitting hairs for me as both are superb films but I have a slight preference for Skyfall, at least for now!
Would loved to have seen Danny Boyle's Bond movie. I believe it would have been amazing.
I wonder if the big “creative difference” that led to Danny Boyle leaving the production was the ending.
@@shelbyvillerules9962 there were reports that it was because of the ending.
Ironically the movie does have the same ending as stated in these reports…
@whyemceeay what would Danny have wanted?
Danny was going to blend in a lot of levity.
Wiki says that he planned to have Russian villains and nomi avenging bond . . .
The first 50 seconds of this feels like a Mr Robot monologue but Elliot had a stroke
Not a perfect show but Malek is hypnotic in that performance.
@@oliveraherne5547 might as well be considered perfect after the astounding 3rd and 4th seasons
@@oliveraherne5547 No show is perfect but it's pretty damn close
I thought it was a bit unfocused personally. Tried to tell too many different stories.
Malek just about holds it together with his superb skills though.
@@TheMikenanners 100%
not convinced by Malek's performance or the motivations of his character. But the emotional beats really worked for me
@The Great Metropolis revenge on who though?
I agree. I saw the film a few hours ago and I wondered if I had dozed off and missed something. I didnt understand Malek's character and I got lost when it came to his garden of poison. I felt lost towards the end of the movie.
Same.. disappointed with the movie as a whole. The villian especially was so lackluster and felt daft
Agree. Plus I think Malek is a great actor but was wasted somewhat in an almost three hour film.
Congratulations for giving a proper review rather than just recounting the plot like so many reviewers.
I won't lie, after the opening, I had high hopes but come the credits, I was left rather disappointed.
The ending wasn't any better either was it?
Agree
Agreed. The last time I walked out of a cinema as disappointed as I was after seeing No Time To Die was almost 20 years ago (Die Another Day).
By the end I was disgusted
I felt the same way as I did after watching Spectre - a sort of 'it was ok' feeling. It's not a terrible Bond film but not a great one either.
The first 50 or some minutes are absolutely fantastic until a certain character dies, from then on the film completely loses all of its pace as the convoluted plot takes over and leads to an anti-climactic ending. Remi Malik’s villain started off like a character from The Strangers and finished as Leto from Blade Runner 2049. Moments of greatness but also underwhelming disappointment
I wish we could've seen Danny Boyle's vision. If you compare it to Mission Impossible Fallout it's weak.
@@Onmysheet - I'd go as far to say that the MI series has eclipsed the Bond franchise now. The writing in Bond looks tired and dated compared to the MI series.
That doesn't make much sense, he didn't even appear in Skyfall or Spectre and they were just fine. It was nice to see the character in NTTD but I wouldn't have cared if he didn't appear.
An anti-climatic ending? Clearly we watched 2 completely different movies.😅 I thought it was phenomenal. But then again, I'm not the biggest Bond Fan...
@@williamdoyle1108 Why would the villain wait 30 years to visit Madeleine after he rescued her? At least the writers were sensible enough to not explain something that couldn't be explained.
I've grown up on bond Sean Connery, and oddjob, roger Moore, and jaws, pierce Brosnan who upgraded the character with the fantastic dame judi dench, Daniel Craig in my eyes has been superb through all his bond appearances, theirs more action ,more emotional content, he has brought bond into the 21st century, so sad to hear that's Mr Craig final adventure as 007,but who knows, never say never.to you Mr Craig thank you for your artistry.
Connery is Bond .Looks the part and is the part. Meaning he doesn't have to act the part like Daniel has to . For me he doesn't look the part . He has to act it . There not much humour there also. I love Roger Moore sense of humour in all his Bonds . Piece was good also . I enjoyed Die another Day. After that I didn't bother going to see Bond films . Each to there own .
@@user-dm4gs1ig7r but your talking about different generations, technology etc has improved, and so has the character of James bond.
For me not so much. The stealing of OHMS quotes and score felt cheesy and misplaced, and this underpinned the various other now enormously well worn Aston Martin and disfigured villain cliches and focus-group pleasing plot. I left the cinema emotionally unruffled (in major contrast to OHMS) and really wishing Boyle and Hodge had done it after all.
So did I. No we know what the "creative differences" were with Doyle. He was not going to go down as the director who killed an icon. Good call, Danny.
@@mikeshirleyforever OHMSS is the peak of the series, or a Top 5 alongside Casino Royale, Goldfinger, Goldeneye and FRWL.
They're going to have to get ghostbusting now, in order to tearjerk on the level of those blockbusters.
Totally agree on the 'family' mouthing scene, funny and moving in equal measures
@@freddieaj When Bond is escaping with his family near the end and meets back with Nomi he says something like “this is my…*mouths* family”
I don’t remember this scene?!?
Casino royale was Craig's best.
Not because it was his first..The writing and delivery was so on point.
craig is too serious.we dont see the romance side of him in any of his movies.too robotic.james bond the ideal one was lazenby
I agree. Casino Royale is incredible.
Dalton was the first realistic Bond and I loved the high personal stakes. Craig is awesome too. I like when Bond is vulnerable. Makes it more real. I hate to admit it but i cried when Lazenby's Bond kept talking to his assassinated wife. Ouch. Such a defining moment for the character and why he became the eternal bachelor. And I'm looking forward to Ana de Armas' one kickass scene in No Time... Craig and de Armas reunited!
Dalton's 'Bond' was in no way realistic.
False. The first realistic Bond was Sean Connery. The only Bond was Connery. Dalton tried hard but not a patch on Connery. Lazenby was horrendous - the worst Bond ever. And Moore was far too lightweight, he should've stuck to The Saint and the Persuaders.
@@SpeedKingHighwayStar No, the only Bond you *liked* was Connery. The others count, even if you don’t like them.
@@DoodooSwaggy Not at all. I liked the other actors that played Bond - just that they were nowhere near Connery
@@DoodooSwaggy Lazenby was just pathetic
I personally can't get over exercised by Bond's psycho-drama with Bloefeld. I prefer the more two-dimensional Bond and the air of surrealism of the earlier Bond movies.
The beginning of Live and Let Die scared the living s***t out of me as a kid, totally agree that Kermode references it as a horror movie.
I saw it when I was a wee kid and yes it was scary but I feckin loved it. Probably my favourite Bond film for sentimental reasons, also has a brilliant song.
Best bond movie by far
The best bond film for me. The scarecrows terrified me as a kid
Live and Let Die has one of the best title credits with all the skulls and fire. Played out to one of the best themes by Wing. I always forget George Martin did the music for this film..
A far better Bond film than I had expected to see. It had a story arc, and many of the people around Bond had dimensions rather than just one dimension. There was humour and excitement but that wasn't the only emotions played with. I liked the harking back to all the previous bond films and classic music and dialogue from those previous outings. It was a good end to Mr Craig's innings for me. A story about a little more than just the baddy wanting to blow up the whole world or become the ultimate cat stroker.
It's JAMES BOND!!!!
Great review, thank you for not a single spoiler for those of us in countries that still can't get to the cinema yet. Can't wait to see this, and hope I can in a cinema.
Hopefully you’ll be in soon. It was truly marvellous
I think that review was spot on. My only criticism was I wasn't sitting there thinking who wrote what part of the script. I just enjoyed the script, I totally enjoyed the film and it certainly didn't feel long to me. Daniel Craig is and was a fantastic bond and will be missed.
The Butler did it....
Who'd thought that a side character in Tomb Raider would eventually become the highest paid actor per picture...
Well... I saw him in layer cake and came out of the cinema saying "he'll be the next Bond", I shouted at myself for not placing a bet when it was announced..
@Léon Rififi That is the shelterin emoji - on some UA-cam accounts, there's an emoji button underneath the space where you type. There are other new ones too:
@@seanjonesy180 - sure you did David
@@seanjonesy180 I didn't guess, but Layer Cake was my first exposure to Daniel Craig's work, I was very pleased when he was cast as Bond.
@@seanjonesy180 this is exactly what I said after I saw him in Our Friends In The North, in 1996
I would put it above Spectre and Quat-the-hell-were-they-doing obviously, but in my head it's battling with Skyfall for 2nd place beneath Casino Royale.
Agreed for me its Casino, Skyfall, No Time To Die, Quantum, Spectre
Exactly
When I saw Skyfall at the cinema I thought it was serviceable and entertaining enough - but not a patch on Casino Royale.
However, Skyfall gets so much love that I should probably give it another watch.
The "family" moment got me. I laughed and cried simultaneously. this movie is more profound than the usual bond film. It provides answers. A pastiche to itself. Beautiful.
Casino Royale was great. Craig suffered from terrible scripts for the remainder of his bond career. Looking forward to this one.
You didn’t like Skyfall?
@@passiveagressive4983 Skyfall is thematically interesting and visually compelling and well-directed but its script has a ton of post-Dark Knight cliches like the villain planning for every possible outcome or getting captured just to break out again (just to trigger an impossible sequence of events while escaping, like the train going through the hole) as well as having some weird pacing in the first half of the film
@@danielplainview2584 I hated the home alone booby trap thing near the end of skyfall! Skyfalls opening is the best thing about that film!
@@bengejuknowit3048 some good action in the opening ruined by Bonds fall into the water. Dude would be dead from that height and impact. I know it’s a Bond film but that made me cringe.
@@passiveagressive4983 Skyfall sucked. Extremely overrated
Thank you for an honest review. There's a lot of click bait out about this film; but I do think your review is the best I've seen. Extra points for staying spoiler free and still accurately conveying what works and what doesn't.
Personally I thought it was very good but Malik was very underwhelming as Safin and he was underused as was Anna Depares
The important thing with films like this is to avoid any spoilery trailers/revviews so I stopped after Mark said it was ok. The reason I like Spectre more than Skyfall is only because I didn't watch trailers for Spectre. For certain genres of film surprise is a huge amount of the enjoyment and, ironically, this shouldn't be a surprise.
I understand completely, Mark was very deliberate not to reveal ANY of the story or plot whatsoever in the entire review which is very commendable
Spectre better than Skyfall 😂😂😂😂😂😂
I hated spectre because I was so hyped and watched all the trailers and ended up being so disappointed. Skyfall is better by a point or two but Casino Royale is basically a masterpiece to me.
Spectre bored me to tears
As someone who likes slow burn films, Spectre is beyond boring, too long for no reason and the villain did NOT feel like he's capable of putting together such a wast plan, the film just has no energy no matter how hard they try, and it feels like most films these days, style over substance, even the wounds look sterile.
Great review Mark. A flawed film in some ways - confusing bits and slightly silly villain - but the emotional connection between Bond and Madeleine (and the child), and his team, totally hit home for me. Craig is the only Bond that is more than just a character.
Never liked Craig as a bond too rugged for the part. Not enough comedy involved. Moire had it but was too old towards the end.
@@garycoburn1617 ERMM.....Was JAMES BOND meant to be a.....COMEDY?? LOL...Here I was thinking he was serious SPY/SECRET AGENT who keeps BLURTING out his Name to whoever will listen. Not even once but TWICE...My name is BOND...JAMES BOND!!! CRETIN!!!🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Kermode's knowledge of Bond history is brilliant - nods back to Dalton/Lazenby and especially Johanna Harwood's involvement in the early Bond films as well. Would certainly watch a documentary about the franchise with him presenting it.
He didn't say anything particularly insightful that you wouldn't get from an amateur on UA-cam who had used Google for 30 seconds.
Calm down.
@@JackChurchill101 I've never heard Johanna Harwood talked about in official pr releases or mentioned alongside Pheobe WB though? I can understand the Dalton/Craig comparison but Kermode here is doing a decent job for the casual viewer and fan alike
never ever seen a decent review of a Bond movie by Kermode. He clearly doesn't care at all.
@@petepritchard he doesn't care at all just cause you don't like his reviews. Oh please he clearly likes the bond franchise you just disagree with his opinions
@@jgr2637 . His opinions are poorly formed and clearly juvenile.
Mark K sat firmly on the fence in my opinion ….”a solid film”?
Having settled down at the Cinema on Saturday with my Good Lady to enjoy Daniel Craig’s Bond Finale …..it just felt not like a “Bond Film”. It felt disjointed, trying to nod left/right/back through the franchise and most of all, it felt like Daniel got to make the film that “He wanted” to make.
For both myself and my Good Lady, Daniel Craig is the best Bond, however NTTD was not really a Bond Film. Even now it’s only memorable for …….? That was the talking point.
Oddly it didn’t feel overly long however it plodded to its end, and watching the Cinema Goers leaving …..we all seemed pretty underwhelmed apart from ……?
Sure, best seen in the cinema however I don’t envisage buying the DVD to re-watch …..and that is a crying shame for this finale.
Whatever, go see it if you haven’t and make of it what you will. My opinion …and the many, many other opinions are just that …..”personal opinions” …..what matters is what you think having actually watched NTTD.
Enjoy 👍
I have seen every bond film (bar a couple) a minimum of 50 times each. My first words as the lights came on were "what a pile of sh%t". Everyone pretty much had the same opinion. I would say though that it was an older bond savvy audience. A younger or non bond crowd would probably have a different opinion. I know I won't be downloading it, buying it, watching it when it's on TV. It's just not very good and certainly not bond.
It took everything that is bond out of bond. Some may see that as refreshing, but to me it's like saying its great to see superman evolve into not flying and not wearing a cape. Watching an emotional bond wearing jeans and plimsolls isn't bond.
I'm still not even sure what Safin's motive was, nor how his plan fitted into it.
agree
UNDERRATED COMMENT ALERT 🚨🚨
I'm glad to see the comments section agrees that Casino Royale was the best. I always remember the Matt Damon explanation about how Bond is a chauvinist pig etc. Casino Royale was the first film not to endorse Bond's character, but to show him as the flawed anti-hero he was. Something I think slowly slipped away in the sequels.
"Casino Royale was the first film not to endorse Bond's character..."
In GoldenEye, M disendorses Bond's character to his face - "...a sexist, misogynist dinosaur, a relic of the Cold War..."
@@redlightmax I felt it was more like lip service during that time. It was in Casino Royale that he seduces a woman for information and basically gets her murdered and then shows no remorse when presented with her dead body.
I do hope that the end of the Craig era doesn’t lead to a full reboot with a whole new cast. Moneypenny, q, even post dench m are so good together. I hope they carry on like they did post brosnan even though the films actually went back to the beginning of bond
I hope that too. I like Ralph Fiennes as M.
Bond didn't die. He will re-emerge in the next movie as an amnesiac and had plastic surgery to change his appearance thanks to the explosion so he will now look totally different.
It could be continued with a "James Bond Unit" led by Agent 007
we need to keep the same cast
It wouldn't make sense for the cast to be the same. They've probably all had enough as well.
Not a very memorable villian and a silly plot as far as Bond movies go. The villian wants to kill all Spectre agents and then wants to finish off the world. Why not just do it in one? Worse still is the finale. A franchise ruined.
I'm hoping the next Bond will stop navel gazing and just be a mission per film like before.
With bond actually doing some spy work on a local leve, not saving the world, or dealing with personal issues, right? This made Casino Royale a fantastic movie, imo.
I was very disappointed in this film. I came in with low expectations, which was even worse. The villain had no motivation. I felt that having Bond feeling betrayed and discovering a child, was a very circuitous route to reach a place that would have been more interesting: Bond having something to lose. We've seen him "come back" before, in Skyfall. Here, we have an opportunity to see something I can't recall in any Bond movie: Bond with a family, with something to protect, something that he could be dared to protect. We saw him betrayed with Vesper, fine, let's see him finally love someone, finally allow himself that opportunity, and see the nightmare of having it threatened. (*Spoilers! Spoilers ahead!*)
It was clumsy to make Blofield his step-brother, but the entire character of Safin could have been Blofield himself, both Waltz and Malek were criminally misused in their Bond appearances, with weak villains. Because the stakes were so ridiculous with Safin, and Spectre was never fully fleshed out, what could that organization truly do? Why would Safin want to destroy Spectre? This entire situation is created by a group of people who could have grown up together. How do you lose sight of your step-brother who turns into the evil head of a massive organization, when you're in the intelligence industry? Mr. White's daughter, is intertwined with Safin, who did what for the last 20 years? It makes no sense. If Safin was working with Blofield, that'd make more sense, but it doesn't, and none of the villains have motivations, and by removing motivation from characters and replacing it with massive stakes, it is poor writing, and lazy.
Skyfall worked because the villain made sense. He was a former agent, was betrayed--traded by M for other prisoners--and he was James, before, well, James, and he wanted to destroy the organization that gave him up for dead. The stakes were clear, it was M, the mother-figure of Bond, and we go and see Bond's origin, his family home, we get to see that, a dimension we've never been able to see. His childhood, his pain, and of both reclaiming his birthright, symbolized through using his father's gun, while also discarding the gun because nothing of that past means anything, M represents his reality, the closest thing he has to family. Now we have the opportunity to see Bond have a family, and what do we do? We make it so that he only gets to taste that for a few hours. For Raoul Silva, Bond is the barrier to his goal, the stakes aren't world-ending, they're personal, even if they are done under the guide and within a world of spies and intelligence, security, etc.
It seems that the only reason why the stakes of the world ending are so high, is because we have to justify Bond's death. This movie felt corny, it just did. It felt like a 90's Bond film that was updated for today. That tonal shift was jarring. It also meant that I was disappointed at the predictable death of Bond. I would have rather given him a happy ending and simply rounded out the cheese of corny lines over deaths, filled with puns and all that.
Without a villain who has motivations that make sense, larger stakes are boring. The accented evil scientist was funny, kinda, but he wasn't Boris from Goldeneye. I would've liked to have seen Nomi fleshed out a bit more, I would've loved to have seen Paloma more, de Armas is beyond charming in this--but absent true motivations from villains, the movie follows a predictable send-off for characters we've grown to love. Whether it's Logan, Iron Man, whatever, the formula seems to be the same. At least the end of Nolan's Batman films had the beautiful moment with Bruce Wayne and Alfred, which we don't get here. It was a frustrating movie, especially with how highly I rate Fukunaga and Waller-Bridge.
I liked Quantum of Solace, but calling it Question of Sport is still really funny. :D
I can listen to the whole of Mark Kermode's analysis of films that I have no intention of ever watching
If Dalton’s 3RD Bond film had come to fruition, and then followed that with Goldeneye as his 4th, he would easily be a contender for best Bond. I love TLD and LTK equally
Wasn't Goldeneye supposed to have been Dalton's 3rd outing?
@@Casual_Sadism no, there was a story outline done for a 3rd movie that would have taken place partly in China, you can look it up. Goldeneye would have been 4th, and there may have even been a 5th. I also believe that in the original Goldeneye story outline, 006 was supposed to be an older character, more of a mentor to Bond instead of one of his peers
@@AdamF90 Anthony Hopkins as 006 and Alan Rickman maybe as other villian. Its quite painful to know the what ifs.
Goldeneye is great the way it is. Pierce was excellent in it. His other outings however...
@@allthingsclassicrock I know Goldeneye is great but it would have been interesting to see Dalton in a movie with a little bit more amped up action and a female villain. Tomorrow Never Dies, the second half at least, is decent, from the HALO jump on, the Saigon motorcycle chase and I think the stealth ship is a well done action set-piece. The World Is Not Enough is very boring, overlong, and by-the-books for me, and Die Another Day it is what it is
Wanted to see more Rami, thought his villain and performance was great and enjoyed it everytime he was on screen he just wasn’t on screen enough and yeah I wish his motivation was explained more at the end
He wasn't fully fleshed out basically. I agree.
I thought his motivation was pretty clear, even the dialogue at the start of this video explains, in a very direct way, how he views the world.
@@leighsherval1023 yeah, his motivation was clear but just wanted more of him. Cause his performance was great. We just learned the character through Bond and Madeliene which was a bit disappointing cause I wanted, and alot of people as well, to see more of his character. That's why I said he wasn't fleshed out even though the motivation was very clear.
He was at his best in the opening. Overall he did nothing except speak softly and look weird. Terrible non threatening villain with no charisma whatsoever.
Agree with you 100 per cent
~Heavy spoilers~🍿
~Long Read~📖
I think the overall problem with this movie is that they are trying to pick up the pieces left behind from spectre, and none of whats in that movie landed or felt legitimate or earned. I Actually like Lea Seydoux as an actress who played Madeline and was excited that she was the new bond girl in spectre, but the execution of their love story was so contrived, that in the end I really didn't care or believe it was a legitimate romance. Even the people who made that movie knows what's wrong with it. Why would they double down on it?
The writing and execution in the first quarter of the this movie was pretty good up to a point but the basis for the characters just weren't there for me, again cuz it so heavily relies on spectre. You could call this spectre 2 tbh
The concept of Bond having a child and the fact that it's a daughter on top of it Is actually a genius move as a concept on paper, its kinda like poetic justice for him. The idea that he has to really commit and care and actually be responsible for someone more than yourself. Having that character be his daughter could have been deeply profound in that way. They could have also addressed his relationship with women through the daughter character. That would be addressing the misogyny and faults in his character. Maybe even could address the vesper Lind history that made Bond unable to commit to any real relationships with women because of how his heart was basically ripped out of his chest by Vesper. I'll give Daniel Craig this, he knocked it out of the park with this movie in terms of his acting, especially in a few key scenes. He made me really feel like he realises his life has just turned upside down the moment he saw his daughters eyes. He genuinely made me tear up couple times in the film if I'm being honest. Any scene with Bond and his daughter was elevated by Craig's acting, and almost made up for some of the lackluster writing in the film. He made me really feel Bonds urgency and angst from her safety being in jeopardy. The daughter aspect, if it was utilised more and written better, could have had the potential to make this something really special and powerful. You could potentially really disect Bond through the daughter character, break his character down, address his issues and still feel like everything organically came together, cuz there could be a central focal point for it all, his new daughter. Come to think of it, it's actually not that dissimilar to the concept of what they did for wolverine in Logan.
Ok...Ana de armas was a total smoke show in this role! Goddamn she was good. Her character was badass, playful and intrigueing and that made her even sexier. I didn't think she could get more attractive but this role definitely did it. She should have been Bonds sidekick throughout the movie and become friends with him instead, moving away from a potentially cliched romance. Maybe there could have been a throughline in the film with him becoming sort of her mentor along the way since he's pretty much the most seasoned agent and she's insecure with how good she is. You can even still have the "saying no" scene later in the movie as their partnership grows and maybe some awkwardness leading to a back and forth conversation. Maybe he tells her about Vesper. Wnatever. Something like that would have felt organic, served as character development for Bond and some more three-dimensional depth to her character. Makes the "saying no" moment maybe actually mean something in the movie rather than a throwaway comedic jab at Bonds character.
LaShawna Lynch was fine. The hate for this movie for her being 007 and ppl just assuming that this is more of her movie than James bonds or she's taking power away from Bond and she's taking over, screw feminism, PC agenda pushing bitches, etc etc... I never subscribed to any of that nonsense. It's almost like people are trained and groomed these days to react like that without ever giving anything a chance....hey wait a minute🤔. I like her as an actress, was looking forward to see her performance. Problem is I never understood her character's initial hostility with Bond, I was like why is she going undercover and manipulating him into bringing her back to his place just to stick it to him and show him up. Could of had the same conversation in a different way maybe in a conventional way, idk doesn't matter. I have a feeling that her character doesn't like Bond for his history of misogyny and filandering, but nothing about him as an agent. So the writers prolly decided they should have her characters main reason for not liking bond to actually be a general critique of men in society??? not cuz she has a grudge against him, or he always sucked at his job, or from some personal altercation with him. That's the type of shoehorning of PC agendas that sane ppl of the audience are talking about. Give her a real reason not to like Bond and you can still have her give him shit about his relationship with women. Also you'd think they would have just started out as platonic competition instead of trying to one up and literary sabotage each other's missions when they both have literally the same goal, especially when the stakes are potentially so high. You think maybe she would look up to bond a little, wouldn't the new agents and recruits look up to bond? Wouldn't they all want to secretly be like him, not as a person, but as an agent? Since when is going by the book and putting down your legendary predecessors an interesting character trait. Aren't you supposed to like her by the end of the movie? They didn't give any real scene or event that gets them to respect each other to follow through on squashing the animosity, so what was the whole point? At least Naomi Harris's character didn't have all this nonsense. No newcomer is just going to give a middle finger to the previous guy when he's freaking James Bond, he should be a legend amongst new agents. This whole thing of Bond being out of his time and too old was addressed in Skyfall and spectre so that stuff felt tired. I have no problem with the ideals that were being pushed to be PC and give Bond some me too'ing, but the execution is too forced. At least itsl not as bad as Disney's Star wars tho. There is a way to do this people, organically, where it doesn't feel like a soapbox.
Side note, felt the action was a bit underwhelming in this movie. It peaked with the scene in the first half with that goon shooting away at Madeline's window in the car and James just letting it happen while he deliberates wether to trust her or not. Great Bond moment and was narratively creative. This whole scene is totally Bond and badass. You believe Bond would be an asshole and do something like that. For the most part though this series has lost its edge especially in the action scenes, starting with some parts of Skyfall and heavily with spectre. They just came across as made to look pretty and expensive and putting more effort into the camera work trying to get everything in one one shots rather than making the action actually exciting. You guys remember the parkour scene leading to the shootout at the embassy in Casino Royale?! Those action scenes have so much edge to them, you feel the danger bond is in. Editing is one of the most important components to action scenes and these just feel like constantly unnecessary long takes. Now we even have parts where he is just walking right out in the open, firing his gun vaguely in bad guys direction, on a set that probably costed 1/4 of the movies budget. Even holding his gun from the hip at times and still casually just hitting his mark every time. All the while with the bond theme blaring in the background. Did the same thing in spectre at the desert scene. Just seemed like a total waste and honestly a bit lazy. The SUV Chase was ok I guess but it has Bond literally nudging his car into the bad guys cars just once and they go flying in to some convenient obstacle or hit a ramp that launches them into a flip. A lot of the action is like this and it comes off as just lazy even though they spend hundreds of millions of dollars making these movies.
All that being said I didn't hate the movie, if you watch it just as a spy drama it's not that bad. I didn't get bored really that much even tho it's almost 3 hrs. So take that for what it's worth. There's annoying bits of comedy and one liners that come off as awkward rather than funny. Always thought that kind of stuff didnt fit for Craig's films. Rami Malek was good, but underrutilized. His characters ultimate goal was not really clearly defined, at least to me, but I think he served his purpose in the movie. Nothing more nothing less. For me I didn't mind bond dieing, and the film for the most part earned it, was done decently enough.
It's certainly better than quantum of solace and spectre. A serviceable end to Daniel Craig's era. Although, I have noticed things about these last 3 films and they make me feel that ever since The Dark Knight came out, the people behind these films have been trying to copy Chris Nolan's aesthetics, that should stop. But that's a whole nother conversation.
Thanks for reading.
Loved this far FAR more than I expected. I would urge everyone to go see it before someone inevitably spoils it for you
Yeah, like the Guardian
@@lukasfil I am still so gutted and annoyed by that. They MUST have known what they were doing - any professional with any cop-on would know not to post that - and in a headline too!
@@TheRoryJohn What did they write?
@@Chebab-Chebab That Bond dies.
@@Totalfreedomliving Ah. I hadn't read it, thankfully.
Mind you, Bond's 'died' before - you only live twice.
"I think the best of the Craigs, for me, is Skyfall" I was thinking the same exactly thing just before you said it :P
5. Quantum of Solace
4. Spectre
3. No Time to Die
2. Skyfall
1. Casino Royale
It was a great film to go out on,
we’ll miss you, Daniel 💙
Just got home from the cinema. I feel like the only person who didn’t enjoy it...Casino Royale and Skyfall aside, there’s something about Daniel Craig’s Bond that doesn’t quite hit the right note, for me.
My confusion is that I like Craig in the role, but feel that the last few movies have massively moved away from what I like in a Bond film.
@@Matthayden1965 it’s the sense of fun that is missing. The new ones better bring back the fun but not get too silly. Try to find a better balance.
This is spot on.
Thank goodness you wrote this, mirrored my thinking
Due to circumstances, I saw the movie 2 days in a row, which totally changed my opinion, I wasn’t keen at first view, but the second viewing showed me the depth of emotion contained within, kind of blew my socks off. I also felt Daniel Craig had got to the natural end of his tenure as Bond, if I’m not mistaken, he made more of them than the other Bonds actors. He can go with his head held high, he ushered in an intelligent read of what could have become a cartoon character. I still love Skyfall it will always be my favourite for it’s poignancy. I am now looking ahead and wondering who our next Bond will be!
Connery made 6 . Roger Moore 7
No, he was just in the role the longest.
Would you recommend others watch it again, or just wait for DVD?
@@MrKC23 oh I’d definitely recommend it. All but last 5 mins is brilliant
@@MrKC23 you can’t beat the big screen for a big movie! Support your local cinema👍🏻
FINALLY some recognition of the flow from dalton to craig. i've been banging on about this for yonks.
@@mickeypye2593 so very much with you on that.
@@mickeypye2593 rewatched it a couple of months ago along with most of the other films. It’s definitely one of the best. I admire it’s grittiness and still being able to be a lot of fun. It’s got a great villain too in Sanchez.
I also love The Living Daylights.
I’m very happy that more people are starting to appreciate Dalton as Bond. He deserves it.
There's no plan to it though. It's just some fun throwbacks.
People trying to join it all up as if it's some narrative device are chasing ghosts.
It was a particularly nice touch, seeing the 'Living Daylights' Aston turn up in the second act, as the middle of the 'three Astons' auto motif in the film. I did like that.
@@mickeypye2593 I remember the newspapers in the UK doing a massive story on the fact that Dalton's Bond got all beat up and bled! After previous outings,where he didn't really get a scratch, that was a big thing!
I just saw No Time to Die here in the states. While I have to commend the film on how well made and acted this film is, this film just felt so out of place. Even with its ending and surprises along the way, I was sitting in the theater thinking of Bonds such as Thunderball, You Only Live Twice, Octopussy, License to Kill, Goldeneye, Skyfall and many more and this film felt like it wasn’t even in the same universe as those films. I guess the Game of Thrones/Avengers every ending/plot has to be controversial trend and maybe unexpected trend finally caught up to James Bond…
true.worst bond film.the blank robot villain ruined the movie
Spot on!
@@kadiummusic I’m glad you agree!
13:18 what moment is he referring to, I've seen the film and can't recall
Yesterday I saw the new James Bond! I thought it was unrealistic, a Brit filling up his car!
Licence to Fuel....
I'll get my coat....
@@jcd8172 Licence to Fill…up…
Can I borrow your coat?
@@jcd8172 Licence to Fill…up…
Can I borrow your coat?
@@thehumblegent it's yours 😂
@@jcd8172 ✌🏽God bless ya. X
Who for the next Bond? I want a cold killer and think that Fassbender would be awesome
Dan Stevens fits the mold. Watch The Guest and your want is fulfilled. Fingers crossed Bond producers give him an audition.
Fassbender would be a perfect 007
Really strong opening to the film and it just dissolves into a bit of a mess. Actually found myself bored and checking my watch at various points....
Can somebody tell me what is the motive of the villian in this film ?
No motive.they wanted a Oscar actor who can't act.he can only copy nonsense
I dont think I've ever heard Daniel Craig say the words "Timothy Dalton," I stand to be corrected.. but I always found it odd
I really liked it. There is a sense of brutality without going to dark.
Too
“Is that Austin Powers?” LMFAOOOO 😂😂
Nah Casino was the best maybe overall best bond movie. Keeps you engaged and moving the whole movie. Plus all the amazing locations.
In a series where, within four films, they managed to do-arguably-the best Bond in Casino Royale and _also the worst_ in *SPECTRE,* it’s nice to hear they don’t go out on a sour note but manage a better-than-average overall run.
i don’t know how many bond movies you’ve seen but believe me, spectre is nowhere near the worst
@@TheChocolateTurkey yeah Spectre isn't that bad, it's just mid
I am trying to figure out what Phoebe's contributions were.
The flaw is how did Sabin manage to gain the resources to destroy spectre. It seemed like a poorly thought out bad guy and unremarkable
I Feel like Craig demanded that his Bond ....... I liked his Bond but I feel the last movie pandered to the actor too much.
The departure of Judi Dench from the franchise as M in Skyfall is a lot more meaningful and emotional than Craig's departure as Bond, the ending scene of NTTD where M and the rest of the team gathered in M's office for a toast to Bond is just so cheesy lol.
As much as I like Craig's Bond, I have not been happy with the storyline of his Bond series. It's basically been about using bits and pieces of the Connery's Bond series and rehashing them for a new generation. Craig's storyline has been one long episodic storyline with No time to Die being Its conclusion. It also presents the producers of the film a conundrum on how to reboot the series after Craig's departure. A problem I foresaw after seeing Casino Royale back in 2006. It was quite obvious at the time, the Bourne Identity heavily influenced Casino Royale. From the casting of a blonde Bond to giving him an origin, the absence of witty humourous quips and Bond gals. Basically a revamp of Bond for a new modern era. But rather than just sending Bond on his next mission without any real consequences as usually was the case previously. The new Bond's mission was closer to his heart- his emotional core. This is seen throughout the Craig series. And this where the problem of continuity presented itself. Before I had seen the new film, I had already suspected Craig's Bond's fate. Knowing this would be his final outing as Bond. A character whose creator envisioned as the ultimate male fantasy - a man who could have almost any woman he wanted, no wife, no children A man who lives a life of no responsibility money being no problem. What happens when you give him a revamp and make him human? And how do you continue the series once you conclude his journey?
I agree with all of this.
"So...erm, is it the _best_ of the Craig's?"
"Jesus H, haven't you been listening to anything I've said?"
This movie had a lot in common with OHMSS, not least how decisive it will become over time. The ending was incredibly bold.
It was a bold move indeed, to conceive an ending that crushingly bad.
Loved the film, right up to the last 10 minutes and thus came out of the cinema, unsatisfied and disappointed. That's exactly the opposite of how you should feel at the end of a Bond film!!!
Casino Royale is the only Bond film which I've watched and remember enjoying it.
@@LeethLee1 Casino Royale was really impressive considering how different it was in tone and style to Brosnan's last film. I can't stand Skyfall actually. The entire 'Home Alone' sequence at the Scottish house is ridiculous.
I absolutely love Casino Royale, easily the best Daniel Craig Bond film by far. Quantum of Solace was also a somewhat decent follow up to me. Then all downhill from there.
@@LeethLee1 As much as the performances are good the ending set piece of Skyfall is so shoehorned into the film it unleashed the logic pedant in me and the film falls apart when you do that, just try make sense of what the fuck the villains plan is given what takes place.
I agree Casino Royale is the only truly good Bond film.
100% right. The only Daniel Craig James Bond movie that will stand test of time.
Mark sounded like he felt it could've been much more. It has it's problems Spectre had, full of plot holes and bad writing. The new villain is just in it to advance the plot, with the kidnapping cliche.
This was a better plot tho… it has its issue but definitely not as bad!
@@LitNews Now that we've seen a female play a 00 I hope we'll hear the end of people talking of a female Bond bollocks.
@@Onmysheet god just say you hate women and go.
@@Ravi-xf8dw I don't. I'm sick of the media going on about it.
I really liked Spectre too. I don't get the negative talk about it.
The story is illogical and borderline ridiculous to believe at times like for example when blofeld is bonds brother plus it lack action sequences and the ones there is are no we’re near as good as sky fall no time to die and casino royale and the Bond girl is badly written but she’s much better in no time to die.
My theory is that it’s too much silly fun and everyone wants dark and gritty these days
It stole the plot twist from Austin powers 😂
I thought it was very boring
I've watched Spectre twice, and for me it gets better with each viewing. Dark and brooding, yes, but also a solid Bond movie.
I think Mark was very fair. Not perfect but solid. So much to love about it.
I have all the Bond films on DVD. My personal favourite is The Spy Who Loved Me, so I'm not a Connery/Dalton purist. I have have a massive soft spot for Goldeneye.
But this was the sequel to OHMSS, which is perhaps the best Bond film if you've read the books. The clues are slapping you in the face!
Once the hype has died, history will be very kind to NTTD.
During what scene does someone mouth the word family? I can't remember.
Mark can't understand why people don't like spectre, for starters when a bond film is ripping off ideas from the 3rd Austin powers movie that's a bad sign
That and trying to tie all of Craig’s films into a cinematic universe is stupid. In fact I’d even say that making Dr Evil behind each of the schemes almost taints those other films. Bond has always been more episodic. Plus Lea Seydoux had no chemistry with Craig.
Cary Joji Fukunaga directed this? True Detective Season 1 was as great as television gets.
Maniac was probably one of the greatest things I have ever seen.
The first hour is very good. After that it loses its sense and perspective. There's much to like about the film, but overall it's meandering, melodramatic nonsense played more for an emotional close than a sensible one. It also straight up lifts its plot from Metal Gear Solid and previous Bond titles, with a twist.
bar the nanobots, what else is taken from MGS in your opinion?
@@timdurgan Clandestine badguy working behind the scenes to extort the world's official bodies creates an island base of operations. Our main hero infiltrates by sea. A target-specific virus is loosed upon our protagonist adding a degree of finality to his actions. Nanomachines are the delivery method.
"Straight up lift... with a twist".
Okay, then.
@@KrillLiberator When you consider the scientist is Sokolov (he even looks like him) and Q is Major Zero on the plane, both from MGS3, it gets weirder. Nomi could be seen as a Raiden-like character too. I think someone got wind of the upcoming MGS film and it was reported that Fukinaga would often be late to set because he was off playing games. No doubt getting inspiration.
No Time to Die is good, but the ending was unnecessary. Fans deserved a warmer ending.
The only problem with the ending was it was 90 minutes too late!
Bizarre was the only word I could use to describe this film..
You are correct about Skyfall--great film. But No Time is not. I can't tell you how hyped I was for NTTD and how disappointed I was when I left the theater. Plodding, absurd, and murkily shot. This was "The Last Jedi" of Bond films. It made me not care if I ever see another one. And judging but the disappointing U.S. box office, many Yanks agree.
Such a poignant send off for Daniel Craig. Really happy I got to see his final performance in the cinema. Highly recommend it.
Casino Royale is the best Bond film ever so obviously that’s the best Bond film of the Craig era… but this film, despite its flaws, gives us the best on screen portrayal of Bond we have seen, I highly doubt anyone will ever portray Bond on screen better than Daniel Craig in this film. He’s superb and deserves an academy award nomination
Wasn't a big fan of the idea of Danny Boyle directing Bond, until I saw trainspotting 2. The pub fight between Ewan and Johnny-Lee is one of the best on film.
You could feel the pent anger as they fought .
13:19 what scene words was he referring to??
Made for the wider audience (that's where the money is) rather than longtime fans of bond. Poorly cast villain and the ending was terrible. It'll make money because it's James bond, but can you imagine watching this on Christmas day?!
I don't get the "question of sport" reference.... Can someone explain for me?
I think No Time To Die (2021) will divide a lot of people and most James Bond Fans will absolutely hate it.
I personally like it. It wasn't perfect but it was a very good conclusion to the Daniel Craig/James Bond Era and a BIG improvement over Spectre (2015).
The whole ending is essentially lifted from the novel You Only Live Twice. As was the Blofeld scene which would of replaced the scene with Safin just prior to the end. In the novel Bond falls into the sea and is rescued by a Japanese fishing woman with whom he has a daughter. He also doesn't know who he is or remember anything. Upon seeing the word Vladivostok he decides to head there as it is familiar to him. In the following novel he returns to Mi6 and attempts to assassinate M having gone to Russia and been brainwashed by them. I believe that this will possibly be the beginning of the next movie somehow and they'll retcon the ending to having him survive somehow. Remember that the Russians were heading for the island just prior to the missile strikes. IF they go with that scenario it'll also mean that Madeleine and daughter won't be required as he can't go near them. He may also have the amnesia he does in book. OR they will just forget all about NTTD and make a standalone story like the pre Craig movies and not reference it at all. I think that's more likely as having him brainwashed by the Russians not only diminishes the ending of NTTD but would also mean continuing this story arc. Personally as a lifelong James Bond fan i don't know where they can go now and have sort of dug themselves into a hole. Also as a lifelong James Bond fan i also think maybe it's time to just leave James Bond off the movie screen now and THIS really was the end.
I think they will treat it like doctor who as the show has a fresh slate for a new lead actor to put their stamp on the franchise but the core characteristics stay the same
Absolutely loved it; so much so that we went back to see a second time after rewatching all 4 of the previous Daniel Craig films to catch all the references. Loved the music reference from the Lazenby film, great respect there. So easy to spot Phoebe’s touches! Three hours goes in a flash, you hardly notice…. didn’t want it to end. Now planning to see it a 3rd tune, and guess what’s on my Xmas list?!
I agree, it's a masterpiece that is both a homage to the franchise and a fitting end to Craig's Bond storyline. I don't find any of the criticisms valid. Maybe they are watching it on cell phones.
I initially hated Spectre for trying to lean into an overarching narrative similar to the likes of the MCU; Skyfall's "Lots to be done" epilogue with the classic office, the formal introduction of Moneypenny etc hinted at moving on to the old episodic formula. Then Spectre trampled all over that - not just with the Even Bigger Bad connecting all the previous Big Bads but doubling down with the fact they were adoptive brothers.
It has grown on me a little (though I still find the head-drilling scene far too OTT even for Bond). However I found that NTTD tied everything off with a neat little bow and I'm excited to see how the franchise will develop now.
As for the film itself I largely agree with Mark - very competent, excellent set pieces (the cross-country car-chase and subsequent mist-shrouded shootout was a particular highlight) and enough nods to feel nostalgic without diving into the call-back fest of Die Another Day. The 'family' aspect was handled very well, too - be it close professional ties or actual blood relatives. A fitting send-off.
I thought it was a fantastic film and great send-off for Craig. Malek was weak but still a decent enough villain .
Casino Royale
Skyfall
No Time to Die
Spectre
Quantum of Solace
Agree with your ranking Casino Royale and Skyfall are brilliant and I enjoyed No Time To Die but could have been better and Spectre and Quantum Of Solace weren't great imo ofc
I left the theatre uber disappointed with this film - the plot is all over the place, the baddy has no motivation, Felix Leiter gets topped (again) and Bond has his bollocks removed. Can anyone tell me, without looking it up, what Lashana Lynch's characters name was? AND, worst of all, Blofeld dies because Bond touches him. The most bad, badass Bond baddy ever gets an end like that. Pathetic.
@@womble1981 I thought he copped it in Live and let die, but apparently being eaten by a shark isn't fatal!