2000 AD Online Forum

General Chat => Film & TV => : Tiplodocus 04 December, 2019, 11:25:17 PM

: 007: No time to die
: Tiplodocus 04 December, 2019, 11:25:17 PM
So the title comes from a James Bond film title generator and they seem to be saddled with making this a sequel to one of, if not, the poorest Craig Bonds.

https://youtu.be/wzubcjYeTVQ (https://youtu.be/wzubcjYeTVQ)

But it does look smart and sexy with a great cast and some stupid stunts (which you gotta assume they did for reals). And top marks for the final image referencing the gun barrel that opens Bond movies.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: DrRocka 05 December, 2019, 02:03:28 AM
There’s not been a Craig Bond film that I haven’t loved, even if one or two of them have featured massive plot nonsense holes. Let’s face it, he’s got the role down to a tee, half of Britain’s best actors will turn up at some point, the stunts will take your breath away... what’s not to like? It’s BOND.
Leave your disbelief* at the door and enjoy yourself. They’re always a hoot.

Oddly enough, it’s Skyfall, one of the best received ones, that I found most insufferable. Not a bloody thing about that film made sense.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: broodblik 05 December, 2019, 02:13:32 AM
The Craig Bond films for gradually has decreased in quality.  I just had a big dislike in Skyfall. The trailer looks good
: Re: 007: No time to die
: JamesC 05 December, 2019, 06:01:45 AM
How many DB5s does he own?
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Rately 05 December, 2019, 08:09:45 AM
I think its been a steady downhill decline in quality since Martin Campbell rebooted the series with Casino Royale, which is a great movie.

Hope they do something radical with the casting, or the direction for next one. Would have loved to have seen what Danny Boyle would have done with the series, and a shame that he decided he couldn't continue the project.

Trailer looks great, and hopefully the movie gives Daniel Craig the send-off he deserves.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: karlos 05 December, 2019, 08:55:39 AM
Love the trailer.

I find the Craig Bonds a massive mixed mag (I'm the only person alive who loves QoS) - both Skyfall and Spectre are far too long, and have some great bits in there, but Spectre especially made it quite clear the makers don't really know what to do.

I wonder what will become of the franchise now Craig's left?

: Re: 007: No time to die
: wedgeski 05 December, 2019, 09:20:43 AM
General agreement. I love Casino Royale, it's probably my favourite Bond film. Quantum was okay, albeit a disappointment after the previous. Everything since then has disagreed with me, although I've never stopped loving Daniel Craig's take on the character. As long as the new one gets better-than-average reviews, I'll be there.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: IndigoPrime 05 December, 2019, 09:49:26 AM
Mrs IP and I both really loved Casino Royale. It felt like a fresh, modern take on Bond – one that showed it could make a proper fight of it in an era of Bournes and similar. Quantum felt odd – like a massively extended epilogue. It meandered and didn’t stick in my mind. I couldn’t even tell you what it was about now. It’s probably at that point that the people behind Bond massively freaked out and reverted to type.

Skyfall, as regular forumites know, is a film I regard as a vicious insulting travesty of a production. I’ve never walked out of a film. I very nearly did with this one. Mrs IP and I were appalled by what we’d watched, and conversations from other movie-goers on the night were along similar lines. It’s vanishingly rare I ever write about film, but for this I made an exception (http://reverttosaved.com/2012/11/17/skyfall-james-bonds-return-to-male-gaze-misogyny/). I’ve no idea if Spectre continued the rampant awfulness at the heart of Skyfall or not, but the result is that I… just don’t care anymore.

To which people might, rightly, say why bother commenting then? But for me, this entire run represents a horribly missed opportunity to modernise a franchise and make it relevant. Instead, it’s turned into something that was little above a blacky satirised sketch. Still, given the production nightmares that these films have faced, perhaps Bond will rest for a while now, while someone can figure out how to unstick Purvis and Wade (seriously, what blackmail material do they have on Wilson and Broccoli?), and properly reimagine the series for the modern day. Or, you know, just revert to type again with Daniel Craig’s successor.

Finally, a BBC article from earlier this year (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-48054674) is just astonishing:

At the launch, producer Barbara Broccoli said Bond's attitudes to women would move with the times. "The Me Too movement has had a huge impact - rightfully, thankfully - on society, and these films should reflect that, as everything we do should," she said.

It shouldn’t take the Me Too movement for someone at Bond Films HQ to think: “You know, perhaps he shouldn’t basically rape a sex trafficking victim while she’s in the shower.” I can only hope whatever Waller-Bridge did had serious impact, and wasn’t just tidying up the edges.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: broodblik 05 December, 2019, 02:34:12 PM
The main problem for me with Craig’s Bond movies is that it never felt like Bond movies. They where trying to compete with the Bourne movies and never try to give us a Bond movie. I always liked how the old Bond movies reminded you that you are indeed watching a Bond movie by using the music at the right times.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: I, Cosh 05 December, 2019, 02:44:50 PM
Finally The Sisters of Mercy can do a Bond theme (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZs0VDI-CxM).
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Proudhuff 05 December, 2019, 04:14:01 PM
General agreement. I love Casino Royale, it's probably my favourite Bond film. Quantum was okay, albeit a disappointment after the previous. Everything since then has disagreed with me, although I've never stopped loving Daniel Craig's take on the character.

This ^^^ for me, Craig has brought some intelligence to the role of a state sanctioned killer, but the choices and use of muzak has turned me off the entire series....
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Proudhuff 05 December, 2019, 04:15:20 PM
Having said that enjoyed the trailer  :-[
: Re: 007: No time to die
: blackmocco 05 December, 2019, 06:36:14 PM
(I'm the only person alive who loves QoS)

You're not. I'll easily take it over Spectre and Skyfall any day of the week. I like all the things everyone else hates about it: that it's a smaller movie, essentially an epilogue to CR, and I love that Bond is a completely heartless fucker in it, as he's supposed to be.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: TordelBack 05 December, 2019, 08:19:57 PM
QoS is my favourite of the Craig Bonds. I like Casino Royale too, and while some bits of Spectre were okay in an acapella-covers-of-Bond's-Greatest-Hits way, Skyfall was an abomination.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Daveycandlish 05 December, 2019, 09:19:21 PM
The main problem for me with Craig’s Bond movies is that it never felt like Bond movies. They where trying to compete with the Bourne movies and never try to give us a Bond movie. I always liked how the old Bond movies reminded you that you are indeed watching a Bond movie by using the music at the right times.

This. A thousand times, this. Casino Royale was a good film but the rest? Nope. They've been disappointing.
I'll go see it but I'll have the same mindframe as all those Star Wars fans going to see the finale knowing they've hated the last one. I'm just a glutton for punishment.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: karlos 06 December, 2019, 09:12:29 AM
Hooray!  I'm not alone!
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Tiplodocus 06 December, 2019, 09:41:21 AM
I struggle with QOS because of the shaky action and accountant villain. SPECTRE aside from the opening sequence just doesn't engage me. But I love SKYFALL despite the faults and CASINO ROYALE just plain rocks despite the action being front loaded. And "You Know My Name" is best theme in ages.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: TordelBack 06 December, 2019, 10:52:34 AM
QoS does have a nonsdescript baddie, but the action is top-notch. The Siena stuff is proper Bond, albeit with a Bourne accent.

Meanwhile I can enjoy various setpieces in Skyfall, but as soon as they head for Scotland, it degenerates into a misfiring ITV adaptation of a James Patterson novel, complete with unlikely underwater boghole sequence.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: karlos 06 December, 2019, 12:53:54 PM
Both Skyfall and Spectre could easily lose 30 mins or so - from their respective endings (I'll always have a slight soft spot for Skyfall's, though - as we got to see Albert Finney one last time).

And, yes, that scene in Skyfall really is unpleasant.

QoS works best, as someone up above said, as an extended epilogue to CR.

I'm very upbeat about NTTD, largely because of Waller-Bridge's involvement (so glad to see they haven't fridged Lea Seydoux's character - a VERY good sign).

: Re: 007: No time to die
: Tiplodocus 26 December, 2019, 12:59:41 AM
So for my Christmas Bond film I picked QUANTUM OF SOLACE  which I don't think I've seen for nine years, maybe.

Actually, yeah, it is a cracking Bond movie once you get beyond the terrible villain, fucking atrocious song (good titles though) and the shaky cam and terrible editing obscuring some fine looking stunts.

There's also some great reversals of normal Bond tropes in there. After the Sienna scenes which are set at a festival (because it's always a festival when Bond is in town) and Bond regressed, so does all of the local colour. Everywhere he arrives is grubby as anything and the carnival dancers are replaced by real slice of life stuff; stray dogs, homeless people and, best of all, a random bloke doing his ironing. And when he's back to Her Majesty's Bond, we finally get the gun barrel logo.

There are moments of brilliant visual storytelling (except in the action) and Craig gets several moments where he is just cool as (flipping the bike, all scenes with Mathis, the reveal of Quantum people at the opera , skipping across hotel balcony). Olga is also a very good Bond Girl; better than Seydoux in SPECTRE by a long shot and we didn't really get one that made it to the end in SKYFALL.

And David Harbour, Stana Katic (Castle) and Oona Chaplin all pop up.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Hawkmumbler 26 December, 2019, 11:12:15 AM
Skyfall had many, numerous issues.

But it also had Albert Finney, and any movie could be improved by that mad Salfordian himself being in it.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Tiplodocus 03 September, 2020, 08:51:24 PM
So new trailer for what seems like the next THREE Bond movies...

https://youtu.be/vw2FOYjCz38 (https://youtu.be/vw2FOYjCz38)

Good golly! Doesn't it just look full of set pieces, kick ass women and crazy villains. Like Bond should be.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Rately 04 September, 2020, 09:41:27 AM
Trailer looks great.

Hopefully Daniel Craig's final Bond is as good as his first.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: TordelBack 04 September, 2020, 10:05:47 AM
Does look fun.  But... facial scarring as signifier of evil, are we really still at this?
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Rately 04 September, 2020, 10:24:46 AM
Does look fun.  But... facial scarring as signifier of evil, are we really still at this?

They really do try to shoehorn it in at every opportunity.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: The Enigmatic Dr X 04 September, 2020, 10:27:29 AM
Does look fun.  But... facial scarring as signifier of evil, are we really still at this?

But it is Bond. Isn't your criticism a bit like saying "sound in vacuum, are we still at this?" for Star Wars?
: Re: 007: No time to die
: CalHab 04 September, 2020, 10:54:14 AM
The age disparity of Daniel Craig and the lead actresses is getting to Roger Moore levels now. That's one Bond "tradition" that needs addressing.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Rately 04 September, 2020, 11:08:06 AM
The age disparity of Daniel Craig and the lead actresses is getting to Roger Moore levels now. That's one Bond "tradition" that needs addressing.

Really is an old duffer by now! Loved the line in the trailer about shooting him in his good knee!
: Re: 007: No time to die
: TordelBack 04 September, 2020, 12:42:56 PM
But it is Bond. Isn't your criticism a bit like saying "sound in vacuum, are we still at this?" for Star Wars?

One is an enjoyable fiction, the other is a crappy way to still be treating people with facial scarring. It's bit like if we'do continued to base every sitcom around the once-obvious hilarity of weak gay men and pitiable transvestites.

And current Star Wars is a prime offender too - look.at how Ben Solo's redemption comes with the removal of his eeeevil scar.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: repoman 04 September, 2020, 01:53:49 PM
I loved the first two Craig Bonds.  The next two less so.  Maybe because they went back to being authentic silly Bond movies where as I liked the change of pace that Daniel Craig brought initially.

Best Bond since Moore.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: broodblik 04 September, 2020, 02:09:53 PM
I enjoyed the first Craig Bond movie but his portrayal off the character never worked for me. He feels like a Bond without boyish charisma and witty comments. He is way to serious, why so serious?
: Re: 007: No time to die
: IndigoPrime 04 September, 2020, 02:18:47 PM
I thought Casino Royale was an excellent, modern take on Bond. I was nonplussed by QoS and nearly walked out of the cinema in disgust due to Skyfall, which long-time forumites will be well aware of. I never watched Spectre.

Phoebe Waller-Bridge’s involvement in the latest one makes me a bit torn—she’s bloody awesome. But as talented as she is as a writer, and despite the quotes she’s given about her involvement with the film and the intended direction of the series, I find it hard to believe she’ll be able to eradicate enough of the misogyny at the heart of this production.

I hope I’m wrong.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Rately 04 September, 2020, 02:25:11 PM
Will be very interesting to see how a new Director, and hopefully some fresh, perhaps even female writers or Directors, bring a new Bond to the screen.

It really is a franchise that just ticks along, and i think perhaps if they showed a bit of vision and allowed the reigns to come off, they could be rewarded with a lot more interest. It was all downhill for Daniel Craig after Casino Royale.

Mind you, with what I've suggested, i can imagine the horror in the Daily Mail comments section if any of it was ever, hopefully, to come to pass.

: Re: 007: No time to die
: broodblik 04 September, 2020, 02:45:47 PM
I thought Casino Royale was an excellent, modern take on Bond. I was nonplussed by QoS and nearly walked out of the cinema in disgust due to Skyfall, which long-time forumites will be well aware of. I never watched Spectre.

I though I was the only person on the planet that disliked Skyfall. My worse Bond-movie ever since it never felt like a Bonds-movie more like lets try to mimic one of the Bourne movies.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: IndigoPrime 04 September, 2020, 02:50:25 PM
I wrote this at the time: Skyfall: James Bond’s return to male-gaze misogyny (http://reverttosaved.com/2012/11/17/skyfall-james-bonds-return-to-male-gaze-misogyny/). It got quite a bit of traction and still gets views even today. Some of the comments—particularly Dunya’s—are well worth reading if you decide to read the blog post, BTW.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Tiplodocus 04 October, 2020, 11:57:19 AM
Pushed back again until next year. Cineworld citing that as one of the reasons they are drawing up plans to close.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Tiplodocus 04 October, 2020, 11:59:21 AM
But on a lighter note...https://twitter.com/stevefurst/status/1312159775300313089?s=08 (https://twitter.com/stevefurst/status/1312159775300313089?s=08)

Bond a misogynist dinosaur? Certainly Moore looks like Benny Hill.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: milstar 07 January, 2021, 07:06:32 PM
Well, I ain't exactly warmed up for this one. Partly because imo Bond movies ran out of their juice, partly because I don't rate Craig's films highly, and partly because I hate the cast on this new one. I mean, yeah, of all Craig movies, CR is maybe the best. A classy piece of work. But the rest... And why they had to return Leah Seydoux for the upcoming film? Her facial expressions are all the same. Rami Malek is a talented guy, but I don't see him as a Bond villain. And the storyline; if the rumors are true, that Bond is retired and then is forced to get back into action - well, how many times we've seen a similar or exact scheme?
: Re: 007: No time to die
: The Legendary Shark 07 January, 2021, 07:18:35 PM

They should pull a Who with Bond.

Flashback: 1942. The original James Bond is on another daring mission. He's killed! Oh no! Who will meet with Herr Crushdersouls now!? Enter Lieutenant Connery, who takes on the legend of James Bond. When he's killed, Captain Lazenby takes on the mantle for a while and then so on. Perhaps all the 00s do the same.

Cut to: Present day. Somebody is killing all the retired Bonds... and Commander Craig's next. But maybe Captain Elba's Bond can save the day and continue the legend...

: Re: 007: No time to die
: Dark Jimbo 07 January, 2021, 07:44:42 PM
They should pull a Who with Bond.

Oh, totally, Should have done that the very first time they changed the actor.

But of course, Craig's films are explicitly a different universe, where the non-Craig films never happened...
: Re: 007: No time to die
: The Legendary Shark 07 January, 2021, 07:58:55 PM

Good point.

It would've been cool, though, to see Dalton and Whatsisname in retirement and being really hard to kill but killed nontheless.

: Re: 007: No time to die
: milstar 07 January, 2021, 08:06:13 PM

They should pull a Who with Bond.


You mean, Doctor Who? I don't know... I havent followed the series. But I heard the ratings currently aren't exactly admirable.

The thing with Bond is, that being 007 isn't just another moniker as people thought from G. Lazenby's opening line. It's practically the same character, with severe slow-age problem.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: The Legendary Shark 07 January, 2021, 08:17:32 PM

Sorry, yes, Doctor Who. Finding a way of not only changing actors but folding those changes into the plot. In Bond's case, though, it strips him of his superhuman status - suddenly, he can die, thus opening up dramatic opportunities...

: Re: 007: No time to die
: milstar 07 January, 2021, 08:40:15 PM

Sorry, yes, Doctor Who. Finding a way of not only changing actors but folding those changes into the plot. In Bond's case, though, it strips him of his superhuman status - suddenly, he can die, thus opening up dramatic opportunities...

I dunno... Bonds I enjoy the most are those that show him the least grounded (like Moore films) :)
: Re: 007: No time to die
: The Legendary Shark 07 January, 2021, 10:30:56 PM

Ah - then we extract our Bondian enjoyment from opposite ends. Timothy Dalton's my favourite Bond.

: Re: 007: No time to die
: TordelBack 07 January, 2021, 10:52:43 PM
Coincidentally I'm reading William Boyd's licensed Bond novel Solo at the minute, first Bond I've read since I did all the Flemmings at about 12, and I find myself visualising the character as Dalton, or when I remember it's set in 1969, Lazenby.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Tiplodocus 08 January, 2021, 10:07:59 AM
CINEFIX did an amusing "Bond in Chronological Order" video that sort of, with a lot of head twisting and squinting, works. Starts with Casino Royal and Quantum of Solace then jumps around a bit before returning to Craig in SKYFALL (as an older veteran - which you always had to assume he had loads of off screen adventures between QOS and Skyfall). Amusingly, later Roger Moore's are framed as delusional retirement dreams.

Like Batman, all interpretations of Bond are equally valid so there is no right or wrong answer for Best Bond. Which is why it's great.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: milstar 08 January, 2021, 12:51:02 PM
I remember when I read the first (and only) four Fleming books, from Casino Royale to Diamonds are Forever and was shocked to realize how Fleming Bond is pretty much grounded, even for the most down to Earth cinematic representation. Bereft of ironic wit, and by all accounts, an ordinary man who happens to be a secret agent. Tbh, that kinda disappointed me as it lacked flamboyance from the movies. Furthermore, I found a bit of myself in Fleming's rendition of the character. His doubts, thoughts, his general chilled to the bone attitude, although personally I don't drive, neither I smoke 70 cigarettes a day, neither possess a gun, nor my thrill is sex with married women (not that I ever did it) :)... Also, this Bond suffers terribly. Usually, these stories end with Bond contemplating leaving the life of secret agent behind, on the account of injuries he got in the process.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Tiplodocus 03 October, 2021, 08:14:06 PM
Well that was jolly good fun.

Everything you expect from Bond and plenty you don't. But the unusual stuff is delivered well.

It actually makes SPECTRE better (all the terrible bits of Spectre are still terrible though)

Also chock full of Easter Eggs to previous Bonds if you like that kind of thing.

Try catch it before the big reveals get spoilt by twats.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: milstar 07 October, 2021, 11:05:33 PM
I just got back from the theatre. I am not at all enthusiastic as Tiplodocus about the film. I find it really unremarkable and even worse than Spectre. Overlong (pre-credit sequence goes on nearly forever, and credit sequence is tedious, uninspired as is the Eilish tune), and even with a few twists around the corner utterly predictable and how many times, we had Bond away from the mi6 already? And I thought that the legacy of Spectre and Blofeld perished with the Spectre. The fact that No Time to Die is the final film by Daniel as Bond (I hate even that they gave the 007 moniker to someone else, which is blasphemy) is very transparent if you stay through the whole film. Action scenes, sparse they happen, are poorly made and just unexciting to watch. Bond having a child is really unnecessary, for the character and the plot . One-liner exchanges are funny for six-year-olds. If anything, at least Ana de Armas looks fantastic, and Rami Malek delivers a pretty spooky villain (that perhaps rivals Javier Bardem's Silva). And there are some subtle nods to earlier films.

I think the film might even be exciting if you watch it as a rather stand-alone film than part of the franchise.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Tiplodocus 07 October, 2021, 11:53:15 PM
Well the bit you've spoilered is just the actual theme but there you go. Other people don't be tempted to unspoiler that.

And I thought the villain was the worst aspect.

I did say it had everything you expect from Bond and that includes terrible one liners and often terrible villains.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Richard 08 October, 2021, 12:41:54 AM
It's an excellent film, but every time a new Bond film comes out you can always count on some people to slag it off. (It's like every episode of Dr Who in that respect.)
: Re: 007: No time to die
: milstar 08 October, 2021, 09:56:27 AM
Well the bit you've spoilered is just the actual theme but there you go. Other people don't be tempted to unspoiler that.

And I thought the villain was the worst aspect.

I did say it had everything you expect from Bond and that includes terrible one liners and often terrible villains.

Bond having a family isn't what the film is about. Furthermore, he is not the character capable for that.

Villains should be one koji the best parts of the franchise. Memorable, creepy, charismatic, even a bit two-dimensional, but reimbursed by actor's performance. Rami definitely outruns Christoph Waltz in that regard.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Hawkmumbler 08 October, 2021, 10:03:45 AM
Bond having a family isn't what the film is about. Furthermore, he is not the character capable for that.

Its almost staggering how off the mark you are.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: milstar 08 October, 2021, 10:53:27 AM
Bond having a family isn't what the film is about. Furthermore, he is not the character capable for that.

Its almost staggering how off the mark you are.

Yeah, because Bond is about having wife and kids, which is true definition of off the mark, particularly for this film.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Hawkmumbler 08 October, 2021, 11:27:41 AM
I can't believe ON HER MAJESTYS SECRET SERVICE never happened.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: milstar 08 October, 2021, 12:59:55 PM
Me neither. Especially the ending. I must have imagined it.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Tiplodocus 08 October, 2021, 01:11:32 PM
I can't believe ON HER MAJESTYS SECRET SERVICE never happened.

I very soon reconciled myself to the idea that the Craig Bonds are there own thing and exist in their own Bond universe compared to the other films. I reckon this was their go at OHMSS
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Tiplodocus 08 October, 2021, 03:19:00 PM
Bond having a family isn't what the film is about. Furthermore, he is not the character capable for that.

Its almost staggering how off the mark you are.

Yeah, because Bond is about having ************** which is true definition of off the mark, particularly for this film.

It's exactly what this film is about and what the last two were leading up to.  It might not be what you wanted but that's what it is.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Hawkmumbler 08 October, 2021, 03:39:30 PM
I'd go so far as to say its been the overarching theme of the Craig era. Very odd take to say its an un-Bond element when James had at least one legitimate kid in the novels...
: Re: 007: No time to die
: milstar 08 October, 2021, 03:53:32 PM

It's exactly what this film is about and what the last two were leading up to.  It might not be what you wanted but that's what it is.

No, it's about closure and a rather lame-written one. I don't know where you blokes found family, where Bond didn't even look for it.
In general terms, Bond due to his lifestyle and his job is incapable for that, in fact anything more than one-night stand. I am glad that the idea of him having a girlfriend is ditched after Dr. No. Craig's Bond, which is reboot of previous entries, is more about finding peace and betrayal than anything. When I saw yesterday him having fun with Madeline, I knew this wasn't going to last for very long. I think Bond knew that. One more thing against the film - incredible indifference at the news of being father.

: Re: 007: No time to die
: Richard 09 October, 2021, 12:30:23 AM
His job? In this film he's been retired for five years!
: Re: 007: No time to die
: broodblik 11 October, 2021, 11:27:18 AM
I enjoyed this much more than the previous 3 Craig Bonds. But overall for me his Bond movies almost never felt like real Bond-movies.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: milstar 15 October, 2021, 11:03:47 AM
https://www.thedailybeast.com/bond-director-cary-joji-fukunaga-pressured-me-into-going-nude (https://www.thedailybeast.com/bond-director-cary-joji-fukunaga-pressured-me-into-going-nude)

Oops.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: paddykafka 15 October, 2021, 11:35:44 AM
As a Wag on Irish radio said, with a running time of 2 hours and 40 minutes, No Time To Pee might have been a more accurate title.  :)
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Hawkmumbler 15 October, 2021, 11:37:44 AM
'Me chugging on a magnum bottle of Dr Pepper 5 hours into Satatangos 8 hour runtime'

Pffft, amateurs.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: broodblik 15 October, 2021, 12:22:04 PM
As a Wag on Irish radio said, with a running time of 2 hours and 40 minutes, No Time To Pee might have been a more accurate title.  :)

Defuel before the start no filling up
: Re: 007: No time to die
: Richmond Clements 15 October, 2021, 12:29:45 PM
Well I loved it. I was daunted by the stupidly long running time but it was a great movie. I',m not 100% on the ending but yeah, I'll watch it again.
: Re: 007: No time to die
: paddykafka 15 October, 2021, 01:22:04 PM
As a Wag on Irish radio said, with a running time of 2 hours and 40 minutes, No Time To Pee might have been a more accurate title.  :)

Defuel before the start no filling up

If I can't dance, then I don't want to be part of the revolution.  :D

Also, there are fewer pleasures greater in life than supping one's favourite tipple while at the cinema. (I just wish that my middle-aged bladder was still up to the task, lol.)