If you try to force continuity onto the Bond movies preceding Craig, you're really asking too, too much.
Exactly. If can be argued there was a very very loose continuity pre 2002 and the that is constructed around the conceit that Bond was once very briefly married to a woman named Tracy whom died tragically. Thus you can probably toss in OHMSS as a common case that occurred to the various Bonds pre 2006 as that was where Tracy was murdered. And given it was Blofeld who murdered her, the SPECTRE saga of the Connery films probably happened. Beyond that....there was no set continuity to Bond. Yeah there were Easter eggs and other nods tossed in from time to time, but each actor that played Bond more or less existed as its own thing. The Craig run was originally conceived as a hard reset and was meant as a fresh start. That got Slightly muddled by keeping Dench as M and later even more muddled with Skyfall, but SPECTRE makes it clear the Craig run is not directly related to the previous films. Like prior actors it was its own thing in its own bubble. The only difference this time there was a clearly intended stab at a contained story with a beginning, middle and end. It can be argued it wasn't perhaps executed ideally, but that was the clear intent, and Bond's demise is the period at the end of the sentence.
Well at the start of Craig’s runs these were firmly positioned as prequels (which is how Eon justified it at the time - and there was a lot of discussion about it back then, at least here in the U.K.) - starting with him getting his license to kill, the birth of spectre, genesis of moneypenny and Q - up until the latest movie you could read the entire run broadly as prequel, whereas the latest movie functions as both prequel and bookend. But yes the Craig run has played faster and looser, which I think may have been to its detriment especially with the latest instalment. one-odd thing I was thinking about today about the Craig run - pretty much every movie has him leaving the service at some point
This... and how Blofeld could send and receive signal while in prison via bionic eye. Noone at MI6 could see the eye was electronic..in five years? Signal transmission never detected? Come on... ..great job by Purvis, Wade and the very, very, very bright Waller-Bridge
There's no continuity, there's the original series, then Casino Royale reset the whole thing. The same actor was playing M, Judi Dench, but she wasn't playing the same character with the same characteristics. Look at her clothes style, in the Broz she wears bad looking mao clothing, in the Craigs she is more stylish. And also her mentions. In the Brosnan days, she said 007 was a relic of the cold war. In CR she says she misses the cold war. Not the same history.
This is the entire quote from the "YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE" novel that is referenced near the end of the film during the toast scene. The highlighted is what was in the film itself uttered by M. In the novel , it is in Bond's obituary when the world believes him dead after an evil lair is blown to smithereens with him present (hmm...sounds eerily familiar...). I believe Ian Fleming was quoting Jack London. I think the full quote is illuminating. "I would rather be ashes than dust! I would rather that my spark should burn out in a brilliant blaze than it should be stifled by dry-rot. I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet. The proper function of man is to live, not to exist. I shall not waste my days in trying to prolong them. I shall use my time." Upon reading and revisiting that quote in full , I believe the quote itself was the inspiration of Bond's fate in NTTD.
Good point. Although gigantic plot holes, lack of oversight and problematic writing and things that stretch credibility and Bond are nothing new. One such example... In YOLT the movie , Bond meets Blofeld face to face. Yet in the next movie, how come Blofeld doesn't immediately know he's talking to Bond the minute he shows up in his very thin disguise as Sir Grey? I know the answer is that they filmed the movies out of order and whomever adapted OHMSS failed to take that into account...but you think someone would have brought that up within EON. You would think Cubby Broccolli would have came to that realization and demanded a rewrite or something. If that occurred today, there would already by a hundred youtube videos picking it apart and likely trying to tie it into the wokeism somehow...but I digress... (And let's not even start on how wimpy and physically unimposing Donald Pleasance morphed into big and imposing Telly Sevalas. (Then shrank again into Charles "jump to the left!" Grey. ) Plastic surgery isn't that good. Still though...as I said earlier, whatever EON does next, its time to find some new writers for the films. They've been at Bat since the last two Brosnan films and the Craig era. 20 plus years is long enough. Purvis and Wade need to go.
I think there's probably a practical element to why the disguise is so thin too - Cinema projection in the 60s was not what it is today, plus by end of run the film would likely have aged a lot, and you need the audience to recognise it as Bond. OHMSS was Richard Maibaum, You Only Live Twice was actually the first Bond he wasn't a credited writer Agree with you that it's probably time for Purvis and Wade to move on.
I mean...he's not really wearing a disguise....just glasses. Unless Blofeld either has very poor eyesight and or suffers from Lois Lane syndrome...
probably all that ash from the volcano... Broccoli had form with Paper-thin disguises, see the child-catcher disguising himself as a sweet seller by putting on a coat in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang from the year before OHMSS
I can remember some "WTF" comments even back in 1969. How about in 1971's Diamonds Are Forever, when Blofeld has changed his face yet again and looks just like Charles Gray's character back in 1967 from You Only Live Twice? About the only time I can remember they really were trying for continuity was at the beginning of For Your Eyes Only, set in 1981, when Bond is seen at Tracy's grave (with a 1969 death date), then catches up with Blofeld minutes later (looking more like he did in OHMSS) and Blofeld cries out "Mr. Bond! I'll buy you a delicatessen!"... right before he plummets down a concrete smokestack, apparently to his doom. Even then, they couldn't use the name "Blofeld" due to legal problems, but they eventually bought the name back from the writer/producer who owned it, Kevin McClorey.[/QUOTE]
I hated it. Feminist capture of the franchise. Total jibberish. That being said, all the other Craig films were similarly dire.
Apparently Bond had the secret ambition to serve Roast Beef on Rye as a living. You know....I've changed my mind. The ending of NTTD sucks. Ruined Bond forever. He should have lived. In retirement, Bond and his family should have moved to Manhattan and open up his dream Deli. It's so obvious I don't know why Broccoli and Wilson didn't think of it.
Here's an interesting (and nostalgic) article covering the similarities between On Her Majesty's Secret Service and No Time to Die... The Biggest Winner in 'No Time To Die'? George Lazenby Others have complained that it's kind of a snoozer. I thought it was a little long, but when it gets moving, it's a riveting film and a roller-coaster ride. Note that it takes damn near 20 minutes before they even get to the opening titles! I think you could easily cut a half hour out of the film, and it would still hold up OK. 2:43 is a bit long for this kind of thing. And we stayed all the way, since I had a bet it would absolutely, positively end with "James Bond Will Return"... and it did.
Ok fine. Illustrate how this movie is a feminist capture of the franchise. Show me. Make your case. We will all wait with baited breath for your enlightening TED talk on the matter.
I disagree they could have cut a half and hour, but easily 10-20 minutes. They could have easily cut it down to the same time as SPECTRE. (Talking about a Bond film that could have used a lot of trimming and tightening.).
Whoa. A bit over the top statement but it's true that there were only men who died, women survived (except for Madeleine's mom at the beginning, but that happened before the NTTD events. And didn't Madeleine in "Spectre" told her parents were divorced? D'oh!). Actually, I believe they did a disservice to Nomi. She slyly and maibe cowardly goes away while poor Bond stays alone wandering in Safin's fortress in suspenders (no bulletproof jackets available?). At least the generous Nomi asked M to reintegrate Bond as 007 (one of the most cringeworthy moments in the movie) on the airplane, while going to the villain's island. It would've been great if she got the heroic demise instead, but I guess notorious hacks Purvis & Wade and the very, very, very bright Waller-Bridge had other plans. Should've been titled "No time to die for ladies"
In Thunderball, Bond leaves a tape recorder on for audio surveillance, hidden inside a book. Close up on the tape. Bonds returns several hours later and the tape is almost in the same position. Purvis & Wade definitely have to go. And we can only hope that the very, very, very bright Waller-Bridge never "works" on a Bond script again.
No way I'd call this movie a "snoozer". I think it moves at a good pace - seems way shorter than 2:43. I checked my watch at one point and thought we were maybe 35-40 minutes into the movie - we were 100 minutes into the movie!