I really don't understand the hate surrounding this film. Yes I understand there were many production issues but that doesn't automatically guarantee this film will be a disaster. So DC may have fractured his ankle, an on set explosion occured, and switch of directors due to creative differences, but again all of this shouldn't necessarily mean this film will be a disaster. It can be good or bad, we will just have to wait and see.
shareThey (EON) have been trawling the waters by dropping out woke-bait. They made a big deal of hiring Phoebe Waller-Bridge to re-write the script with a feminist perspective (Waller-Bridge then hilariously said that she was just in for a dialogue edit and she didn't want to harm the core of Bond). Then they made it clear that "007 is a woman now" and have been hinting at or possibly taking a temperature on replacing Bond 007 with a woman in the role for future films.
In a nutshell: they are appearing to alter the character and storylines to cater to SJW Millennial types who hate Bond while ignoring their fanbase who dig the anachronistic superspy.
Now, I personally want to see No Time to Die and I've been enjoying Craig's Bond's...more or less (Spectre was mediocre, Quantum of Solace stunk and sunk), but that's why a lot of people are hating on it.
The real thing is that people dislike propaganda and they don't like it when somebody takes their favourite toys, breaks them, and then gives the toy back, telling the original person that the toy is better than ever now. It's disrespectful, it's disingenuous, and worst of all, it's bad art. It's preaching and lecturing.
People hate that.
I'm reserving judgement until I see the film; this could be much ado about nothing. If, on seeing the completed movie, I witness a soapbox and propaganda spewing, I'll jump on the hatred for the film. But until then, I hope that EON knows its brand and this is all a bit of misguided marketing smoke designed to get a younger crowd out to see the film.
I'll dislike it if the film uses the "new 007" as a way to show up Bond and insult him for being a "misogynist" (basically "not woke enough"), or if the film retires Bond (literally or figuratively) to pave the way for a new "007" film starring a new secret agent who checks enough boxes. That kind of thing.
Fans are told these days to like big progressive changes or they'll be called bad people; naturally, they're feeling defensive.
Respectable. I know this is getting a lot of backlash for a lot of these so called woke elements but I honestly don't think it's gonna be that much of a big deal in the film
I do think in the beginning of the film, Lynches character does helm the 007 codename but I don't see that as an insult to the character of Bond. Yes she's probably gonna act like a big shot towards him in the beginning of the film and have that attitude but I think that's just to give her character more levity. If it's gonna be like that throughout the rest of the film then that could be an issue and make Bond look like a joke but I doubt that will be the case.
I honestly just feel like people are overreacting to this whole "woke" element. I think there is definitely gonna be some elements like that lingering in the film but I doubt it will be overdone. That's just how I see it.
Also the production isn't as bad as people make it out to be. Like there were no reshoots or anything. It's not like a Rise of Skywalker scenario. Production was just put on hold a couple of times due to a set being destroyed, Craig injuring himself, and change of directors but thats due to creative differences and it shows how committed EON is to making Craig go out on a high note.
That's how I feel about this film and I'm absolutely excited for it and I think the film is in good hands!
I hope it won't be a big deal.
Yeah, in years gone by, I think Lynch would have been 007 at the start of the film and the film would be about Bond reclaiming the title, as it were. He rebelled every other movie for awhile (Licence to Kill, Die Another Day ("I threw [suicide pill] away!"), and Skyfall where he "retires"). In Skyfall he was the "old guy" vs. the computer-savvy youngsters. BUT in all of those movies, Bond is ultimately right.
So, with No Time to Die, if Lynch acts like a big shot and Bond is still the biggest badass in the room, that's cool. If they use Lynch to constantly one-up Bond or use Bond as a punchline more than twice, yeah, not cool. I didn't mind in Casino Royale when Vesper got the last word a few times (although I still object to anybody giving Bond clothing advice, rookie or not). But I rolled my eyes a few times in Die Another Day when they were trying to deliberately make Jynx as cool as Bond at his own game.
Most people overreact to the woke stuff. I'm at about a 30% bad reaction to it, and most of that is because I fear that this stuff will be given an inch and take a mile. It'll "set up camp" at the goalposts, insist that the goalposts be moved, and then go set up camp and lather-rinse-repeat until the Wokies have re-written everything to their (niche) tastes.
All that said, the trailer looks good. It looks like it's got solid action, I've enjoyed these Bond films, and I think they can stick the landing with Craig's last movie. Spectre isn't really a high bar to get over, anyway. Like I said, if the movie ends with Bond reclaiming his 007 status (it's got to be 7. If they shift numbers, I'll boo right in the theatre (assuming those are open)), fair play. If the movie Lynch is a Bond ally without showing him up, more power to the film.
Yeah I'm very confident that there will be a good balance between the whole feminism aspect of the film and Bond being the best he's ever been but more so focused on Bond. That's how I think it's gonna play out. Like I expect Lynch to somewhat make Bond look like a step down compared to her in some parts in terms of combat skills given that she's much younger than him and that Bond is older and retired so I wouldn't be surprised but I think he'll end being justified and being the best he's ever been and being even more badass then he was in his previous films as this film progresses throughout its runtime.
It definitely makes sense if Lynch's character Nomi does helm the 007 title at the start of the film cause obviously he's retired but I definitely want to see him regain that title back. It wouldnt make much sense if he isn't 007 at all in the film especially since the marketing for the film such as the trailers and posters all have the iconic 007 logo attached to them and then he never ends up regaining that title in the film.
Anyways my expectations are very high for this film and I have many positive viewpoints regarding my anticipation for this film. Like I said it can be great or bad but I honestly think this film will live up. I could be wrong but that is what I think.
Lynch could start out by showing him up, but the more she shows him up in the first act, and the bigger a deal it is (she gets a witty put down is different from him nearly blowing a mission and she saves his bacon completely), the more he's gotta come from behind in the third and totally outgun her. Like, for instance, if as you say, she's more athletic because of her youth and drive, and that's why she schools him at first, she has to be out of her depth by the third act. Her experience (or lack thereof) is costing her big-time and Bond's know-how and veteran status shows her that just being faster or stronger isn't enough - it takes an extra edge.
Skyfall did this. He's out of his element at first. He has no hope of catching up to the cyber-geniuses around him. Q is young, hip, and into the digital revolution. Bond is out of shape and getting older. "Okay, Boomer! Go home, old man!" But the third act has Bond beat Silva by stripping it all down. He uses rudimentary booby traps and a retro spy car (as well as grim drive and determination) to win the day.
And, yeah, he *must* be 007 by the end. If he's not, it's over. At that point, I'd be wanting a different company to take it over. I'd probably be done giving EON money. That would be a slap in the face to Flemming's legacy.
I'm managing expectations. Spectre was mediocre, Quantum was bad...I love Casino Royale and Skyfall is top-grade, too, but...Craig's series has been hit-and-miss. Still: I am optimistic and looking forward to it.
If feminist aspects fit organically into the story then it should all be fine. It's when a movie tries too hard to be overtly "woke" that it becomes a groaner and a box office bomb. Audiences don't like being preached at.
shareExactly and I honestly feel that it will fit it into to the story very well but at the same time, not being an overly woke fest. Most of the woke elements will most likely feature in the beginning of the film but if it’s gonna be throughout then there will be a lot of hate
shareIf you're looking for a film that does a good job balancing feminism, maybe Little Women or something like that is up to your speed. I'm not sure what interest you have in James Bond.
shareAh, modern feminist take on Little Women, that movie that showed how oppressed women were relaxing in a luxury house while men could enjoy the heteropatriarchal privilege of being killed in the frontline 😂
I honestly just feel like people are overreacting to this whole "woke" element
Or replace 'woke' with 'new'/'not-like-it-was-in-1967' and we see the real truth - ageing men can't accept that the world is different now to how it was when Connery was in the role.
shareOr replace it with "thinking humans arent accepting trash movies". So sorry ... you arent part of that group. Have fun with your pile of trash!
shareDifferent argument entirely - why would a trash movie be a woke one or vice versa? Quality and this entire 'woke' excuse made by a bunch of masked racists aren't the same thing by any stretch, but continue to make excuses for your bigotry.
shareHow does comparing Religious elements to a film franchise make any sense. None of what you said has nothing to do with what I’m trying to discuss. What does Q have anything to do with being replaced by a so called Christian as well as M? What kind of logic is this?
All I’m trying to discuss is that whole feminist side of NTTD doesn’t seem like a big deal as many anticipate. The whole woke argument here is just to see if Lynches character Nomi really elevates this film to be woke or not and not make Bond look like a fool. This not some Biblical type nonsense about Christians, Atheists or whatever which has no comparison to woke elements.
You asked, and I tried to explain it to you. People who belong to some faith find it natural to have old movies, stories and franchises "adapted" to their faith, but non-believers in general heavily dislike it.
The easiest way to understand it is to imagine your favorite franchises "adapted" to some religion that you don't particularly like. Imagine how you feel watching 007 going Christian. This is how non-Wokes feel watching 007 (or other franchises) going Woke.
Spectre have to be Satanists! Bond is an Exorcist. Throw in some Wiccans for comic relief.
shareMore or less.
There's a extremely good video analyzing why Christian movies are so bad. I think the whole analysis could be applied to woke modern Hollywood.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50_3J6Go5Ng
The pinned comment by Sean Paul Murphy in the comment section is very interesting too.
Zero correlation.
That only a certain group of people weaponize terms like 'woke' or 'SJW' just feeds into the far more viable rationale that you can't accept that commercial entertainment products no longer appeal to your demographic.
It's the same when old muso's whine that music is crap now - it's just not made for them.
Pissed that movies no longer reflect THEIR experience "like they used to", they outsource blame to whatever buzzword or social movement bears closest resemblance to the opposite of their ideals and say it's the fault of that (like, when do you ever see the words woke or hipster used by anyone not decrying them?) and nothing to do with them just being older and less important to the execs who churn out movies to get as many asses on seats as possible.
Time to switch radio stations. You got old.
you can't accept that commercial entertainment products no longer appeal to your demographic [...] old muso's whine that music is crap now [...] THEIR experience "like they used to"[...] them just being older and less important to the execs [...] You got old
Yes *I'm* repeating the same bullshit. Perhaps count up how many threads you've polluted with this shit, grandpa.
shareI just don’t get any of these haters on these boards nowadays. I’m just trying to make a valid statement that people are over hating this film which hasn’t even been released yet and that we don’t even know how so called “woke” this film will be. I’m just saying I have high hopes for it and i don’t think it’ll fall heavily into this woke category. I didn’t want to use this word but all these haters are just sexist I guess.
shareSame. But the reason IMDb closed was because the same bores couldn't stop themselves from being problematic, trying to invent a counter-culture or religion out of an already-in-the-rearview slang term to serve their barely-oppressed racism/sexism.
shareWon’t be surprised if this site shuts down as well.
shareYep, that certain group called thinking people. Too bad you will never become part of that group and stay a beta male forever. Your fault, not ours.
share"Stay a beta male..." hmm, interesting one. I have a house, a car, pretty okay job, a degree, a dog and an 18 year relationship, ability to enjoy film and TV without having to go rant about how unfair it all is - seems like being beta is a pretty decent place to stay "forever".
By the metric of your flatline insult, it would suggest you consider yourself an alpha, and that you don't respect anybody you consider to be 'lower' than you. That old adage of being judged by the company you keep comes to mind - why in hell would I want to be comparable to guys who consider themselves alphas if all they do is condescend that nobody else is as good as they are?
They (EON) have been trawling the waters by dropping out woke-bait. They made a big deal of hiring Phoebe Waller-Bridge to re-write the script with a feminist perspective (Waller-Bridge then hilariously said that she was just in for a dialogue edit and she didn't want to harm the core of Bond). Then they made it clear that "007 is a woman now" and have been hinting at or possibly taking a temperature on replacing Bond 007 with a woman in the role for future films.
In a nutshell: they are appearing to alter the character and storylines to cater to SJW Millennial types who hate Bond while ignoring their fanbase who dig the anachronistic superspy.
High-five!
I am cautiously optimistic that this is woke-hype to try and sell a few tickets and the film won't actually gut-punch Bond - but it is VERY cautious optimism.
So rather than creating a completely new female spy character with her own franchise, they'd rather wreck an existing character by rewriting him into a nobody.
Come to think of it, has there ever been a female bond villain?
Yup. My observation is that this latest movement is as interested in tearing down the old institutions as they are in building up their own. It also seems to be important to specifically remove perceived anti-theses from society. Bond is a "man's man" and early on displayed sexism (I love Goldfinger, but Bond slaps a woman on the rear at one point to dismiss her so he can talk to Felix Leiter while saying, "Man talk.") So I think it's important for this movement to basically neuter Bond - and other properties like Bond. If there's something important to "the Man", then the movement (woke people) want to take it over, tear it down, and/or neutralise it. They've also convinced a disturbingly large segment of the population that if they don't help do stuff like this, then they're sexist (or racist, or whatever other flavour of bigotry the movement accuses people of).
Now, I don't know if that's what's going on here. I know that there are a couple whiffs of it in the trailer, but it's not enough for me to pass judgement.
Female Bond villain? Yes. Not many, but yes.
From Russia with Love had Rosa Klebb. Okay, she reported to Blofeld, but she was the one pulling all the strings in the movie. Red Grant was a henchman.
The World is Not Enough had Elektra King. Renaud was the final kill, but Elektra was the one in charge. Elektra is actually one of my favourite Bond characters.
The new trailer looks fun. It doesn't look 'woke' to me. Deliberately gender-reversing a role, that's woke. Ditto races. Ditto having a gay character for the sake of having a gay character. The audience picks up on those details, especially when it adds nothing to the plot. Or everything in Ghostbusters 2016.
The disaster in tearing down old institutions is that they're well-established institutions. Trying to replace them has always ended in disaster. See Dr. Who for a prime example.
Bond always put his mission first. I remember one of Connery's movies where he's seducing one girl only to start strangling her for information. Craig in Casino Royal left a girl to follow a lead (she ended up getting killed for it).
I like the way the writers tried to expand Bond's character with Craig in the role. But it's always been some guy as the villain.
Because it's another Craig Bond when the last couple of Craig Bond films are underwhelming at best or utter terrible at worst. People just want a shakeup. New actors, new directions. Anything, just not the same mediocre thing again and again.
shareDaniel Craig's Bond is beloved by many. Casino Royale and Skyfall are considered to be some of the best Bond films and they are beloved by fans and critics. Sure Spectre wasn't that great but that doesn't mean the next installment will automatically be a failure. Skyfall came out after Quantum and look how much of an improvement Skyfall was.
Casino Royale was great i give you that. Skyfall was an improvement compared to QoS. But to be fair, any movie would be an improvement compared to QoS. So it was an easy task. Then when people's trust was starting to build up they let us down with Spectre. You know, fool me once....
sharei really liked Skyfall for its backstory. Casino Royal had great action and was a masterpiece definitively more fun to watch than Skyfall but I was moved more by Skyfall for sure. It is my favorite Daniel Craig movie
shareSame both are fantastic films. I like Casino Royale a little more mainly because I find it more rewatchable but Skyfall is still another masterpiece of a film. I just don't understand why No Time to Die is getting so much hate.
shareHonestly I doubt that's the case on why Skyfall got so much praise. Yes it was a huge improvement over Quantum but that's not the reason why it got the praise it got. It was a great movie on its own. You might not think so and that's fine. Film is subjective and we all have our options. I personally love Skyfall and agree with the main consensus surrounding it's praise. Spectre on the other hand, yes that was a disappointment. I didn't hate Spectre, I thought it was just average for the most part but people didn't necessarily like Spectre that much because it wasn't that great on its own, and yes a disappointing follow up to Skyfall.
I'm just saying that there is really no need for people to hate on No Time to Die. I understand everything about the production troubles, but I don't even think the production was that bad tbh if you really think about it. I think people are going about the whole woke elements and I could kinda see why people might not be to thrilled about this one because it's the next installment after Spectre which left a bad taste for fans but really I don't see why this film is getting so much hate.
People can say what they want about Quantum - ill take a Bond movie at Quantums run time over one thats Specturd's.
shareI'm not a fan of choices Sam Mendes made in Skyfall and Spectre (the supporting cast, Craig stylished as a short haired bulldog, making Bond and Blofeld brothers, ...) and they seem to continue with that path to the bitter end. I worship Casino Royale and liked Quantum of Solace (despite its flaws), but the latest two entries haven't been to my taste. They made money, so they have no reason to change the course. I'm out on this one.
shareThat's fine. I know many might not like the route Mendes took with Skyfall and Spectre. Yes the Blofeld being Bonds brother thing wasn't the best choice but I absolutely had no problem with what he did with Skyfall. Spectre wasn't the best but that doesn't prevent me from being excited for No Time to Die. The film can either be great or bad. We will just have to wait and see.
shareFeel free to read through any number of threads, not only here, but also on the Spectre and Skyfall pages. People hate Craig and the current people running the series for much greater reasons than "woke" p.c. posturing, but that's certainly a big part of it too.
shareYeah I've noticed that these message boards particularly express the most hatred towards Craig. That's why I started this thread because the overall audience consensus loves Craig as Bond as well as Casino Royale and Skyfall but here on the message boards, many users don't feel the same. I am a huge fan of his Bond. I loved Casino Royale and Skyfall. Quantum and Spectre werent that great but I don't hate them.
As for No Time to Die, I have high expectations for it and I can't wait to see it. I just don't get why people are anticipating this to be a failure. Yes, the production wasn't smooth but it wasn't like a disastrous production where there had to be reshoots because certain aspects didn't work or anything like that. Again it's not like a Rise of Skywalker scenario or like X men dark Phoenix where reshoots had to happen because certain things didn't work out. If that was the case for NTTD than I would be concerned, but it really isn't like that. I could see why people would be bothered by the whole "woke" elements but I think that is being overreacted on too much. If Lynch's character stands out more than Bond in the film then that's an issue, but from what I've seen in the trailers and marketing, I don't think that'll be the case. I just think this film is getting too much hate.
They had an opportunity to forget the nonsense from Spectre, make a standalone film, and finally give Craig a chance to make a normal fun Bond movie. They squandered that chance, and there is nothing they can do to make this right now. They needed to abandon that storyline and make something totally original for this one to be salvaged, but they fucked up instead. Regardless of the pandemic, I highly doubt that there were going to be droves of people lining up to see some forgettable character like Swann five years later. You are also downplaying the extent and gravity of the production issues, all of which were self-inflicted. There were reshoots after Craig's injury (he aint getting any younger), and it was never actually clarified if they were able to properly reschedule Rami Malek's scenes with Craig because Malek was already working on another production by the time Craig was recovered. My suspicion is that they still need to do reshoots, but I'm not sure how they will manage to do that now. Fukunaga's instagram post claiming that the film is set in stone at this point is not a credible source to prove otherwise.
shareI get where your coming from about the whole Spectre follow up. Sure it wasn’t the greatest but I just don’t see how they can just abandon the storyline since that film had a massive impact on the Craig era itself since it was revealed Spectre was behind everything in the other films which I believe wasn’t planned out from the beginning when Craig first started. It was just improvisation. So basically it would be odd if they abandoned that storyline since they want this film to be a culmination of all of the films so they can give Craig an emotional character arc and send off. If they were to just make a stand-alone film, it wouldn’t feel like a concluding storyline for Craig which they wanted to go for.
Maybe there were reshoots when Craig injured himself but it wasn’t for anything that they thought that wasn’t working out in the film. They probably had to change up how they were originally gonna film some scenes with Craig due to his injury. They weren’t going to change up some key plot points.
CF wouldn’t lie about the film being finished and not being tweaked more. If they were to do reshoots, it would look really bad on them that they would lie about that and use COVID as a cover up because if they were to do reshoots, we would eventually know. Also that rumor started spreading around a month before it was originally supposed to be released and right after the delay announcement. If they were to do reshoots, they probably couldn’t afford it because they need to spend more money obviously and they already used up a ton of money from all that marketing such as the teaser trailer, tv spots, posters, and including that super bowl spot which costs a lot. Then once this film will eventually be released they will have to even spend more money on marketing.
They can abandon it by just abandoning it. Nobody will notice or care. There have never been storylines like this in the past. The average person going to see this film is not going to realize that it is part of some convoluted storyline, nor will they care that it is. Which makes the decision even more idiotic because longtime fans did not like SF and Spectre, so these films are intended for a casual audience, but none of those casuals will ever care enough about the series to follow a storyline this closely. Besides, it's been FIVE YEARS, so even if people were paying close attention to the storyline, how can they possibly still be interested this many years later?
On another note, Craig was old, washed up, and couldn't fire a gun properly eight years ago in SF. He was never even formally authorized to return to the field. How is that supposed to make any sense this many years later when he's jumping off bridges like it's no big deal?
Uh, it’s these boards.... they’re all about hating. In other words, this place is full of haterz. Sure, some may be genuinely concerned about how the film will turn out quality-wise (mainly due to the production issues), but most haters are just here to... hate. Positivity? Yeah, nobody here got time (the worldview) for that!
But apart from the numerous dedicated Craig-Bond haters on here that were NEVER planning on giving this film a fair chance, many (it wouldn’t be unfair to say MOST) of those hating on this film in this board happen to be... surprise... reich wing propagandists.
Seriously, all one needs to do is take a look at the things most of these whiners are complaining about. Just look for certain overused (kool reactionary) terms they use and the particular subjects they bring up to complain about - you’ll definitely notice a pattern with these obvious reich bros. Then again, they’re everywhere on this site. Poor them... the harder they cry about the pro-inclusion and anti-regressive agenda that they have an agenda against, the more the film industry seems to (thankfully) double down and spit on reactionary wishes. XD
Anyway, psyched for this film! And you can bet many are as well.
Yeah these message boards are just filled with haters that like to critique every bit of a certain film for such an unnecessary reason.
I get people may be concerned about the production but I’m just trying to make people understand that the production behind this film isn’t as bad as people may think. Production was basically put on hold a few times due to Daniel Craig’s injury and an on-set explosion while filming. This doesn’t necessarily change or have an effect on the film itself. Also the switch of directors thing isn’t that much of a big deal either. Eon just didn’t like the route Boyle was going to take with this film so they got CF which btw they wanted him as a Bond director for a while. Therefore, they started from scratch and worked something else out with CF. This was the reason for the delay from November 2019 to April 2020. This shows how dedicated EON is to making this film great instead of rushing this film to come out and not being pleased by it.
Haters just like to hate on these boards. That’s all that it is. And yes I know many people are looking forward to this as well. Especially taking this was originally tracking for a big opening weekend at the time. I just can’t wait for the film and my expectations are very high
There's not one single positive thing to say about the Craig era at this point. I am so fed with it that I even turned on CR long ago. He has been a disaster. It's easy to just say everyone is a hater when the reality is he has turned so many loyal fans against the franchise.
If Eon was dedicated to making a good film, they would have done many things differently. For example, abandoning the events of Spectre, re-casting the role of Bond, firing Purvis and Wade, not bringing back failed characters the fans have no interest in like Swann... among other things. It's almost as if they are trying to make a bad film.
Im glad that "reich" is your favorite word. And tomorrow we will learn together ... your second word! Im sincere that you will be able to learn a second word.
share[deleted]
Because there have been a ton of rumors that this film is just going to be another wokefest that won't respect Bond's character and will instead shove political messages in our face about how women are so much better than men and that you need to apologize for being born a while male, blah, blah, blah. We don't go to see James Bond movies for political messages, we go to be entertained. This is the same reason why those new Star Wars movies have gotten such backlash.
shareWe don’t know if this film will deal with a political message like this or not. Lashana Lynches character just happens to be the new female 007 in which she took over that role since Bond is retired. That’s it. We won’t know till we actually see the movie if Bonds character will be disrespected like that or not. Of course Lynch will stand out a little more than Bond in the beginning of the film, but that’s only to give her character a little more charisma. If she stands out more than Bond throughout the whole film, than that would be an issue like I said.
The Star Wars films didn’t get backlashed for being woke. Rey was an essential part of the Force Awakens and look how much praise force awakens got. Last Jedi and Rise of Skywalker received backlash because they weren’t that great in general. There’s no reason for the Star Wars films to be considered woke at all because the producers wanted Rey to be the essential main character. Just because the main character of a Star Wars film is female doesn’t mean it’s woke.
Bump
share