There is an opening scene in 1971's 'Diamonds Are Forever': Sean Connery - aka James Bond - walks over to a lounging bikini-clad woman. She thinks he's there for pleasure and poses suggestively. But he's got other things on his mind and one swift movement of his hand later, he's obtaining valuable information from her, all the while choking her out with her own deftly removed bikini top... Call it whatever you want, but that is the essence of Bond. That's what the books were and are: Bond was always something of a selfish and sexist character; he didn't care if you were male or female. But we live in an age of increasingly watered down fiction, where this is now unacceptable, which is why Bond too is now being compromised/adjusted to be politically correct for the masses. What will be next, a genteel, cross-dressing Macbeth? A gender reversal/lesbian themed remake of Tom Sawyer? Where will it all end? For Bond, it all started with 'Skyfall', where it was hinted that, yes, James Bond does not just like the ladies, anymore, he may have had dalliances with the guys too. And it went steadily downhill from there. Suffice to say that in Bond's current iteration, it would not be out of the realm of disbelief to see Craig's Bond gagging for air while getting choked out by his own Borat-style mankini and this movie's 007 being the one who's doing the strangling, but more on that later.
After a great opening sequence (though still not quite as good as the one in 'Skyfall'), the plot kicks into gear: a super nanobot virus is stolen from a secret London lab and a scientist goes missing. It's up to Bond to come out of his self-imposed retirement, find the scientist and track down the nanobot virus. Along the way, he discovers that another (female) agent 'Nomi' has been appointed his iconic 'double O' number. They work separately from each other for a while before finally uniting to bring down the bad guys (Rami Malek and company). There is some good action here: the aforementioned opening sequence, the break in at the secret lab, the sinking of the ship, the shootout in Cuba and the chase through the misty, primordial forests in Norway - all that is effectively staged and well done. It's what's in between is where the issues arise...
While there's been a lot of controversy made about the relinquishing of the famous number, that's the least of the problem. After all - to quote Nomi (Lashana Lynch) the new proprietor of the 007 tag in this movie - it IS only a number, and numbers can be reassigned. The main issue here is what's been done with Bond himself. It appears as if someone just woke (yes, pun intended) up one morning and decided: James Bond has treated women sooo badly all these years, it's now time for him to PAY. And how does one make James Bond pay? Simple: give him a woman whom he truly loves, and - yes, seriously - a daughter. Then, through plot contrivances so overcooked, manipulate it so he can never see them/touch them again. There-take that Mr. Bond, you misogynist woman-user, you!
And if that doesn't make matters any worse, the makers decide to do a one-eighty and kill off Bond at the end. Admittedly, in a movie that's full of confusing turns, it's not exactly clear why he must die. At first you assume it's to keep the blast doors from opening on a timer or something to that effect, but as they don't attempt to reopen after he closes them for the second time, why did he have to remain there? Furthermore, there's Safin's (Rami Malek's) scheme to blind/kill/injure(?) Bond's love interest Madeleine Swann (Léa Seydoux) using some kind of... tea(?): if revenge is his thing, why not just shoot her? And when his plan is collapsing near the end, rather than hold on to Bond's daughter as a hostage for insurance to guarantee his escape, he unfathomably lets her go... why? That tactic makes no sense. Later, we see a scientist fall into a swimming pool-size tank of liquid, where protectively clad workers are tending to it, only for the scientist to burn/melt... why? Even Safin's plan to infect agents of Spectre midway through the movie with the nanobot virus (we see his scientist switching them earlier on or something) while avoiding Bond - whom he then infects much later - seems very convoluted. Yes, this is a Bond you will not fully understand on first viewing.
Craig at least seems reenergized and less bored here than he was in the last three outings (a legacy of knowing his tenure as Bond is finally at an end, perhaps?). As for the addition of 007 having a daughter, look at it for what it is: it was not added to the story for nothing. To quote the song title of the previous Bond movie 'Spectre', the writing is on the wall. The addition of the daughter is neither an accident or a one-off and was inserted into the story for a reason. As the Bond series has a history of aping whatever is in fashion at that particular moment in time (i.e., Hitchcock, Kung Fu movies, Blaxploitation, Star Wars, 80s action movies, Batman, Bourne, and now Marvel, etc), keep an eye out in the future for an accompanying series of movies starring Bond's daughter existing alongside the regular Bond series-aka a 'shared universe'. Yes, you guessed it: just like what Marvel is doing.
So while this movie chronicles the death of Bond, clearly the producers intend it to be more the death of the 'old' Bond and its accompanying machismo that began in the Connery era - as it is, indeed, hinted in the end credits that he will in fact return. But it's clear the second coming will be lacking an edge and be the kind of inoffensive, genteel stuff women will love because he will be more romantic (and good with children). It's a move that will prematurely date the franchise and in particular this installment.
So, in light of all that, where exactly does 'No Time To Die' fall? There are two ways of looking at it. As an action movie, it's perfectly acceptable and competent; but as a Bond movie, however, it pretty much fails. While it delivers on a few good action sequences, what remains is a very diluted Bond adventure. Normally, Bond seduces all the 'Bond girls' - sorry: WOMEN - but in this one, he's left humiliated when he tries to seduce a woman whose only purpose is to turn down his advances (why was she so quick to unbutton his shirt then?) and save his hide because, well, you know, Bond is now too old and inept. The message here is clear: you're obsolete, Mr. Bond; you're yesterday's news. It's time for version 2.0. These are strange times we live in.
After a great opening sequence (though still not quite as good as the one in 'Skyfall'), the plot kicks into gear: a super nanobot virus is stolen from a secret London lab and a scientist goes missing. It's up to Bond to come out of his self-imposed retirement, find the scientist and track down the nanobot virus. Along the way, he discovers that another (female) agent 'Nomi' has been appointed his iconic 'double O' number. They work separately from each other for a while before finally uniting to bring down the bad guys (Rami Malek and company). There is some good action here: the aforementioned opening sequence, the break in at the secret lab, the sinking of the ship, the shootout in Cuba and the chase through the misty, primordial forests in Norway - all that is effectively staged and well done. It's what's in between is where the issues arise...
While there's been a lot of controversy made about the relinquishing of the famous number, that's the least of the problem. After all - to quote Nomi (Lashana Lynch) the new proprietor of the 007 tag in this movie - it IS only a number, and numbers can be reassigned. The main issue here is what's been done with Bond himself. It appears as if someone just woke (yes, pun intended) up one morning and decided: James Bond has treated women sooo badly all these years, it's now time for him to PAY. And how does one make James Bond pay? Simple: give him a woman whom he truly loves, and - yes, seriously - a daughter. Then, through plot contrivances so overcooked, manipulate it so he can never see them/touch them again. There-take that Mr. Bond, you misogynist woman-user, you!
And if that doesn't make matters any worse, the makers decide to do a one-eighty and kill off Bond at the end. Admittedly, in a movie that's full of confusing turns, it's not exactly clear why he must die. At first you assume it's to keep the blast doors from opening on a timer or something to that effect, but as they don't attempt to reopen after he closes them for the second time, why did he have to remain there? Furthermore, there's Safin's (Rami Malek's) scheme to blind/kill/injure(?) Bond's love interest Madeleine Swann (Léa Seydoux) using some kind of... tea(?): if revenge is his thing, why not just shoot her? And when his plan is collapsing near the end, rather than hold on to Bond's daughter as a hostage for insurance to guarantee his escape, he unfathomably lets her go... why? That tactic makes no sense. Later, we see a scientist fall into a swimming pool-size tank of liquid, where protectively clad workers are tending to it, only for the scientist to burn/melt... why? Even Safin's plan to infect agents of Spectre midway through the movie with the nanobot virus (we see his scientist switching them earlier on or something) while avoiding Bond - whom he then infects much later - seems very convoluted. Yes, this is a Bond you will not fully understand on first viewing.
Craig at least seems reenergized and less bored here than he was in the last three outings (a legacy of knowing his tenure as Bond is finally at an end, perhaps?). As for the addition of 007 having a daughter, look at it for what it is: it was not added to the story for nothing. To quote the song title of the previous Bond movie 'Spectre', the writing is on the wall. The addition of the daughter is neither an accident or a one-off and was inserted into the story for a reason. As the Bond series has a history of aping whatever is in fashion at that particular moment in time (i.e., Hitchcock, Kung Fu movies, Blaxploitation, Star Wars, 80s action movies, Batman, Bourne, and now Marvel, etc), keep an eye out in the future for an accompanying series of movies starring Bond's daughter existing alongside the regular Bond series-aka a 'shared universe'. Yes, you guessed it: just like what Marvel is doing.
So while this movie chronicles the death of Bond, clearly the producers intend it to be more the death of the 'old' Bond and its accompanying machismo that began in the Connery era - as it is, indeed, hinted in the end credits that he will in fact return. But it's clear the second coming will be lacking an edge and be the kind of inoffensive, genteel stuff women will love because he will be more romantic (and good with children). It's a move that will prematurely date the franchise and in particular this installment.
So, in light of all that, where exactly does 'No Time To Die' fall? There are two ways of looking at it. As an action movie, it's perfectly acceptable and competent; but as a Bond movie, however, it pretty much fails. While it delivers on a few good action sequences, what remains is a very diluted Bond adventure. Normally, Bond seduces all the 'Bond girls' - sorry: WOMEN - but in this one, he's left humiliated when he tries to seduce a woman whose only purpose is to turn down his advances (why was she so quick to unbutton his shirt then?) and save his hide because, well, you know, Bond is now too old and inept. The message here is clear: you're obsolete, Mr. Bond; you're yesterday's news. It's time for version 2.0. These are strange times we live in.