Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 05:49:29 PM

Login with username, password and session length

No Time To Die (Bond 25)

Started by Blue Jam, December 04, 2019, 02:55:16 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

mothman

The Sanjeev Kohli one, I couldn't get on with, but I can't remember why.

... OK, now I'm confused. I looked it up. He was on the recent (well, June 2020) Moonraker one, which doesn't ring any bells. I'm wracking my brains. Perhaps the sound was bad? I listen to it in my car, and a couple of recent ones have been poorly recorded so I've given up on them. I trust your discernment, MV, maybe I should try it again...

Magnum Valentino

He works up a couple of nice running gags throughout, and is a very endearing comic generally. He was also my couch to 5k 'coach' which is why I ended up sort of needing him in other audio formats (because running is hard and any small comfort is welcome), else I'd probably never have listened to Smershpod at all.

Blue Jam

Quote from: mothman on September 17, 2021, 07:45:19 PM
When it's good (any episode with the aforementioned guests; some of the "sidePods" such as The Long Good Friday one) it's good. But when it's bad (those comedians; any episode that isn't about a Moore Bond, especially the Craigs, which seem to annoy the host) it's dire.

The Al Murray one is the best one, but it probably helps that Moore is also my favourite Bond and I also love Moonraker.

Not so keen on the Craig ones, partly because they keep going on about how very ugly he is, and while I vehemently disagree with them on that point I also think it's just very mean and unnecessary.

Neomod

Quote from: mothman on September 17, 2021, 07:45:19 PM
I still listen to Smershpod but it doesn't half get on my nerves a lot of the time. The host plainly doesn't know a lot about James Bond - it's frequently obvious he's never read any of the books - and displays a telling lack of intellectual curiosity.

Ugh, I sacked that shit off after one episode for those exact reasons.

I'd recommend Matt Gourley's James Bonding podcast. Finished now but still available and the guy even went and stayed at Piz Gloria. That's commitment.

Quote from: lipsink on September 01, 2020, 06:33:26 PM
Yeah From Russia With Love is a close second for me. I'd rather watch Diamonds Are Forever over Thunderball and You Only Live Twice. I genuinely don't know why it's looked down on so much. I kinda love that early 70s vibe to it. Mark Gatiss, I remember described it as "looking like the 1960s had gone off".

I do also enjoy OHMSS but the long stretch where Bond is in character as someone else (just as we're getting to know his Bond) is infuriating.

I'm watching now, and its just so much grimier and grotty compared with OHMSS.

Old Nehamkin

Diamonds Are Forever is a big favourite of mine. I think at heart I love the Bond films best when they step firmly into that sort of Gerry Anderson-esque camp sci-fi territory. I'll always stand up for Die Another Day for similar reasons.

Anyway, can't believe we're only 4 days away from this new one. Hope it's not shit!

mothman

DAF is certainly my favourite Connery.

Bernice

I thought I hated Diamonds are Forever, but really loved it on a rewatch a couple of months ago, particularly Blofeld making an exact double of himself, twice, for no reason and with precisely no bearing on the plot.

Povidone

Quote from: Neomod on September 18, 2021, 08:52:24 AM
Ugh, I sacked that shit off after one episode for those exact reasons.

I'd recommend Matt Gourley's James Bonding podcast. Finished now but still available and the guy even went and stayed at Piz Gloria. That's commitment.

Seconded, I fucking love the decadent Matt Gourley and his twin obsessions of squibs and James Bond. His Ian Fleming impressions on the Superego and Dead Author's podcasts are also worth a listen.

Pinball

Looking forward to this. Hard to believe the trailer was released March 2020...

bgmnts

Would be ace if Bond gets rescued by a Bond from a different dimension and is pressured to get buggered by him, hopefully with an ace pun after ejaculation.

Proper unedited awkward pumping for a few minutes, with a tear trickling down Craig's face.

mothman

That'll teach him to be all cock-of-the-walk with Silva!

So do you think he'll actually die at the end? That's why Danny Boyle allegedly left the project in its early stages, but those reports could also be bollocks. I imagine they'll do a total reboot next, so why not?

Bernice

If that was the case they'd have called it "Time to Die", wouldn't they? They wouldn't lead us up the bloody garden path like that.

Noodle Lizard

Quote from: Bernice on September 26, 2021, 07:59:33 PM
I thought I hated Diamonds are Forever, but really loved it on a rewatch a couple of months ago, particularly Blofeld making an exact double of himself, twice, for no reason and with precisely no bearing on the plot.

Wint & Kidd are among my favourite subvillains. Properly unacceptable, of course - the bit where Bruce Glover does a comedy gay "wooooo!" when Bond is disposing of him is hilariously out of order - but they had a lot more weirdness and personality than even some of the main villains of previous films. They wouldn't be too out of place in a Coen Bros film.

sevendaughters

Quote from: Bernice on September 27, 2021, 07:29:12 AM
If that was the case they'd have called it "Time to Die", wouldn't they? They wouldn't lead us up the bloody garden path like that.

no, it would be perfect, Patricia Routledge looks over his twitching bullet-ridden corpse and clucks "James, this is no time to die, come on!"

greenman

CGI Desmond Llewelyn will utter the title(+007) mid film when he turns up in a robotic swan.

Thomas

Quote from: thecuriousorange on September 26, 2021, 11:11:58 PM
So do you think he'll actually die at the end? That's why Danny Boyle allegedly left the project in its early stages, but those reports could also be bollocks. I imagine they'll do a total reboot next, so why not?

I'd love for Craig's Bond to die in this. The conclusion for every preceding Bond has been a sort of damp contractual squib. They weren't consciously written a finale - their contracts just ran out. As far as I know, this is the first time a Bond film has ever been written to accomodate a proper ending for the character (except, perhaps, for the messy Spectre).

Surely we can't have 007 just retire (again) and drive off into the sunset (again). You can't satisfyingly imagine Craig's borderline-psychopathic Bond settling down and eating toast for the rest of his life. He tried it for ten minutes in Casino Royale and immediately reverted to killing people. At the very least, he should have an ambiguous Holmesian ending, tumbling over a waterfall, never seen again. Felix Leiter finds the DB5 parked up at the Golden Gate Bridge, keyring dangling from the ignition.

frajer

Quote from: Thomas on September 27, 2021, 12:17:40 PM
Felix Leiter finds the DB5 parked up at the Golden Gate Bridge, keyring dangling from the ignition.

Felix chuckles wryly. "Dogging even in death. You fucking rascal, James."

JAMES BOND WILL RETURN
IN
YOUR MUM IN A CAR PARK

Old Nehamkin

#199
Good post Thomas.

I think I'm OK with the idea of Craig's Bond being killed off, mainly because his era has formed such a continuity-ridden cul-de-sac that began by insisting on a clean break with the films that came before and seems set to do the same thing on the other end. When you do three movies in a row themed ever more doggedly around Bond being too old for this shit and needing to fuck off, you're pretty firmly rejecting the old custom of having a floating timeline that you simply pass on to the next actor (a conceit which, again, the Craig films started off by breaking from, and incidentally, something I'm not even sure would be readily accepted by audiences in today's pop-culture climate in which I feel people tend to be more precious and demanding about the fidelity of long-term continuity, worldbuilding etc.)

So yeah, it seems pretty likely that the (presumable) next entry in the series isn't going to take place in the same timeline as this one, and so I don't really see why the screenwriters shouldn't go for a more definitive or status quo-shifting ending than a Bond film has had before. Thomas mentioned that this is the first Bond film to be consciously written as the finale for the star, but it may also be the first one to be written without any prerequisite of leaving the universe intact for the follow-up entry.

I just hope that whenever they get round to making the next one they simply let the new Bond have a nice, self-contained adventure without being troubled by any overwrought origin story gunk. And also that the producers institute a permanent ban on any and all boring Bondless B-plots about the internal politics of Mi6. And that they go back to casting regular unfamous character actors as M, Q and Moneypenny rather than sexy hollywood hotshots who demand to be indulged with plentiful screentime and juicy character arcs. (none of my wishes will ever happen)

The Culture Bunker

Quote from: Old Nehamkin on September 27, 2021, 07:22:17 PM
When you do three movies in a row themed ever more doggedly around Bond being too old for this shit and needing to fuck off, you're pretty firmly rejecting the old custom of having a floating timeline that you simply pass on to the next actor
I always sort of took it that all the Connery/Lazenby/Moore films were supposed to be the "same" Bond, even though that covers over 20 years. After all, Moore was older than Connery. Having the same people playing Moneypenny, Q and M (until death got in the way, in the case of the last of those) helped too.

sevendaughters

I always interpreted it as "James Bond" being the name given to whomsoever becomes 007, but I'm not willing to back up my interpretation.

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth

If James Bond is a code name, why would he also need the 007?

Magnum Valentino

007 is the internal designation, James Bond is the field moniker.

I don't buy that theory, but also have no issue with those that do. I find it simultaneously credible and uninteresting.

Old Nehamkin

#204
Quote from: sevendaughters on September 27, 2021, 08:02:58 PM
I always interpreted it as "James Bond" being the name given to whomsoever becomes 007, but I'm not willing to back up my interpretation.

This has become a fairly popular theory in some circles, but I've personally never found it a particularly compelling idea or one that really makes any sense in-universe. James Bond is a character with a fairly consistent set of personality traits and a handful of fixed biographical details. He was a commander in the navy, he's been married and widowed (at least in the pre-Craig era), he has a family coat of arms and (more recently) a childhood home complete with his parents' gravestones. Besides which, I can't work out what the strategic benefit is supposed to be of assigning the same cover-name to a series of different secret agents over the span of several decades.

For me, I'm happy to just imagine the Bond of Connery through Brosnan as existing in a state of comic-style limbo, and am at peace with the broad-scale floatiness of a series which allows its main character to grouchily dismiss the Beatles in one entry and dangle perilously from the millennium dome in another.


sevendaughters

it is an uninteresting way of viewing it but also when you see a Bond after reading le Carre's ouevre you see how little Bond is based in anything close to reality.

mothman

The conceit is that the first five Bonds are the same person, and you ignore the fact his adventures then span forty years. It doesn't really hold water though, there is very little continuity of experience. Do you think Dalton went into space? Or Brosnan? It's easier to think of Dalton and Brosnan being a new iteration of the character. Like Connery/Lazenby/Moore, there's a whole Cold War prehistory you can imagine for Bonds 1 & 2 (with Craig being Bond 3).

Old Nehamkin

Quote from: mothman on September 27, 2021, 08:21:05 PM
Do you think Dalton went into space?

I think he's got a dim feeling at the back of his mind that he might have been into space at some point, but nothing more than that. He is trapped in an eternal vague middle-age as the world moves on around him and he can only really recall his most recent couple of adventures before things get fuzzy. He tries to avoid thinking too much about the purgatory he is doomed to though, hence the drinking and the shagging.

mothman

That's quite meta though. And yet it nicely sums up the nature of the Bondian existence. And yet many of the same people who're seemingly happy with that idea (in as much as they ever think about it - I mean, have you MET the serious Bond fans? Headcases one and all) will be up in arms if this iteration of Bond dies...

Old Nehamkin