Skip to main content

Nanobots aren’t just for Christmas.

No Time to Die

(SPOILERS) You know a Bond movie is in trouble when it resorts to wholesale appropriation of lines and even the theme song from another in order to “boost” its emotional heft. That No Time to Die – which previewed its own title song a year and a half before its release to resoundingly underwhelmed response, Grammys aside – goes there is a damning indictment of its ability to eke out such audience investment in Daniel Craig’s final outing as James (less so as 007). As with Spectre, the first half of No Time to Die is, on the whole, more than decent Bond fare, before it once again gets bogged down in the quest for substance and depth from a character who, regardless of how dapper his gear is, resolutely resists such outfitting.

Nomi: I have a thing for old wrecks.

By far the movie’s most egregious act is the use of Louis Armstrong’s all-time-high Bond song We Have All the Time in the World and Bond uttering as much, not once but twice. Whatever claim the Craig era has to have struck out in an individual direction – and charmless yobbo Bond was certainly a break with his predecessors – is dashed by the makers kneeling to the memory of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service and the one really moving, affecting Bond movie (the reason that one works is because George Lazenby is willing and able to play vulnerable; Craig, in contrast, continually begs the question, rather like his vodka martini’s preparation, of why you should give a damn). It’s quite appallingly lazy. Bond has never stooped to feeding upon itself in quite such a shameless, brazen way before, to admitting “Yes, this one is so much better than we are, so we’ll have some of it”.

Particularly since it further underlines how lifeless No Time to Die’s central romance is. As with national-treasure Judi’s M, the Craig’s era just can’t help banging on about things better left buried, so the ghost of Vesper dutifully follows him around everywhere he goes, forgetting that James looked far too thuggish at the time to get hopelessly lost in a romance (whatever the makers tried to tell us otherwise; again, go to OHMSS for the one that worked). Vesper’s replaced by Madeleine Swann, Eon compounding the errors of Spectre by making her the love of Bond’s life (or is it really Vesper, I’m never quite clear due to the harping on), and neither Seydoux nor Craig can do anything to convince us Bond and Maddie have any chemistry. Which made the initial prospect that she might have been working for Spectre all along – we know it’s a slim chance, but we hope so all the same – an appealingly schismatic one.

It’s very telling that the parts of No Time to Die that work for Swann – and there aren’t many – involve her dark secret or her interaction with Rami Malik’s Beelzebub Mephistopheles. I mean Lyutsifer Safin (seriously, WTF?) And then further, Madeleine Jr’s (Coline Defaud) prologue encounter, possibly the best sequence in the movie, as she shoots his diminutive Michael Myers alike before heading out on a frozen lake (what happens next, we never discover, since their relationship over the years is left more than vague. The same as how Abaddon Belial looks about Madeleine’s age, even with that makeup, despite being a good two decades older than her). Running about with a mortified moppet is rarely a good look for a movie, unless you’re Sigourney Weaver, and you know, the moppet has a glimmer of personality (which is why Old Nick leaving her after she bites him is amusing in more ways than one, as it’s a signal the writers are just dog tired with this dispensable plotline). Yet the backend of No Time to Die is pretty much that.

It’s another case of don’t tell us. Invest us. Don’t tell us Bond loves Maddie, make us feel it (without resorting to We Have All the Time in the World). Don’t tell us Bond cares about his new-found moppet (Lisa-Dorah Sonnet); give them some kind of er, bond, beyond a stuffed toy. And don’t tell us Bond’s self-sacrifice is profoundly affecting; make us weep for the loss. Rather than, you know, breathe a sigh of relief.

Knowing the outcome to No Time to Die was at Craig’s behest rather puts me in mind of sourpuss Harrison Ford’s attitude to Han Solo. Except that Han really had nowhere to go once he’d been derogued and domesticated. I guess neither did Craig Bond, even after they’d done every damn thing they could to give him some additional dimensionality and still come up short. It’s been suggested Danny Boyle fell out of directing this effort because he wanted a light-hearted romp with Russkies as villains (perhaps as a break from all that soul-shredding 2012 Olympics predictive programming). But Craig wanted to die.

Probably because he’d seen Logan or something (it can work to kill a hero, but only if you have an idea. Rather than, you know, a Purvis and Wade script with some spot welding from Fleabag). Toasting Bond simply emphasised there was no power to his send off. If they really had to riff on OHMSS, they should have had Craig exclaim “This never happened to the other fellow” just before he exploded (I’m doubtful Dan is overly bright; I suspect he took the part in Logan Lucky simply because it had Logan in the title. Making a Soderbergh movie tends to benefit no one, not even Steven’s CV).

The most affecting sequence in No Time to Die comes much, much earlier, and relates to a character short changed not only in the Craig era but Bond generally. Previously, that had much to do with an almost perverse desire to recast the role each movie (and when they did return to an earlier actor, that seemed almost perverse in itself). Jeffrey Wright is one of the unqualified highlights of the Craig era, and every time his Felix Leiter appeared on screen, I wanted to follow his adventures rather than the spy we’re lumbered with. Obviously, if they were going to kill Bond off, they’d kill of Felix first. As a taster. And for weight. Gravitas. All that stuff. On the plus side, though, Wright makes every moment count and reverberate in a manner Craig couldn’t dream of, so his exit is genuinely upsetting; I was just glad to see him again, after he’d been so rudely ignored in the previous two movies.

Q: Can I just have one nice evening place before the world explodes?

So we’ve dealt with the deaths and returns, largely, and I’ll address the plotline shortly. What of the other supporting factors? The irony of the Craig era is some very good key casting. Ben Whishaw returns as Q, but this time as GAY Q, in case you hadn’t realised that Ben only ever plays fey characters (except for Paddington, who’s merely bear-curious). Moneypenny’s role is a bit thankless, but the whole treatment of Naomie Harris’ version has been positively perverse, so making her final stint borderline redundant is about right. Rory Kinnear is very likeable as Bill Tanner and like Wright’s Felix, the indelible version of the character. But in Bill’s case, well, entirely inessential. M…

Q: Blofeld's eyeball unlocked.

What exactly happened to M between movies? He’s suddenly become entirely inept and morally unconscionable. He’s basically Homer Simpson, with a “Doh!” response to how the deadly DNA killer developed at his invitation was misused, allowing Swann to see Blofeld because she’s the only one he will see (that’s EXACTLY why you shouldn’t let her), and somehow letting Blofeld’s bionic eyeball pass undetected in a hyper-security facility.

That’s the returnees. We also have the new 007, in the form of Lashana Lynch, most remarkable because she’s the first chunky 00 – there’s no other explanation for trousers approaching one’s neckline – rather than for having assumed the 7 mantle, and clearly not built for speed, hence the mostly carefully curated camera angles. Ostensibly, she’s the “woke” part of the movie, taking over the franchise from the toxic male, although in any other era (you could easily see her in the Moore to Brosnan run as an amusing intrusion upon the status quo), she’d hardly raise an eyebrow.

Mostly, she suffers from that self-same problem the series currently suffers in any area; whenever it attempts to hit a mark, be it romance or emotional baggage or sexual politics, in looks a bit silly. Lynch is fine in the way Seydoux is fine; forgettable, a bit bland, nothing you’ll remember apart from the cheap shot ducking David Dencick’s Valdo Obruchev in a nanobot vat for making a racial slur. That, and relinquishing her 007 status because she sensed through the aether it wouldn’t do to have Bond die without his designated number attached.

The contrast to this vague sense of hopelessness, cast wise, is trying to have a simple, breezy good time. No Time to Die scores in exactly the same way A Quantum of Solace (Gemma Arterton), Skyfall (the Bond-Moneypenny rapport) and Spectre (the Bond-Belluci lust) did. The entire gamut of Bond and Paloma (Ana de Armas) is an absolute highlight of the movie, as she introduces herself as a bit of a klutz before revealing she’s devastatingly effective (you’re never remotely convinced Nomi is). The whole section of the meet up, segueing into the ultra-weird and very obviously evocative of Rothschilds circa-1972 dinner parties Spectre/Elite meet up, followed by her turning incredibly kick-ass, is a delight. When Bond offers a farewell “You were great”, you can but concur. She really was. You want a female Bond movie. Make Paloma. She’s a gift.

Elsewhere, there’s Billy Magnussen, a much more serviceable bad guy than either of the (inevitably, despite the prejudicial connotations) disfigured ones. Malek can’t get over looking about fifteen, which means, once he’s shorn of his mask, his impact diminishes. Waltz is simply a bit shit as Blofeld, once again, which means that, even though he has a glorified cameo, he helps to collapse the overall import of this 00-edifice.

During the first half of No Time to Die, I was pretty convinced it was the best-directed Bond movie. The staging and editing of the action sequences is superlative, from the Italian graveyard bomb to the first of several enviably versatile car chases, to the Cuba encounter and poor Felix’s demise. But let’s not forget Cary Fukunanaga, who did such a grand job on the first season of True Detective, also has a story and screenplay credit, so is at least partly responsible for the third act drudge that follows, failing to turn the series into an effective first-person shooter and falling on tired and pedestrian devices and plot developments that ultimately do for both the movie and the sense of continuity he was carrying from scene to scene and act to act, instilling a palpable internal tension to the proceedings. Fukunaga fumbles it, and even employing the reliably “building” Hans Zimmer score cannot redress the balance.

As to balance, we have to wonder about Phoebe Waller-Bridge’s contribution, deemed as it was important enough to garner a screenplay credit. One has to guess she refashioned much of the dialogue, but much of it could easily have been written by “lesser” luminaries. You know, Hugh Dennis making “small pox in a lunchbox” gags and Bond joshing that Swann’s next revelation, post his child, will be “another child”. Proponents of the Craig era will make a case for his burly wit, but I’ve found him mostly rather dour and self-serious, and this is no different when his character “arc” gets in the way of the story, which was ever thus (he has a producer credit).

Safin: People want oblivion and a few of us are born to build it for them.

Of course, Phoebe is not simply an Elite stooge, no matter her woke-ing of Bond (apparently, she turned departed Donald Glover’s TV spin on Mr. and Mrs. Smith on the grounds of, and I quote, his being a “fucktard”). One has to look more broadly at who dictates Eon’s content to pinpoint the plot expediencies here. Who feeds Eon their MacGuffins? Are Purvis and Wade as immaterial as Chris Carter when it comes to submitting to and facilitating a broader agenda?

Last time out, Bond was injected full of nanotech (smart blood), and we barely batted an eye in the face of the bigger threat (a NWO engineered behind the scenes by Blofeld that only the stalwart MI6 could fend off). Was this a stealth manoeuvre, such that it isn’t the smart blood that kills Bond – he’s injected again this time – but rather smart missiles? Either way, No Time to Die is in retreat. M (per above) is now making all the wrong moves, and Project Heracles, “a bioweapon containing nanobots that infect like a virus upon touch” (per the Wiki summary) developed by British government is, shockingly, misused by the bad guys rather than those who would use it for morally upstanding purposes. This is a well-worn trope, naturally, so there’s little point spending much time on it (again, it seems early on as if Bond might discover the whole world to be corrupt – in the way at-odds nations can unite suddenly in response to a global “threat”, almost as if powers are only nominally at odds and really cajoled by octopoid tentacles behind the scenes – the only surprise being the movie mustered even that level of doubt).

It’s telling that the scientists at the opening are joking about notoriously deadly and transmissible smallpox (and Ebola) before revealing via Obruchev – David Denick, as your comedy foreigner par excellence, see also Alan Cumming in Goldeneye – a contagion that actually is transmissible in the manner of the Pasteurian disease model. This one still requires direct exposure (via a “mist”) but once in one’s system, others can be “infected” (so, see shedding for a comparison). One can also be an asymptomatic carrier (hence Bond's self-sacrifice).

No Time to Die embraces popular DNA science for its MacGuffin, able to target an individual, a family, or entire ethnic group. Fortunately, this is very easy to control and blow up its manufacturing base, enabling a trad third-act finale. The movie was initially due for release just as the plandemic was taking hold, of course (and before even: 2019, when Boyle was still attached), and some commentators have suggested its engineered viral outbreak plot may be a little too close to home for some viewers. The movie’s a hit, but it looks like a very limited one in the States, and its sure not to recoup its considerable costs on its cinema release alone. Plus, even given this is *just* one incarnation of Bond – while the framed portrait of frickin’ Dench M was no surprise, it was nice to see Bernard Lee, previously on a wall in The World is Not Enough – thanks to Daniel it’s still a Debbie Downer of an ending. If Bond can die, anyone can…

Generally, my take on the Craig era – and I know there are those who will strongly disagree, claiming there’s bags of gags – is one of dour self-importance that diminishes the series’ best virtues. As if Licence to Kill had been a hit and remained the franchise template. That approach, the Bond Identity, served Casino Royale well, but nothing since has offered a sufficiently robust plot for the two modes –excess of scheme and budget versus studious character arc – to marry successfully. As such, I don’t mourn this Bond’s passing. Indeed, I think it’s really quite alright.

Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.