No Time to Die:might have been good, if it hadn’t been made by James Bond

I’ve been watching the movie for exactly one week, and I haven’t gotten out of the plot. Sometimes when I think of the ending in class, I have a heart attack, in a feeling that I want to curse but can not curse out. I was indeed moved by the ending, after all, Daniel’s Bond is my favorite character since adulthood, and watching him die a heroic death on the screen, I could not not not be moved. But that doesn’t stop me from thinking that “Death Without Dying” is essentially a disappointing James Bond movie – or not a James Bond movie at all.It tells the story of Bond, who, five years after retiring, has to accept an offer from his CIA friend to fight for justice again because the MI6 biological weapon has fallen into the wrong hands. He accidentally discovered during his investigation that his former girlfriend Madeleine had not betrayed him and had given birth to a child for him

I think the problem is very obvious and very serious by this point in the writing. Is this a family ethics soap opera, or is Bond not supposed to have children? Let me put it this way: any character has the right to be a father on the screen, except James Bond. Because the appeal of the character is that he’s all alone, unattached, that he sleeps with all the world’s beautiful women and still manages to walk away, flirtatious and ruthless. The first thing you need to do is to get a good idea of what you are getting into.

The famous British non-fiction writer Ben Macintyre has written: Bond has no friends, no political stance, no family, no past, and it is in such conditions that he is able to fight for the Queen and country without distractions, always alone and sad, which is the core of the character. The decision to stuff him with a child was both lame and absurd – how could Bond allow himself to keep a child? Didn’t he know that a child would be a handle?Let James Bond just do James Bond, do not turn him into Iron Man or Wolverine, he does not need a child to set off his humanity, he does not need to sacrifice himself for his wife and children is also already a hero. Which brings me to the second point that makes me out-and-out angry: they killed off Bond.I’d like to ask Mr. Macintyre how he felt after watching the film. Did you want to knock the book on the director’s head? Yes, Bond is the type of character that never dies, he wanders in the edge of life and death, but always able to turn the danger into success. This is also one of the essence of the role. Now, I don’t know how many years brain thrombosis can write such a plot: Bond not only died, or for the wife and children died.What the ACTUAL FUCK????At the end of the third act, Bond is poisoned by the villain Safin, who only has to get close to Madeleine and Mathilde (Bond’s daughters) and they will die. Not only that, the poison can be easily contagious, meaning that even if he does not touch them, but touched others, one by one, sooner or later will come into contact with them and then kill them. What a perfect solution, Bond can only go to death, right?

And not to mention how vulgar this plot is, this is simply the universe level out of character. the last scene, Bond stood on the roof of the building, staring at the sky flying missiles, eyes calm and relieved. I’m sorry, I don’t know who this is, but it’s not James Bond. Casino Royale” shows us a 007 filled with an almost coarse vitality. He has been counted, poisoned, lost the love of his life, and could not pass the simplest test …… But none of this affects him to come back to the battle line again and again, for the Queen and the country to go through fire. Whether in the book or the film, Bond’s image is always the same: even though he has nothing, all over the body, but also will still trudge in the suffering, a forward, for Queen and country.007, as the protagonist of an enduring series of IP, has irreversible rules. I dare say one of them is that he cannot die. He is the role that we can watch him born and die without worrying that he will really go away. He will be temporarily defeated, but never truly defeated. That was his aura and his magic, and it was this impracticality that generations of viewers loved about him. Now it’s a good thing, all kinds of clichéd love stories, family warmth, fathers born to die for their daughters ….. This is “Hurricane Rescue”, right?(No, no, because this is not as good as “Hurricane Rescue”.)Other than that, I have to spit on Ms. Madeleine Swann again and again. This character failed miserably in Ghostbusters, and was basically not saved in Immaculate Conception. She is a very poorly portrayed character: we don’t know her personality (in contrast, we know what Vesper and Paloma are like as soon as they appear), we can’t empathize with her, and her character is almost unmemorable. No one will question why Bond loves Vesper, but you only have to do a search to see a whole lot of people confused about how Bond fell in love with her.

I don’t deny that Léa Seydoux was outstanding in “The Life of Adele,” but casting her as Bond Girl was a bad decision, for which the casting director deserves to be dunked in a pigsty. She pretty much only has two expressions in the movie: sleepy, and sad, but other than that she and Daniel don’t have any on-screen chemistry (probably because she’s almost 20 years younger than he is). This is not my own words, I quote a few random Rotten Tomatoes reviews:

“The attraction of the two leads is undeniable, but there’s not a single spark of romance between them. Their interactions are slightly awkward and don’t light up the screen the way Bond and Vesper did in 2006’s Casino Royale.””If anything, Lashana Lynch’s new 007 is a much more interesting subject to interact with, compared to Madeleine. The lack of chemistry between Bond and Madeleine is unbearable, and that wouldn’t have been a problem – but the movie is built precisely on Bond’s fervent love for her (Daniel Craig and Eva Green were great in Casino Royale, which is why, four films later, seeing Bond visit Vesper’s grave, still moves us deeply).”

“The problem is that the end of the movie is built on a relationship that is barely dramatic at all: Madeleine’s character is so thin that she can only be a shadow of the deceased Vesper – and that love is so poignantly played by Eva Green that you fully believe it can penetrate James Bond, a sharpshooter for his country.”

“Madeleine and Bond’s chemistry never fails to convince …… To be fair, all the Bond girls of the era are a distant second to Vesper.””Unfortunately, even with all the affection and even with all the beautiful words of affection, we still have trouble believing that the couple is deeply in love with each other. It’s a shame because, in the end, it’s this relationship, this love, that becomes the backbone of this movie.”There’s a lot more to it than that, and I can find the original text for anyone who wants to see it all. I like this kind of blatant pull stepping.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Proudly powered by WordPress | Theme: Funky Blog by Crimson Themes.