No Time to Die has it all to do
It seems like a lifetime ago that Daniel Craig decided to risk “slashing his wrists,” and announce that he was going to play James Bond for one final send off. Although the trailers have been promising, alongside the cast and crew being incredibly stacked with talent, there are still concerns on my part about the last film in Craig's Bond era with No Time to Die. So, let us get into why and in order to do that, lets recap on Craigs Bond movies up to this point.
Craig’s tenure as Bond has been better than most. He started with a home run, in what I consider to be one of the best action movies, and by far the best Bond movie ever made with Casino Royale. It was dark, brutal, but most importantly, kept the spirit of what James Bond is in the films, and the books from Ian Fleming. He was both a suave man with a quip, but also a hardened killer who would do anything to accomplish his mission. Everything about it is wonderful, and I would go as far to say that it is one of those rare movies that I cannot find a single fault with. Vesper Lyn was the most complex Bond girl, someone who was more than just eye candy and could challenge 007; Le Chiffre was one of the best villains, and Craig took Bond to a level that no actor had even come close to reaching, barring Timothy Dalton in License to Kill (somewhat of a hot take I know.)
Then came Quantum of Solace, which took the wind out of Craig's sails a bit. Funnily enough, I have come to appreciate this movie over time, just not as a Bond film. Due to the 2008 writers’ strike, director Marc Forster and Craig had to write significant chunks of the film themselves and ended up creating the first ever sequel in the franchise. Problem is, it is basically a knock off version of a Bourne movie, but if you treat it as an epilogue to Casino Royale it is alright. James Bond finally becomes the Bond we know and love from previous incarnations, and it features some great scenes with good character development, but this is all undermined with a rubbish main plot that drags on (even though the film is the shortest in the franchise,) terrible shaky camera work, and a villain that is laughably feeble.
Then came another brilliant return to form for Craig with Skyfall, a film that quickly became the first and only Bond movie to break the billion-dollar box office barrier. Being directed by Sam Mendes, it was a more reserved outing, casting Craig as a Bond who was slowly becoming obsolete with modern technology and his advancing age. I always find it weird that Bond went from being the brash youngster earning his 00 badge, to being a grizzled veteran so quickly, but that is really my only gripe with Skyfall. The cinematography from Wally Pfister is the best in the entire series, and the move to have Judi Dench’s M as the main Bond girl was genius, giving her the send-off she deserved with a tragic but uplifting ending. So, when it was announced that Mendes and his crew were going to be making the next Bond film in the franchise as well, we all thought, surely nothing could go wrong — right?
Then it did, my god it did. All my worries for No Time to Die stem from the absolute disaster that is Spectre, one of my least favourite Bond movies by far. While it does not have the worst story, or presentation, or even acting in the Bond franchise, it commits the worst sin I can think of for a Bond film; it’s boring. Spectre is nearly 3 hours long, and barring the opening action sequence, does not have an exciting moment in it. The dialogue is stilted, the action scenes are lifeless, and it makes the cardinal sin that many franchises fell into around this time, by attempting to copy Marvel's cinematic universe, without any of the planning that that franchise went through into introducing its weaving plotlines.
This leads into why I feel No Time to Die could be in trouble. Spectre introduces Bond’s most iconic villain, Blofeld, played by Christoph Waltz who is vastly underutilised in the role. When his appearance and the titular shady organisation of the film are shown, it is revealed that Spectre have been pulling the strings of every single Craig Bond movie. They controlled Le Chiffre, Quantum and Skyfall’s villain Silva, but none of it makes a lick of sense, with gaping plot holes immediately coming into question the minute Blofeld reveals this plot twist. In one fell swoop every Craig Bond movie became weaker, the villains less important, because an angry half-brother, stroking his cat has been shoehorned in as the big bad guy of the series.
On top of that, Spectre introduced James Bond to another Bond girl that he falls in love with, Dr Madeleine Swann, and retires at the end of the film to live a life of peace with her. While this could have been great if the chemistry were there, it isn’t. In fact, it comes off borderline creepy due the near 20-year age gap between Craig and Lea Seydoux, giving me vibes of the awful chemistry of Pierce Brosnan and Halle Berry in Die Another Day, which also ranks near the bottom of films in the Bond canon for me.
For No Time to Die to work, both of these troubling elements must be at the fore of the movie, due to how much time has been spent setting them up. This seems to be the case, judging by the promising trailer. However, they already seem to be the weak links to the rest of what looks an exciting Bond film. Rami Malek’s villain looks great, but Blofeld seems completely pointless and shoehorned in; and when Bond gets emotional at seeing Madeline again after they have split for some unknown reason, all I could think was one thing — who cares? I have more of a love-in for the return of Felix Leiter than I do with Madeline if I am being honest.
It would be such a shame if the actor who was the first to portray Bond in line with his book counterpart is saddled with a mediocre finish. However, the same worries were aired after Quantum, and Bond managed to bounce back. Let us hope lighting does strike twice for 007.
