No Time To Die and non-spoiler review

[Barry]

      < Introduction 1:
Since 1959 the Fleming estate and the moviemakers (EON) had attempted to reclaim parts of James Bond (Casino Royale, SPECTRE, Blofeld that  they no longer legally had. Over the last decade and a half, starting with Craig’s Casino Royale, they slowly got them all back and put them into the movies as they got them. This movie brings them all together as if it were pieces of a puzzle.

Introduction 2:
This movie play homage to a few non Craig Bond movie, using the same dialogue and even the old music.

Introduction 3:
Woman are treated so differently and better here.

Introduction 4: I have seen every Bond movie at least ten times. (except 1968's Casino Royale)  The older it is the more I have seen it.  I have read the Fleming books about four times each and I am currently up to Diamonds are Forever.  I have also read the non Fleming books. I accidently , watching this movie, finished a Bond line of dialogue.. “I shall use my time.”

Non-Spoiler Review:
This is not just a great James Bond movie, this is a great movie. 5 stars out of 5.  It doesn’t look like a Bond movie, there is no great action adventure opening and just a few chase scenes. It is story about people.  And friends.

But that is all can tell you in a non-spoiler review.  If you like the Bond movies, see this one! And if you don’t you might want to see this one.  Craig is fantastic. He has captured the “book” Bond perfectly. I don't want to give anything away, except, as I said, it pulls everything together.  

I saw it bog screen in a Dolby theater and picture and sound were great.

[David Vaughn]

I may end up going to the theater to see this one. 

[Paul Heroy]

Thanks, Barry. Really appreciate your info and perspective on this, and the Star Trek & Marvel franchises.

There's been a lot of... agenda driven BS spouted about this movie in some places I read online so it's great to see this.

[Barry]

I may end up going to the theater to see this one.

Please go see it. And see it before someone tells you what the plot is

[AVSCraig]

I'm looking forward to seeing this too. 

[Barry]

If you want me to write a much fuller and accurate review it would be a spoiler review and I would do that.  I would not reveal very much but If That is what is wanted I would do it. Probably put it up Sunday

[Paul Heroy]

I'm set to see it Sunday afternoon, so I'll wait until then before clicking on this thread again. 

[tripplej]

Thanks Barry for your quick review.

I haven't read the books but I have seen all the movies.

Will check this one out in the theater soon.

[Barry]

    Sean Connery will always be the favorite James Bond. Daniel Craig is the best.
 
Huh?

The James Bond of the books was an assassin. He killed people and had to have the personality to do so.  He was a shallow character, with a shallow name.  He lived on a civil servants salary, 1,500 lbs a year, and 1,000 more as a bonus if he did his job well. He was fussy, but not sophisticated. He was not terribly attractive, he looked like Hoagie Carmichael, but with a scar. And he had no sense of humor whatsoever. He hated to kill in “cold blood” but he did. And he was destroying himself from the inside. In fact, Fleming kills him off in “From Russia with Love.” He had reached the end of the line. (He returns in Dr. NO after his publisher pressured him.)
 
And Fleming could NOT sell that Bond to the movies.
 
So director Terrance Young and Sean Connery invented a LIKABLE character because that was what the movies of the 1960s wanted. Connery was good looking, affluent, full of humor, sophisticated and popular with woman. And buy did they tone down the violence.  Did you know that when the re-released the first Bond movies the edited-out sense where Bond was overly violent? (IN Dr. No, for example, he shots someone six times, in the release only once.
 
They made the character likeable.
 
But times have changed. Casino Royale, when first produced in 1954 was deemed to violent, sadistic and sexual for CBS to continue with it. For those reasons it was a big success 16 years ago with Craig!
 
Craig had captured the essence of the James Bond of the books.  Of course he is updated, he doesn’t smoke or beat up women. But, while we root for him, he does not play a likable character. And, as in the book, he is self-destructing. He cannot trust anyone anymore. So Connery will always be more liked, Craig witll always be the James Bond of the Books.
 
I loved this movie, this is a fitting end to Craig’s journey.  It is full of surprises and glances back to the original movies.

[AVSCraig]

Thanks Barry. I'm really looking for to watching this last film, and re-visiting the other Daniel Craig Bond films - all in a row over 5 nights or so.

[Paul Heroy]

Saw it Sunday, really good overall. 

Noticed at least a couple of callbacks but I'm sure there were more. 

[David Vaughn]

Finally saw this today. Wow...what a movie! Very emotional and much more dramatic than I expected. In a lot of ways, it's a psychological thriller. While Connery's Bond was great, in my mind Craig is the best of the bunch beating out the great Sean Connery by a whisker. 

[tripplej]

Finally got the chance to see it in Imax. Wow, this has to be one of the best Bond movies that I have seen in a long time.. The ending, wow, double wow.

I do want to say thou, I will definitely see Ana de Armas in whatever movie she will be in next.

[David Vaughn]

Couldn't agree more (on the movie and the actress!). 

[bmoney]

I’m curious the direction they will go here on out. Did not expect that!