Sin tiempo para morir

Best bond film after casino royale. The action sequence are breathtaking the score by Hans Zimmer is awesome but the best part about this film is cinematography by Linus Sandgrenhe he has outdone himself.

I alway liked Daniel Craig but in this film Rami Malek and Léa Seydoux stole the show but as they say great villan makes a great film and no doubt this is great film Go watch it without a doubt.

This is a very odd film, which feels far too melodramatic and miserable to be a James Bond story. It's more reminiscent of a serialised romantic drama or a tragedy, than that of a spy thriller. There are contradicting styles in the script that leave the viewer totally confused as to why certain events or decisions are made and no real depth to any of characters that make the story plausible or, well, worth emotionally investing in.

If you think back to one of the classic Bond films you'll remember a much more optimistic, simple and pleasurable experience. Every story was unique and the next adventure was a whole new mission. This suave and somewhat-blithe secret agent was solely invested in protecting national security and saving the world from unhinged megalomaniacs. Along the way there were interesting characters, exotic locations, beautiful women, stylish outfits, new gadgets and the most modern of cars (also fitted with the latest gadgets).

The five Craig-era films have spent 15 years moping about the same event which happened back in the first, without really moving on. His Bond seems more like a 'prima donna' that leaves, sulks and refuses to help more times than a French trade union. I refuse to believe than anyone with his psychological and unstable emotional profile would ever be drafted in as a 00 Agent. What is also forgotten is than Bond is a secret agent, not a frontline commando - aka John Rambo. He should use stealth, intelligence and subterfuge, with only action and violence used when absolutely necessary.

Still, having actually enjoyed Skyfall (which subsequently seems like the odd one out in the series) and having waited years since the last (thank you Covid-19), I accepted an invite to a pre-screening.

The positives:

• The 'alternative' 007 was actually a good character. She was physically imposing enough to be believable as another 00 Agent and is a good actress. Nothing worse than being told that a size-0 model can boot a 'pro-wrestler' sized henchman across the room and forced to accept it. Though, replacing the designated 'Agent 007' so soon, after going missing... I question both the realism and motive here.

• The filmography was impressive. Maybe the large screen helps amplify how good the camera-work quality really is. Some lovely shooting involved.

The negatives:

• Rami Malek's character made no sense and was effectively 'cardboard'. To have an Oscar-winning actor and effectively make him a dull two-dimensional side character is a total under use of talent.

• The plot and script writing. One of the things that is known about this film is how the script was rewritten mid/post production, and it shows. It's all over the place. What appears evident is how the first cut must have felt too gloomy in editing, so the producers brought in Waller-Bridge to lighten it up. Unfortunately, adding in random comedy lines or moments does not take away how miserable this film is.

• The odd logic and lack of people. The reshoots have clearly affected how scenes play out. For example, instead of controlling missions from a control centre (think Goldeneye), Ralph Fiennes (M) was just in his office with Rory Kinnear, seeming almost low budget. The final scene was just six people in an office with a drink - where on Earth is the rest of the intelligence service in this who film? Clearly 'social distancing' themselves from this mess.

• The romance. The chemistry between Bond and leading love interest is about as reactive as a nobel gas. Flat and painful. So, to have two films of the same thing is beyond the pale.

• The music. I can't even remember the theme tune, so not even worth my time commenting on. Clearly it was so bad that Hans Zimmer instead decided to base the soundtrack using 'On Her Majesty's Secret Service' all the way. Why plagiarise a film from the 60s and use arguably one of the worse films in the franchise? Clearly, Louis Armstrong was not available to decline.

• Treatment of classic characters. It's clear that the producers want to draw a line under the franchise and start afresh - pandering to the 'woke mob' and hoping that future tokenistic nonsense will prove as successful as the original premise was. Spoiler: It won't and it never will.

The producers are clearly inept at creating anything that remotely feels as good or as likeable as it once was. This is an institution and it deserves respect, not total destruction. Classic Bond films will continue to be on TV and still fondly remembered for years to come. I don't think many will ever want to watch this film more than once. That's what will speak the loudest.

Daniel Craig loses no opportunity to demonstrate why he has had such a salutary impact on the evolution of James Bond. His Bond is more impulsive, sensitive and passionate than ever before.

A befittingly grand farewell party for Daniel Craig in his final outing as James Bond, No Time To Die has no time for half measures. It goes all out to give fans of the franchise the highs they are looking for and the actor who has stamped his class on the role since 2006's Casino Royale gets the send-off he deserves.

One of my guilty pleasures as a moviegoer is watching James Bond movies and I have no intention of apologising for that. Thus, I watched as soon as I had the opportunity 'No Time to Die' directed by Cary Joji Fukunaga, the latest film in the series, whose release has already been postponed several times and which finally meets the screens and its viewers this cinematic fall of the year 2021. The James Bond film series is approaching the age of 60. All Bond movies start from the same premises and have the same hero, but the way he looks and behaves and the structuring of the story have evolved over time. This says a lot about how cinematic entertainment was and is perceived and accepted in the movies of the big studios.

A lot has happened during these years. The hero evolved from the nonchalant and humorous commander in Fleming's books and played by Sean Connery to the complex and gloomy character in the last series, played by Daniel Craig. The original 007 had gone through the experience of World War II and was active during the Cold War. He was excused for his womanising as many things are excused to war heroes, and there was no room for moral doubt concerning his actions because he lived in an age when it was clear who were the good guys and who were the bad guys. Thee 21st century James Bond lives and acts in the turbulent era after the fall of communism and after the novels of John Le Carre were written. Today's enemies are not ideological, and screenwriters of such films (not just those in the Bond series) often prefer not to identify them politically, ethnically, or religiously. On the other hand, the romantic implications of the character are no longer devoid of substance. James no longer conquers but falls in love. From Bond the Don Juan we now (almost) get Bond the family man. One of the qualities of the script in 'No Time to Die' is that it manages to describe at this stage of the character's evolution a story that is acceptable by today's standards of the big studios and is somewhat credible in terms of character psychology. Craig's James Bond has been throughout this series and is in this film also a real character, not just a two-dimensional comics book figure.

What I liked about 'No Time to Die'? Daniel Craig. Action scenes, car chases and stunts that show ingenuity in a few moments (just when we thought we saw everything in this area) and use the landscapes spectacularly, especially in Italian villages. Humour and self-humour. The presence of Ralph Fiennes, an actor who can do anything on screen and I will like it. Ana de Armas, a classic Bond-girl who I hope will survive until the next series. What I liked less? Rami Malek, an actor who constantly disappoints me and who plays a mediocre bad guy here. Lea Seydoux is OK, but her relationship with Bond lacks chemistry. The dose of melodrama introduced in the script towards the end. The scientific pretext, which is thin and I could not understand what they were brewing in those pools (not that it would be important).

'No Time to Die' honorably concludes the Daniel Craig chapter of the Bond epic. It's not the best Bond I've ever seen, but it's above average. I look forward to the next reincarnation.

The story is really engaging. It didn't feel like 2.5 hours! I enjoyed every second of it. I like the bond between Daniel Craig and Lea Seydoux. The ending got me tearful. Who would have thought James Bond would make someone cry?