No Time to Die
I wonder how disarming it has to be for people coming into 007 through the Daniel Craig films when they go back and watch earlier films, and realize that not every iteration of the British spy has involved a multi-film arc for the character. I still have plenty of the earlier Bonds to go through, and yes, characters and organizations get carried over, but I know enough that the stories don’t really connect the way they do in the Craig films. Is it a product of the modern times of franchises and multi-film arcs, or did Craig realize, at a certain point, he wanted to just do something different with the character?
Watching “No Time to Die” months after its release was not ideal in terms of presentation- ideally, this would have been a theatrical viewing for me- but I’m glad I didn’t necessarily have to watch it at a time where everyone else was discussing it, as well. Sometimes, that distance can be beneficial when it comes to a movie as highly-anticipated as this one. (It also means that sometimes, you can forget plot points that might have been spoiled for you. Except for one thing at the end, I was, thankfully, spoiler-free.)
I know I was not the only person to have reservations about the way SPECTRE and Blofeld to reintroduced to the Bond universe in 2015’s “Spectre.” Rewatching that film as part of a Craig-era rewatch prior to “No Time to Die,” I like that SPECTRE was seen as the ultimate thorn in Bond’s side throughout the previous film, but the way Blofeld was cast as a bitter adopted brother was so much of a miscalculation it’s hard to see how they were going to make either work in one more Craig film, let alone going forward. Now that the Craig films are complete, I think it’s clear that these are their own, isolated Bond films, and that- while actors like Ralph Fiennes, Ben Whishaw and others are likely to be brought back, the events of this series will have no real bearing on what future James Bond movies look like. If I’m wrong, I’ll be fascinated to see how it operates.
Craig’s James Bond has always been haunted by Vesper Lund, Eva Green’s character in “Casino Royale.” One of the great things about the Craig films has been how it has modernized its view of women, and their capabilities, in the James Bond universe while also playing to the tropes of the franchise in their sexuality, and allure to Bond. Dr. Madeleine Swann (Lea Seydoux) is given depth here, starting with a flashback to when she witnessed her mother’s death at the hands of agents of Lyutsifer Safin (Rami Malek). She’s having a memory of that when she’s with Bond after the events of “Spectre”; he’s officially retired from active duty, but Vesper still lingers in his thoughts. When he goes to her grave, and it explodes- nearly killing him- the subsequent chase scene opens up revelations that history might be repeating itself with Swann. There’s nothing for Bond to do than go forward on his own.
The five year time jump after that moment is fascinating, and resets our expectations of what “No Time to Die” has Bond up to. When a deadly virus is stolen, Bond- still retired- brought back into the fold, but not by MI6. There might be a reason for that. I love that we finally get Jeffrey Wright’s Felix Leiter back; one of the great things about Craig’s films has been how it has made room for the supporting cast to be important to the action, and CIA agent Leiter was a great asset to “Casino Royale” and “Quantum of Solace.” Here, he has another agent with him in Logan Ash (Billy Magnussen), but he also has Bond meet up with Paloma (Ana de Armas), a contact whom infiltrates a SPECTRE gathering with him in Cuba. de Armas is dazzling and sexy and more than capable of holding her own with what happens- she also doesn’t take Bond’s shit when it comes to flirting. That gathering raises even more questions, though. Eventually, Bond must return to MI6, and meet back up with Blofeld and Swann if he’s going to figure out the truth behind what’s going on.
I can’t be the only person relatively disappointed by the lack of definition in Safin as a villain, can I? There’s enough to where we understand his motivations, and Malek plays him fine, but I don’t feel the mano a mano aspect of the hero-villain dynamic here that the rest of the Craig films, and the best Bond films in general, have. The film feels more preoccupied with getting to Bond’s endgame than it does developing a strong spy story for him to follow. On the whole, the film works fine, and- for the ending it is building up to- it’s successful, but if you want the spy antics of Bond, I can imagine “No Time to Die” being a disappointment. Ultimately, this film is part of this arc for Craig’s Bond, and as the conclusion of his arc, I couldn’t have asked for anything more compelling and entertaining.
