Bond 25 Finally Gets Its Title, and You May Be Surprised By It

No Time To Die 007 logo

We have been hearing so much about the 25th film in the 007 franchise to where it threatens to feel like we have watched it in full long before it arrives in theaters everywhere. Daniel Craig confirmed to Stephen Colbert he would return to do a fifth movie as James Bond, Danny Boyle was originally set to direct but later dropped out and was replaced by Cary Joji Fukunaga, and there were rumors Adele would return to compose this film’s theme song. Other than that, we were left with an endless set of questions: Would Christoph Waltz return as Blofeld? Who will compose the score for this one? Can they possibly get “Skyfall” cinematographer Roger Deakins to return? What kind of Bond villain is Oscar winner Rami Malek going to play? Who will be the latest Bond woman?

As fans posed these questions and several others, many including myself had one which we desperately wanted an answer to: WHAT WAS THIS BOND FILM GOING TO BE TITLED??!! In the wake of a press conference featuring the cast of Bond 25 and various behind the scenes images from the set, it seemed no one thought to give this one a name. Did longtime Bond screenwriters Neal Purvis and Robert Wade start writing it without a title in mind? Did fellow scribes Fukunaga, Scott Z. Burns or Phoebe Waller-Bridge get a chance to add their two cents to this issue? Seriously, it cannot be this difficult to generate a title for this or any other motion picture, right?

Well, after what feels like an eternity, MGM has finally given us the title of the 25th James Bond film: “No Time to Die.” My opinion regarding this title is quite mixed. A title like this one sounds like something out of an easily disposable paperback novel, while fun to read, won’t stay in the mind for too long. Granted, “Die Another Day” was already taken, but after the titles of the previous Craig Bond movies (“Casino Royale,” “Quantum of Solace,” “Skyfall” and “Spectre”) which implied quite a bit without saying so much, this one feels surprisingly ordinary. Couldn’t they have come up with something infinitely more inspired?

At the same time, perhaps it is not a bad title for this installment, likely the last to feature Craig as 007. In terms of years, Craig has now held onto this iconic role longer than any of his predecessors, and we have grown with him as we watched him make this role his own from “Casino Royale” to “Spectre.” In this installment, Bond is said to have retired from active duty and is now enjoying a leisurely life with Dr. Madeleine Swan (Lea Seydoux) in Jamaica. But the vacation quickly ends when his CIA pal, Felix Leiter (Jeffrey Wright), arrives in town and asks for Bond’s help in rescuing a kidnapped scientist. Suffice to say, retirement does not last long for Bond, and the only way for him to escape any sort of responsibility from this situation would be death. However, death would be the easy way out, and Bond is not about to go down that route.

Craig’s interpretation of James Bond reminds me a lot of Jack Bauer from “24” as both characters have sworn a loyalty to their countries of origin, and this is a loyalty which, whether they admit it or not, proves to be far more important than anything else in their lives. Still, their actions come with consequences and an inescapable case of karma which will never let them rest easy. How does one live with being someone who willingly kills if the situation calls for it and not go through life with one form of guilt or another? Craig’s Bond has numbed his consciousness more often than not with alcohol, and this is regardless of whether it is shaken or not stirred. The only way a character like this can possibly find peace is in the realm of death, and Bond is not about to choose this realm as he eventually returns to his call of duty when the circumstances call for it, and this installment makes it clear he is not about to die even if it will cease his suffering.

“No Time to Die” will arrive in theaters in April of 2020. Check out the title announcement below.

 

 

‘Solo: A Star Wars Story’ is Not the Droid You Are Looking For

Solo movie poster

Here we are again in a galaxy far, far away, and it is the third time we have ventured there in three years. We also head back to an even longer time ago when one of our favorite “Star Wars” characters, in this case Han Solo, was young, full of vigor and demographically desirable. But while the “Star Wars” movies have always been filled with tremendous imagination and unforgettable characters, I have to be honest and say that “Solo: A Star Wars Story” proved to be an underwhelming space adventure. While I am as big a Han Solo fan as the next person, seeing his early years portrayed here felt strangely ordinary to where this didn’t feel like a “Star Wars” movie, but instead an average science fiction movie yearning to be.

This movie begins with a routine chase sequence in which Han (Alden Ehrenreich) and his girlfriend Qi’ra (Emilia Clarke) attempt to escape a criminal gang, and from there I started to have a bad feeling about this. Usually these movies have me totally hooked in right from the start, but I did not feel the same kind of excitement I usually feel with the average Lucasfilm adventure. When Qi’ra and Han are suddenly separated at a transport station, Han tells her he will come back for her. Will he? Well, she is played by Emilia Clarke. Will Qi’ra and Han live happily ever after? Did Greedo really shoot first?

“Solo” reminded me of the problems I have with most prequels as they seem more concerned with connecting the dots between their story and the ones we have seen a thousand times. Like “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” and “The Thing” prequel, the filmmakers are saddled with a cinematic history they are forced to adhere to, and it results in a lack of surprise and suspense as we know how things will turn out. And, like “Hannibal Rising,” it tells us more than we need to know about an iconic character to where I walked out feeling how certain things are best left to the imagination instead of being made into a movie.

Alden Ehrenreich has been an actor on the rise ever since his scene-stealing role in “Hail, Caesar,” and he certainly has a strong screen presence as Han Solo. At the same time, he ends up giving a one-note performance as the intergalactic smuggler which lacks the charisma Harrison Ford brought to the role. While he tries to play it cool throughout, Ehrenreich never quite comes to life here, and what results is a disappointing case of miscasting.

We do get introduced to some new characters, and among which is Tobias Beckett who is played by Woody Harrelson. As always, I am reminded of how Harrelson can play just about any character he takes on, and he provides us with the mentor Han Solo was always destined to have. Tobias, like Han, is a smuggler, but he also represents the darker road Han could find himself on if he is not careful.

Other actors are not as lucky. Thandie Newton shows up as Val Beckett, Tobias’ wife and partner in crime, but she is gone way too soon. Jon Favreau voices the alien character Rio Durant, but Rio merely functions as an easily disposable member of Tobias’ crew who we know will not last long. Paul Bettany makes Dryden Vos into a wonderfully ruthless crime lord, but his presence in “Solo” feels a bit uneven as if he is there to fill in the missing blanks. It should be noted how Bettany took over this role after the original actor cast, Michael K. Williams, was unable to return for reshoots. Things had to be changed to accommodate Bettany, and it shows.

Production problems kept plaguing “Solo” before its release, the biggest of which was the firing of the original directors, Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, both of whom still received an executive producer credit. It was one of several instances which showed how protective Lucasfilm was of this franchise. The word behind the scenes was that Lord and Miller were looking to mix things up and did not want to give audiences the same old thing, but Kathleen Kennedy was not about to let anyone change things up. While I commend Kennedy and Lawrence Kasdan for taking extra special care of this franchise, I came out of “Solo” thinking they should shake things up in the future if they want it to maintain the relevance it still has.

Replacing Lord and Miller is Oscar-winning director Ron Howard, and this had me excited as this is the same man who directed “Apollo 13.” That film was based on a real-life event everyone knew the outcome of, and yet he turned it into a riveting piece of entertainment. I figured he would bring this same energy to “Solo,” but even he is saddled with the characters’ history which he cannot easily maneuver around. Apparently, Howard reshot 70% of this movie, and I came out of it wondering how much of the finished product was his. As a result, the whole movie feels inescapably uneven.

For what it is worth, “Solo” does improve when Donald Glover, a man of many talents, arrives on the scene as Lando Calrissian. Glover brings the kind of charisma to this role I expected Ehrenreich to bring a wealth of to Han, and it makes me want to see Lando get a film of his own. From the first moment he appears onscreen, Glover makes this character the epitome of cool to where he does not need a can of Colt 45 to prove it, and he brings an infectious joy to a movie which needed it sooner.

We also get to meet another unforgettable droid here, L3-37. As voiced by Phoebe Waller-Bridge, she is a sardonic delight as she shows more attitude and resilience than any other droid I have seen in any previous installment. It is also a kick to see L3-37 discuss the possibilities of sexual compatibility between her and Han with Qi’ra. After all these years, the “Star Wars” movies are proving to be more progressive than ever before! As for Lando, I think it is safe to say this is the droid he was looking for.

While certain moments like the first time Han meets Chewbacca (played here by Joonas Suotamo) and the initial appearance of the Millennium Falcon end up feeling uninspired and anticlimactic, the scene where Han makes the infamous Kessel Run in less than twenty parsecs is thrilling to watch, and it reminded of why I love the “Star Wars” movies so much. Yes, we know how things will turn out, but Howard keeps us on the edge of our seats as he subverts our expectations and plays with our emotions with glee.

Sure, “Solo” does have its moments, but they only served to remind of everything about it which does not work. The screenplay by Jonathan Kasdan and Lawrence Kasdan features dialogue which feels lifeless even when spoken by talented actors. Granted, there is none of the god-awful dialogue Hayden Christensen was forced to utter in “Attack of the Clones,” but it still feels derivative of lesser sci-fi movies which cannot even compare to “Star Wars” in general. I was also surprised at how uninspired the film score by “Jason Bourne” composer John Powell ends up sounding, and it only comes to life when he utilizes the immortal themes of John Williams.

“Rogue One” was also a prequel, but it had a cast of characters you really cared about, and its story of sacrifice pushed all the right buttons as we came to deeply admire the heroic actions they took. Even though we know the secret plans of the Death Star would end up in the hands of the Rebels, getting there was more than half the fun. “Solo,” however, is nowhere as effective, and what results is a big disappointment and a missed opportunity. This marks the first time I have ever given a negative review for a “Star Wars” movie, and yes, I have seen “The Phantom Menace.”

Lucasfilm would be better off looking to the future instead of going back to the past. Enough backstory has been established for these iconic characters to where we don’t need any additional information. We will certainly be looking forward when “Episode IX” is released in December of 2019, but it appears other “Star Wars” origin movies are in the works such as one on Obi-Wan Kenobi. Seriously, I am with Ralph Garman when he said, wouldn’t a movie about Obi-Wan watching Luke Skywalker growing up from a distance be a little too creepy?

* * out of * * * *