30 Years Later, ‘Tomorrow Never Dies’ Has Aged Shockingly Well

by

As a seasoned critic with a soft spot for the quirky and the bold, I must say that “Tomorrow Never Dies” is a rare gem in the James Bond franchise. The film, much like its protagonist Elliot Carver, is a caricature, but it exposes uncomfortable truths about the media industry that remain pertinent to this day.

Spoiler Alert: This article contains extensive spoilers for the 1997 film Tomorrow Never Dies.A James Bond picture is the last place you’d seek out for a gripping thriller that thoughtfully explores geo-politics. Though the 007 canon leans heavily into the world of espionage and real-world conflicts as a backdrop, producers tend to favor the least provocative material possible. Compared to the typical John le Carré adaptation, Bond plots veer into outright sci-fi. By a fluke of circumstances, Pierce Brosnan’s second Bond movie, Tomorrow Never Dies, provided the most prescient and intellectually stimulating of the bunch. Too bad no one cared at the time, everyone was probably distracted by the shurikens, helicopter chases, and explosions.

Titled after its villain’s media conglomerate, a newspaper named “Tomorrow,” this movie features Pierce Brosnan, Judi Dench, Jonathan Pryce, Michelle Yeoh, and Teri Hatcher in the main roles. The film is filled with grappling hooks, poorly executed German accents, lifeless henchmen, and a multitude of cringe-worthy jokes that epitomize cheesy cinema. Compared to its predecessor, this movie is less memorable, overshadowed by the exceptional “GoldenEye” but also not as iconic as Brosnan’s previous adventure in the absurdly humorous “Die Another Day.” The last thirty minutes unfold predictably, diminishing any suspense the film generates with a dull climax that was hastily written in just an afternoon.

Under the guidance of director Roger Spottiswoode, screenwriter Bruce Feirstein is the driving force behind this film. Unfortunately, as fresh writers were brought in, the more satirical aspects became diluted. The title itself, “Tomorrow Never Dies,” symbolizes the movie’s chaotic production process. It was a typographical error in an office memo that read “Tomorrow Never Lies” and was never corrected. At first glance, this film might seem like just another run-of-the-mill comedy in Spottiswoode’s career. However, upon closer inspection, it reveals itself to be a solid thriller, delving into the corruption of cable news and the potential consequences of China’s territorial expansion in the South China Sea.

James Bond’s Cloudy Crystal Ball

Note that the same film franchise, famously known for James Bond, presents him as a heavy drinker with debatable views towards women. He also works alongside seemingly unfazed Mujahideen in Afghanistan, which some might find outdated and problematic. Ian Fleming’s Bond character, intentionally or not, appears to be rooted in the past, starring in tales that feel dated as well. Attempting to smooth over these issues would result in a watered-down version of the original character.

a ruthless news tycoon aiming for global dominance, specifically in terms of Nielsen ratings.

This particular Bond film hasn’t gained classic status among fans, often overshadowed by the numerous other installments. However, Feirstein added some zest to a potentially dull formula with sharp wit and engaging dialogues. Interestingly, this is the only Bond movie so far that explores the influence of media in global conflicts. The production team didn’t shy away from this topic. Feirstein brought a fresh perspective, having gained insight into the inner workings of media conglomerates through his experience in television and press rooms.

The character Elliot Carver in the movie “Some Kind of Hero” was not meant to be a representation of Rupert Murdoch as previously thought, but rather Robert Maxwell. Maxwell operated a vast publishing and tabloid empire during the 1980s and was implicated in various controversies such as the Inslaw scandal and the “Octopus Murders” conspiracy theory. By making this portrayal, the movie’s creator, Feirstein, appeared to be severing ties. The villainous mastermind of the digital age, far from just seeking nuclear weapons or classified devices, instead aims to control satellite signals in pursuit of exclusive rights.

No Villain? No Problem.

During the mid-90s, screenwriters found it challenging to come up with a suitable Bond villain as the Soviet Union had ceased to exist. Consequently, action movies shifted towards portraying one nondescript antagonist after another. Willem Dafoe, Tommy Lee Jones, Jeremy Irons, and John Malkovich were among the actors who played psychopathic terrorists in ’90s Hollywood action films. Carver stands out from these characters because he manipulates others using his pride and paranoia, allowing him to orchestrate events rather than doing the work himself. He cleverly exploited the Chinese Air Force’s tendency to harass adversaries in international waters by staging a phony attack on a British warship, anticipating that the British would feel compelled to retaliate publicly to maintain their international standing.

Despite the chaotic mess that the movie’s production seemed to be, there are still some truly brilliant moments scattered throughout. It is filled with subtle humor and ironic commentary, such as mocking bug-ridden software requiring frequent updates (a satire of Microsoft), as well as a subplot where Carver’s network is denied by the Chinese government over their airwaves – a plot point so controversial that it would likely be removed from any modern Hollywood movie for fear of offending China’s censors and losing access to their market.

It’s a distinctly inside-baseball plot, wherein you need to understand the nature of centralized media in China in order to fully make sense of Carver’s scheme to take control of state-run China Central Television (think of it like Elon Musk making an agreement with a UK Prime Minister to take over operations of the BBC). The director admitted United Artists, the production company, weren’t fans of making a film about Chinese-British relations in light of the Hong Kong transfer. Consultants warned him it could trigger an international incident:

It wasn’t clear if the transition would be peaceful. Predicting a romanticized version of events so soon after they happened didn’t appear to be a prudent decision.

It’s quite possible that United Artists wouldn’t have had the opportunity to halt him, given the circumstances. If you found the movie disjointed and inconsistent in its tone, your observation is spot on. Feirstein admitted that the story was merely an afterthought, hastily developed around the studio’s specified chase scenes and BMW branding deal. In essence, the script’s final pages were typed mere moments before filming commenced. The Brosnan-era Bonds featured a diverse array of intricate antagonists, from disgruntled ex-MI6 agents with Borderline Personality Disorder to oil heiresses suffering from Stockholm Syndrome and media CEOs obsessed with maximizing ad revenue. Among these complex adversaries, Carver serves as a tribute to the sensationalist journalism of William Randolph Hearst. Despite being rooted in the early 20th century, the corrupt newspaper tycoon fits seamlessly into the late 20th century setting.

Making Fake News Cool

In simpler terms, though its outer appearance may be unimpressive, there’s an interesting concept hidden within. Unlike many Bond films that seem less convincing upon closer inspection, Tomorrow Never Dies is unique in that it becomes more intriguing when you focus solely on its themes. Moreover, the character of Carver, before the News of the World phone hacking scandal, not only created sensational headlines but also manipulated events to make his news stories even more extraordinary. This involved a bit of coercion, keeping compromising material and a professional assassin as a client to ensure a constant flow of scandalous celebrity drug overdoses.

In an audacious manner reminiscent of a Bond villain, Pryce, known for making scenes his own, addresses his news bureau heads by saying, “What chaos will Carver Media Group unleash upon the globe today?” The phrase “unleash” highlights the emphasis on creating.

Carver may be a satire, but it sheds light on an uncomfortable reality about journalism: It often thrives on chaos and morbid curiosity, sensationalizing events before all facts are known to outdo competitors, stir up public anger without regard for the fallout, and oversimplify complex situations into catchy headlines.

This film effectively highlights that misinformation, often labeled as “fake news,” has been around since the invention of the printing press. Relying solely on one source for your information could potentially lead you into trouble. The lesser-known movie starring Daniel Craig serves as a reminder that none of the more recent films have managed to surpass the audacity and unique nature of the stories produced during Pierce Brosnan’s tenure.

Read More

2024-12-08 22:03