The 25th Bond film isn’t perfect, but explosive stunt sequences and a magnetic performance from Daniel Craig are enough to overcome a complicated plot and and long run time, critics say.
“No Time to Die” currently holds an 83% “fresh” rating on Rotten Tomatoes from 138 reviews.
“No Time to Die” debuts in the U.K. on Friday before opening domestically Oct. 8.

Daniel Craig stars in “No Time To Die” the latest James Bond film.
MGM | Universal

After 18 months of waiting, the latest installment in the James Bond saga is finally arriving the in theaters.
A swan song for actor Daniel Craig, who has portrayed 007 since 2006’s “Casino Royale,” “No Time to Die” debuts in the U.K. on Friday before opening domestically Oct. 8.

The 25th Bond film isn’t perfect, but explosive stunt sequences and a magnetic performance from Craig are enough to overcome a complicated plot and long run time, critics say.
Years after apprehending Ernst Stavro Blofeld (Christoph Waltz), the main antagonist of 2015’s “Spectre,” James Bond has retired and is living a quiet life in Jamaica. When an old CIA agent contact asks for help with one last job, Bond finds himself confronting the sinister Safin (Rami Malek) as well as the woman he once loved Madeleine Swann (Lea Seydoux).
“No Time to Die” currently holds an 83% “fresh” rating on Rotten Tomatoes from 138 reviews.
Here’s what critics thought of Craig’s final James Bond film ahead of its U.K. opening:

A.O. Scott, The New York Times

It’s clear throughout “No Time to Die” that the film’s producers and writers were keenly aware that this was Craig’s final turn as the iconic 007.

A.O. Scott of The New York Times said the film “is uncommonly preoccupied with memory and leave-taking,” in his review of the film.
“Mortality looms over the quips and car chases — not only the expected slaughter of anonymous minions, but an inky cloud of grief, loss and weariness,” he wrote.
Bond refers to himself as “an old wreck” and Craig, 53, plays the part of a man who’s survived battle, but has not been left unscathed.
“[Director Cary] Fukunaga has a crisp, stylish way with action, and some of the set pieces have the flair and inventiveness of musical numbers, most notably a party in Havana where Ana de Armas shows up to play Cyd Charisse to Craig’s Gene Kelly,” Scott said. “That sequence feels like a throwback and an update, reprising the Bond tradition of elegance, charm and high silliness.”
Read the full review from The New York Times.

Daniel Craig stars as James Bond in “No Time To Die.”
Source: MGM

Nicholas Barber, BBC

“No Time to Die” feels long, but “it packs in so much that you can hardly complain,” wrote Nicholas Barber in his review of the film for the BBC.
The film clocks in at two hours and 43 minutes, the longest of any James Bond flick to date.
“It piles on the grief and raises the emotional stakes, with the help of Hans Zimmer’s operatic music and Linus Sandgren’s warm cinematography,” said Barber. “But it also keeps the jokes and the silliness coming: it’s been decades since Bond had this many groan-worthy one-liners, and he’s never had this many Oliver Hardy-style exasperated glances.”
Barber said the latest James Bond film “does exactly what it was intended to do,” give Craig a proper send-off.
“Beyond that, it somehow succeeds in taking something from every single other Bond film, and sticking them all together,” he said.
Read the full review from the BBC.

John Nugent, Empire

John Nugent, a writer for Empire, also praised Fukunaga’s directing in his review of “No Time to Die.”
“Fukunaga, it seems, was an ideal choice of director, skillfully balancing the contradictions of the character and the franchise, and while he doesn’t quite escape the usual pitfalls — a middle third bogged down by plotting and exposition doesn’t justify that heaving runtime — he has always been an intuitive filmmaker, deeply interested in the humanity of his characters,” Nugent wrote.
He compared Fukunaga’s action sequences to that of John Wick, noting the emphasis on sharp and savage gunfights and intense chases.
“This is a Bond film that dutifully ticks all the boxes — but brilliantly, often doesn’t feel like a Bond film at all,” Nugent wrote. “For a 007 who strived to bring humanity to larger-than-life hero, it’s a fitting end to the Craig era.”
Read the full review from Empire.

Daniel Craig stars as James Bond in “No Time To Die.”

Brian Tallerico, Roger Ebert

For Brian Tallerico of RogerEbert.com, “No Time to Die” director Fukunaga “plays it too safe and too familiar.”
“Even as it’s closing character arcs that started years ago, it feels like a film with too little at stake, a movie produced by a machine that was fed the previous 24 flicks and programmed to spit out a greatest hits package,” he wrote in his review of the film.
Tallerico was particularly critical of how the film used its supporting cast, noting that returning actors like Ralph Fiennes, Naomie Harris and Ben Whishaw are given little to do except “push the plot forward to its inevitable ending.”
Lashana Lynch, a new addition to the film as Bond’s 007 replacement, “feels like a self-aware nod to controversy around the casting of Bond, which is cool enough, but then she’s not given much of a character to make her interesting on her own,” he said.
And Ana de Armas, who appears as a fellow spy during a mission to Cuba, “pops up to give the film a completely different and welcome new energy in an action sequence set in Cuba, only to leave the movie ten minutes later.”
Read the full review from RogerEbert.com.

Jason Solomons, The Wrap

“‘No Time to Die’ will be remembered for its emotional impact above all,” wrote Jason Solomons in his review of the film for The Wrap. “And, to cap it all, Craig may well have delivered the most complex and layered Bond performance of them all.”
Many critics have agreed that Craig’s performance is one of the most emotional of any previous James Bond actor. Since “Casino Royale,” the character of Bond has been given more depth than any other portrayal of the iconic character.
“Suffice to say, then, that ‘No Time To Die’ is Daniel Craig’s best incarnation of an iconic role, an iteration that sees Bond travel to emotional spaces the character has never been to before, at least not since ‘On Her Majesty’s Secret Service’ or in certain passages of Ian Fleming’s books,” Solomons wrote.
“You feel all the wear and tear on Craig’s body and face, all the strain on Bond of having to save the world one last time (again) yet also all the tantalizing freedom of someone approaching the end of a long run,” he said.
Read the full review from The Wrap.Disclosure: Comcast owns NBCUniversal and CNBC. Universal is releasing “No Time To Die” internationally while MGM handles the domestic release. Rotten Tomatoes is owned by NBCUniversal.

WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

Young moviegoers don’t mind paying extra fees to see films on the big screen, if it means they get to sit in the best seats in the house, a new survey says.
Morning Consult’s survey of moviegoers comes in the wake of AMC Entertainment announcing its plans to eliminate the one-price-fits-all approach to selling tickets.
Not all moviegoers or cinema chains are on board with a sweeping change to the movie theater ticket pricing.

Group of cheerful people laughing while watching movie in cinema.
Zoran Zeremski | Istock | Getty Images

Young moviegoers don’t mind paying extra fees to see films on the big screen, if it means they get to sit in the best seats in the house, a new survey says.
The survey, from Morning Consult, found that 54% of Gen Z ticket buyers and 46% of millennials found dynamic pricing, a strategy seen in the concert space that charges more for the most desirable seats in a venue, “appropriate” at movie theater chains.

Only 32% of Gen X respondents and 22% of baby boomers felt the same, according to the survey, which was conducted last week. Morning Consult polled more than 2,200 U.S. adults.
The report comes nearly two months after AMC Entertainment announced its plans to introduce “Sightline at AMC,” which will eliminate the one-price-fits-all approach to selling tickets. For example, moviegoers who want to sit in the middle of the auditorium would pay a few dollars more and those who choose the front row would pay a few dollars less.
The initiative, which faced initial backlash from consumers, is expected to roll out nationwide by the end of the year.
Representatives from AMC did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.
“Our data is showing that more than half of Americans have skepticism towards seat-based pricing,” said Saleah Blancaflor, media and entertainment reporter at Morning Consult. “But it also shows that younger generations, such as Gen Zers and millennials, are interested in heading to the theaters regardless of if they have to pay a few extra dollars to get those better seats.”

Blancaflor said these younger consumers are “extremely eager” about the entertainment they consume and are the ones buying the majority of concert tickets, which also have dynamic pricing. In both generations, more than 50% of respondents said they’d be willing to pay a few extra dollars for preferred seats.
Meanwhile, only 36% of Gen X and 25% of baby boomers said they would be willing to pay extra.
However, she noted that while the data could give other cinema chains confidence in altering their pricing, these younger generations do have financial concerns and may balk if it becomes the norm. She also said that movie theaters shouldn’t disregard older generations, who have returned to cinemas in the wake of the pandemic for films such as “A Man Called Otto” and “80 for Brady.”
“While catering towards younger generations is important to the future of moviegoing, they also shouldn’t completely ignore the older generations,” Blancaflor said. “Because they could be missing out on people in those groups that still have an interest in going to theaters but might not be open to these newer initiatives that might be unfamiliar to them.”
Already, cinema chains such as Alamo Drafthouse have said they do not plan to implement dynamic pricing in their theaters.
“We could put more rows in our theaters and we don’t,” Shelli Taylor, CEO of Alamo Drafthouse, told CNBC last month. “We purposely sit in every single chair and we look for the most optimal sightlines. So, our front rows are awesome; there’s no reason for us to discount them.”

WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

“You need to stockpile something,” the former FDA chief told CNBC on Monday. “But putting away 50% of all the doses, I think, is denying more people access.” More

CVS Health CEO David Joyner defended controversial pharmacy middlemen, who are widely accused of inflating prescription medication prices, and instead accused manufacturers of “monopolistic” practices that keep drug costs high in the U.S. 
Joyner, who stepped into the role in October, spent much of his opening remarks on the company’s fourth-quarter earnings call discussing so-called pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs. 
It comes at a time when lawmakers on both sides of the aisle and President Donald Trump have signaled interest in cracking down on PBMs. 

David Joyner, a longtime CVS executive, speaks during a Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing in Washington, D.C., on May 10, 2023.
Al Drago | Bloomberg | Getty Images

CVS Health CEO David Joyner on Wednesday defended controversial pharmacy middlemen like his company’s Caremark unit, which are widely accused of inflating prescription medication prices, and instead accused manufacturers of “monopolistic tendencies” that keep drug costs high in the U.S. 
Joyner, who stepped into the role in October, spent much of his opening remarks on the company’s fourth-quarter earnings call discussing so-called pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs. It was atypical for CVS’ quarterly call to begin that way, but comes at a time when lawmakers on both sides of the aisle and President Donald Trump have signaled interest in cracking down on PBMs. 

CVS owns Caremark, one of the nation’s three largest PBMs that collectively administer roughly 80% of prescriptions in the U.S.
Those middlemen negotiate rebates with drug manufacturers on behalf of insurers, create lists of medications known as formularies that are covered by insurance and reimburse pharmacies for prescriptions. But lawmakers and drugmakers alike argue that PBMs overcharge the plans they negotiate rebates for, underpay pharmacies and fail to pass on savings from those discounts to patients.
Joyner acknowledged that rising health-care costs in the U.S. are pressuring patients, employers and the federal government. He blamed factors such as increased patient utilization of services, rising health-care provider costs, labor shortages and “dramatic price hikes” for branded drugs. 
But he said PBMs like Caremark are “one of the most powerful forces helping to offset rising health care costs,” claiming that they are the only part of the drug supply chain solely focused on lowering costs. 
“Our work is a critical counterbalance to the monopolistic tendencies of drug manufacturers,” Joyner said. “This is why PBMs are needed and why manufacturers fight so hard to limit our capabilities.” 

He alleged that branded manufacturers added $21 billion in annual gross drug spending in the first three weeks of January through their price hikes, but did not cite where the figure is from. 
Joyner added that multiple economists have estimated that PBMs generate net value for the U.S. health-care system, more than $100 billion a year.
“No one has demonstrated more success than the PBMs of driving down drug prices,” he said.
However, the pharmaceutical industry and lawmakers argue that PBMs and insurers pocket those savings from negotiated rebates and discounts rather than passing them to patients.
In a statement on Wednesday, PhRMA, the nation’s largest lobbying group for the pharmaceutical industry said PBMs are “under intense, well-deserved scrutiny.” 
“Bipartisan state attorneys general, policymakers in both Congress and state legislatures and the FTC are all investigating these health care conglomerates,” a PhRMA spokesperson said. “They’ve all come to the same conclusion: PBMs are driving up costs and reducing access at the expense of patients, employers, and our health care system.” More

Giani Clarke,18, a senior at Wilson High School, takes a test in her AP Statistics class. The desks are doubled as a way to provide more social distancing.Ben Hasty | MediaNews Group | Getty ImagesThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Friday revised its guidance on social distancing in schools, saying most students can now sit 3 feet apart instead of 6 feet so long as they are wearing masks.The recommendation is for all K-12 students, regardless of whether community transmission is low, moderate or substantial, the CDC said.In communities where transmission is high, the CDC recommends that middle school and high school students remain at least 6 feet apart if schools aren’t able to keep students and teachers in assigned groups. In elementary schools, where younger children have been shown to be at less risk of transmitting the virus than teens, kids can stay safe at 3 feet apart with masks, the agency said.The CDC said it continues to recommend at least 6 feet of distance between adults in schools and between adults and students. It also still recommends 6 feet of social distancing in common areas, when eating, during in-door activities, such as band practice and sports, and in settings outside of the classroom.”CDC is committed to leading with science and updating our guidance as new evidence emerges,” the agency’s director, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, said in a statement. “Safe in-person instruction gives our kids access to critical social and mental health services that prepare them for the future, in addition to the education they need to succeed.”The updated guidance from federal health officials comes after a study published last week in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases suggested public schools could safely reopen as long as kids were 3 feet apart and other mitigation measures, such as wearing masks, were enforced.Some schools had complained that maintaining a 6 feet rule was not feasible. The World Health Organization and the American Academy of Pediatrics have both OK’d 3 feet social distancing.Walensky told lawmakers on Wednesday that the CDC was working on updated guidance for schools. The White House’s chief medical advisor, Dr. Anthony Fauci, said Thursday that shortened social guidelines would “likely” happen. He was also asked Sunday about the study published in Clinical Infectious Diseases.”What the CDC wants to do is they want to accumulate data and when the data shows that there is an ability to be 3 feet they will act accordingly,” Fauci told CNN. “I can assure you within a reasonable amount of time, quite reasonable, they will be giving guidelines according to the data they have.”President Joe Biden has made safely reopening the nation’s schools for in-person learning a focus of his first 100 days in office. Some parents have been forced to stay at home to watch their children instead of going to work.New data from the CDC published Thursday suggests that virtual learning “might present more risks than in-person instruction related to child and parental mental and emotional health and some health-supporting behaviors.”The CDC surveyed 1,290 parents or legal guardians of school-age children up to age 12 between October and November. Overall, almost half — 46.6% — of all parents reported increased levels of stress, 16.5% said they were using more drugs or alcohol and 17.7% said they had trouble sleeping, among other deleterious effects from the pandemic. But those with kids in full-time or part-time virtual learning programs reported higher levels of suffering across the board than parents with kids in school, researchers found.The administration has said it is pouring $10 billion from the recently passed stimulus package into Covid-19 testing for schools in an effort to hasten the return of in-person learning across the country. The money will be used in part to provide diagnostic tests to symptomatic teachers, staff and students, as well as those who don’t have symptoms but might have been exposed to an infectious person. The CDC came under scrutiny last month after Walensky said teachers do not need to get vaccinated against Covid-19 before schools can safely reopen. The White House walked back Walensky’s comments, and Biden later urged states to states to prioritize vaccinating teachers and school staff.”Let me be clear, we can reopen schools if the right steps are taken even before employees are vaccinated,” Biden said March 2 at the White House. “But time and again, we’ve heard from educators and parents that have anxieties about it.”– CNBC’s Will Feuer contributed to this report. More