Film

Live or let die? How James Bond can survive beyond the Daniel Craig era

The future for the 007 brand is uncertain, but a full reboot is looking increasingly likely

Daniel Craig as James Bond in No Time to Die: Where will 007 go from here?

Donald Clarke's face
Donald Clarke
Wed Dec 29 2021 - 05:00

Nearly 60 years into the James Bond franchise, No Time to Die, the latest episode in the series, has become the highest-grossing English-language film of the year. All the more reason to wonder where the sequence is going next. The $771 million that No Time to Die trousered is probably less than the producers would once have hoped for, but that still looks like pre-Covid money. No movie franchise is healthier.

Here is where we issue a rare spoiler warning. The next paragraph will address the ending of No Time to Die. So if you haven’t seen it go and read something else.

Still with us? To the surprise of almost everyone, the film ended with James Bond giving his life so the rest of us might survive. One could hardly imagine a more uncompromising conclusion to the Daniel Craig era. When he left he took the entire franchise with him. Right?

Well, of course not. Barbara Broccoli, who inherited the Bond custodianship from her father Cubby, has done an extraordinary job of growing the venerable brand over the last decade or two. She is not going to walk away and tend her allotment.

READ MORE

A number of quaint theories about how the series was to continue sprang up as the news of Bond’s death got about. The decision to temporarily grant Nomi, Lashana Lynch’s character, the 007 assignation was a brilliant bit of trolling, convincing reactionary blowhards that James Bond was now a black woman – but might it also identify the protagonist of the next movie?

Closing credits

Not a chance. It requires no great immersion in the series’ history to conclude that the USP in the James Bond portfolio is James Bond. Lest anyone be confused, the closing credits reprised a message that cheered 007 fans half a century ago. “James Bond will return in Thunderball,” it said at the end of Goldfinger. We don’t know which vehicle will bring the agent back to our cinemas, but the credits reassured us that “James Bond will return”. Not Nomi. Not Ana de Armas’s Paloma. Not (as has been suggested on some fan sites) James Bond’s daughter.

“Sure, there are other main characters like M and Q and all that,” Broccoli told The Hollywood Reporter. “But we haven’t really wanted to make a Bond film without Bond. It would be like making Hamlet without Hamlet.”

But James Bond is dead. How can that happen? The notion of a prequel in the current universe doesn’t work. Casino Royale began with Bond securing his “double-oh” status. Any linked precursor would, thus, have to end before Bond became 007. That is not going to happen. There has been some clunky writing in the franchise, but we can probably also rule out MI6 discovering Bond alive amid the wreckage of that annihilated island. Daytime soap opera logic won’t cut it.

When I saw the film, I immediately, without much pondering, jumped to the conclusion that we were headed towards a full reboot (pay attention to our upcoming correct usage of that much-abused neologism). That is, after all, what happened with Casino Royale in 2006. With the notable exception of Judi Dench’s M, who was too beloved to defenestrate, the entire fictional universe of the preceding film was junked and we began again with a Bond who had yet to meet Ernst Stavro Blofeld or Auric Goldfinger.

Cabin cruisers

Leaving the cinema, I thought again. The Craig series has worked harder than earlier versions to build a team around Bond. Are they really going to sack Ben Whishaw (lovable nerdy Q), Naomie Harris (witty Moneypenny) and Roy Kinnear (harassed Bill Tanner)? Well, I wouldn’t advise them to buy any cabin cruisers on projected earnings from future Bond films. The Dench precedent may allow Ralph Fiennes to stay as M, but, if you really are rebooting, then you need to be ruthless with the current staff. It is important that the audience properly understands that the PC has been turned off and turned on again.

So the most likely scenario is a new Bond for a new secret service. It feels liberating to finally be in the interregnum. For the past few years, tabloids have recycled any amount of bilge – information too flimsy to be dignified with the word “rumour” – about candidates for a vacancy that didn’t exist. Broccoli has said that no serious discussions will be made about a replacement until the New Year. She has, however, confirmed that the character will be a British man of any ethnicity or race (answering a question, she also implied they might be open to the idea of a non-binary actor in the future).

Bond persona

This seems sensible. The essentials of the Bond persona are all there. Broccoli didn’t address age, but it seems likely they would prefer an actor no younger than 28 or no older than 45. Alas, Idris Elba, who would have been great, missed the boat a while ago. At 44, Tom Hardy, joint bookies’ favourite at 10/3, is just about still in the game, but would such an eccentric want the job? Henry Cavill does want the job – and was allegedly second choice when Craig got it – but might be a little too obvious.

Broccoli’s repeated assertion that James Bond can be a person of colour suggests the team may be leaning purposefully in that direction. Daniel Kaluuya would bring a whole new energy. David Oyelowo, though at the upper end of the age limit, has the right degree of suavity. Riz Ahmed would be excellent. He’s charming, but he can also be dangerous. At 39, he is right in the sweet spot as far as age goes. The popular Dev Patel might be more likely.

Expect a lot more of this ill-informed speculation over the first few months of 2022.