I'm hoping the next Bond will do precisely three films so we have the complete set: Roger Moore - 7 Sean Connery - 6 Daniel Craig - 5 Pierce Brosnan - 4 New Bond - 3 Timothy Dalton - 2 George Lazenby - 1 Idris Elba - 0
I hope they package Craig’s arc into its own timeline and go back to standalone films like they used to do. Bond is more enjoyable to me when I don’t need to know every detail from the previous films to understand the newest one.
I just never felt like I was watching a James Bond movie in this last era, except for the first hour of Spectre where I thought Craig was excellent, I thought I was watching Connery or Brosnan until he fell in love again and ruined it completely
I agree on a younger actor, but rather than a "here's how he became 007 again" story, have him already 007 but tie into his naval background and do a story based around that. I also think it should be a (relatively) unknown actor as a known face comes with all manner of downsides. I anticipate an announcement on the next actor and the next director being made on the actual 60th anniversary of the release of Dr No, Monday 10th October 2022 😀 can't wait!
Something more based on Bond's Royal Navy background ? I can almost see something about eco terrorism or global climate profiteering unfolding around that, as long as they don't go too preachy and hamfisted about it.
Yes! You could even have him be a seasoned 00, but then tell the story of his naval background working on the HMS Elizabeth through a few short flashbacks. Even better, have a twist that he faced a betrayal in his naval career that killed crew under his command, and have the same person who caused that betrayal be the main bad guy whos trying to destroy England. The title? For Queen and Country.
I hope they don’t do an origin story again. I’m hoping for a Bond in his mid-late 30’s, who’s been in the role for a few years, just going out on missions. No major overarching plot. Just a series of Bond films like the Moore era where they can be enjoyed in any order.
Bond needs a “show runner”, a creative individual who can more coherently map out the character arcs for the next Bond. Note, not the stories, but at least the characters. PWB may be doing this already. I dont want to see Bond 7 just retread the DC era, so I’d like a young Bond (early 30s), established as a 00, a better tie in to his Naval background, and back to individual missions and stories. Oh, and a return to the classic Bondisms - a proper gunbarrel, naked chicks in the titles, and the bloody Bond theme actually played in its entirety at least twice in the film. Edgar Wright is the man for me to deliver this.
Agreed, a 'showrunner' like PWB [who served that function on Killing Eve] to map out a trilogy would be a good move. I love Edgar Wrights work [even if his experiences with the MCU and Ant Man might have soured him to blockbusters] and he'd bring something new to the series.
I doubt they'll retread the Craig era. I vaguely remember quote from Michael G Wilson after DAD where he said it would be easy and profitable to do the same thing but they wanted to take the series in a new direction. With NTTD's ending and a massive shift in movie culture thanks to the pandemic I have no doubt they recognise that another new direction is called for. Edgar Wright would also be my no.1 choice to reboot the series. He strikes me as someone who can take the classic tropes and use them in creative ways. Locking down some writers long term and having a multi-film plan seems like the smart move right now too.
@@TheGamerThing Bit harsh assessment there. He's someone who finds new ways to explore things [Baby driver was an idea he had for 20 years] and the things he did on spaced [a low budget sitcom] was great.
Great video Calvin. My number one hope for any future movies is that they stop spending so much time looking backwards for the sake of nostalgia - no more DB5, no more reborn classic villains, etc. We need some new, fresh iconic moments!
I don’t mind the DB5, what I do mind is harking back to terrible films such as Ohmss and The living daylights as if they were something to celebrate. What a dreadful film NTTD was, a joke, an embarrassment, but I think the DB5 is bond, you can’t avoid it. A DB7 and a DB9 aren’t bond cars, and the V8 vantage in my opinion isn’t fondly remembered. Maybe the Vanquish, the 2002 one, but can we have it without being invisible? Hopefully
Thanks, Domini! Yeah the Craig era certainly ended up leaning on nostalgia a lot more than previous eras did. I know this is very much a Hollywood trend at the moment but Spectre and NTTD certainly felt more overt than the series usually does.
I want a return to the tone and sensibility of GoldenEye. I feel it struck the perfect, natural balance between light and dark without ever feeling like it was actively trying too hard to please everyone. I know the Brosnan era is accused by some of trying to be as palatable and marketable as possible, but I really do think GoldenEye nailed expertly the careful balancing act between being unmistakably modern and classic at the same time. Most of all, I just want self-contained adventures without the retroactively serialised, soap opera bollocks.
I personally felt always the best Brosnan bond was tomorrow never dies. Goldeneye is ok, and was fantastic to see Bond again in theaters, but tomorrow never dies was better.
They need to do a complete reset to a Bond in the middle of his career going off on single missions. I'm not really interested in another redundant origin like The Amazing Spiderman. The interconnectedness of the Craig era gives them a bit of a challenge to get the general audience to follow along with the changeover. As much as I like the current MI6 regulars, I think they should recast them all. I also think it would actually be helpful to bring Felix Leiter back immediately with a new actor (to clue the GA in on this being a total reset). Get an actor that's young enough (around 30) to play Bond for 15+ years, and get back to doing standalone adventures.
I view the Craig era as bookends to the previous 20 films. For continuity this would likely mean that Casino Royale until Bond blew up Blofeld's lair in Morocco occurred before Dr. No and the London ending in Spectre and NTTD were the finality of the series. I agree that they should definitely plug back into the middle of his career/timeline from now on.
@@BlackMuslimConservative If you want that to be your head canon, fine it's fun to do even if it doesn't explain a lot of inconsistencies with the 'classic' continuity [Felix's injuries in Licence to Kill not being there in NTTD for example]. They can do a fresh re-boot but have it that Bond has been a 00 for a few years to skip the origin story [maybe have him meet a new M for the first time to show it's a new continuity] as they did for Spiderman in the MCU.
Bond 26 prediction: A faithful adaptation (updated to take place in the 2020s, of course) of ‘007 in New York’. Most of the film is just scrambled eggs. EON continue with their trend of casting big name actors as the villains by casting Jeremy Irons as the Scrambled Eggs.
I would love for Martin Campbell to get a third try. GoldenEye was a masterpiece and Casino Royale was the only Daniel Craig 007 film that i enjoyed enough to watch more than once. I just hope the next era of Bond brings back the fun. More Gadgets, hot Bond girls, and cool guns. Also i have no idea on actors to play Bond but i would like a young one for once. Like mid 20s or early 30s.
Well, there were two of those. Sean Connery was 31 during filming for Dr. No and George Lazenby was 29 during filming for On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.
Something else to consider for the producers is that Fleming's works will become public domain in 12 years. It's possible that EONs trademarks won't prevent another studio from making Bond movies. If the next Bond's tenure is comparable to Craig's, they could be the last Bond exclusively controlled by EON. In a world where literally anyone could be James Bond, having the same guy as the last 12 years come back to make your movies would be a huge advantage over other studios.
Never going to happen. As Calvin says these movies live on product placement - in 2025 How can you sell mobile phones/sports cars /beers in a film set in the 1950’s - either the products don’t exist yet or the 50’s brands are all defunct or totally naff. If it was set in the 50’s the main product placement would be cigarette brands !
@@patrickfisher4241 I hope it becomes Calvins new "we are not science fiction, we are science fact" when it comes to talking about or bringing up Martin Cambell
@@DafyddBrooks maybe Double O Zorro....and Martin doesn't bring in any green lanterns...Martin has already indicated he would be prepared to come back, but he's not getting any younger...be amazing if he pulled off introducing 3 new Bond actors...we will see...will they again gamble with Campbell?
I've thought about this: I think they'll certainly aim for a younger actor (29-32) mainly so the actor can be physically up for it and so he can stick around for a decade. The film itself shouldn't be as serious as Craig's output, it would be nice if they aimed for something like Tomorrow Never Dies, a fun film but with elements of drama. I would like Ralph Fiennes to reprise his role as M, though I think that is fairly unlikely. I suspect the films will become slightly more fantastical, but hardly near Moonraker territory. I think that the films will still be linked, narratively speaking, though perhaps not to the same degree as with the Craig films.
I want the new Bond direction to have more spy/espionage angle, similar to From Russia With Love. It's a direction that hasn't been done for a while. If not I'd like new Bond movies to be similar to The Living Daylights. Most of all I just want more fun injected into the series, the Craig movies were just too serious
For me I think THe Living Daylights nailed the globe-trotting adventure of Bond films, and this political narrative being stretched across various landscapes with decent scale. Something I think future Bond movies should make use of. Especially because after Skyfall, the Craig films felt a bit stuck to Italy and London. I love Quantum of Solace for really taking us into new territory. And I can absolutely respect No Time To Die for doing the same by going to Cuba, but that's also a very restrained/confined location of one street, and then afterwards we get some domestic Swedish landscape and some Northern European-looking island (ik its Kuril islands but still not very interesting). It's good to have a down-to-earth thing like For Your Eyes Only, after a huge film, but globe-trotting is part of Bond and there's so many geopolitical situations still left to explore. My favourite Bond movies were ones that explored geopolitics, and that's an important part of both the novels and the older movies.
There's so many people that could play Bond and personally I would love to see Henry Cavill as Bond. But also if the next movie is a new reboot I would love to see Timothy Dalton as M, I know it's probably not gonna happen but I can dream
While I personally think Dalton as M would be awesome, imagine how much that would fuel the codename theory... Not saying that's a reason not to do it, but OH MAN...
Cavill is busy filming other stuff, plus if he’s announced next year he’ll be 39 and at least 40 by the time the movie comes. A bit old perhaps. Plus he may still play Superman once again.
The beginning of this video made me wish we had some kind of funeral scene or something as a tribute to James. I guess we got M's toast and quote in No Time To Die, but something a little more official would have been nice too.
Next year Michael G. Wilson turns 80, so I’m guessing it’ll be pretty soon that he steps down from his producer role, whether it be into retirement or into a hole in the ground. So I guess we’ll have one of his sons take his place - I know both are involved with EON at the moment in some capacity. If that does indeed happen, it’ll be interesting to see what their take is and how much the direction of the series will change. No idea what Barbara Broccoli’s children are up to - I know she has a daughter, but I have absolutely no idea if said daughter has any interest in the family business. Even if Barbara Jr. doesn’t follow her mother’s footsteps, Barbara must be thinking about her successor. No idea what their plan for the future is, but Barbara herself is 60, so I’m guessing they must be looking into getting the next generation into the fold so they’re ready to take over in a decade or two’s time - after all, Barbara was Associate Producer on the 80s Bonds before taking over from Cubby in the 90s.
Indeed, at the premier Barbara made an impromptu speech thanking Wilson for being a great partner and all his years work etc. No one every said ‘retirement’ but that was certainly the implication. I imagine he’ll keep on inputting and maybe be credited as Exec Producer for as long as he lives but yeah, it’s not immediately apparent who would really be fit to take his place.
@@calvindyson He's certainly seemed aged and somewhat diminished in the last few years. I'd be happy if he and Babs stepped aside and handed over the reins to others.
I think some new blood and perspective that high up in the production could be a good thing right now. We always consider new actors, themes, directors, etc., but nobody ever considers those possibilities.
Wilson’s son has had assistant producer credits since Casino Royale I think and even made a cameo appearance in Spectre standing next to his dad. So if he isn’t being groomed to take over the reins, I don’t know who is😄…
I'd like a new film, starting as if Bond and the regulars have been at it for a while like the pre-CR days. The movies have always chased what was popular in film and CR's dark reboot thing was just an example of this. People are starting to like fun films again and while I wouldnt want TSWLM or Moonraker I'd like a Dr. No, Living Daylights or GoldenEye: good espionage and meaty acting moments but still a creative adventurous action fest.
N Harris as M is Calvin's best idea yet. Bring a new dynamic to the Bond/M relationship. She would bring some familiarity to the next Bond era as Judi did with the last.
it's one of the worst ideas I've ever seen. If Fiennes can't continue in the role then at least give it to someone who's mildly suitable, not just a ''let's tick a box to please twitter numpties''
It seems like it was only yesterday that Bond's 50th anniversary was being celebrated with Skyfall. Only 2 films released in 10 years?! Even without the pandemic, the series has really slowed down.
These films take a long time to make and are very complicated, especially if people want to do other things [Like Craig with Knives Out]. I remember reading the plan was to do Spectre back to back with a follow up but this was dropped for being too time consuming [and probably for the best given Mission Impossible 7+8 have been shooting for over a year and more filming is still to come]. Even Brosnan thought he's films were rushed so maybe it's not a bad thing.
@@davidshillaker7578 so than they decided to write crap screen plays and She Too it up for good measure?? If it's not worth doing right it's not worth doing
Imo the next bond should be a reboot into the 60s, where he's already bond and doing traditional bond stuff. The reboot shouldn't be too similar to Daniel Craig Instead it can be similar to Sean Connery era with modern action and special effects
My prediction: we'll get an annoucement of the new Bond on 5 October 2022. Agreed with most points you made, especially with a younger Bond. I remember going to watch SPECTRE with my girlfriend at the time and some of her friends and the girls all thought Q was more attractive than Bond, which I suppose made sense since we were in our mid 20s at the time. So perhaps someone currently in their late 20s/early 30s... maybe Nicholas Hoult? I feel like he's the right age and at around the same level of fame as Craig had when he was cast (had lead roles in smaller films and a small role in a big blockbuster film- Tomb Raider for Craig and X men for Hoult). Regarding the tone, if you consider Dalton and Craig to be the more serious Bonds and Moore and Brosnan to be the lighthearted Bonds, then there seems to be a back and forth pattern, so the next Bond will probably be a more lighthearted Bond. I think they will try for a Marvel-esque tone of funny and lighthearted first half of the movie then more serious in the second half. Something akin to Goldeneye or the Living Daylights. Harris as M is a great idea but may be too confusing to the general public and will probably lead to a bunch of nonsense "theories" a la Codename Bond. I think we'll probably just get a new cast for the MI6 regulars. Personally I'd prefer if they went back to standalone films and no origin story. Bond's not like Batman or Spiderman that always needs the origin story to show how he became Bond. Just have him straight in a mission and have some throwaway lines about his parents or how he was in the navy like they used to do the in pre-Craig films. However in today's Cinematic Universes world I think they'll probably try to do another origin story and link all of the new actor's films together, which if they plan it well I don't mind. I wonder if Craig will stay on in some kind of a behind-the-scenes role since he's been credited as co-producer in his last 2 Bond films and seem to get on really well with Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson.
The youngest Bond should be, is mid 30s. He's a Commander in the Royal Navy Reserve and a 00. You don't get to either one of these positions only a couple of years after graduating from college.
He would be fine but his shoulders are so small...well, the producers made Craig, a fragile little man looks tough working out, so it wouldn´d be hard to make Turner fit in. Good idea. Turner as Bond.
I think the next Bond, should be around 35 ish, and shouldn’t be in it above about 42/43, I understand in Dr No he was given as being a man in his 30’s. but yet another fascinating video Calvin. Btw so many people have been asked if there doing Bond that even I am in the running at 350000/1odds. 😂
@@drumtum end of credits in no time to die it said James Bond will return but I agree you could get a blond women who could be his daughter who has become 007
@@drumtum Of course completely ignoring the text "JAMES BOND WILL RETURN" at the end of the credits of No time to die. So James Bond will be back, but rebooted obviously.
@@marksmith18889 The 'daughter' spin off idea hasn't held much water with me, both from a practicality perspective [it would have to be set in 2040 at the earliest] and story [Madeline wouldn't want her daughter anywhere near Espionage given what happened to her father].
Agree on a lot of your points! The problem with casting Bond now is the emergence of social media, where everyone has an opinion on who should be the new Bond which can be picked up on and shared quite easily. TV shows are also bigger than what they were when Craig was cast, so there are more actors who are in the public eye. I’m not expecting a Henry Cavill-type to be cast, but I think it will be someone we have heard of.
For what it's worth, 2022 is the 60th Anniversary of Dr No and James Bond on the big screen, the 55th Anniversary of You Only Live Twice, the 45th Anniversary of The Spy Who Loved Me, the 35th Anniversary of The Living Daylights, the 25th Anniversary of Tomorrow Never Dies, the 20th Anniversary of Die Another Day and the 10th Anniversary of Skyfall!
i just want to go back to basics and have bond just be a secret agent going on different adventures and seeing different directors making the bond film they want and not worrying too much about continuity
@@spenser9908 I want the old continuity back myself. I don’t care if it’s over the top, villain or gadget wise. We need more car chases with gadget use. Plus, I’d think the Valle De Los Caidos in Spain would make a great backdrop for a villainous lair. Despite the religious controversy behind it. In addition, 007 should travel to Ireland and Sweden too
About recasting M: I’d suggest either Timothy Dalton or Pierce Brosnan. Because (a) you do need some sort of “passing the torch” vibe and (b) the relationship between M and Bond in the books is one of mutual respect and bonding (sorry), and if M is sympathetic towards Bond because M’s been through what 007’s about to do, that’s a thread that can be built on.
Absolutely not. That would cause pure confusion and no need to pass anything on. Just start with a Bond movie no explanations just run with it. None of this you are new to the job crap or trying to find his feet just run with a story.
@@bighands69 Remember the scene in Live And Let Die where Connery's Bond hands over his Walther PPK to Moore's Bond? Me neither. It's James Fucking Bond, not Excalibur.
I don't think you need to cast them in that role to "pass the torch", as such, but they're both decent enough actors to play M, and Dalton's theatrical background should give him similar on screen gravitas to Fiennes.
I like the character arc proposed but casting an old Bond would be very cheesy and distracting [It's well know that Lois Maxwell wanted to play M in the Dalton era and that was shot down and I have similar reservations about that idea].
I'd prefer 35+ bond, no need origin story. just fresh start with new actor. same like living daylights with epic introduction. when it comes to the story i really want them to use Dalton's "third" script and polish it. and it could still use Fleming's short story name so young audience can rediscover Flemings stories for themselves. For Villains i would like them to take one villain from the past and bring him back throughout all new movies, lets say Scaramanga, Stromberg or Drax. and they don't need to be larger than life villains, then can be down to earth, but as powerful as bond. (not like Safin, who supposed to be bond's equal....pffff). also no need Spectre for now. keep it at rest. when it comes to henchman , i prefer bring back Hinx or Jaws, (i know they already portrayed perfectly, but i think they can adopt them into modern world brilliantly). And i want Lotus Esprit to be in new movie. (don't mind db5 at all, i will never be tired of it). and as much as i like MI6 staff, i think they will change it as they presence always will remind us about Daniel's timeline(i know they did it with Judi Dench, but times were different). and for God sake EON, please make normal gun barrel this time, stop with that horrible CGI gun barrel they gave Daniel Craig... Bonus: Soundtrack by Adele (i think she can give another smash hit)
This is not at all what I personally want, but what I think would make the most sense from EON's perspective: Now that Craigbond is dead, leave him dead, and make a couple 007 movies in the same timeline with Lashana Lynch. This would give the Craig lovers (Barbara most of all) a chance to grieve, allow them to keep crowd-favorites Harris, Wishaw, and Fiennes (who despite their overabundance of screen time, still feel woefully underdeveloped), open the door to reincorporate de Armas, and give EON a way to diversify the "Bond" casting without having to sacrifice Ian Fleming's character. It also would give another 10 years to hopefully put the Elba, Cavill, Hiddleston talk to bed. Again, not my choice... That died with Spectre and was routinely buried with NTTD. But, it makes a ton of sense given that they are clearly desperate to do something different.
Yeah nah, nope nah please nah. With all due respect not a good idea. If they still made another James Bond and spun off De Armas character that would be great. But a new James Bond movie where he is still dead and all that is happening is us getting reminded he has been killed isnt a great idea tbh. But still a cool interesting concept.
I'd give it 3 or 4 years for another Bond movie to come out solely because finding the right actor and director is something that will take time plus, the producers also need to know what direction to take the franchise and Bond as a whole going forward
I would LOVE to go back in time.. I want to see Bond in the early 60’s again during the Cold War but with an actor between the ages of 35 and 40 and I would also love to see more of his Naval background as well!
I’d love the start of Bond 26 be like the start of Live and Let Die; M and Moneypenny turn up at his place to give him his mission. No explanation, and the “regulars” just turn up and interact with him in the first scene of the film. He could also be with a lady (copyright; A.Partridge), there could be gadgets, etc. Basically “Hello Bond - here’s your mission. Off you go …..”
I would like to see a hard reboot of the series by taking the action back to the 60's. Modern technology makes traditional espionage films and particular Bond much more difficult. In this modern world it's hard to believe that there is a new super group in every film that the governments have no idea exist. By going back to the 60's you could have a greater variety in Bond villain , story and global factors e.g. cold war. I wouldn't mind seeing in the first film a younger bond transitioning from commander in the navy to a double 0 agent.
I heard once Quentin Tarantino said he’d do that if he were given the chance. I really like that idea, but I don’t think it’d really work as far as the general audience is concerned. There’s also the argument that Bond should adapt to modern times, because, well, these films spent eight years (six films) in the sixties.
@@samuelbarber6177Agreed, no chance of it happening. I think Tarantino's idea was more an 'ideal situation' than one that was piratical [given his Star Trek idea still hasn't seen the light of day years after he pitched it]. I read somewhere he wanted to set it after OHMSS [with Uma Thurman as Vesper] but still have Brosnan as Bond which would have been a bit confusing to the casual movie goer!
@@jamesatkinsonja It would probably also confuse Bond fans, let alone the casual movie goer who hasn’t seen OHMSS. Slightly unrelated, but it’s surprising Tarantino’s Star Trek never took off given his general popularity. Really, I think they should just some unrelated Bond inspired films in the 60s for that idea. Bond has been around so long and keeps relatively modern that it would really just be a step back, as interesting as it would be. Remember, this film series spent eight years in the 1960s.
@@samuelbarber6177 The Star Trek thing is odd-probably will find out at some point but very strange. Yeah but the fact the film series has done the 60's at the time is probably why they wouldn't go back [and The Man from Uncle bombing at the box office would put them off too].
Let's hope the next bond movies aren't full of seriousness & realism. It doesn't matters which actor will serve for Her Majesty, it depends on the producers they really need to go back to the classic bond style that is suave, awsome gadgets, women & fun. I don't wanna sound like I hate Daniel Craig but his bond movies weren't fun. His bond movies felt like generic action movies. Timothy Dalton did a portrayal of darker & violent bond before Craig but his movies still felt like you are watching a 007 film because it stayed true to The Bond Formula.
I understand your point and seriously hope this happens! We, the true Bond fans, were pushed aside off the fanbase with too much drama. We need to get back into that fun Bond! Did you also noticed how they took off the gadgets in the last one?
@@thedangerousfella5860 I just feel that I haven't seen a Bond movie for nearly 20 years Daniel Craig's portrayal of Bond was not Classic James Bond at all except for the first hour of Spectre when he was brilliant, with that exception he was a generic action character like Bourne, Ethan Hunt etc He fell in love with 2 women and left MI6 twice all in the space of 4 movies, that's not a Classic Bond, could you ever imagine Connery, Moore or Brosnan doing anything like that If you want the Bond from the books then watch Dalton or Craig but 99% of people identify with Bond through the movies not the books, They were the dark serious Ian Fleming Bond, that guy wasn't Iconic, The fun loving playboy Bond was Bond was a charming funny charismatic suave and sophisticated playboy MI6 agent who bedded loads of women on his way to killing the bad guy and saving the world Bond isn't an Icon for being an angry love sick puppy with a Bourne complex, he was 2 hours of the embodiment of a masculine playboy with style and humour Connery set the scene and it was continued through Moore and Brosnan, This is what separated the Classic James Bonds from all other action movie characters, it's why every guy wanted to be him It's why Classic James Bonds like Moore, Brosnan and Connery were Brilliant while Craig's Bond is nothing more than a vulnerable generic action character with a cool name and heritage built on the backs of 3 of his predecessors.
My concern is that they go back to a campy Bond. One of the reasons why I like Craig and Dalton is that their Bonds had higher stakes and made the character grounded. I'm not a fan of Moore's style of Bond or Brosnan's.
@@eramos8916 here you got a point. Too campy means less realistic. However; too realistic means less Bond. They need to get back into the middle ground, just like Connery was. Realistic and at the same time, fictitious, charm and fun. They can do it, but they won’t
Don’t need ‘story arcs’, we need a return to more fun times, a modern Roger Moore or Pierce Brosnan needed, stories can have reality and fantasy mixed, just no more dreariness. Next film starts with Bond being woken up by M like Live and Let Die
Given that the MCU is the dominant franchise at the moment and you can 'catch up' easily now a days [You could watch all of Craig's 4 films the week before NTTD which you couldn't do pre-home media/regular TV airings] there is a big incentive to have ongoing story-lines. Even Fast & Furious-which is knowingly silly and OTT- does it now a days. It's also more likely to keep a general audience returning to the films [especially as NTTD was sold as Craig's finale]. Sorry but it's probably here to stay unless movie trends change.
Apparently a big reason why the fantasy elements were dropped was that Austin Powers had mocked those tropes too much to be taken seriously. But given even part 3 is now 20 years old maybe enough time has passed for those elements to return.
Oh STOP with that. We had 20 fun movies during 40 years and you want more fun ? What make the charm of the Craig era was this seriousness. So yes that not the taste of all, but is a new interesting direction, in a period where fun dominate everything with Marvel. Also No time to die IS fun with fantasy, and it is his big problem, it is not a Craig movie but a Brosnan/Moore movie. The Bond death will be perfect with these two, less with the serous of Craig. Saffin, the most important problem of this movie, is basically a new Drax/Stromberg, even the Blofeld plan with héraclès is near to a plan of a Moore villain.
@@coreyburns4168 that’s true, but the film’s were always films, without the films, the notoriety and fame of Bond wouldn’t be anywhere near as it is and as likely given some content the books consigned to history
I'd love to see some standalone bond films again, maybe even some based in the past like the 60s, I'm sure there's many stories they can use that aren't remakes, the modern tech plots are getting a bit tired. (edit: you make an extremely good point about the product placment, I didn't think of that)
I think they should do a James Bond detective story where he is trying to figure out some mystery that you do not know what it is until the end. And just do it as a stand alone no need to start of with nonsense like you are new to the job Bond. Q was also useless at best so they need him to go back to his roots.
There really isn't that many Fleming plots that have not either been adapted faithfully or had chunks used for other films [Live and Let Die for For your eyes only and Licence to Kill, the novel Moonraker for Die another Day, the book You only live twice for No time to Die] and even most of the short stories have been used [007 in New York inspired the bit with Vespers ex in Quantum] which only leaves stuff like novel 'The spy who loved me' which were skipped over for a reason. They'll still use bits going forward [such as the safe house in Spectre being called Hildebrand].
Since I've been hearing the Navy thing a lot, I find it funny that one of my biggest theories regarding the video game is we we're going to have at least one level where you play on a Navy boat
If the Bond series wants to consider new blood then they should consider new writers other than Purvis and Wade who have had a hand in every Bond film since TWINE..every Bond movie in the 2000s so far...and it seems other writers come up with the better scene like those in Skyfall (John Logan) and Casino (Paul Haggis). The stories have really let down the most recent films...also cut the film's down to be closer to 2 hours and more enjoyable and entertaining.
I’ll be happy with just about any option they go with so long as the next film doesn’t open with Ralph Fiennes selecting a new agent to take on the code name James Bond.
I just hope the film is a real mission without Bond coming back from the dead or coming out of retirement or having his license revoked and going rogue. Those things have been done to death.
The idea of Naomie Harris as a new M is a really interesting one. She would really fit the role I think and it would make sense, since she's been a field agent in Craigs era, has since been involved in every mission and could be a suitable successor to Ralph Fiennes' Mallory. And of course, Moneypenny starts with M, too!
They have a big problem if they make Naomie M it will mean that we have to somehow forget what happened to Bond. If they had not finished No Time to Die like they did she could have been M and Fiennes could have a new role. They really really messed it up.
Tom Hardy with Chirstopher Nolan directing. Unless the producers yet again turn down an a-list director in favour of a crowd pleasing forgettable trend like they did in the Brosnan era
SPECTACULAR video Calvin - filled with great ideas and brilliant analysis- and most importantly- EXACTLY what we needed to cleanse our palate and move forward after that sad end to our hero! I definitely agree with you that they will go even younger next time - with an unknown actor that is not even on our radar right now. The reasons for that, as you pointed out, are not only so they attract a younger audience and so he would be around for several films, but because the films are so physically demanding that it just makes good business sense to go that route - so there are no more production delays due to injuries! I do think -sadly - that the days of mission based single adventures are done. I think modern audiences are just so used to continuing storylines from film to film in other franchises that it’s expected and would probably be strange to them to suddenly not have it anymore. One thing I would love though - but is probably highly unlikely - is to keep this M, Q and Moneypenny! These are much tougher parts to cast than we thought and Ray Fiennes, Ben Whishaw and Naomi Harris are just perfect so I’d love to see them somehow continue the way Judi Dench did as M! ( but since they toasted his death lol - this definitely may not be possible!) If we could keep only one though - I’ll take Bens Q- I think he could very easily be around for the next 15 years or so like Desmond was! I also think - thanks to the Amazon deal - that we will get a new film sooner rather that later though - so that is great news as well!
@@heroicDale Even with these films he is not A-list in US. For most Americans I would say he's the guy who looks familiar (bc of his films, etc.) but cannot recall his name.
@@NeverSaySandwich1 I think the fact he is gay makes him an even better candidate. As a traditionalist Bond fan I want him to remain hetero (or bi when necessary as alluded to in Skyfall), but in my opinion having a gay actor portray Bond makes the series more contemporary.
I could imagine a Bond where the pretitle sequence is set in the 1950s with a caracter who's basically Bond as written and described by Ian Fleming in the books. The audience never hears his name but he has the scar on his cheek, he drives the bentley, he smokes the Morland cigarettes and he has a housekeeper named May in his flat. But he's involved in something very important that has consequences in the present day, which brings us to Bond. I mean that would be quite cool in my opinion. Well, for one movie at least
@@tcaudiobooks737 this might be true unfortunately but at the same time his biography has been updated over the decades. He used to be born on the 11th November 1920 in Glen Coe and went through a different education than the latest version who was born on the 13th April 1968 in West Berlin and doesn't have a weakness for cigarettes and women but therefore tends to be depressive. To avoid code name bs I'd call him Jason Bateman or so (initials JB) and he would be 007 long before James Bond's time. It would be great fan service for the book readers anyway I guess.
I can see them going back to an actor in his late 20s early 30s and picking up after a Casino Royale style mission has taken place already in this continuity, Bond is a fairly new 00 but not totally green, then just pick up with new missions each film
The end of the credits of No time to die says James Bond will return. So the next bond film will be a full reboot with all regular characters recast. It will be another parallel universe. I don’t have any current actor who could play bond. I did like Daniel Craig as Bond because he does look like he has a Military background. He looks like a warrior who also looks good wearing a suit. So all the action and fighting scenes look believable to me.
I’ve always wanted them to go with a completely unknown actor for Bond rather than an A-lister as well. Like with most of the other actors, for whoever it is, it can be the job that kickstarts their career. That opening actually got me a bit! Love how you keep making fun of NTTD’s ending because my GOD, was it stupid!
The last time they did that, they got Lazenby, who was not the best choice unfortunately. But I agree with their current philosophy of getting semi-established actors like Connery, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan and Craig and making their careers that way.
They should begin the next film similarly to The Living Daylights with a gritty training exercise at somewhere like Fort Monckton at Portsmouth, set at sunset. There could be several Bond-like trainees and it's not immediately clearly who is Bond.
I would also be interested to see how the next film -- like Goldeneye - repositions Bond geopolitically in a different world. What will a post-Brexit, post-pandemic Bond look like?
Although I'm not really a fan of the 'spin-off' trajectory either in most cases, the Paloma character was severely underused in NTTD, in my humble opinion - so I wouldn't mind seeing more of her in the future.
They do not need to go crazy with a Spin off series just another character with their own movie series and it only needs to be two or three movies. They could make it different from Bond with different types of stories. The character does not need to be action like and could be a detective type agent trying to solve something but with all the cool Bond series niches.
@@bighands69 Well, that does sound interesting to me, but wouldn't that remind too many people of Ana De Armas and Daniel Craig's previous collaboration, regarding the detective aspect?
I'm sure if Paloma was in Craig's, say 4th film, she'd be brought back for sure, probably in an expanded role. However, she was only introduced in Craig's last film and was a late edition, mainly because he liked working with her in 'Knives Out' [Purvis and Wade said the equivalent in there script had about 2 lines] so I doubt she'll return now Craig's gone and the chemistry is lost, plus any re-introduction would need a work as she's a bit of a blank slate in background etc [hence perfect for her extended cameo to hit the ground running, less so for a full film]. Apparently Ana De Armas is in talks to head a female John Wick spin off so that might be a 'spiritual' follow up.
@@terrancehall9762 If you've seen MI Fallout which more or less did that, I think that's why they made Safin and Blofeld enemies rather than allies to do something different.
I wish for the series two things: 1) They leave Bond dead 2) They throw the last director out and get Martin Campbell back to make a good old Bond a la Goldeneye/ Casino Royale with an unknown Bond. There are some things that haven't been adapted from the books which can be used
I also didn’t believe they’d do any period set films although it had never occurred to me it would be for product placement reasons but you’re totally right. I honestly thought Richard Madden stood a decent chance of being Bond (at least, the best chance of the frequently touted names) but now he’s on the marvel train I wonder if that rules him out, depending on if they have future plans for his character. I certainly hope the producers at least listen to Edgar Wright’s pitch. He’s probably my favourite working filmmaker and I think he’d do something bold with bond without straying too far from convention. I also hope the fun aspect gets brought back a bit more. I mean don’t get me wrong I’m a fan of Craig’s tenure but I’d prefer both the general tone of it and the serialisation aspect to be one off experiments. That being said, thanks to the evolution in blockbuster filmmaking, I think audiences expect those emotional punches and personal connections, something as silly and frankly emotion-free for the protagonist as say, moonraker, wouldn’t get made now.
@@MikeHalsey we probably wouldn’t be wanting a period bond if these films continued because it would have filled that space. But you are correct that producers probably ruled it out because of Man From U.N.C.L.E.
I like Jamie Dornan. Excellent as a manipulative serial killer family man in The Fall. Got the sex appeal too. Perfect time for him too career and age wise.
I feel the next Bond film/actor should do the following. 1. Cast an unknown, younger actor to play Bond (so they can grow into the rol) 2. Use a similar tone to the Kingsman films (light-hearted, great action but with some serious moments. No Time to Die was a great start, but embracing the fun could be crucial) 3. Keep it set in 2020's (so we can see new, modern/relevant villains. Maybe a rich, flamboyant tech giant like Musk or Bezos, an insane eco-terrorist with plans to destroy the modern world to save the natural one, something to do with the Middle East to replace Russia, or even a Russian villain again just for fun). 4. Back to basics in terms of an overall story (back to the stand-alone films with hints of plot carrying over, but nothing major) 5. A much more ruthless Bond (to contrast with the most vulnerable performance we just got). 6 (optional). A full reboot (confirming the James Bond is a codename theory in this continuity only could lead to interesting ideas, maybe a new arc about the new Bind trying to live up to his predecessor and struggling under his huge reputation, but a full reboot I don't think would be unwelcome, and essentially scraps the interconnected timeline of Craig, in order to start fresh)
Sam Witherington, Bond also needs to go back to using women as disposable pleasures instead of falling in love and resigning all the time, that's not the Bond I was brought up on
I think of all the MI-6 regulars, I’d want Ben Whishaw to remain of all people. He’s my second favourite Q, and I’d like to have another long running side character actor who can be like Desmond Llewellyn.
Calvin, speaking personally I'm relieved to hear another fan admit to not being ticked pink about faithful adaptations of the Flemings. I don't know who started that idea years ago, why it picked up steam, or why there is a subsection of the fanbase that salivates at the prospect. Every time I hear or read someone suggest that it would be "awesome" my reaction is "Really? You literally just want them to film the books? You don't want any surprises or anything new at all?!?". Bless your heart, Calvin.
One idea is they could do some separate adaptations for streaming services, like a mini series on Amazon. They could make faithful, period accurate Bond adaptations, just as a side thing.
@@THEremiXFACTOR The radio adaptions are pretty much the closest your going to get to that [the Goldfinger adaption for example had Rosamund Pike as Pussy Galore and Ian McKellen as Goldfinger]
@@billkoenig1552 Would it be fair to argue that it's a generational thing? In other words, fans of a certain age are hoping to see Bond on screen living in a world they witnessed personally but is now long past?
They should remake the man with the golden gun. Which of course starts, in the book, with bond returning brainwashed having been believed to be dead - and attempting to assassinate m. They could keep it entirely ambiguous as to whether this is a continuation (of course it isn’t they never mention wife and child again) but they keep it ambiguous enough eg specific mention of what happened on Japanese island, same actor as m, different actors for money penny and W. This would 1) please fans wanting a basis in flemings novel, 2) give an alternative to one of the most polarising films in the series. 3) allow endless debate about whether there is one consistent timeline. 4) work as an introduction to a new bond actor, on his “first” mission following his brainwashing.
Sorry but just because Bond is brainwashed, doesn't mean the MI6 regulars-who know his wife and child -have been [unlike Kissy in the novels who was unknown to them] and Madeline [given she's a psychologist and Bond's ex] would be the ideal person to get his memory back if they did a 'Bond Returns' plot. Generally this would be very confusing for a general audience member [and I've seen people on these comments sections confused at Craig's timeline not marrying up to the Connery-Brosnan films] and a full reboot is the simplest way to go [and Bond can be an established MI6 agent to cut out the origin story] as well as being fair to the new actor who may well have a totally difference approach to Craig and having them carry on his story is a big ask. But...If they make Bond 26-28 a trilogy, they could easily have this occur in the new timeline for the start of 27 or 28 which would be interesting to explore [as Calvin said, it's a bit disappointing the brainwashed Bond is just a prologue to Golden Gun when there is enough material for a full novel/movie].
Bond will go the way of Batman. The novels are already public domain in Canada. Like the Batman there will be several reboots iterations and alternate reality/parallel universe multiverse stories: Steampunk Bond Cyberpunk Bond Bond vs. Cthulhu… wait, that has already been done… kinda… the Laundry Files (A type of Bond deconstructed).
The novels maybe already public domain, but the james bond theme and the iconic gunbarrel scenes are not. So it would be weird if there is a canadian producer make bond movie without james bond themes and gunbarrel scenes
I've always ALWAYS wanted to see Bond before he became a 00-agent (Or a MI6-agent for that matter.) Part of my introduction to the Bond series were the Young Bond novels, and while I don't need the movies to show us teenage Bond studying at university, I would like to see him in the army, or navy rather. I just want to see the man before the mythos. Even Casino Royale wasn't a "proper" origin story, considering that the man we met in the parkour scene in the opening of that film is basically the same character we'll see later. Sure - he went through a lot of character development until No Time To Die - but he was a 00-agent, a ruthless killer, a capable spy and a martini-drinking playboy, who knows his way around tux-and-tie dinner parties. I want to see the character grow into that. He doesn't have to be our finished James Bond in this first film. He should be human.
I think that would somehow make him less interesting and remove some of the mystery and what makes bond so special, i already think they humanized him too much by doing what every other franchise does.
My guess is october/november 2022 the actor will be known. This gives enough time for the current film to make money and by announcing the new actor provide a small boost. By october 2024 the next film will be at the movies. This way momentum of interest is kept. Also M.G.Wilson is not getting younger.
They’ll end up giving someone like Kathryn Bigelow the directing gig. First female director and all that. Tbh, I’d settle for her. Think she’d do a good job.
It's a shame she hasn't done a Bond film before. At 70 she is 8 years younger than Martin Campbell who people keep linking to Bond. Susanne Bier was linked after 'The Night Manager' but I don't know how seriously [and her post Night Manger career hasn't had the same impact].
The "odds" reports actually refer to the odds the bookies are offering. You know, those bookies who have loads of influence on the decision and definitely aren't just touting names about to persuade people to hand money over that they'll never see again.
Director Quintin Tarantino or Christoper Noland, actor safe choice Henry Cavill or the more interesting choice Tom Hardy, the direction the film from the officer in the special boat service to ending up as 00 at the end of the film. Setting back in the early '60s
I think Cavill is a shoe in for the role honestly. Youthful look, perfect character fit. If not him then an unknown commodity, I would hate to see them go young only to attract a younger audience. Get the right choice, not the popular one. I think they need to keep it contemporary as well. A period piece is harder to pull off with cars/gadgets. I would like to see a return to the original timeline because I felt Die Another Day was a weak sendoff. If they're rebooting, then don't do another closed loop, keep this timeline open. Hated what they did with the last two films. Tonally, I'd like to see them keep the depth of Craig's bond but far less somber. There's a healthy medium between Moonraker campy and No Time To Die seriousness. Play within those boundaries and mess with the balance but don't go extreme like they have been. I think they need to recast MI6. Now that we've seen them mourn Bond's death it would be odd for us all to pretend we didn't see it and go back to business as usual with a new bond. I do like the idea of Bond going back to getting his assignments from M though, I looked forward to those interactions. Particularly when it was Judi Dench. Her dialogue with Brosnan in Goldeneye was perfect, I love that relationship and would like to see a similar one in play.
Interestingly enough the poison garden in No time to die was also in the book of You only live twice in which Bond discovered the main villain Shatterhand was in fact Blofeld and the original working title for No time to die was Shatterhand but they decided not to go with it. I think for the next Bond we dont need another origin story, maybe they could do a young Bond but one who has already been in the game a few years and isnt quite burnt out yet. Craigs Bond was completely self contained so they could quite easily start a new chapter of James Bond adventures
Finally got to watch the film today, sucks Australia delayed it. I loved it and I loved how it ended. It’ll be interesting to see how they continue now. Hopefully we get a younger Bond, a different path to DC tenure. Hopefully they get an A list director, with an experienced not well known actor.
I feel old the next bond they choose will probably be younger than me. Love the intro. I hope we have a less serious bond more like pierce next with more a focus on gadgets again 🤞🏻.
While I've always thought that Bond should be a trendsetter rather than a trend follower, I wish any new films would take the model that the MI films have taken and give us some solid spy adventure stuff. Bond is good at what he does, but he's not a perfect hero, and that's fine, but it doesn't appear that we're able to have flawed characters anymore (that's toxic), so I'm not really sure that what we'll get in the immediate future will really be James Bond, even though it has the name. The idea of some adventures set in their proper time period would be nice, but now that every major film has to have the broadest demographic + the corporate sponsorships it's doubtful we'll ever get that. As it stands the comicbooks are probably the best thing going now for James Bond fans as they respect the character in ways that the films can't.
Bond has always been a trend follower in fairness [most noticeably Moonraker with Star Wars and Licence to Kill with Lethal Weapon/Miami Vice] which does mean that it moves with the times and can change when outdated [such as using Bourne and Batman Begins as templates for Casino Royale after Die Another Day]. I love the MI films but even they are adopting the MCU style continuity with Fallout being a direct sequel to Rouge Nation and 7+8 likely to be a 2 part story. Someone correctly said that the MI films also show a trend in a lack of 'womanizing' given we've had two films of Ethan and Ilsa getting close but they haven't even shared a kiss on screen. The 'general audience' factor, as you say, is a big part. The comic's/books are read by a niche audience where you can do period setting etc. while the movie has a much wider appeal and tastes do change [Roger Moore didn't like the scenes with Bond hitting Maud Adams in 1974 even if that is true to the books character]. You can have a flawed character [Craig's Bond certainly made mistakes in his work] but you do have to be careful ['The Last Boy Scout in 1991 was constantly re-edited as test audiences found the lead character-a hard drinking, misogynist-very unlikable].
Personally, I would love it. If the next Bond was a more light hearted crazy version of the character. Like Roger Moore was at his best. Sometimes at his worst as well, however. His more sarcastic and casual take on Bond. To me for a new actor if they embraced the sillier aspects of Bond. Would be the perfect palette cleanser for the Daniel Craig era of Bond. Besides it might finally help you get over the trauma. From the ending of No Time to Die.
![Lil Uzi Vert - Chill Bae [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/D7F42F_JM3U/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm hoping the next Bond will do precisely three films so we have the complete set:
Roger Moore - 7
Sean Connery - 6
Daniel Craig - 5
Pierce Brosnan - 4
New Bond - 3
Timothy Dalton - 2
George Lazenby - 1
Idris Elba - 0
Also a Trilogie could have a good progressing story which is planable
Perfect for Michael Fassbender then!
And then whoever comes next must do 8
@@MCMIVC And the guy after that has to do 9.
@@BenCol what about a sequel too bloodstone has a James Bond movie.
I hope they package Craig’s arc into its own timeline and go back to standalone films like they used to do. Bond is more enjoyable to me when I don’t need to know every detail from the previous films to understand the newest one.
Agreed. While I did enjoy the Craig era, my personal favorites are the stand-alone films that are loosely connected.
Agreed!
@Skeletor Couldn't agree more, Bond for me died when Brosnan handed in his Walther PPK & LTK
I just never felt like I was watching a James Bond movie in this last era, except for the first hour of Spectre where I thought Craig was excellent, I thought I was watching Connery or Brosnan until he fell in love again and ruined it completely
@Skeletor Craig is a grotesque abomination as Bond.
I agree on a younger actor, but rather than a "here's how he became 007 again" story, have him already 007 but tie into his naval background and do a story based around that. I also think it should be a (relatively) unknown actor as a known face comes with all manner of downsides. I anticipate an announcement on the next actor and the next director being made on the actual 60th anniversary of the release of Dr No, Monday 10th October 2022 😀 can't wait!
Great idea to tap into his naval background! Would love to see more of that in the series
agree
Excellent idea indeed!
Something more based on Bond's Royal Navy background ? I can almost see something about eco terrorism or global climate profiteering unfolding around that, as long as they don't go too preachy and hamfisted about it.
Yes! You could even have him be a seasoned 00, but then tell the story of his naval background working on the HMS Elizabeth through a few short flashbacks. Even better, have a twist that he faced a betrayal in his naval career that killed crew under his command, and have the same person who caused that betrayal be the main bad guy whos trying to destroy England. The title? For Queen and Country.
I hope they don’t do an origin story again.
I’m hoping for a Bond in his mid-late 30’s, who’s been in the role for a few years, just going out on missions. No major overarching plot. Just a series of Bond films like the Moore era where they can be enjoyed in any order.
Yes! I also hope they bring back the more fun and laid back vibe that the Moore films had!
Same
We are in the 'streaming/binge watching era' so overaching plots is the norm now a days-even sitcoms on TV often have a series long plot.
@@mehrankooshiar1005 The last Moore film was nearly 40 years ago now.
Bond needs a “show runner”, a creative individual who can more coherently map out the character arcs for the next Bond. Note, not the stories, but at least the characters. PWB may be doing this already.
I dont want to see Bond 7 just retread the DC era, so I’d like a young Bond (early 30s), established as a 00, a better tie in to his Naval background, and back to individual missions and stories. Oh, and a return to the classic Bondisms - a proper gunbarrel, naked chicks in the titles, and the bloody Bond theme actually played in its entirety at least twice in the film.
Edgar Wright is the man for me to deliver this.
Agreed, a 'showrunner' like PWB [who served that function on Killing Eve] to map out a trilogy would be a good move.
I love Edgar Wrights work [even if his experiences with the MCU and Ant Man might have soured him to blockbusters] and he'd bring something new to the series.
I doubt they'll retread the Craig era. I vaguely remember quote from Michael G Wilson after DAD where he said it would be easy and profitable to do the same thing but they wanted to take the series in a new direction. With NTTD's ending and a massive shift in movie culture thanks to the pandemic I have no doubt they recognise that another new direction is called for.
Edgar Wright would also be my no.1 choice to reboot the series. He strikes me as someone who can take the classic tropes and use them in creative ways. Locking down some writers long term and having a multi-film plan seems like the smart move right now too.
@@jamesatkinsonja i think wright would lean too far into nostalgia to make anything actually new
@@TheGamerThing Bit harsh assessment there. He's someone who finds new ways to explore things [Baby driver was an idea he had for 20 years] and the things he did on spaced [a low budget sitcom] was great.
@@TheGamerThing He's not JJ Abrams in fairness!
Great video Calvin. My number one hope for any future movies is that they stop spending so much time looking backwards for the sake of nostalgia - no more DB5, no more reborn classic villains, etc. We need some new, fresh iconic moments!
I don’t mind the DB5, what I do mind is harking back to terrible films such as Ohmss and The living daylights as if they were something to celebrate. What a dreadful film NTTD was, a joke, an embarrassment, but I think the DB5 is bond, you can’t avoid it. A DB7 and a DB9 aren’t bond cars, and the V8 vantage in my opinion isn’t fondly remembered. Maybe the Vanquish, the 2002 one, but can we have it without being invisible? Hopefully
@@danielnuttman6511 what about a James Bond movie that a sequel too bloodstone the video game he’ll yay.
@@donna3bbb maybe, never say never
Thanks, Domini! Yeah the Craig era certainly ended up leaning on nostalgia a lot more than previous eras did. I know this is very much a Hollywood trend at the moment but Spectre and NTTD certainly felt more overt than the series usually does.
@@calvindyson It weirdly leaned on nostaglia considering it was trying to rip up the rule book and do things its own way.
I want a return to the tone and sensibility of GoldenEye. I feel it struck the perfect, natural balance between light and dark without ever feeling like it was actively trying too hard to please everyone. I know the Brosnan era is accused by some of trying to be as palatable and marketable as possible, but I really do think GoldenEye nailed expertly the careful balancing act between being unmistakably modern and classic at the same time.
Most of all, I just want self-contained adventures without the retroactively serialised, soap opera bollocks.
^ This
In fact, a modern day Tomorrow Never Dies-inspired plot with a Zuckerberg/Musk/Bezos-like villain would lend greatly to a new Bond.
@@yrooxrksvi7142 would rather not have remakes
I personally felt always the best Brosnan bond was tomorrow never dies. Goldeneye is ok, and was fantastic to see Bond again in theaters, but tomorrow never dies was better.
@@brumav9779 No exactly a remake, more like heavily inspired. Kinda like A View To A Kill was an 80s update of Goldfinger.
Yep, no more interconnected storylines. The Bond formula worked for so long for good reason
They need to do a complete reset to a Bond in the middle of his career going off on single missions. I'm not really interested in another redundant origin like The Amazing Spiderman. The interconnectedness of the Craig era gives them a bit of a challenge to get the general audience to follow along with the changeover. As much as I like the current MI6 regulars, I think they should recast them all. I also think it would actually be helpful to bring Felix Leiter back immediately with a new actor (to clue the GA in on this being a total reset). Get an actor that's young enough (around 30) to play Bond for 15+ years, and get back to doing standalone adventures.
Using the spider man analogy, they might have a Bond already established [like Spider man was in the MCU] to avoid repetition of the origin story.
The problem they have in killing of Felix is that we all remember him dying and we remember what happened to Bond.
I view the Craig era as bookends to the previous 20 films. For continuity this would likely mean that Casino Royale until Bond blew up Blofeld's lair in Morocco occurred before Dr. No and the London ending in Spectre and NTTD were the finality of the series. I agree that they should definitely plug back into the middle of his career/timeline from now on.
@@BlackMuslimConservative If you want that to be your head canon, fine it's fun to do even if it doesn't explain a lot of inconsistencies with the 'classic' continuity [Felix's injuries in Licence to Kill not being there in NTTD for example]. They can do a fresh re-boot but have it that Bond has been a 00 for a few years to skip the origin story [maybe have him meet a new M for the first time to show it's a new continuity] as they did for Spiderman in the MCU.
'The Batman's approach [where Batman has been operating for a couple of years off screen] would be a good way to go with Bond 26
I'd love to see an unknown as Bond, rather than someone who's already familiar.
Bond 26 prediction:
A faithful adaptation (updated to take place in the 2020s, of course) of ‘007 in New York’. Most of the film is just scrambled eggs.
EON continue with their trend of casting big name actors as the villains by casting Jeremy Irons as the Scrambled Eggs.
I’d genuinely love to see that. $250 million budget.
With Danny Boyle as director, Benedict Cumberbatch as Bond and Stephen Fry as M. Also starring Simon Pegg, Shelley Duvall and Yoko Ono.
@@BenCol genius. as long as Yoko gets offed.
@@MegaWolfGaming she'd probably be a Bond ally, he hates The Beatles after all...
I suspect he would be left with egg on his face...
I would love for Martin Campbell to get a third try. GoldenEye was a masterpiece and Casino Royale was the only Daniel Craig 007 film that i enjoyed enough to watch more than once.
I just hope the next era of Bond brings back the fun. More Gadgets, hot Bond girls, and cool guns. Also i have no idea on actors to play Bond but i would like a young one for once. Like mid 20s or early 30s.
Well, there were two of those. Sean Connery was 31 during filming for Dr. No and George Lazenby was 29 during filming for On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.
Sailor Mercury, I only enjoyed him in the first hour of Spectre
GoldenEye isn’t even sort of a masterpiece. lol
@@kfitz2711 what about a sequel too bloodstone has a James Bond movie.
@@donna3bbb you gonna ask activision or remake it because the ending was a cliffhanger.
Something else to consider for the producers is that Fleming's works will become public domain in 12 years. It's possible that EONs trademarks won't prevent another studio from making Bond movies. If the next Bond's tenure is comparable to Craig's, they could be the last Bond exclusively controlled by EON. In a world where literally anyone could be James Bond, having the same guy as the last 12 years come back to make your movies would be a huge advantage over other studios.
I'd like to see a period piece James Bond.
Set the stories in 1950's post war Europe as the original stories were.
It works for Sherlock Holmes.
Never going to happen. As Calvin says these movies live on product placement - in 2025 How can you sell mobile phones/sports cars /beers in a film set in the 1950’s - either the products don’t exist yet or the 50’s brands are all defunct or totally naff. If it was set in the 50’s the main product placement would be cigarette brands !
@@nathanthomas5133 True enough, but I can dream.
@@timbuktu8069 Dreams are never a bad thing
@@klaudiagrob You never had the one where you're in your underwear in front of a large crowd?
3:03 - 3:13 ACTION, ACTION, ACTION, ACTION, ACTION, ACTION GO GO GO GO , "that's our director Martin Campbell" brilliant man :)
"Sharp as a knife" as Campbell keep on saying to Pierce, etc...
@@patrickfisher4241 I hope it becomes Calvins new "we are not science fiction, we are science fact" when it comes to talking about or bringing up Martin Cambell
@@DafyddBrooks maybe Double O Zorro....and Martin doesn't bring in any green lanterns...Martin has already indicated he would be prepared to come back, but he's not getting any younger...be amazing if he pulled off introducing 3 new Bond actors...we will see...will they again gamble with Campbell?
I desperately hope they'll keep Ralph Fiennes, he's my favourite M of the entire series.
My favorite is Judi Dench, but he absolutely killed it in No Time to Die
With age, Ralph Fiennes is looking more and more like Bernard Lee.
I've thought about this:
I think they'll certainly aim for a younger actor (29-32) mainly so the actor can be physically up for it and so he can stick around for a decade.
The film itself shouldn't be as serious as Craig's output, it would be nice if they aimed for something like Tomorrow Never Dies, a fun film but with elements of drama.
I would like Ralph Fiennes to reprise his role as M, though I think that is fairly unlikely.
I suspect the films will become slightly more fantastical, but hardly near Moonraker territory. I think that the films will still be linked, narratively speaking, though perhaps not to the same degree as with the Craig films.
Yeah I'd like to keep the present M and Moneypenny on for the next Bond
I would like to recommend that bond films are not like tomorrow never dies, that film is not great, although the tone is a bit too campy for me
@@motion-movies Each to their own. TND is n't my favourite but I don't think serious and gritty will be done again, at least not in the same way.
I want the new Bond direction to have more spy/espionage angle, similar to From Russia With Love. It's a direction that hasn't been done for a while. If not I'd like new Bond movies to be similar to The Living Daylights. Most of all I just want more fun injected into the series, the Craig movies were just too serious
For me I think THe Living Daylights nailed the globe-trotting adventure of Bond films, and this political narrative being stretched across various landscapes with decent scale. Something I think future Bond movies should make use of. Especially because after Skyfall, the Craig films felt a bit stuck to Italy and London. I love Quantum of Solace for really taking us into new territory. And I can absolutely respect No Time To Die for doing the same by going to Cuba, but that's also a very restrained/confined location of one street, and then afterwards we get some domestic Swedish landscape and some Northern European-looking island (ik its Kuril islands but still not very interesting). It's good to have a down-to-earth thing like For Your Eyes Only, after a huge film, but globe-trotting is part of Bond and there's so many geopolitical situations still left to explore. My favourite Bond movies were ones that explored geopolitics, and that's an important part of both the novels and the older movies.
There's so many people that could play Bond and personally I would love to see Henry Cavill as Bond. But also if the next movie is a new reboot I would love to see Timothy Dalton as M, I know it's probably not gonna happen but I can dream
While I personally think Dalton as M would be awesome, imagine how much that would fuel the codename theory... Not saying that's a reason not to do it, but OH MAN...
I love Dalton as M. That would be so fun.
@@MCMIVC Dalton's M: You know 007, I used to be just like you... in fact I WAS you.
Bond: Really sir?!
Dalton's M: No.
Cavill is busy filming other stuff, plus if he’s announced next year he’ll be 39 and at least 40 by the time the movie comes. A bit old perhaps. Plus he may still play Superman once again.
Dalton has the chops for that part. Needs to be someone who for Queen and Country will send the Majesty’s Men/Women to their Graves
The beginning of this video made me wish we had some kind of funeral scene or something as a tribute to James. I guess we got M's toast and quote in No Time To Die, but something a little more official would have been nice too.
Next year Michael G. Wilson turns 80, so I’m guessing it’ll be pretty soon that he steps down from his producer role, whether it be into retirement or into a hole in the ground. So I guess we’ll have one of his sons take his place - I know both are involved with EON at the moment in some capacity. If that does indeed happen, it’ll be interesting to see what their take is and how much the direction of the series will change. No idea what Barbara Broccoli’s children are up to - I know she has a daughter, but I have absolutely no idea if said daughter has any interest in the family business. Even if Barbara Jr. doesn’t follow her mother’s footsteps, Barbara must be thinking about her successor. No idea what their plan for the future is, but Barbara herself is 60, so I’m guessing they must be looking into getting the next generation into the fold so they’re ready to take over in a decade or two’s time - after all, Barbara was Associate Producer on the 80s Bonds before taking over from Cubby in the 90s.
Indeed, at the premier Barbara made an impromptu speech thanking Wilson for being a great partner and all his years work etc. No one every said ‘retirement’ but that was certainly the implication. I imagine he’ll keep on inputting and maybe be credited as Exec Producer for as long as he lives but yeah, it’s not immediately apparent who would really be fit to take his place.
@@calvindyson He's certainly seemed aged and somewhat diminished in the last few years. I'd be happy if he and Babs stepped aside and handed over the reins to others.
I think some new blood and perspective that high up in the production could be a good thing right now. We always consider new actors, themes, directors, etc., but nobody ever considers those possibilities.
Wilson’s son has had assistant producer credits since Casino Royale I think and even made a cameo appearance in Spectre standing next to his dad. So if he isn’t being groomed to take over the reins, I don’t know who is😄…
@@matthewsliwerski6036 what about a sequel too bloodstone has a James Bond movie.
I'd like a new film, starting as if Bond and the regulars have been at it for a while like the pre-CR days. The movies have always chased what was popular in film and CR's dark reboot thing was just an example of this. People are starting to like fun films again and while I wouldnt want TSWLM or Moonraker I'd like a Dr. No, Living Daylights or GoldenEye: good espionage and meaty acting moments but still a creative adventurous action fest.
ME TO
Three of my favourite bond films. Lining daylights, Dr no and Goldeneye. Easily in my top 10 bond film film's.
to me thats what kingsman is ?
@@ewanhub6080 kingsmans fun but I want Bond, the MI6 crew and all the Bond movie nuances
@@kelsohunt460 Same here they balance the espionage and fun aspects so well
N Harris as M is Calvin's best idea yet. Bring a new dynamic to the Bond/M relationship. She would bring some familiarity to the next Bond era as Judi did with the last.
Seems far too young to be running something as big/important as MI6.
it's one of the worst ideas I've ever seen. If Fiennes can't continue in the role then at least give it to someone who's mildly suitable, not just a ''let's tick a box to please twitter numpties''
@@fiddlecastro1453 you literally make no sense
@@4879daniel she is 45 ands will be 48 by the time of the next film.
That will not be an option now with the way they ended No Time To Die. They now need to replace every character in the Franchise and start fresh.
It seems like it was only yesterday that Bond's 50th anniversary was being celebrated with Skyfall. Only 2 films released in 10 years?! Even without the pandemic, the series has really slowed down.
Because Skyfall unlike Spectre and No Time To Die was actually good
@@dictorfeelgood Couldn't agree more. The last two films were crap, Craigs first 3 were his best!
These films take a long time to make and are very complicated, especially if people want to do other things [Like Craig with Knives Out]. I remember reading the plan was to do Spectre back to back with a follow up but this was dropped for being too time consuming [and probably for the best given Mission Impossible 7+8 have been shooting for over a year and more filming is still to come]. Even Brosnan thought he's films were rushed so maybe it's not a bad thing.
You were aware that MGM had massive trouble with funding, right? Both SPECTRE and No Time To Die barely managed to get off the ground
@@davidshillaker7578 so than they decided to write crap screen plays and She Too it up for good measure?? If it's not worth doing right it's not worth doing
Dude your sense of humor is amazing. How do you stay so positive?
Ha! Thank you! I try my best, particularly when it comes to Bond. They're only movies, books and games afterall!
@@calvindyson what about a sequel too bloodstone has a James Bond movie hell yay.
"how can they continue after vapourising the main character"
has me cracking up for some reason
Imo the next bond should be a reboot into the 60s, where he's already bond and doing traditional bond stuff.
The reboot shouldn't be too similar to Daniel Craig
Instead it can be similar to Sean Connery era with modern action and special effects
Calvin as the next JB got my vote
My prediction: we'll get an annoucement of the new Bond on 5 October 2022.
Agreed with most points you made, especially with a younger Bond. I remember going to watch SPECTRE with my girlfriend at the time and some of her friends and the girls all thought Q was more attractive than Bond, which I suppose made sense since we were in our mid 20s at the time. So perhaps someone currently in their late 20s/early 30s... maybe Nicholas Hoult? I feel like he's the right age and at around the same level of fame as Craig had when he was cast (had lead roles in smaller films and a small role in a big blockbuster film- Tomb Raider for Craig and X men for Hoult).
Regarding the tone, if you consider Dalton and Craig to be the more serious Bonds and Moore and Brosnan to be the lighthearted Bonds, then there seems to be a back and forth pattern, so the next Bond will probably be a more lighthearted Bond. I think they will try for a Marvel-esque tone of funny and lighthearted first half of the movie then more serious in the second half. Something akin to Goldeneye or the Living Daylights.
Harris as M is a great idea but may be too confusing to the general public and will probably lead to a bunch of nonsense "theories" a la Codename Bond. I think we'll probably just get a new cast for the MI6 regulars.
Personally I'd prefer if they went back to standalone films and no origin story. Bond's not like Batman or Spiderman that always needs the origin story to show how he became Bond. Just have him straight in a mission and have some throwaway lines about his parents or how he was in the navy like they used to do the in pre-Craig films. However in today's Cinematic Universes world I think they'll probably try to do another origin story and link all of the new actor's films together, which if they plan it well I don't mind.
I wonder if Craig will stay on in some kind of a behind-the-scenes role since he's been credited as co-producer in his last 2 Bond films and seem to get on really well with Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson.
I agree with you Joey that they need to go back to self-contained, standalone movies.
I think Nicholas Hoult, if he can shape up, would be great and charming in a Brosnan-esque way, but less smarmy
@@rp7773 He's still a bit young and a bit too pretty for my liking.
The youngest Bond should be, is mid 30s. He's a Commander in the Royal Navy Reserve and a 00. You don't get to either one of these positions only a couple of years after graduating from college.
Pattinson!
I’m from the future and I can confirm that Aidan Turner is great as Bond
spolier alert
He would be fine but his shoulders are so small...well, the producers made Craig, a fragile little man looks tough working out, so it wouldn´d be hard to make Turner fit in. Good idea. Turner as Bond.
Then is Eleanor Tomlinson his Bond girl?
@@adamcronchey7264 what about a sequel too bloodstone has a James Bond movie.
@@stevedennison4095 what about a sequel too bloodstone has a James Bond movie.
I think the next Bond, should be around 35 ish, and shouldn’t be in it above about 42/43, I understand in Dr No he was given as being a man in his 30’s. but yet another fascinating video Calvin. Btw so many people have been asked if there doing Bond that even I am in the running at 350000/1odds. 😂
Bond is dead. So it won´t be a new Bond. It might be a new 007, but not Bond.
@@drumtum what about a James Bond movie that a sequel too bloodstone.
@@drumtum end of credits in no time to die it said James Bond will return but I agree you could get a blond women who could be his daughter who has become 007
@@drumtum Of course completely ignoring the text "JAMES BOND WILL RETURN" at the end of the credits of No time to die. So James Bond will be back, but rebooted obviously.
@@marksmith18889 The 'daughter' spin off idea hasn't held much water with me, both from a practicality perspective [it would have to be set in 2040 at the earliest] and story [Madeline wouldn't want her daughter anywhere near Espionage given what happened to her father].
Agree on a lot of your points! The problem with casting Bond now is the emergence of social media, where everyone has an opinion on who should be the new Bond which can be picked up on and shared quite easily. TV shows are also bigger than what they were when Craig was cast, so there are more actors who are in the public eye. I’m not expecting a Henry Cavill-type to be cast, but I think it will be someone we have heard of.
Very true about TV. I feel like any handsome British man who stars in some Sunday night show ends up being touted as a potential Bond at some time!
@@calvindyson Very True. The minute Night Manger, McMafia and Bodyguard finished everyone was going 'that guy will be Bond!'
@Skeletor , well, he’s handsome and the right age. Besides, he’s got the charisma.
For what it's worth, 2022 is the 60th Anniversary of Dr No and James Bond on the big screen, the 55th Anniversary of You Only Live Twice, the 45th Anniversary of The Spy Who Loved Me, the 35th Anniversary of The Living Daylights, the 25th Anniversary of Tomorrow Never Dies, the 20th Anniversary of Die Another Day and the 10th Anniversary of Skyfall!
i just want to go back to basics and have bond just be a secret agent going on different adventures and seeing different directors making the bond film they want and not worrying too much about continuity
@@spenser9908 I want the old continuity back myself. I don’t care if it’s over the top, villain or gadget wise. We need more car chases with gadget use. Plus, I’d think the Valle De Los Caidos in Spain would make a great backdrop for a villainous lair. Despite the religious controversy behind it. In addition, 007 should travel to Ireland and Sweden too
About recasting M: I’d suggest either Timothy Dalton or Pierce Brosnan. Because (a) you do need some sort of “passing the torch” vibe and (b) the relationship between M and Bond in the books is one of mutual respect and bonding (sorry), and if M is sympathetic towards Bond because M’s been through what 007’s about to do, that’s a thread that can be built on.
Absolutely not. That would cause pure confusion and no need to pass anything on. Just start with a Bond movie no explanations just run with it.
None of this you are new to the job crap or trying to find his feet just run with a story.
@@bighands69 Remember the scene in Live And Let Die where Connery's Bond hands over his Walther PPK to Moore's Bond? Me neither. It's James Fucking Bond, not Excalibur.
I don't think you need to cast them in that role to "pass the torch", as such, but they're both decent enough actors to play M, and Dalton's theatrical background should give him similar on screen gravitas to Fiennes.
I like the character arc proposed but casting an old Bond would be very cheesy and distracting [It's well know that Lois Maxwell wanted to play M in the Dalton era and that was shot down and I have similar reservations about that idea].
I'd prefer 35+ bond, no need origin story. just fresh start with new actor. same like living daylights with epic introduction. when it comes to the story i really want them to use Dalton's "third" script and polish it. and it could still use Fleming's short story name so young audience can rediscover Flemings stories for themselves. For Villains i would like them to take one villain from the past and bring him back throughout all new movies, lets say Scaramanga, Stromberg or Drax. and they don't need to be larger than life villains, then can be down to earth, but as powerful as bond. (not like Safin, who supposed to be bond's equal....pffff). also no need Spectre for now. keep it at rest. when it comes to henchman , i prefer bring back Hinx or Jaws, (i know they already portrayed perfectly, but i think they can adopt them into modern world brilliantly). And i want Lotus Esprit to be in new movie. (don't mind db5 at all, i will never be tired of it). and as much as i like MI6 staff, i think they will change it as they presence always will remind us about Daniel's timeline(i know they did it with Judi Dench, but times were different). and for God sake EON, please make normal gun barrel this time, stop with that horrible CGI gun barrel they gave Daniel Craig... Bonus: Soundtrack by Adele (i think she can give another smash hit)
Picking a Prime age made of 28 would give them a good long run. Especially if they can find an actor that is sauve and mature at the same time.
This is not at all what I personally want, but what I think would make the most sense from EON's perspective:
Now that Craigbond is dead, leave him dead, and make a couple 007 movies in the same timeline with Lashana Lynch. This would give the Craig lovers (Barbara most of all) a chance to grieve, allow them to keep crowd-favorites Harris, Wishaw, and Fiennes (who despite their overabundance of screen time, still feel woefully underdeveloped), open the door to reincorporate de Armas, and give EON a way to diversify the "Bond" casting without having to sacrifice Ian Fleming's character. It also would give another 10 years to hopefully put the Elba, Cavill, Hiddleston talk to bed.
Again, not my choice... That died with Spectre and was routinely buried with NTTD. But, it makes a ton of sense given that they are clearly desperate to do something different.
Yeah nah, nope nah please nah. With all due respect not a good idea. If they still made another James Bond and spun off De Armas character that would be great. But a new James Bond movie where he is still dead and all that is happening is us getting reminded he has been killed isnt a great idea tbh. But still a cool interesting concept.
I'd give it 3 or 4 years for another Bond movie to come out solely because finding the right actor and director is something that will take time plus, the producers also need to know what direction to take the franchise and Bond as a whole going forward
I would LOVE to go back in time.. I want to see Bond in the early 60’s again during the Cold War but with an actor between the ages of 35 and 40 and I would also love to see more of his Naval background as well!
Harry Styles for 007, “do the script, play the part, sing the theme tune” 😂😂😂😂
Bond wearing a dress and a string of pearls. Ian Flemming would spin in his grave.
I’d love the start of Bond 26 be like the start of Live and Let Die; M and Moneypenny turn up at his place to give him his mission. No explanation, and the “regulars” just turn up and interact with him in the first scene of the film. He could also be with a lady (copyright; A.Partridge), there could be gadgets, etc. Basically “Hello Bond - here’s your mission. Off you go …..”
I would like to see a hard reboot of the series by taking the action back to the 60's. Modern technology makes traditional espionage films and particular Bond much more difficult. In this modern world it's hard to believe that there is a new super group in every film that the governments have no idea exist. By going back to the 60's you could have a greater variety in Bond villain , story and global factors e.g. cold war. I wouldn't mind seeing in the first film a younger bond transitioning from commander in the navy to a double 0 agent.
I heard once Quentin Tarantino said he’d do that if he were given the chance. I really like that idea, but I don’t think it’d really work as far as the general audience is concerned. There’s also the argument that Bond should adapt to modern times, because, well, these films spent eight years (six films) in the sixties.
@@samuelbarber6177Agreed, no chance of it happening. I think Tarantino's idea was more an 'ideal situation' than one that was piratical [given his Star Trek idea still hasn't seen the light of day years after he pitched it]. I read somewhere he wanted to set it after OHMSS [with Uma Thurman as Vesper] but still have Brosnan as Bond which would have been a bit confusing to the casual movie goer!
@@jamesatkinsonja It would probably also confuse Bond fans, let alone the casual movie goer who hasn’t seen OHMSS.
Slightly unrelated, but it’s surprising Tarantino’s Star Trek never took off given his general popularity.
Really, I think they should just some unrelated Bond inspired films in the 60s for that idea. Bond has been around so long and keeps relatively modern that it would really just be a step back, as interesting as it would be. Remember, this film series spent eight years in the 1960s.
@@samuelbarber6177 The Star Trek thing is odd-probably will find out at some point but very strange.
Yeah but the fact the film series has done the 60's at the time is probably why they wouldn't go back [and The Man from Uncle bombing at the box office would put them off too].
I’d like to see Pierce return for one more film!
Channel Tim, Still the best for me and I've been watching Bond for 50 years
Calvin Dyson is James Bond 007 in...
"The Return of Mrs Bell".
🤪😆🇬🇧👍
hey buddy. loving all your content. Watching from Trinidad in the Caribbean!!
Let's hope the next bond movies aren't full of seriousness & realism. It doesn't matters which actor will serve for Her Majesty, it depends on the producers they really need to go back to the classic bond style that is suave, awsome gadgets, women & fun.
I don't wanna sound like I hate Daniel Craig but his bond movies weren't fun. His bond movies felt like generic action movies. Timothy Dalton did a portrayal of darker & violent bond before Craig but his movies still felt like you are watching a 007 film because it stayed true to The Bond Formula.
Indian 2080s, Bond died for me when Brosnan handed in his Walther PPK & LTK
I understand your point and seriously hope this happens! We, the true Bond fans, were pushed aside off the fanbase with too much drama. We need to get back into that fun Bond! Did you also noticed how they took off the gadgets in the last one?
@@thedangerousfella5860 I just feel that I haven't seen a Bond movie for nearly 20 years
Daniel Craig's portrayal of Bond was not Classic James Bond at all except for the first hour of Spectre when he was brilliant, with that exception he was a generic action character like Bourne, Ethan Hunt etc
He fell in love with 2 women and left MI6 twice all in the space of 4 movies, that's not a Classic Bond, could you ever imagine Connery, Moore or Brosnan doing anything like that
If you want the Bond from the books then watch Dalton or Craig but 99% of people identify with Bond through the movies not the books, They were the dark serious Ian Fleming Bond, that guy wasn't Iconic, The fun loving playboy Bond was
Bond was a charming funny charismatic suave and sophisticated playboy MI6 agent who bedded loads of women on his way to killing the bad guy and saving the world
Bond isn't an Icon for being an angry love sick puppy with a Bourne complex, he was 2 hours of the embodiment of a masculine playboy with style and humour
Connery set the scene and it was continued through Moore and Brosnan, This is what separated the Classic James Bonds from all other action movie characters, it's why every guy wanted to be him
It's why Classic James Bonds like Moore, Brosnan and Connery were Brilliant while Craig's Bond is nothing more than a vulnerable generic action character with a cool name and heritage built on the backs of 3 of his predecessors.
My concern is that they go back to a campy Bond. One of the reasons why I like Craig and Dalton is that their Bonds had higher stakes and made the character grounded. I'm not a fan of Moore's style of Bond or Brosnan's.
@@eramos8916 here you got a point. Too campy means less realistic. However; too realistic means less Bond. They need to get back into the middle ground, just like Connery was. Realistic and at the same time, fictitious, charm and fun. They can do it, but they won’t
Don’t need ‘story arcs’, we need a return to more fun times, a modern Roger Moore or Pierce Brosnan needed, stories can have reality and fantasy mixed, just no more dreariness. Next film starts with Bond being woken up by M like Live and Let Die
Given that the MCU is the dominant franchise at the moment and you can 'catch up' easily now a days [You could watch all of Craig's 4 films the week before NTTD which you couldn't do pre-home media/regular TV airings] there is a big incentive to have ongoing story-lines. Even Fast & Furious-which is knowingly silly and OTT- does it now a days. It's also more likely to keep a general audience returning to the films [especially as NTTD was sold as Craig's finale]. Sorry but it's probably here to stay unless movie trends change.
Apparently a big reason why the fantasy elements were dropped was that Austin Powers had mocked those tropes too much to be taken seriously. But given even part 3 is now 20 years old maybe enough time has passed for those elements to return.
Oh STOP with that. We had 20 fun movies during 40 years and you want more fun ? What make the charm of the Craig era was this seriousness. So yes that not the taste of all, but is a new interesting direction, in a period where fun dominate everything with Marvel. Also No time to die IS fun with fantasy, and it is his big problem, it is not a Craig movie but a Brosnan/Moore movie. The Bond death will be perfect with these two, less with the serous of Craig. Saffin, the most important problem of this movie, is basically a new Drax/Stromberg, even the Blofeld plan with héraclès is near to a plan of a Moore villain.
FUN isn't Janes Bond though. The source material is far from it.
@@coreyburns4168 that’s true, but the film’s were always films, without the films, the notoriety and fame of Bond wouldn’t be anywhere near as it is and as likely given some content the books consigned to history
Unpopular opinion: Idris Elba as M. I can absolutely see him bossing ANY Bond around.
No, that's actually a great idea! An action oriented M.
That’s actually not a bad idea! Good thinking!
I'd love to see some standalone bond films again, maybe even some based in the past like the 60s, I'm sure there's many stories they can use that aren't remakes, the modern tech plots are getting a bit tired.
(edit: you make an extremely good point about the product placment, I didn't think of that)
I think they should do a James Bond detective story where he is trying to figure out some mystery that you do not know what it is until the end.
And just do it as a stand alone no need to start of with nonsense like you are new to the job Bond. Q was also useless at best so they need him to go back to his roots.
There really isn't that many Fleming plots that have not either been adapted faithfully or had chunks used for other films [Live and Let Die for For your eyes only and Licence to Kill, the novel Moonraker for Die another Day, the book You only live twice for No time to Die] and even most of the short stories have been used [007 in New York inspired the bit with Vespers ex in Quantum] which only leaves stuff like novel 'The spy who loved me' which were skipped over for a reason. They'll still use bits going forward [such as the safe house in Spectre being called Hildebrand].
Since I've been hearing the Navy thing a lot, I find it funny that one of my biggest theories regarding the video game is we we're going to have at least one level where you play on a Navy boat
I'd definitely welcome back Martin Campbell to kick start a slightly less depressing era.
@Wasp Factory he's also expressed an interest in returning.
If the Bond series wants to consider new blood then they should consider new writers other than Purvis and Wade who have had a hand in every Bond film since TWINE..every Bond movie in the 2000s so far...and it seems other writers come up with the better scene like those in Skyfall (John Logan) and Casino (Paul Haggis). The stories have really let down the most recent films...also cut the film's down to be closer to 2 hours and more enjoyable and entertaining.
I’ll be happy with just about any option they go with so long as the next film doesn’t open with Ralph Fiennes selecting a new agent to take on the code name James Bond.
I just hope the film is a real mission without Bond coming back from the dead or coming out of retirement or having his license revoked and going rogue. Those things have been done to death.
The idea of Naomie Harris as a new M is a really interesting one. She would really fit the role I think and it would make sense, since she's been a field agent in Craigs era, has since been involved in every mission and could be a suitable successor to Ralph Fiennes' Mallory. And of course, Moneypenny starts with M, too!
They have a big problem if they make Naomie M it will mean that we have to somehow forget what happened to Bond.
If they had not finished No Time to Die like they did she could have been M and Fiennes could have a new role.
They really really messed it up.
I think 2024 will be when Bond 26 is released. It feels the right length of time.
HA, 2024 me here and still nothing. Well that was optimistic 😂
Tom Hardy with Chirstopher Nolan directing. Unless the producers yet again turn down an a-list director in favour of a crowd pleasing forgettable trend like they did in the Brosnan era
They’d be crazy to not at least listen to Edgar’s and Cary’s pitches.
more woke shiteeee. no thanks.
SPECTACULAR video Calvin - filled with great ideas and brilliant analysis- and most importantly- EXACTLY what we needed to cleanse our palate and move forward after that sad end to our hero!
I definitely agree with you that they will go even younger next time - with an unknown actor that is not even on our radar right now.
The reasons for that, as you pointed out, are not only so they attract a younger audience and so he would be around for several films, but because the films are so physically demanding that it just makes good business sense to go that route - so there are no more production delays due to injuries!
I do think -sadly - that the days of mission based single adventures are done.
I think modern audiences are just so used to continuing storylines from film to film in other franchises that it’s expected and would probably be strange to them to suddenly not have it anymore.
One thing I would love though - but is probably highly unlikely - is to keep this M, Q and Moneypenny!
These are much tougher parts to cast than we thought and Ray Fiennes, Ben Whishaw and Naomi Harris are just perfect
so I’d love to see them somehow continue the way Judi Dench did as M!
( but since they toasted his death lol - this definitely may not be possible!)
If we could keep only one though - I’ll take Bens Q-
I think he could very easily be around for the next 15 years or so like Desmond was!
I also think - thanks to the Amazon deal - that we will get a new film sooner rather that later though - so that is great news as well!
I'd keep "the Scooby gang" intact. Ralph Fiennes reminds me of Bernard Lee (it's the forehead!) and the rest of the gang are just perfect.
I love going back to these videos in the future, just to see what we predicted and compare it to what it ultimately becomes
Prediction: next Bond film opening uses some form of reference or aside like “rumors of my death have been greatly exaggerated”. lol
I do hope they bring back some of the more light hearted fun of the classic films
This. I'd love something with more of a Roger vibe.
Thanks Calvin, I really liked that, quite funny. It's a massive task now. Got to get it right after the disaster of NTTD.
Huge Richard Madden fan. Ticks a lot of boxes: young, Scottish, handsome and a very good actor. He's relatively unknown in the US, even with Eternals.
Even with Game of Thrones??
But he's gay, he wouldn't be all in with the women stuff
@@heroicDale Even with these films he is not A-list in US. For most Americans I would say he's the guy who looks familiar (bc of his films, etc.) but cannot recall his name.
@@NeverSaySandwich1 I think the fact he is gay makes him an even better candidate. As a traditionalist Bond fan I want him to remain hetero (or bi when necessary as alluded to in Skyfall), but in my opinion having a gay actor portray Bond makes the series more contemporary.
I could imagine a Bond where the pretitle sequence is set in the 1950s with a caracter who's basically Bond as written and described by Ian Fleming in the books. The audience never hears his name but he has the scar on his cheek, he drives the bentley, he smokes the Morland cigarettes and he has a housekeeper named May in his flat. But he's involved in something very important that has consequences in the present day, which brings us to Bond. I mean that would be quite cool in my opinion. Well, for one movie at least
I love the imagery... but I can't help but think it would empower the codename theorist morons too much.
@@tcaudiobooks737 this might be true unfortunately but at the same time his biography has been updated over the decades. He used to be born on the 11th November 1920 in Glen Coe and went through a different education than the latest version who was born on the 13th April 1968 in West Berlin and doesn't have a weakness for cigarettes and women but therefore tends to be depressive. To avoid code name bs I'd call him Jason Bateman or so (initials JB) and he would be 007 long before James Bond's time. It would be great fan service for the book readers anyway I guess.
The film needs to just start with a new 007 already on a mission like Dalton and Brosnan. No origin story crap
I can see them going back to an actor in his late 20s early 30s and picking up after a Casino Royale style mission has taken place already in this continuity, Bond is a fairly new 00 but not totally green, then just pick up with new missions each film
@@spenser9908 what about a sequel too bloodstone has a James Bond movie.
@@spenser9908 No more bond orgin nonsense we already had that crap with craig and look how that turned out.
The end of the credits of No time to die says James Bond will return. So the next bond film will be a full reboot with all regular characters recast. It will be another parallel universe.
I don’t have any current actor who could play bond. I did like Daniel Craig as Bond because he does look like he has a Military background. He looks like a warrior who also looks good wearing a suit. So all the action and fighting scenes look believable to me.
I’ve always wanted them to go with a completely unknown actor for Bond rather than an A-lister as well. Like with most of the other actors, for whoever it is, it can be the job that kickstarts their career.
That opening actually got me a bit! Love how you keep making fun of NTTD’s ending because my GOD, was it stupid!
The last time they did that, they got Lazenby, who was not the best choice unfortunately. But I agree with their current philosophy of getting semi-established actors like Connery, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan and Craig and making their careers that way.
it cant be unknown, people wont care
@@Sh0tgunJust1ce Yeah, perhaps not a model, but a solid actor who's been a support/ main character in minor films.
I really liked the ending but that opening skit was hilarious!
I appreciate the Everything or Nothing title song in the background
They should begin the next film similarly to The Living Daylights with a gritty training exercise at somewhere like Fort Monckton at Portsmouth, set at sunset. There could be several Bond-like trainees and it's not immediately clearly who is Bond.
I would also be interested to see how the next film -- like Goldeneye - repositions Bond geopolitically in a different world. What will a post-Brexit, post-pandemic Bond look like?
Although I'm not really a fan of the 'spin-off' trajectory either in most cases, the Paloma character was severely underused in NTTD, in my humble opinion - so I wouldn't mind seeing more of her in the future.
so was nomi. i wanted a proper sequel to spectre with team 007( nomi and bond) vs blofeld and safin( a modern day sanchez and dario)
They do not need to go crazy with a Spin off series just another character with their own movie series and it only needs to be two or three movies.
They could make it different from Bond with different types of stories. The character does not need to be action like and could be a detective type agent trying to solve something but with all the cool Bond series niches.
@@bighands69 Well, that does sound interesting to me, but wouldn't that remind too many people of Ana De Armas and Daniel Craig's previous collaboration, regarding the detective aspect?
I'm sure if Paloma was in Craig's, say 4th film, she'd be brought back for sure, probably in an expanded role. However, she was only introduced in Craig's last film and was a late edition, mainly because he liked working with her in 'Knives Out' [Purvis and Wade said the equivalent in there script had about 2 lines] so I doubt she'll return now Craig's gone and the chemistry is lost, plus any re-introduction would need a work as she's a bit of a blank slate in background etc [hence perfect for her extended cameo to hit the ground running, less so for a full film].
Apparently Ana De Armas is in talks to head a female John Wick spin off so that might be a 'spiritual' follow up.
@@terrancehall9762 If you've seen MI Fallout which more or less did that, I think that's why they made Safin and Blofeld enemies rather than allies to do something different.
I wish for the series two things:
1) They leave Bond dead
2) They throw the last director out and get Martin Campbell back to make a good old Bond a la Goldeneye/ Casino Royale with an unknown Bond. There are some things that haven't been adapted from the books which can be used
1) Not gonna happen
2) Might as well mine a bit from the Gardner and Benson books or stitch some elements from the two to make a strong movie plot
@@korystephens3318
1) sadly they won't
2) I have not read them yet because they are hardly available in Germany 😅
I also didn’t believe they’d do any period set films although it had never occurred to me it would be for product placement reasons but you’re totally right.
I honestly thought Richard Madden stood a decent chance of being Bond (at least, the best chance of the frequently touted names) but now he’s on the marvel train I wonder if that rules him out, depending on if they have future plans for his character.
I certainly hope the producers at least listen to Edgar Wright’s pitch. He’s probably my favourite working filmmaker and I think he’d do something bold with bond without straying too far from convention.
I also hope the fun aspect gets brought back a bit more. I mean don’t get me wrong I’m a fan of Craig’s tenure but I’d prefer both the general tone of it and the serialisation aspect to be one off experiments. That being said, thanks to the evolution in blockbuster filmmaking, I think audiences expect those emotional punches and personal connections, something as silly and frankly emotion-free for the protagonist as say, moonraker, wouldn’t get made now.
A period-set Bond movie might have been on the cards if the Man from U.N.C.L.E. reboot had worked... which it didn't. Shame, as I like that film 😔
I also very much like the UNCLE reboot film. I’d have like it if they could have kept on making more of thise
@@MikeHalsey we probably wouldn’t be wanting a period bond if these films continued because it would have filled that space. But you are correct that producers probably ruled it out because of Man From U.N.C.L.E.
I like Jamie Dornan. Excellent as a manipulative serial killer family man in The Fall. Got the sex appeal too. Perfect time for him too career and age wise.
@@MikeHalsey Yeah, that film bombing at the box office ruled it out.
I’d love it if they have a Bond who actually looks and acts very much like the Fleming books version and I’d be happy with a 50s or 60s timeline
I feel the next Bond film/actor should do the following.
1. Cast an unknown, younger actor to play Bond (so they can grow into the rol)
2. Use a similar tone to the Kingsman films (light-hearted, great action but with some serious moments. No Time to Die was a great start, but embracing the fun could be crucial)
3. Keep it set in 2020's (so we can see new, modern/relevant villains. Maybe a rich, flamboyant tech giant like Musk or Bezos, an insane eco-terrorist with plans to destroy the modern world to save the natural one, something to do with the Middle East to replace Russia, or even a Russian villain again just for fun).
4. Back to basics in terms of an overall story (back to the stand-alone films with hints of plot carrying over, but nothing major)
5. A much more ruthless Bond (to contrast with the most vulnerable performance we just got).
6 (optional). A full reboot (confirming the James Bond is a codename theory in this continuity only could lead to interesting ideas, maybe a new arc about the new Bind trying to live up to his predecessor and struggling under his huge reputation, but a full reboot I don't think would be unwelcome, and essentially scraps the interconnected timeline of Craig, in order to start fresh)
Sam Witherington, Bond also needs to go back to using women as disposable pleasures instead of falling in love and resigning all the time, that's not the Bond I was brought up on
I officially throw my hat in the ring for next James Bond, not taking questions for the moment
I think of all the MI-6 regulars, I’d want Ben Whishaw to remain of all people. He’s my second favourite Q, and I’d like to have another long running side character actor who can be like Desmond Llewellyn.
15:24 Ben Whishaw looks like Christopher Reeve as Superman's alter ego, Clark Kent lol
Calvin, speaking personally I'm relieved to hear another fan admit to not being ticked pink about faithful adaptations of the Flemings. I don't know who started that idea years ago, why it picked up steam, or why there is a subsection of the fanbase that salivates at the prospect. Every time I hear or read someone suggest that it would be "awesome" my reaction is "Really? You literally just want them to film the books? You don't want any surprises or anything new at all?!?". Bless your heart, Calvin.
Thanks, Edgar! Appreciate it :)
A lot of that comes from older fans like me. As we die off, that will go away.
One idea is they could do some separate adaptations for streaming services, like a mini series on Amazon. They could make faithful, period accurate Bond adaptations, just as a side thing.
@@THEremiXFACTOR The radio adaptions are pretty much the closest your going to get to that [the Goldfinger adaption for example had Rosamund Pike as Pussy Galore and Ian McKellen as Goldfinger]
@@billkoenig1552 Would it be fair to argue that it's a generational thing? In other words, fans of a certain age are hoping to see Bond on screen living in a world they witnessed personally but is now long past?
Probably the funniest intro yet Calvin!
Thanks, James!
They should remake the man with the golden gun. Which of course starts, in the book, with bond returning brainwashed having been believed to be dead - and attempting to assassinate m. They could keep it entirely ambiguous as to whether this is a continuation (of course it isn’t they never mention wife and child again) but they keep it ambiguous enough eg specific mention of what happened on Japanese island, same actor as m, different actors for money penny and W. This would 1) please fans wanting a basis in flemings novel, 2) give an alternative to one of the most polarising films in the series. 3) allow endless debate about whether there is one consistent timeline. 4) work as an introduction to a new bond actor, on his “first” mission following his brainwashing.
They could start with this.
Sorry but just because Bond is brainwashed, doesn't mean the MI6 regulars-who know his wife and child -have been [unlike Kissy in the novels who was unknown to them] and Madeline [given she's a psychologist and Bond's ex] would be the ideal person to get his memory back if they did a 'Bond Returns' plot. Generally this would be very confusing for a general audience member [and I've seen people on these comments sections confused at Craig's timeline not marrying up to the Connery-Brosnan films] and a full reboot is the simplest way to go [and Bond can be an established MI6 agent to cut out the origin story] as well as being fair to the new actor who may well have a totally difference approach to Craig and having them carry on his story is a big ask.
But...If they make Bond 26-28 a trilogy, they could easily have this occur in the new timeline for the start of 27 or 28 which would be interesting to explore [as Calvin said, it's a bit disappointing the brainwashed Bond is just a prologue to Golden Gun when there is enough material for a full novel/movie].
Bond will go the way of Batman.
The novels are already public domain in Canada.
Like the Batman there will be several
reboots
iterations
and
alternate reality/parallel universe
multiverse stories:
Steampunk Bond
Cyberpunk Bond
Bond vs. Cthulhu… wait, that has already been done… kinda… the Laundry Files (A type of Bond deconstructed).
The novels maybe already public domain, but the james bond theme and the iconic gunbarrel scenes are not. So it would be weird if there is a canadian producer make bond movie without james bond themes and gunbarrel scenes
I've always ALWAYS wanted to see Bond before he became a 00-agent (Or a MI6-agent for that matter.) Part of my introduction to the Bond series were the Young Bond novels, and while I don't need the movies to show us teenage Bond studying at university, I would like to see him in the army, or navy rather. I just want to see the man before the mythos. Even Casino Royale wasn't a "proper" origin story, considering that the man we met in the parkour scene in the opening of that film is basically the same character we'll see later. Sure - he went through a lot of character development until No Time To Die - but he was a 00-agent, a ruthless killer, a capable spy and a martini-drinking playboy, who knows his way around tux-and-tie dinner parties.
I want to see the character grow into that. He doesn't have to be our finished James Bond in this first film. He should be human.
Huh, not sure if I'd agree but interesting take, my dude
I think that would somehow make him less interesting and remove some of the mystery and what makes bond so special, i already think they humanized him too much by doing what every other franchise does.
Brilliant !!!
"A new Bond for each Movie !!!"
Excellent !!!
If it was me I go back to Orginal Dr. No Die Another Day Time and bring back one or two actor from that era like Colin Sammon or John Cleese
A John Cleese cameo as a retired Q would be wonderful.
My guess is october/november 2022 the actor will be known. This gives enough time for the current film to make money and by announcing the new actor provide a small boost. By october 2024 the next film will be at the movies. This way momentum of interest is kept. Also M.G.Wilson is not getting younger.
They’ll end up giving someone like Kathryn Bigelow the directing gig. First female director and all that. Tbh, I’d settle for her. Think she’d do a good job.
She would be a good choice. I agree. And people would have to guess whether it would be like Point Break or Zero Dark Thirty.
It's a shame she hasn't done a Bond film before. At 70 she is 8 years younger than Martin Campbell who people keep linking to Bond. Susanne Bier was linked after 'The Night Manager' but I don't know how seriously [and her post Night Manger career hasn't had the same impact].
I personally think that the new Bond actor announcement for the 60th anniversary would be a great idea
The "odds" reports actually refer to the odds the bookies are offering.
You know, those bookies who have loads of influence on the decision and definitely aren't just touting names about to persuade people to hand money over that they'll never see again.
Director Quintin Tarantino or Christoper Noland, actor safe choice Henry Cavill or the more interesting choice Tom Hardy, the direction the film from the officer in the special boat service to ending up as 00 at the end of the film. Setting back in the early '60s
I think Cavill is a shoe in for the role honestly. Youthful look, perfect character fit. If not him then an unknown commodity, I would hate to see them go young only to attract a younger audience. Get the right choice, not the popular one. I think they need to keep it contemporary as well. A period piece is harder to pull off with cars/gadgets. I would like to see a return to the original timeline because I felt Die Another Day was a weak sendoff. If they're rebooting, then don't do another closed loop, keep this timeline open. Hated what they did with the last two films. Tonally, I'd like to see them keep the depth of Craig's bond but far less somber. There's a healthy medium between Moonraker campy and No Time To Die seriousness. Play within those boundaries and mess with the balance but don't go extreme like they have been. I think they need to recast MI6. Now that we've seen them mourn Bond's death it would be odd for us all to pretend we didn't see it and go back to business as usual with a new bond. I do like the idea of Bond going back to getting his assignments from M though, I looked forward to those interactions. Particularly when it was Judi Dench. Her dialogue with Brosnan in Goldeneye was perfect, I love that relationship and would like to see a similar one in play.
Interestingly enough the poison garden in No time to die was also in the book of You only live twice in which Bond discovered the main villain Shatterhand was in fact Blofeld and the original working title for No time to die was Shatterhand but they decided not to go with it. I think for the next Bond we dont need another origin story, maybe they could do a young Bond but one who has already been in the game a few years and isnt quite burnt out yet. Craigs Bond was completely self contained so they could quite easily start a new chapter of James Bond adventures
I dunno, Calvin better stock up on some stock topics because I really don't think we're getting a new Bond film anytime soon.
Finally got to watch the film today, sucks Australia delayed it. I loved it and I loved how it ended. It’ll be interesting to see how they continue now.
Hopefully we get a younger Bond, a different path to DC tenure. Hopefully they get an A list director, with an experienced not well known actor.
I feel old the next bond they choose will probably be younger than me. Love the intro. I hope we have a less serious bond more like pierce next with more a focus on gadgets again 🤞🏻.
While I've always thought that Bond should be a trendsetter rather than a trend follower, I wish any new films would take the model that the MI films have taken and give us some solid spy adventure stuff.
Bond is good at what he does, but he's not a perfect hero, and that's fine, but it doesn't appear that we're able to have flawed characters anymore (that's toxic), so I'm not really sure that what we'll get in the immediate future will really be James Bond, even though it has the name.
The idea of some adventures set in their proper time period would be nice, but now that every major film has to have the broadest demographic + the corporate sponsorships it's doubtful we'll ever get that.
As it stands the comicbooks are probably the best thing going now for James Bond fans as they respect the character in ways that the films can't.
Bond has always been a trend follower in fairness [most noticeably Moonraker with Star Wars and Licence to Kill with Lethal Weapon/Miami Vice] which does mean that it moves with the times and can change when outdated [such as using Bourne and Batman Begins as templates for Casino Royale after Die Another Day].
I love the MI films but even they are adopting the MCU style continuity with Fallout being a direct sequel to Rouge Nation and 7+8 likely to be a 2 part story.
Someone correctly said that the MI films also show a trend in a lack of 'womanizing' given we've had two films of Ethan and Ilsa getting close but they haven't even shared a kiss on screen.
The 'general audience' factor, as you say, is a big part. The comic's/books are read by a niche audience where you can do period setting etc. while the movie has a much wider appeal and tastes do change [Roger Moore didn't like the scenes with Bond hitting Maud Adams in 1974 even if that is true to the books character].
You can have a flawed character [Craig's Bond certainly made mistakes in his work] but you do have to be careful ['The Last Boy Scout in 1991 was constantly re-edited as test audiences found the lead character-a hard drinking, misogynist-very unlikable].
Personally, I would love it. If the next Bond was a more light hearted crazy version of the character. Like Roger Moore was at his best. Sometimes at his worst as well, however. His more sarcastic and casual take on Bond. To me for a new actor if they embraced the sillier aspects of Bond. Would be the perfect palette cleanser for the Daniel Craig era of Bond. Besides it might finally help you get over the trauma. From the ending of No Time to Die.
Yes, make Bond movies fun again .
Next film should be Bond coming out of retirement but with Brosnan, Dench, Samantha Bond, John Cleese and Michael Kitchen