What Next for 007?

I very much enjoyed ‘No Time to Die’ despite the reprobate tweens in front of me disturbing the whole cinema (mind I very much enjoyed watching them be removed by the staff). It had all the best things about a Bond movie turned up to 11. The villain. The gadgets. And that car chase about half way through is the best car chase I’ve ever seen on film.

Daniel Craig’s 007 rebooted the series in 2006 with ‘Casino Royale’ and as a result created, in my eyes, some of the finest films in the whole Bond franchise. His films managed to give Bond a more realistic, naive, human portrayal without ever ceasing to be everything Bond should be. However, a lot of audiences and critics seem to be divided on this issue when it comes to this latest film, because, seemingly, they think, it is not in James Bond’s nature to actually die.

Now, I thought it was very well done. I enjoyed the callbacks to ‘On Her Majesty’s Secret Service’ and the use of Louis Armstrong’s “all the time in the world.” It was an emotional goodbye that was fitting to Craig’s portrayal of the character. It’s not like Bond’s death was an incident where, like in the beginning of ‘The Spy who Loved Me,’ James Bond is plunging to his death and, in the words of Alan Partridge “JAMES BOND’S GOING TO DIE” except the inevitable parachute emergence doesn’t happen.

No, Craig’s Bond sacrifices himself to save the world. If ever James Bond was to die, then this is how he should go. If he is as undying as people hoped, then surely that means he’ll die of old age in his nineties. Is that really a more Bondesque exit?

So, as we’ve gathered, I thought the death of Bond was well executed, if you’ll pardon the pun. I did, however, being the cynic that I am, think that it was a very tactical move. There is a lot of controversy about James Bond in the modern age. About how he’s misogynistic, or a symbol of imperialism or a racist character. Or whether or not he should be portrayed by a woman. These are all fair arguments I guess, but I thought the Craig era had given us a Bond for the 21st century. Apparently not in the eyes of some. Apparently there are still underlying issues, with the biggest thing that most people who take issue seem to think being that Bond, in order to progress, must be played by a woman. Now, there I think, and most people I feel do, is an unnecessary change to the nature of the character. And this is something Barbara Broccoli, Bond producer and daughter of famed classic Bond producer Cubby Broccoli, apparently agrees with me on.

I thought, (and there is still time for this to happen) that once the cat was out of the bag, everyone has seen the film and everyone knows Bond’s fate, Broccoli would come out and say something along the lines of “well, that’s it for Bond, if he can’t be accepted in the modern era, it’s time for him to go” and call it a day. Now, of course, these films are one of the world’s biggest franchises, so options had to be left open for the money making machine that is the movies. I considered this. I thought, in the creation of the 007 character Nomi, there was options for spin offs with a female lead to appease certain audiences. And then, of course, the Craig movies being a reboot themselves, the series could always, if it decides to continue, just reboot again. Or indeed, make prequels in the same universe, as Hollywood is fond of doing these days to cash in on big, popular earners. I was informed after seeing the film that the words ‘James Bond will return’ do in fact appear at the end of the credits. Inevitable, I suppose, but I do hope if they are going to do this they take the prequel route, because to be quite frank I rather like the idea of James Bond, having been deemed by too many as not able to continue to exist the way he does, bowing out in the most James Bond way possible, and Craig performed that role exceptionally.

Nobody does it better X