James Bond 007: What will happen after Daniel Craig's departure?

James Bond 007: What will happen after Daniel Craig's departure?

James Bond 007

James Bond's 25th official cinema adventure 007: No Time to Die has been in corona limbo for over a year. If the film then sees the light of day or the projectors at some point, those responsible for the franchise will face another problem: James Bond, as we know him, no longer really fits into the blockbuster landscape of 2021.

The interest in the series is still great, but with increasing budgets, less and less income per film is achieved. Where records could still be broken and expectations exceeded with Skyfall, the successor Specter was already sinking a good 200 million dollars less into the box office, even though it was the most expensive film in the series to date. With the numerous problems and delays that have afflicted the production of No Time To Die, it can be assumed that this relationship will shift even further to the negative.


James Bond 007: No time to die - the new trailer before the cinema release is here loadVideoPlayer ('83225', '& sAdSetCsategory = artikel_featured', 12, '16: 9 ', false, 1369581, false, 267389, 260, false, 0,' ',' ', false); In addition, with Daniel Craig, a Bond has given up his tuxedo, who has really thrilled the audience from the start, even if his films vary in quality. Whoever follows in their footsteps is having a difficult legacy and needs a similarly strong first appearance in order to get the fans on board for the next few years.

The change of leading actors and tones is of course a tradition First of all, after Craig's Schwanengesang, the question arises for me as to how one intends to adapt the new offshoots to the current global political climate and to remain relevant without completely losing what defines the series and the character of Bond at the core .

Restart in reverse gear

The "old" Bond, a chauvinist sipping cocktails who saves the world for his beloved England and shoots terrorists who build space lasers, was already making an impact in the 2000s fallen out of time. Which is why the decision was made to shoot a reboot with a fresh timeline in 2005. Casino Royale, the first offshoot with Daniel Craig, then broke with many of the cornerstones of the Bond cosmos: Bond suddenly gave a shit about how his beloved vodka martini was prepared, and the woman at his side was more than just a prize that wanted to be won psychological consequences of his actions palpable and devastating. An adult bond for an adult audience. Similar to Christopher Nolan with Batman, Martin Campbell heaved James Bond into the 21st century, just as he had him step out of the shadows of the Cold War in Golden Eye in the mid-90s.

Now it's the turn of the road again . The radical realignment by Casino Royale was gradually revised in the sequels. The offshoots of Sam Mendes in particular steered Bond back into familiar territory and offered numerous references to the era that had actually been declared closed. In terms of character development and fan service, Skyfall in particular works almost like a prequel to the classic Bond films. When, with Blofeld (Christoph Waltz), a villain is introduced into Specter who is more likely to evoke memories of the parody version of the character from the Austin Powers films, we have left the exciting new route for good. It is also regrettable that the competence of Vesper Lynd, embodied by Eva Green, is no longer achieved by any of the female characters who follow her. Whether Cary Fukunaga's conclusion of the saga even warms up well-known things remains to be seen - how the film will be received will in any case have an impact on how the series will continue in the future. Daniel Craig as Bond Source: © 2012 Sony Pictures Releasing GmbH

Modern or Classic?

For me there are actually only two directions in which Bond as a franchise could continue without the different styles constantly conflicting with each other: Either you give the cult agent a really fresh spin and only keep the elements from the Past that make sense for the new version, or you consciously go back to the good old days.

The latter would mean sending the agent back to the 60s or 70s. This would also circumvent the problem that the current political situation and the claim to be a franchise with international appeal barely allow to represent a political threat from outside, from which Bond has to protect the rest of the (western) world. The prevailing political enemy images at the time could still gain new facets through a modern perspective and the old Bond stories could get a fresh coat of paint.

Even gadgets such as cars with machine guns, laser pens or other silly gimmicks appear more coherent the further the world of a movie is removed from our current reality. If you want, you could even partially bring back the camp factor of the Roger Moore era.

The agents' agenda

The more exciting - and in my opinion also more likely - variant, but is the way forward. So let's take a look at the construction sites that are likely to give producers the biggest headache here.

As mentioned, it's more difficult to make an agent thriller these days than it was 20 years ago, which is especially true the greatly expanded target group. Where previously only the English-speaking market was targeted as an audience, a blockbuster the size of a Bond film now has to sell well elsewhere as well. As an internationally active spy for the British empire, James Bond gets around quite a bit, of course, but his client has not sent him on politically explosive missions for several films, which is because the executives fear less income and get cold feet with something like this . Instead, Bond has more of a personal conflict to deal with in his most recent adventures, and the actions of his opponents, who belong to the internationally operating Specter terror network, are usually not politically motivated, but are more about self-enrichment.

The entertainment does That is no break, as long as the motivations are understandable. However, there could be signs of wear and tear in the future if our hero always faces the same type of enemy. Maybe the next Bond film will prove me wrong. At least Rami Malek's character will be Dr. No Lyutsifer Safin is officially described as an anarchist. (Yes, apparently the name of the character is actually Lyutsifer. But it's probably not the devil himself. Unfortunately.)

Rami Malek plays Lyutsifer Safin Source: Universal Pictures

Die Another question is in which direction one develops James Bond himself as a character. Where earlier Bond films mainly told the men in the audience that shooting people and then having sex with beautiful women is the best job in the world, Daniel Craig's interpretation seems to suffer a lot from all the traveling, killing and having sex with beautiful women br>
Perhaps one is afraid that an agent with a license to kill, who likes to use it without suffering any visible psychological consequences, will suddenly no longer gain sympathy from parts of the audience. Which is somehow understandable. Still, I would like to meet an agent who has a little fun with his work. A possible ambivalence of the audience towards the figure should simply be accepted. The stories might even benefit from it.

How the new Bond will look is probably most likely to be decided by whether the next offshoots will take place in the same universe or not. But more on that in a moment.

The women’s question

Another problem that Bond has been pursuing for a long time is the allegation of sexism. Bond's relationships with women, some with great names like Chew Mee, Pussy Galore, Kissy Suzuki, Christmas Jones, Honey Ryder, Holly Goodhead, Xenia Onatop and Octopussy, are often used as an argument that James Bond is a chauvinistic macho, whose image of women is constantly confirmed by the world around him. In addition, the female characters in the series are usually only there to sleep and then to be shot or to be replaced with a new model in the next film. In the course of the series, attempts have often been made to counter this accusation with strong female characters, but with the exception of the Vesper Lynd mentioned above, there are only a few examples that really do away with the cliché of the "Bond girl". With Lea Seydoux, at least in No Time to Die, a Bond liaison for a sequel returns for the first time in the history of the franchise.

In the future, even 007 may even be played by an actress in the future. Rumor has it that Lashana Lynch, known as Captain Marvel's Monica Rambeau, will inherit Daniel Craig at the end of the new adventure. Which doesn't sound so improbable considering the fact that she already appears as the new 007 while Bond has given up being an agent.

Lashana Lynch as 007 Source: Universal Pictures

Ob das However, it actually happened, probably depends on the success and the audience reaction to the new film. Personally, I don't really believe in it yet. Especially since MGM and Universal can always leave the back door open to develop a spin-off series with Lynch as a double zero agent, while a man continues to appear in the main series as 007. Sticking to Lynch would get in the way of a complete reboot of the series, as you are still moving in the same timeline. That would also mean that Daniel Craig's Bond would still exist somewhere in the same world. Unless the title of the film is misleading and you let a Bond jump over the edge for the first time in the history of the series.

Maintaining continuity between films has never been a tradition in the franchise. For example, Judi Dench appeared as M and Desmond Llewelyn as Q in several Bond eras. In the age of a Marvel Cinematic Universe, studios are placing much more emphasis on this than ever before. Who knows whether those in charge at MGM can imagine keeping Ralph Fiennes as M, for example, but relinquishing Naomi Harris and Ben Wishaw as Ms. Moneypenny and Q.

Should the audience think the new film sucks , these considerations would have been done quickly anyway. It would probably be less than two weeks before it was announced that we would have a complete new start with the next film - whether with a female or a male lead.

Another man would have to be cast - the efforts of the sexist Past the series and to meet the wishes for more diversity in the Bond actors, with all due respect - also not reprehensible. The fantasy of the top spy, who saves the world, is admired by the opposite sex and can shoot everything that stands in his way, can certainly be brought to the screen without degrading women to clumsy sex objects. All it takes is a script with properly written female roles. I understand that for more diversity you also need more blockbusters with non-male main characters, but it would be kind of a shame if you actually couldn't take sexism from the Bond franchise without exchanging the main character for a woman br>
James Bond's effect on women is legendary and a tradition of the franchise Source: United Artists

One could see that Bond's chauvinism and his preference for very young women are adequately treated and presented with the necessary distance. Judi Denchs M was a good counterbalance here before the actress left. The boss always had a very good eye for who Bond is at the core and where his weaknesses lie.

Or you turn the Christmas Jones of this world into three-dimensional figures and Bond into a charmer who is in the current Time fits. There's nothing wrong with the sex appeal of the series, or the fact that Bond has a few quibbles on his missions. Maybe he should just be a little less intrusive when trying to conquer.

No time to die

With a realignment of the franchise, I believe that the golden mean is the most likely to lead to the goal: keep what makes the series unique (cool, extremely British figure with chic evening wear, expensive song in the intro, interesting locations, handmade action, sex appeal). Discard whatever has always been criticized about her (Bond as an old lusty pig, confused plots). And reinvent what has slowly worn out after almost 60 years (similar or the same villains, always the same martini scene).

Ian Fleming's original books have all been used as the basis for motion pictures. That's why I also believe that we will definitely get fresh stories with creative ideas in the future. And even if the next film could tear a small hole in the studio's money store, the title couldn't be better chosen.

You can't get enough of films and series? Then listen to the latest edition of the Heim Kino podcast! Maci and Chris chat about films that deliberately and cheekily kidding and positively (and negatively!) Surprise. In addition, there is our first game - don't miss it!

Powered by Blogger.