That would be nice. Shame that the tropes of the Craig era are pretty much the same tropes that EON has been using for the better part of thirty years now, and for the entirety of Barbara’s run in charge of the franchise. I have a hard time seeing them changing their approach, especially since they’ve been validated with nearly $2 billion in box office receipts on their last two films.
I think it partially started out with Dench being cast - and, ironically, with the decision this should not be a reboot for Brosnan. So Dench‘s M was the new hand on deck and there had to be ‘issues’ between them. Although everything except Q was new, the Lego headquarters, the interiors. It wouldn’t have been a big thing if had they called this a reboot.
When Craig arrived in his reboot the writers once again went back to their default position of ‘issues’ between M and Bond, this time she supposedly doubting him. Actually, wouldn’t it have been a stronger dynamic if she hadn’t had any doubts regarding Bond? After all, he didn’t arrive in the 00-section because he was employee of the month three times in a row. Let others doubt Bond and blow the top of their heads. M’s the one who sent him and, whoever M is, they will have had their reasons.
Craig’s tenure turned out vastly different from what one may have expected after the last frames of CASINO ROYALE. Some of it was no doubt due to considerations about how genre cinema was received during these years - a version of the series picking up on current trends and playing them with an 007 theme like MOONRAKER. As you said, the success is what justifies these decisions, up to a point.
Since these films have evolved into their own series within the series it’s hard to imagine Craig’s successor will not star in his own reboot again. Maybe that reboot will then look for other themes, will keep its distance from the person of Bond for a time and instead look for its own way of telling a fantasy spy romp. We only can speculate - but we shall see.
It’ll most likely depend on whatever the current trends are at the time. It wasn’t a big thing to “reboot” franchises in 1995, which is probably the only reason that GE isn’t an official reboot, although I’ve always felt that it kind of lies in its own frame of reference outside of the films from Connery through Dalton.
The next Bond, I’m sure, will be a reboot, since Craig’s tenure is most likely going to be entirely self-contained, but whatever takes hold as being popular in a post-Covid world will dictate what direction EON goes. Hopefully that means less Bond/M trust issues and something that leans more towards just allowing the professional do his work, but we’ll see.
1 Like
I wonder whether the Bond/M relationship will become less conflict laden from this point onwards.
With the casting of Dench it was a mandate to give her something to do - which led to more involvement between her and Bond, and turning it up even more in the Craig era. With her being killed off in SKYFALL it would have been possible to go back to less personal relationship only if not another A-lister had been cast as M.
After the Craig tenure, it would have to become a total reboot in order to get back to the 60/70/80-relationship. Otherwise critics will ask: hey, now M is just a Mr. Exposition again, what a waste! And Fiennes would say: I’m not playing that.
As for OHMSS - I think back then I would have been quite irritated by the way LazenbyBond suddenly had all the experiences of ConneryBond. In that regard it was not like a reboot at all, it was just shoving the new actor into this universe and acting as if he had been there all along. This is what LALD, TLD, GE and CR thankfully avoided - although they all had parts of the previous cast return. But at that point we were used to the rebuilding of Bond´s world with former parts. OHMSS had to start it, and EON had the good fortune of one of the best Bond stories as a basic element. Just like CR.
For the time after Craig this will be the next film´s biggest challenge. Especially with so many Bond films now already having mined the existing Fleming novels. What would new ideas for Bond be about? Are there new ideas for it? Maybe only if the next arc/tenure will be placed in the changed contemporary reality. One in which the virus is still rampant or overcome. One in which Great Britain has completely changed, with Bond having to fight for someone he does not believe in anymore, yet trying to bring balance to world peace by sticking to his job?
1 Like
Everyone’s contract is up, so if there’s ever a time for a reboot, it’s now.
Mark Gatiss would be a good M - and would always be okay being Mr Exposition…given he gave himself that role in Sherlock.
2 Likes
He would be a perfect M. His Mycroft did mention his “opposite number” using a blunt instrument.
Expanding on the theory that the WWI Mycroft was first head of Secret Service and maintained position until succeeded by Sir Miles
1 Like
Indeed. I understand why they took this approach, especially as YOLT’s poster proclaimed ‘Sean Connery IS James Bond’. Delaying Bond’s introduction in the pre-title sequence built up the supporting characters such as M, Q and Moneypenny, and we see the Aston Martin before Lazenby himself is fully identified. As you say, the intention was to make the world feel like an authentic continuation.