Reboot the Craig Era

Honestly, I have mixed feelings. Casino was great, and I even loved Quantum. However Skyfall got a little too ridiculous at times and Spectre had a twist straight out of Austin Powers. At the same time both had great moments.

In General I have the following idea

Keep Casino Royale:

Modify Quantum: Bond’s relationship with Camille stays and the theme of him trying to face his demons is there, but it takes center stage. Rather than the water scheme Bond’s quest for vengeance takes center stage. In the end Bond gets over his grief and gets as much peace as he can, but Mr White escapes. This plays a role later.

Bridge Film: Rather than jumping straight to Craig in his older years, we get a more classic standalone Bond Film; this has the typical formula elements but still differs in some ways. We see Bond as a full established career. He’s not quite in the cynical mode we see in Skyfall

Spectre Trilogy: This is a series of movies that chronicles the end of Bond’s career.

Skyfall: Modify it to make Silva’s plan a little less ridiculous. Show that there’s a dark force guiding Silva’s actions. Spectre is rising

Spectre: Overhall the movie; Bond’s connection to Blofeld is that when Quantum fell Blofeld swallowed the remnants, which is what helped him become powerful (making Bond indirectly responsible for Blofeld’s rise to power). Bond manages to thwart nine eyes and we get the start of a war

Final Craig Movie: Spectre and the various intelligence agencies are at war; unfortunately Blofeld is being backed into a corner and quite frankly a snake is most dangerous when it’s cornered. Bond thwarts Blofeld’s attempt to unleash a bioweapon but Blofeld in a final act of cruelty tries to recreate Vesper’s death with adeline but this time Bond is able to save her. Blofeld is defeated and ultimately jailed. Bond retires for good to be with the woman he loves.

I quite like your ideas. It’s silly the writers didn’t at least make up some backstory, a few missions and names, to go between Quantum of Solace and Skyfall. As it is, Craig Bond’s career feels really short.

It would have been nice to have one more film with Casino Royale/QoS Bond before he got all crotchety!

I’m hoping EON maps out an arc like yours for the next Bond.

I enjoyed reading your idea for the ‘could have been’ Craig arc… shame the writers don’t think like this.

It’s a silly idea. What’s done is done. Like the movies, hate the movies, yet there they are. What’s next? DIsavow Die Another Day and Make NSNA an official film?

It’s funny you should say that, there is a fan theory that says everything after the title sequence in DAD is a fever dream that Bond has while being tortured in the POW camp. It even goes on to say that afterwards an amnesiac he was dumped back with Mi6 and he had earn his stripes and learn how to be Bond again. The idea of course being that Casino Royale was actually in continuity with the previous films.
Utter nonsense when you get right down to it but it’s the fun kind of nonsense.

But I do agree that rebooting again would be a bad idea. I’m personally getting fed up with franchises continually rebooting and I’m sure I’m not the only one. We live in an age where big films are more continuity driven and hitting the reset button repeatedly is going to start alienating audiences. Not everything about the Craig-era worked but a good writer can use what’s come before as opposed to throwing it away and starting again.

After DAD, a reboot (of sorts) needed to happen. Sure, the next film following DAD could have ben massively stripped down but to me, it tarnishes Bronsan’s legacy. It could have en Bronsan’s FYEO but the reboot trend started and the changes happned.

People may have their gripes about QoS and Spectre, but I’ll take those over Die Another Day anytime.

There are two other theories on a similar vein.

One is that Bond died in the PTS to Skyfall. Evidence of this is Mallory’s remark to Bond, “Why not stay dead?” and Bond’s reply to M asking his whereabouts, “Enjoying death.”

The other was outlined by Dennis Franich in his Entertainment Weekly review that Bond dies in Blofeld’s chair, and the last third of SPECTRE’s ridiculous plot is due to his dying fever dream. Some even say the rest of the canon’s first 20 films occur in this vein, which could explain recurring characters, different casting, Aston Martin inconsistencies, and even NSNA and CR’67.

EON could address this with Bond 25, but more likely they will be vague rather than face it head on (think DAF after OHMSS.) They still have a chance to pull off a faithful YOLT novel adaptation so long as they give us a straightforward story and try not to be too clever about it. Then if they end it with Craig’s Bond as an amnesiac (or actually dying), then they’re free to go in any direction after that. Most of us seem to want a return to the traditional formula of stand alone movies.

Amen to that! Traditional formula of standalone movies! I’m very fond of the Craig Bonds but enough with reboots and going rogue.

I think the series could have recovered from DAD, FYEO after Moonraker is a good analogy. But the reason I was behind the reboot, and the reason it worked was that back in '05 the franchise reboot was a new and interesting concept. Shifting the focus to a more character focused story while simultaneously adapting the first novel as Bond’s first mission was actually a brilliant move and represents to me the best of what a reboot can be.
SPECTRE on the other hand represents the downside of reboots, attempting to recreate famous elements without anything that made them great the first time round. In this case Blofeld with the slow build up and reveal replaced with a tacked on connection to the hero. However I was always in the camp that didn’t want to see Blofeld return in the first place so I’m more than happy to let the series move on and explore villains. The last thing I want is another reboot and a third attempt…

Those fan theories are a little bit of fun but I don’t think they should be anything more. Pulling the ‘it was all a dream/ hallucination’ trick rarely works out well.

Indeed. I think the Craig era should still be the foundation going forward; Bond’s history is established and now they can transition back to more traditional stories. If nothing else the keep Ralph Fiennes around as ‘M’ for as long as possible.
However in this day an age I don’t think the films necessarily need to be completely standalone. While I don’t see the need for overarching stories it could be interesting to explore Bond’s relationship with lovers, allies and villains over multiple films in a way that hasn’t really been done before.