Not sure they could really get away with this nowadays, though. Moneypenny and Q are out in the field, falling off their own mountains while Bond has turned more into an unwilling subject of a never-ending medical experiment where each film he tries out the latest injectable tracking technology.
3 Likes
It’s funny how elements of characters can change and it becomes the new long lasting norm. One piece of media is the justification for what follows as it’s now ‘official’. Eg. characters like Alfred, who is now often characterised as younger and more physical.
First Light seems to be keeping Q inside the lab, even though he did venture out in past films such as LTK. Creating personas for Cleese and Wishaw after Desmond’s passing is what gave the character some new dimensions.
Moneypenny being an active resource in the field was activated through the origin story angle to her career, but I see aspects of that continuing in Bond media.
3 Likes
2 Likes
Too young for my taste.
But Amazon will love to cater to that audience, not giving a damn about the long time Bond fans.
2 Likes
Im sure the fact he’s about to have 2 things released on Netflix has nothing to do with this…its not like the other “top contenders” have always been said as they are just about to start a press tour…
2 Likes
He has the height and general look but yeah, his age is a very low number. Even younger than First Light Bond who is 26. “In 2024, Partridge had a cameo in the spy film Argylle as a younger version of the title character played by Henry Cavill.” I’m not attaching myself to anyone or any rumour now. It’s a long and winding road before official confirmation.
3 Likes
They believe that those fans will watch the movie anyway, and they want a Bond who will generate new fans.
3 Likes
There would be serious room for longevity but it makes me wonder how often that really happens. Would someone really be left in a position for 20 plus years? Especially if those are productive years, not just sitting on the sidelines and waiting ala chunks of the Craig era. The market dictates how long something lasts, and things can happen to disrupt - as Lazenby and Dalton know. In any case, just another rumour to add to the pile.
4 Likes
That’s right. Just something to fill column space at the moment. Someone like Louis becoming Bond right now would be like Dalton being cast for OHMSS (1969). Which is something to wrap your mind around. A younger Bond would surely shape other casting too. Superiors like M would more or less stay the same, but female leads and allies would have to match more closely. Someone like Glen Powell, your great suggestion for Felix, is currently 37.
6 Likes
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0252936/
You think late 50’s is too young?
Older than that young whipper snapper who played M in Dr. No in 1962
Edit: and, yes, first light Q is older than when film Q started
3 Likes
I don’t doubt for a second that in this cinema climate the choice for a lead will be someone who is in his twenties.
And yes, marketplace, cinema attending is mostly for teenagers and young adults now, and Amazon will go for the surest thing as a habit.
But unless you make a „Young Bond“-movie the casting needs to look for someone who is a believably proven soldier, ready to step into a solitary, highly dangerous job, being perceived by outside forces as someone they can fear or trust.
Not a young poser with no experience.
4 Likes
I would argue a young Bond is almost imperative to keeping the franchise alive. A Bond that a generation grows up with is exactly what the series needs. And when that actor ages out, I am sure that generation will be more than ready to tell the world what is best for the next Bond incarnation.
4 Likes
Regarding this young/very young/too young thingy, these days I oftentimes misjudge people’s ages, regardless of gender or profession. It’s probably a side effect of my own 60ish perception. Maybe younger audiences wouldn’t mind a Bond in his 20s so much? And an M in his 40s?
Those wouldn’t be the ages we might choose for those roles - I used to be very sceptical of the idea of a 20something Bond - but for younger audiences it’s probably no big deal, judging by the Kingsmen films.
It’s true Brosnan was already approaching middle age when he took over. But he was still looking younger than his years - and times were just that bit different in that youths were basically striving to grow into their own parents’ lives. Is that even still the case today? Our reality suggests it’s at least no longer true for a significant portion of the population. Most kids today will likely have trouble to even hold living standards of their parents - and for many it’s not even a goal to aspire to.
I suppose it’s been considerations along these lines that lead to the above stories (regardless of their substance or lack of) in the first place. It may not be to our liking but rumination along tose lines has to go on in the Amazon executive ranks in some form.
3 Likes
Bond starting out as a young thirtysomething?
No problem.
Bond starting as a 23 year old, learning the ropes, becoming the Bond we know and love…
Yawn.
6 Likes
Bond is by design not a ‘fresh‘ hero. He’s been around longer than most people alive today can even remember. He’s also not really an ‘underdog’ people would root for because they like to see the little ordinary guy win. Bond is firmly the agent of the established order fighting to keep the world from blowing up. That’s certainly not obsolete in a world that’s actually demonstrably heading in that direction. But it’s not a given that’s really the best environment for innovation from a corporate perspective.
It’s true that the Craig era tweaked many of the elements of the Brosnan films - and this has been a lament. But judging by the box office and studio profits, this crucially hasn’t been a common one. I‘m not sure there’s any appetite for going in a new/different/unexpected direction with BOND 26. Maybe going for a younger-than-expected actor is already the sum total of creative risk they are willing to take?
Then again, perhaps not and BOND 26 manages to reinvigorate the series as a whole. Making Bond cool and fun again with old and new fans.
4 Likes
History is one of the franchises’s greatest assets, IMO. I’ve always enjoyed that sense of superiority Bond has over other characters. The longevity has given prestige, and that perception seems to stay despite any shortcomings along the way.
If they cast someone likeable I’m positive there will be a sense of excitement and freshness injected. I certainly felt both when Casino Royale (2006) was released.
I also think Bond is still someone to root for. He works for a large organisation but at the core he’s still a human being who likes rebelling against authority, is thrown into extraordinary situations and has to overcome obstacles.
When you think about it, the fact he’s a loner without real connections gives grounding and reflects a lot of people’s friendless lives today.
But it’s also wish fulfilment and the genre itself that will always appeal to an audience. As Fleming said, “spying has always been regarded as a very romantic one-man job, so-to-speak. A one man against a whole police force or an army.”
It’s not going to be easy, but Bond can be successfully relaunched again. The ingredients that made it happen in the past are still there. They just need to be adapted to now.
8 Likes
That depends on one’s expectations.
As hard core fans we already know the previous ideas and retooling, so we are bored and yearn for something else.
But as we look at what’s greenlit and successful, the mass audience (needed for Bond) is clearly going for McCinema, and that is just lowest common denominator style of reheating what worked before.
EON post Cubby did try to innovate. The fact that they very cautiously proceeded, in a much more adventurous and sure fire time for blockbuster cinema, tells us a lot about what a company like AmazonMGM will be prepared to do in these troubled times.
And to give insight into the processes of a major studio riding on huge successes but getting nervous after wobbly times and political influence…
3 Likes
It’s actually a pretty apt description of society, of the human experience in general; it doesn’t matter what a big shot you have been once, what your merits used to be or how irreplaceable you considered yourself: you could be replaced by some slob or, worse even, by some program in a blink. And neither your friends nor your kids will remember you for your important contacts in your diary or the fact you never had time for them because of all your important projects and world saving.
It’s perhaps the most poignant scene in the entire series - only one usually realises it when it’s already too late. Admittedly, not perhaps best placed in a piece of entertainment aimed at letting us conveniently avoid uncomfortable realities. 
10 Likes
But is it really shrugged off? The more I think about NO TIME TO DIE the more I get the impression it’s THE central theme of this film: absent fathers - White, Oberhauser, Bond, Safin’s - and what their absence, for whatever reasons, does with those left behind. NTTD is no kitchen sink drama, nor should it be. But I don’t think it’s merely burning up its interesting ideas.
EDIT: Though in all fairness it has to be said it’s a little frivolous how the film discards any poignancy by showing Madeleine being perfectly dandy with Bond’s absence in the end and telling Mathilde lovely bedtime stories about her father (though I’m not sure she’s going to include his preference for married women as yet…)
7 Likes
Fully agreed.
That scene is a very funny one at first („they don’t recognize the name James Bond?“) and becomes a poignant one.
In my mind this is how great scenes should work: first within the context of the plot and second on a larger scale that stays in your mind.
12 Likes