It is a good idea for telling more storys without having to un-do Bond's final sacrifice.
I'd place these untold tales between Quantum... and Skyfall, as he was suddenly a worldweary vet by SkyFall and apparently we'd missed his best years in between those two films.
Thing is, retrofitting stories in that window of time would be a Period Piece, which people keep suggesting wouldn't work. And I think getting the period details right for 10 years ago would be even more challenging than 1950s/60s, because it would be less obvious when an anachronism slips through.
While I don’t think there’d be any meaningful problem for audiences to accept Bond’s return in this timeline — it just requires sufficient explanation and a better film to justify it — I’m not yet sure this crew could pull it off well. Writing after Casino Royale has not been the strong suit, which is why they’ve relied on big sentimental moments to distract, which by and large works with Gen-Xers and Millennials. A follow up to NTTD would rely on some similar angsty proposition to conceal the creaky, uneven stories, and they may have run out of those after killing Vesper, killing Mathis, killing M, killing Blofeld, killing Felix, blowing up Bond’s house, and having Bond quit multiple times and then apparently get vaporized while full of deadly nanobots. The only over-the-top personal emotional hook left I can think of is Bond finally gets his family back after making some kind of deal for saving the world that is a riff on Blofeld’s for amnesty and to be left totally alone. Maybe he bests the biggest villain of all and gets his private abode as reward. I do think they’d set it after NTTD, both for production ease and because they have kept moving the films forward with some flashback.
With the screen going white, it gives enough time to allow Bond to fall through the collapsed roof from the initial strike. The possibility is there I just don't think it's likely to happen. Probably depends on how much negative feedback is making it's way up to BB and MGW.
I find it fascinating that so many are trying to jump through mental hoops to come up with the ways Craig’s Bond could come back. Why? It’s a purely academic exercise, and not a particularly interesting one at that. The bottom line is it’s not going to happen. He has said he’s done. He is acting as though he’s done. So is EON. The character was literally blown to bits on screen. There’s a much better chance that EON never makes another Bond film than Craig returns. And either way, the franchise could now go in a ton of different directions. To me, these are much more interesting prospects to consider, but I understand that it’s an uncomfortable reality for some. Hence all of the theorizing about Craig’s return.
I think most of us agree that DN to DAD is the first timeline and Craig had his own seperate timeline. I've assumed Bond 26 will start a third timeline, hopefully spanning several Bond actors. But it just occured to me that EON can return to the origonal timeline. This means Bond26, 27 etc can directly reference Tracy, Dr No, hollowed out vulcanos and so on as something the same Bond has experienced. They have to forget about when these things actually happened since the first events were Sixty years ago, but I think they in effect did this at least from TLD anyway.
The next Bond hasn't experienced Vesper, M getting killed or Madeleine. In story terms Craig's Bond never existed. This isn't a judgement of Craig's tenure for me, just a way of telling the story. What do you think?
I guess they could go back to the original 'timeline' (which is a very loose definition! Do I think that the Bond in Die Another Day was the guy dodging fie on Crab Key? Not really) but I think I'd prefer if they just started afresh again.
Probably because they’re dissatisfied with the way the arc ended and the ricketiness of No Time to Die’s storytelling and because they didn’t literally see Bond blown to bits — no one did. The screen goes white as the final explosion goes off. And Craig said at the end of Spectre he wasn’t interested in coming back — that he’d rather slash his wrists — and lo and behold, he came back. Why does it concern you that others wish to speculate? I find it fascinating this concerns you so much.
We don't actually see Bond getting blown up because of cencorship to keep the age limit for audiences down I suspect. Craig made the "slash my wrists" comment after SP, but that came from his feelings at the moment and he never repeated it. Craig and other people involved in the production of NTTD has said many times for a long period of time that this is his last time. The situations are very different. The ending of NTTD looks very much like consious effort to make it a definite ending. If they somehow make up a story where Bond survived the end of NTTD it will look like a massive cheat, a cheat that has to cheapen the ending of NTTD. It will look like one of those PTS's in TB and TMWTGG where we get these "Bond is dead! -no he isn't, we got you there! 😁" situations. But this time it won't be just for a PTS. It will have to be major parts of two movies.
People are of cource free to speculate on how Bond could've survived, it's what fan forums are for. But I think they would do themselves a service and admit to themselves that it'll never happen. It's comparable of talk of Lazenby in DAF or a third Dalton movie.
but there was talk of Lazenby in DaF, and a third Dalton movie. We know how they intended DaF with Lazenbyto begin (what became the end of OHMSS once he quit), and just last year someone published a book with the plot details for two unmade movies EON had planned for Dalton! So those are legitimate "what if"s
I think the end of this latest film is Craig both making another BondFilm and slitting his wrists at the same time. He doesn't even have to make a smart remark to a journalist to prove he'll never play Bond again, he already did it as the final act of the film.
Still a fun exercise to imagine a way out for the character, especially if we have to wait five years to find out what really happens next. And there was the "Bond gets plastic surgery" angle mooted back in the 60s (I think by Connery himself) so even though Craig is 99.9999% for-sure never coming back, the version of the character he played could return.
Dalton and Lazenby are legitimate "what if's" and I enjoy speculating about it, Even though I know those oportunities are gone. I don't get the impression some of the people speculating about Craig are realistic enough to realize the odds of Craig's return are roughly what you wrote.
Well, we don’t know anything for certain at this point, whether the screen goes white for censorship — they could just as easily have cut to a distance shot of the whole mountain being destroyed if that was their concern — or if Craig’s claims of not returning are any more or less credible than his wrist slashing comments the last time around. People who maintain they know for certain right now are speculating just as much as those imagining ways for Craig to return, the only difference being only one of those two groups seems to be determined to tell the other to stop their speculation.
I don't think Craig will return because he got everything he wanted. When he joined the franchise he mooted the idea of Bond getting killed off at the end of his run. And according to the Spy Command, Craig's stipulation for coiming back after Spectre was Bond death. After receiving such a grand finale, his return would be an anticlimax. He's gotten everything he wanted and is surely done with the role. Benoit Blanc is waiting in the wings.
I think that’s the most likely scenario. But as much as egos come into play, it’s still a business, and being anticlimactic for Craig personally is not the same as being anticlimactic for the films. One way or another, Bond is likely to return regardless. Bond actors have famously said how sick they are of the role and then come back for another. We have no certainty what will happen next, anymore than in 2015, when no one could have predicted dragging their feet on production of Bond 25 would preface a pandemic that delayed the release of the film and most likely will eat away at potential profits. Craig’s star power all comes from Bond, as he’s hardly had any comparable success in anything else. Will the Knives Out sequels do big business? They may well. Or they may flounder, and Craig finds himself looking for something to refresh his career. We just don’t know at this point.
id say they will reboot the whole thing, because itll be funny wouldnt it to see M (Ralph) call another agent James Bond 007, where his M was already connected to Daniel Craig James Bond 007
Fascinating? Jumping through mental hoops? All I've seen is some general conversation amongst Bond fans on a possible scenario where Bond survived. All the while acknowledging how unlikely it is. It's a fan forum for discussion last time I checked.
The "Knives Out" sequels are being produced by Netflix and will go directly to Netflix. I'm not sure whether or not they will be given a simultaneous short run in cinemas at all. I agree Craig is only a huge star and big box office draw when he is playing Bond but he has a deserved reputation as a fine actor and the range to also be able to do comedy and characters. I don't think Craig will have a hard time making a living as an actor going forward.😄 I do believe NTTD will be the last we see of him as Bond.
It’s not about making a living, though. Were that the case, Craig could have stopped quite some time ago, as he’d already made more than nearly everyone else can expect to earn in their lifetime. He’d never go hungry, never not have clothing or shelter. And it’s not for want of acting. With his financial security, he could afford to act in theater or on television for free. He could spend the rest of his life entertaining audiences pro bono, keeping ticket prices down or even doing free performances to get theater to more people. Anyone worth millions could make the world a better place by simply not charging their exorbitant fee. And Craig, like Tom Hanks, Brad Pitt, Keanu Reeves, Angelina Jolie, or Oprah Winfrey, would still have so much money they could afford any luxury they wanted. They could just live off investments.
But that’s not how it works. There will never be enough money or enough of the fame, power, and privilege than comes with being a star, and there will always be rationalizations for their deserving such. Doors open. Perks, like limos, expense accounts, and free travel for friends and family, make life sweeter. The constant accolades, the fan adulation — it’s all like a drug for people already psychologically predisposed to needing it. A very small percentage of big stars can walk away from that. And it’s all built on the foundation of continuing to be a box office draw. Once that wanes, the rest starts to go, too. They’re only as relevant as they are profitable.
Maybe Craig needs no more, Perhaps, like Matt Damon, he’s a big enough star that even if he makes one box office bomb after another, studios will still give him big checks to make more. But so far, Craig just doesn’t have that level of appeal, regardless of his ability as an actor. He’s like Leonard Nimoy in that he’s so brilliant in one role, it outshines everything else and keeps him known. Objectively, Craig may or may not be a better actor and he definitely has a more financially successful career, but Bond is what makes all that possible.
Do I think he’ll come back to Bond? Doubtful. But life is a funny thing. Connery swore up and down he was done and then came back twice. Until late in life, his career was quite similar to Craig’s in that Bond made everything else possible and cross fed his success. Moore was ready to quit and then realized he had nowhere to go either. Eon may be so desperate they throw a big enough bag of money and other enticements at Craig to come back. All they have to do is figure out what part of his ego to appeal to. Craig, for instance, seems involved in the whole performative woke movement. Maybe they agree to finance projects for marginalized filmmakers with Craig as executive producer so he feels like a savior. It could be that simple.
I am curious of all this talk about reboots etc considering that in essence, the character James Bond has now been killed off. The name has gone but the number still lives on. Ian Fleming created a fictional male character and gave it a real name, not a codename, not a code word but a real mans name, a character that was given parents, a boyhood that turned into man hood.
You can't have another James Bond because they have killed the character off but you can certainly have another 007. Someone mentioned about Eon losing exclusive rights to the movie franchise in 2035 which means after 2035 it would be open season on anyone wanting to make a James Bond movie. What better way to prevent movie house trying to continue where Eon left off by having the character killed off. With Eon establishing that the little girl is Bonds, maybe the intention is to have the girl become the next 007, following in her fathers footsteps, maybe make a couple more Bond related movies until Eon's rights expire in 2035.
Comments
🤣
I think it's technically possibly, but it won't happen.
It is a good idea for telling more storys without having to un-do Bond's final sacrifice.
I'd place these untold tales between Quantum... and Skyfall, as he was suddenly a worldweary vet by SkyFall and apparently we'd missed his best years in between those two films.
Thing is, retrofitting stories in that window of time would be a Period Piece, which people keep suggesting wouldn't work. And I think getting the period details right for 10 years ago would be even more challenging than 1950s/60s, because it would be less obvious when an anachronism slips through.
While I don’t think there’d be any meaningful problem for audiences to accept Bond’s return in this timeline — it just requires sufficient explanation and a better film to justify it — I’m not yet sure this crew could pull it off well. Writing after Casino Royale has not been the strong suit, which is why they’ve relied on big sentimental moments to distract, which by and large works with Gen-Xers and Millennials. A follow up to NTTD would rely on some similar angsty proposition to conceal the creaky, uneven stories, and they may have run out of those after killing Vesper, killing Mathis, killing M, killing Blofeld, killing Felix, blowing up Bond’s house, and having Bond quit multiple times and then apparently get vaporized while full of deadly nanobots. The only over-the-top personal emotional hook left I can think of is Bond finally gets his family back after making some kind of deal for saving the world that is a riff on Blofeld’s for amnesty and to be left totally alone. Maybe he bests the biggest villain of all and gets his private abode as reward. I do think they’d set it after NTTD, both for production ease and because they have kept moving the films forward with some flashback.
With the screen going white, it gives enough time to allow Bond to fall through the collapsed roof from the initial strike. The possibility is there I just don't think it's likely to happen. Probably depends on how much negative feedback is making it's way up to BB and MGW.
I find it fascinating that so many are trying to jump through mental hoops to come up with the ways Craig’s Bond could come back. Why? It’s a purely academic exercise, and not a particularly interesting one at that. The bottom line is it’s not going to happen. He has said he’s done. He is acting as though he’s done. So is EON. The character was literally blown to bits on screen. There’s a much better chance that EON never makes another Bond film than Craig returns. And either way, the franchise could now go in a ton of different directions. To me, these are much more interesting prospects to consider, but I understand that it’s an uncomfortable reality for some. Hence all of the theorizing about Craig’s return.
Well said, Miles Messervy!
+1!
I think most of us agree that DN to DAD is the first timeline and Craig had his own seperate timeline. I've assumed Bond 26 will start a third timeline, hopefully spanning several Bond actors. But it just occured to me that EON can return to the origonal timeline. This means Bond26, 27 etc can directly reference Tracy, Dr No, hollowed out vulcanos and so on as something the same Bond has experienced. They have to forget about when these things actually happened since the first events were Sixty years ago, but I think they in effect did this at least from TLD anyway.
The next Bond hasn't experienced Vesper, M getting killed or Madeleine. In story terms Craig's Bond never existed. This isn't a judgement of Craig's tenure for me, just a way of telling the story. What do you think?
I guess they could go back to the original 'timeline' (which is a very loose definition! Do I think that the Bond in Die Another Day was the guy dodging fie on Crab Key? Not really) but I think I'd prefer if they just started afresh again.
Probably because they’re dissatisfied with the way the arc ended and the ricketiness of No Time to Die’s storytelling and because they didn’t literally see Bond blown to bits — no one did. The screen goes white as the final explosion goes off. And Craig said at the end of Spectre he wasn’t interested in coming back — that he’d rather slash his wrists — and lo and behold, he came back. Why does it concern you that others wish to speculate? I find it fascinating this concerns you so much.
It certainly seems like they included that to keep the option open, though I agree it’s unlikely Craig will return.
We don't actually see Bond getting blown up because of cencorship to keep the age limit for audiences down I suspect. Craig made the "slash my wrists" comment after SP, but that came from his feelings at the moment and he never repeated it. Craig and other people involved in the production of NTTD has said many times for a long period of time that this is his last time. The situations are very different. The ending of NTTD looks very much like consious effort to make it a definite ending. If they somehow make up a story where Bond survived the end of NTTD it will look like a massive cheat, a cheat that has to cheapen the ending of NTTD. It will look like one of those PTS's in TB and TMWTGG where we get these "Bond is dead! -no he isn't, we got you there! 😁" situations. But this time it won't be just for a PTS. It will have to be major parts of two movies.
People are of cource free to speculate on how Bond could've survived, it's what fan forums are for. But I think they would do themselves a service and admit to themselves that it'll never happen. It's comparable of talk of Lazenby in DAF or a third Dalton movie.
but there was talk of Lazenby in DaF, and a third Dalton movie. We know how they intended DaF with Lazenby to begin (what became the end of OHMSS once he quit), and just last year someone published a book with the plot details for two unmade movies EON had planned for Dalton! So those are legitimate "what if"s
I think the end of this latest film is Craig both making another BondFilm and slitting his wrists at the same time. He doesn't even have to make a smart remark to a journalist to prove he'll never play Bond again, he already did it as the final act of the film.
Still a fun exercise to imagine a way out for the character, especially if we have to wait five years to find out what really happens next. And there was the "Bond gets plastic surgery" angle mooted back in the 60s (I think by Connery himself) so even though Craig is 99.9999% for-sure never coming back, the version of the character he played could return.
Dalton and Lazenby are legitimate "what if's" and I enjoy speculating about it, Even though I know those oportunities are gone. I don't get the impression some of the people speculating about Craig are realistic enough to realize the odds of Craig's return are roughly what you wrote.
Well, we don’t know anything for certain at this point, whether the screen goes white for censorship — they could just as easily have cut to a distance shot of the whole mountain being destroyed if that was their concern — or if Craig’s claims of not returning are any more or less credible than his wrist slashing comments the last time around. People who maintain they know for certain right now are speculating just as much as those imagining ways for Craig to return, the only difference being only one of those two groups seems to be determined to tell the other to stop their speculation.
I don't think Craig will return because he got everything he wanted. When he joined the franchise he mooted the idea of Bond getting killed off at the end of his run. And according to the Spy Command, Craig's stipulation for coiming back after Spectre was Bond death. After receiving such a grand finale, his return would be an anticlimax. He's gotten everything he wanted and is surely done with the role. Benoit Blanc is waiting in the wings.
I think that’s the most likely scenario. But as much as egos come into play, it’s still a business, and being anticlimactic for Craig personally is not the same as being anticlimactic for the films. One way or another, Bond is likely to return regardless. Bond actors have famously said how sick they are of the role and then come back for another. We have no certainty what will happen next, anymore than in 2015, when no one could have predicted dragging their feet on production of Bond 25 would preface a pandemic that delayed the release of the film and most likely will eat away at potential profits. Craig’s star power all comes from Bond, as he’s hardly had any comparable success in anything else. Will the Knives Out sequels do big business? They may well. Or they may flounder, and Craig finds himself looking for something to refresh his career. We just don’t know at this point.
🤣🤣🤣
It doesn’t concern me at all. It bores me.
id say they will reboot the whole thing, because itll be funny wouldnt it to see M (Ralph) call another agent James Bond 007, where his M was already connected to Daniel Craig James Bond 007
You sure do talk a lot about it for someone who’s bored with it.
Fascinating? Jumping through mental hoops? All I've seen is some general conversation amongst Bond fans on a possible scenario where Bond survived. All the while acknowledging how unlikely it is. It's a fan forum for discussion last time I checked.
The "Knives Out" sequels are being produced by Netflix and will go directly to Netflix. I'm not sure whether or not they will be given a simultaneous short run in cinemas at all. I agree Craig is only a huge star and big box office draw when he is playing Bond but he has a deserved reputation as a fine actor and the range to also be able to do comedy and characters. I don't think Craig will have a hard time making a living as an actor going forward.😄 I do believe NTTD will be the last we see of him as Bond.
It’s not about making a living, though. Were that the case, Craig could have stopped quite some time ago, as he’d already made more than nearly everyone else can expect to earn in their lifetime. He’d never go hungry, never not have clothing or shelter. And it’s not for want of acting. With his financial security, he could afford to act in theater or on television for free. He could spend the rest of his life entertaining audiences pro bono, keeping ticket prices down or even doing free performances to get theater to more people. Anyone worth millions could make the world a better place by simply not charging their exorbitant fee. And Craig, like Tom Hanks, Brad Pitt, Keanu Reeves, Angelina Jolie, or Oprah Winfrey, would still have so much money they could afford any luxury they wanted. They could just live off investments.
But that’s not how it works. There will never be enough money or enough of the fame, power, and privilege than comes with being a star, and there will always be rationalizations for their deserving such. Doors open. Perks, like limos, expense accounts, and free travel for friends and family, make life sweeter. The constant accolades, the fan adulation — it’s all like a drug for people already psychologically predisposed to needing it. A very small percentage of big stars can walk away from that. And it’s all built on the foundation of continuing to be a box office draw. Once that wanes, the rest starts to go, too. They’re only as relevant as they are profitable.
Maybe Craig needs no more, Perhaps, like Matt Damon, he’s a big enough star that even if he makes one box office bomb after another, studios will still give him big checks to make more. But so far, Craig just doesn’t have that level of appeal, regardless of his ability as an actor. He’s like Leonard Nimoy in that he’s so brilliant in one role, it outshines everything else and keeps him known. Objectively, Craig may or may not be a better actor and he definitely has a more financially successful career, but Bond is what makes all that possible.
Do I think he’ll come back to Bond? Doubtful. But life is a funny thing. Connery swore up and down he was done and then came back twice. Until late in life, his career was quite similar to Craig’s in that Bond made everything else possible and cross fed his success. Moore was ready to quit and then realized he had nowhere to go either. Eon may be so desperate they throw a big enough bag of money and other enticements at Craig to come back. All they have to do is figure out what part of his ego to appeal to. Craig, for instance, seems involved in the whole performative woke movement. Maybe they agree to finance projects for marginalized filmmakers with Craig as executive producer so he feels like a savior. It could be that simple.
Really ? There are people who still think Craig could come back in the role ?
It's as likely as having Phoebe Waller-Bridge saying she would love to date Harvey Weinstein...
🤣
Or people who thought Craig was completely wrong for the role in 2005 and argued Casino Royale was going to be a disaster.
I am curious of all this talk about reboots etc considering that in essence, the character James Bond has now been killed off. The name has gone but the number still lives on. Ian Fleming created a fictional male character and gave it a real name, not a codename, not a code word but a real mans name, a character that was given parents, a boyhood that turned into man hood.
You can't have another James Bond because they have killed the character off but you can certainly have another 007. Someone mentioned about Eon losing exclusive rights to the movie franchise in 2035 which means after 2035 it would be open season on anyone wanting to make a James Bond movie. What better way to prevent movie house trying to continue where Eon left off by having the character killed off. With Eon establishing that the little girl is Bonds, maybe the intention is to have the girl become the next 007, following in her fathers footsteps, maybe make a couple more Bond related movies until Eon's rights expire in 2035.