Idea for Balancing Workload of Next Actor

DavidJones

During his tenure, the workload for Craig was always something of an issue, either because of the physically demanding action scenes which sometimes resulted in injury, or just the matter of filling so much screen time.

Perhaps this would be an idea, though I'm sure it's flawed in some way I can't see: maybe future Bond films should be split 60/40 between the next actor and a female co-lead. They would feature in alternate scenes and occasionally, and briefly, meet each other before staying together for the whole of the last act.

Such a female lead would change with each film. Depending on the plot, you could a brave, resourceful and clever female character who can be, say, a financial analyst, a biochemist, a computer hacker, an activist, a soldier - someone, in other words, who can plausibly advance the plot themselves instead of the film relying on Bond alone to do that.

The woman could be an up-and-comer - in the way that Emilia Clarke or Felicity Jones was a few years ago - so wouldn't be a big enough star to be busy on other films or unwilling to play the second lead.

This will not only make the films less arduous for the Bond actor but also satisfy the need for giving women good roles in the franchise and widen the usual audience demographic of this series (typically men either middle-aged or older).

You could have two units shooting at once (or four if you give each a second unit to tackle the action, which is what happens now).

The shoots would be quicker as a result, and we could even have a film every two years. With fewer days on set for the Bond actor, he could also find time to do a mid-budget indie, like Tom Holland's recent Cherry.

Probably wrong-headed of me to suggest it, but would this be feasible, do you think?

caractacus potts

sounds a bit like Steed and Peel or Mulder and Scully, except the female lead changes with each episode. I like the idea of the female lead having more to do, but remembering precedent within previous BondFilms, specifically Jinx in Die Another Day, that felt like an attempt to establish a spinoff character at the expense of the proper hero contributing less to his own story.

any way I dont have much sympathy for Craig's "work load". He made five films in 15 years when previous actors would have given us eight, and he might have spent more time acting if he wasn't also doubling as Executive Producer. and I'd rather have good dialog than than death defying stunts, if the stunts were the issue, He's not going to break an ankle acting in more scenes with good dialog.

DavidJones

I agree with you on every point.

I love me some Avengers, by the way, and would love to see it come back. (A new version was mooted about three years ago but it's since gone quiet).

Jinx was quite over-bearing in Die Another Day, I thought. It was like she was nudging Bond out of his own film. Particularly unfortunate as it was meant to be the cinema equivalent of a birthday party :)

I don't have sympathy for Craig either. There were too many years between films. I appreciate that it can be arduous, but there is such a thing as stunt performers. You can even CGI the actor's head on a stuntman nowadays. They definitely didn't have that in A View to a Kill :)

I don't think we even need that many 'stunts'. I'd choose more suspense and a little less action. One of the most exciting films ever, in my view, is Hitchock's Notorious, and that's set almost exclusively indoors, and there isn't even any fisticuffs in it.

Of course, my suggestion of a prominent co-lead would have to avoid seeming like a Harleyquinn Romantic Suspense novel. I'm sort of imagining how Tomorrow Never Dies might have been if we had seen a bit of Wai Linn's investigation.