The Search for the Next James Bond Will Begin in 2022

[The Deadman]

https://www.ign.com/articles/james-b...raig-successor

James Bond producer Barbara Broccoli has said the search for Daniel Craig's successor will begin next year.

Broccoli appeared as a guest on BBC Radio 4's Today program alongside her half-brother and fellow Eon producer Michael G. Wilson to discuss all things 007 ahead of the upcoming release of No Time to Die. According to Deadline, the two producers said they would not be giving any thought to Daniel Craig's James Bond replacement until 2022.

"We're not thinking about it at all," Broccoli admitted after being quizzed on whether a decision had been made about who would take over the role of the iconic British spy following Craig's fifth and final outing as the MI6 agent. "We want Daniel [Craig] to have his time of celebration. Next year we'll start thinking about the future."

Broccoli credited Craig for bringing different facets of the character to the surface in a way that allowed them to "really explore the emotional life of Bond and go into the person and complexity and conflicts that happen within the Bond character." Wilson similarly praised Craig's performance as he acknowledged that he was leaving behind some "big shoes to fill."

Craig first portrayed Bond in the 2006 film Casino Royale. He reprised the role in 2008's Quantum of Solace, 2012's Skyfall and 2015's Spectre, all of which have collectively grossed more than $3.1 billion at the worldwide box office. Craig is officially bidding farewell to the 007 franchise with No Time To Die, which is the longest James Bond movie to date.

[CyberCubed]

The next James Bond is either going to be black, a woman, a gay, a hispanic, or all of the above. They're definitely not going to choose another white guy.

[Sumac]

Strangely enough I believe it is still be a White Man.
Some of those Holyweird exes talk the talk, but don't walk the walk.

Brocoll. hopefully not so far gone into salad, so she understands what makes Bond popular. And its definitely has nothing to do with SJW trash and their ****** racist and sexist ideology.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Sumac

Strangely enough I believe it is still be a White Man.
Some of those Holyweird exes talk the talk, but don't walk the walk.

Brocoll. hopefully not so far gone into salad, so she understands what makes Bond popular. And its definitely has nothing to do with SJW trash and their ****** racist and sexist ideology.

I'm kind of in this mindset. It'll be a traditional Bond. Maybe even less of an outlier as Craig was to begin with (a little less refined, a little rougher, etc.). Like a younger "dangerous" Colin Farrell type, but more polished. They may even audition black Bonds to drum up media attention to show they're not excluding anyone but I don't believe for a moment they were ever actually going to take the plunge into a female Bond.

They'll compensate to appease the SJWs in every other way, of course. And you know the ways. Supporting cast. LGBTQ this or that here in the periphery. Beef up Jeffrey Wright's part and so on.

My only question is... since everything since Casino Royale exists in a Kelvin Timeline-like universe where none of the other Bond movies existed... what does it mean now when we say "we're casting a new Bond"? Because before Daniel Craig we all knew it just meant a new actor was slipping into the same character and all of that history was intact. i.e., will the new actor be playing Daniel Craig's character? Will there be some in-story thing where they do, in fact, make Bond and 007 mantle that can just be handed to another person? There aren't any rules in the Bond Kelvin universe, so I dunno.

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by The Deadman

Barbara Broccoli

... That's a real name?

[The Deadman]

She loves her vegetables so much she adopted the name of one.

[AquaParade]

Broccoli...James Broccoli.

[sdp]

Yeah, I'm also more interested in seeing how they go on, I'm guessing it'll be another reboot instead of trying to continue off as if Bond has always existed which they used to do. I could see them trying something "new" to keep it alive, but doesn't now Amazon have the rights to bond movies? So I guess it depends a lot on them now. It could really go a few routes, a more "traditional" bond, just another Daniel Craig, or a radically different one.

My interest in bond is mostly because my father was a huge fan. Of course he didn't really like any of the bonds starting with Pierce Brosman though he tolerated him a bit but absolutely despised Daniel Craig, he said that wasn't James Bond. Of course he loved Sean Connery and he also liked Roger Moore. I can't remember what he thought of George Lazenby and Timothy Dalton but I don't think he disliked them.

I grew up with Goldeneye and the Pierece Brosman films but I do remember catching some reruns of the James Bond Jr cartoon. Eon films really missed the boat on not making a All Bonds movie, couldn't have been sillier than some of the Brosman films.

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

My only question is... since everything since Casino Royale exists in a Kelvin Timeline-like universe where none of the other Bond movies existed... what does it mean now when we say "we're casting a new Bond"? Because before Daniel Craig we all knew it just meant a new actor was slipping into the same character and all of that history was intact. i.e., will the new actor be playing Daniel Craig's character? Will there be some in-story thing where they do, in fact, make Bond and 007 mantle that can just be handed to another person? There aren't any rules in the Bond Kelvin universe, so I dunno.

I hate comic book sliding timelines so I always found the James Bond 007 being a mantle an awesome idea even if it's contradicted by having a bond reference something another bond did. Though if they do the mantle thing now the chances of a black/female bond could be much higher, and for James Bond that is indeed a franchise killer.

[CyberCubed]

It’ll be a new world. James Bond can’t be the same guy in the 60’s, then the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s etc. and never age.

They sort of played around with Sean Connery and Roger Moore being the same Bond but Timothy Dalton’s era already felt very different than everything that came before it with a new Moneypenny and M. And then everything that came after.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

It’ll be a new world. James Bond can’t be the same guy in the 60’s, then the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s etc. and never age.

They sort of played around with Sean Connery and Roger Moore being the same Bond but Timothy Dalton’s era already felt very different than everything that came before it with a new Moneypenny and M. And then everything that came after.

Yet, both Dalton and Brosnan were supposed to be the same Bond as Connery's and Moore's.

Yeah, it doesn't make sense and I, personally, much more prefer idea of "James Bond" being a mantle, rather than the same character, even if it breaks some continuity in the movies.

About post-Craig's Bonds - it is interesting question.

The thing is, unlike previous Bond eras, which can be clearly dated by some political stuff and styles, Craig movies do not really feel like period pieces, outside of, maybe, some of the technology. So it is not really necessary to evoke "sliding timeline" in this case.

It might prove to be necessary, if Broccoli will go with a Holyweird trash and turn Bond into woman or Black, but as long as he kept White it doesn't really needed and they can pretend that it is the same character. As for appearance and mannerisms, well Connery and Moore were nothing alike, so it is a moot point, when it comes to Bond series.


Personally I feel that it would be shameful, if Bond franchise would've ended up killed by SJW garbage. It had survived multiple recastings of main character, end of the Cold War and absurd plots about generic mad scientists, only to be potentially finished off by crazy puritans, who think that Bond is nothing, but a toxic masculinity (even though nowadays he much more refined, compared to previous iterations).
Of course, SJW-tards, can't figure out that people are not suppose to imitate a fictional character and that fiction is not a reality.

Also, I find it hilarious, that the same people who angry about Bond apparently are OK with more egregious protagonists, like Dexter. By their own warped logic, everyone who watched this series and liked main character, are already potential serial killers. What a bunch of shitfaced clowns, they are.

[sdp]

My dad would roll over in his grave if James Bond was a woman, it's everything James Bond shouldn't be. He was very passionate about the franchise, he absolutely despised Daniel Craig, it wasn't Bond for him.

A new female character inspired by Bond is a great idea however, I loved Joanna Dark:

[oldmanwinters]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

going to be black, a woman, a gay, a hispanic, or all of the above

Now that would be a trip.

[CyberCubed]

Daniel Craig does feel like the era of the mid-2000's to 2010's (which it was), due to the use of laptops, smartphones, etc. It doesn't seem that way to us now, but 15-20 years from now when the future generation looks back at the Daniel Craig Bond, it'll look as dated to them as Sean Connery and Roger Moores Bond in their eras looked to us.

[sdp]

Watching some 90s movies, they feel they could take place today, when you see the laptops you can just assume they have Windows 10 instead of Windows 98 but when they take out their humongous cellphones, it almost takes you out of the movie but it's not too bad.

All those movies that reference social media and todays culture of hashtags and whatnot today are going to get date so badly. It'll be like how kids in the 90s saw 80s afros on old movies. Now that will definitely take you out, it's like watching the future of old scifi movies like voyage to the planet of prehistoric women.