Daniel Craig wrapped up his Bond duties with NO TIME TO DIE, — SPOILER ALERT coming up, if you don’t want to know certain plot points of that film skeep on down to the next picture and avoid the next few lines of typing that are about to come out of my fingers, okay? You was warned.
Daniel Craig took over for Pierce Brosnan who was someone I thought would make a good Bond but his scripts were lousy and he was doing an imitation of Roger Moore. Here’s the thing with Bond, if you take the role make it yours. Pay no attention to the folks who have come before you. Brosnan took over for Timothy Dalton who was really good in his first Bond film and then had an awful script for his second and last Bond film. Dalton took over for Roger Moore who aged out at 59 when he left the role. Moore was a good SAINT in the British TV Series and that’s essentially how he played James Bond, because he ignored Connery who had come before him and established the role of the super spy. In between Connery came George Lazenby who was only 28 at the time he played bond in 1969 but he came across a lot older so it worked, and he really was pretty good. He unfortunately got an ego and angered the producers so he was out after one go round and Connery was back for one last hurrah.
Sean Connery was the first big screen James Bond starting with 1962’s DOCTOR NO and for the most part he was perfect. He started to get a little doughy, and his toupee was looking the worse for wear by 1971’s DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER but if you stick with GOLDFINGER and THUNDERBALL he was in top form.
But back to Craig, he wrapped up his last Bond film — and for the record Craig’s first film CASINO ROYALE and his follow up QUANTUM OF SOLACE were Connery Level, they each got slightly weaker as his series went on . Taking us to his last film where he died at the end of it. Not died in a way that maybe he could come back, he was blown up with nuclear missiles, so yeah, he’s not coming back, but James Bond is, so that presents an interesting question right? How?
Well there are theories out there that James Bond is a code name, the same way his boss M is a code name and we’ve had multiple actors playing M over the course of 25 films. They could also just ignore the fact that he died and bring in the new James Bond, to which we get to the point of this post— finally!
Idris Elba in a still from 'Luther' (Photo| IMDb)
There is a lot of talk about who the next Bond is going to be, and rumor is they’re going to announce it possibly before this blog see’s print— but as I write this a choice has yet to be made. For my money the ONLY choice is Idris Elba. He’s got the looks, he’s got the gravitas, he looks like he can handle himself and I honestly can’t see anyone else stepping in after Craig.
There is talk about a woman playing Bond, that works for me if we go with the idea of it being a code name, but then why not just make a new character and put them in a series, like UNDERWORLD right? It’s got a female lead and she’s great.
There is also a rumor Aaron Taylor Johnson— I might have that name wrong— is up for the new film— that’ll end my tenure as a Bond fan and I will never have to pay to see it in theaters again.
The negative flack towards Elba is that he’s too old at 51. I disagree. Roger Moore started as Bond at 46 and he carried it very well. Times have changed, Elba looks great for his age and as long as he stays in shape it’ll work. I also think Bond has to be someone who has been around, he has a lot of experience, he’s been through the worst of it and come out in fine form which is how he earned his 00 rank. Put a little boy like Pattison in it and you’re making the role laughable.
I also think Bond works best as a character set in the 1960s, Cold War, Russian Spies, the fashion of the time, I’d love to see Bond as a period piece. Batman and Superman work better as 1940s characters than they do as contemporary. Sherlock Holmes should be tail end of the 19th Century. It just makes sense.
I’m all in on Elba. Fingers crossed.