Be warned, dear Reader, for today I will drop a few spoilers from the latest James Bond film, No Time To Die. So if you haven't seen it yet and intend to, then I suggest you stop reading here.
Now on to business.
The big bombshell (heh) of Bond's death at the end of No Time leaves no doubt in our minds that this is the end of actor Daniel Craig in the role of 007. I believe the demise of the character was part of the deal to bring the reluctant Craig back for one more "romp". It's been a long time since there's been an actor shift in the Bond role. Casino Royale was Craig's debut as the super-spy, and that was released in 2006. Sixteen long years... not that very many Bond movies came our way during that time; long lapses in between some of the films really stretched things out for poor little rich boy Daniel. The latest, No Time To Die, is the fifth and final of the Craig-era movies.
Who will take over the starring role? I know that a handful of actors' names have been floating around the rumour mill for at least a few years, but as talented and charismatic as these guys are, there are logistical problems with them... for me. For example: Idris Elba, would be great, but he's nearly age 50 - that's fine now, but how many movies would we get out of him... a few, tops? Same age issue with Tom Hardy, though he looks capable right now. But when an actor nears 60, things become problematic in the highly physical role. We need someone maybe in their early-to-mid 40's, at the oldest. And perhaps mid-30's at the youngest. Bond is supposed to be a seasoned field agent, with some serious missions under his belt, not to mention a prior career in the navy. So a new actor must at least look old enough to have those experiences on his resume and yet be young enough to be able to manage four, five, maybe even six movies as 007.
Henry Cavill could be a good candidate for the 007 role, even age-wise at just under 40. I didn't even know he was British until this moment, and thought his assumed American blood would be dead wrong for the part. So there's a maybe. But... he's very famous, and when I see his face, I think Superman. Hm.
Irish actor Cillian Murphy, who I know from the series Peaky Blinders, might fit the bill, too. Tom Hiddleston, of the BBC series The Night Manager, also has solid cred. Even Richard Madden, of the show, Bodyguard, could wear the tux and holster. There are others on the various prospective lists out there, but either I don't know anything about them or even care. I feel that a lesser known actor would be the best choice for 007 going forward. Easier for him to be accepted as Bond and not have audiences picturing him as a previous character. Some of the above-mentioned actors could do that without much problem.
But I find it even more interesting to ponder the future of the secondary characters in this long-running franchise. There's only a small core group of recurring characters, some of whom only show up from time to time, while others appear in just about every film. Bond's boss, M, is a constant, as are M's secretary Miss Moneypenny and Q, head of MI6's gadget research and development. James' CIA counterpart and old friend Felix Leiter appeared in a number of the earlier movies and was brought back in the Craig era. Evil villain Blofeld was also resurrected for the modern films after a long hiatus from the franchise.
As those who saw No Time To Die know, both Leiter and Blofeld met their demise. So whatever happens next, whether a clean reboot or a "continuation" of sorts, neither of those actors can appear again. I mean, they're not superhuman. And neither is Bond (but close). It only makes sense then that new actors are used in whatever revamped world of 007 we see next.
I thought that the casting of supporting actors during the Craig era of Bond films was great. Judy Dench convincingly carried on as M from her stint in the Pierce Brosnan movies. The veteran thespian brought the goods as a tough yet motherly head of MI6, and she gracefully passed the torch to another fine actor, Ralph Fiennes. I have a problem with losing Fiennes as M so soon; I think he is excellent in the part and 'ought to continue. He's a likable and more than capable version of M. As for a replacement, I haven't given it any thought, and don't really care to. There are a lot of elder actors who would be suitable for the role.
Same goes for Q, ever the lovable gadget-master of the series. The cranky old version of Q in Desmond Llewelyn managed to charm audiences for nearly four full decades, suffering the parade of Bond actors who came and went. I grew to enjoy the quirky fun that even his successor, relative youngster Ben Whishaw, brought to the role. Again, since he's appeared precious few times in the Bond films, why not keep him on? I like Whishaw's take on the Q character, with his modern lifestyle and youthful nerdy-tech tendencies.
While the Miss Moneypenny character plays a very minor role in the film series, she feels like part of the Bond family, and so it seems like a piece of the puzzle is missing when she doesn't make even a tiny appearance. She has been a constant in the world of 007, exchanging teasing affection and repartee with Bond. Her mocking displays of a schoolgirl crush on James are endearing, especially when we glimpse her strong feelings for him.
Moneypenny has been portrayed by only a few actors in the nearly sixty years of cinematic Bond, mostly thanks to Lois Maxwell, who kept MI6 offices running smoothly for over twenty years (14 films!). After Maxwell, someone different came on board with each subsequent Bond actor. The Craig-era Moneypenny was played by the cool, fun, and lovely Naomie Harris. I'd like to see Harris remain in the role, for we have only just gotten to know her a little in her few stints in the Bond movies. Let's keep her on board.
And last but not least, Ernst Stavro Blofeld, super villain. Most of his appearances were in the earliest films, during the 60's, though we were teased along by his return to the last two films. And I, for one, was let down. Actor Christoph Waltz was underused in the role in these franchise entries. He wasn't given much to work with, and despite Waltz's strong talent elsewhere, he could not make this new world Blofeld convincing. Sort of a limp noodle portrayal, underwhelming, and barely a hint of the sinister, maniacal master criminal we came to know in early iterations. I blame the directing and writing departments most. His dialogue and even his hidden lair seemed slap-dash. Waltz's delivery and manner injected nothing of substance, either. Maybe if he had lived (not died in No Time), his character might have become more colourful and demented. But nope, Waltz is gone. Now, if the producers care to bring Blofeld back, they must rustle up some new talent... and hopefully a more engaging version of the character.
I was extremely nervous about Daniel Craig when he first took the 007 mantle, but despite his very non-Bond look as far as I was concerned, he gradually grew into the role, and bothered me far less. Some great movies, to be sure, but he never completely satisfied me as a fan of 007. I am just as anxious about the studio's next choice for Bond. Not at all happy with No Time To Die's last act, I hope the franchise can find its feet again and pull disappointed long-time fans back in with a good fresh cast and solid stories that'll throw off the silly notion that family and parenthood belong in a Bond film. Nope. I want escapist, dangerous spy thrillers that take me away from ordinary real world drudgery.
No comments:
Post a Comment