The James Bond Pierce Brosnan Era

[CosmiComic]

I actually don't have an opinion on where it should go I just knew I couldn't take whatever James Bond Daniel Craig was serving.

Oh ok. I like Craig because his era isn't too campy for the most part. But I'm curious to see where it goes after him

I'm kind of curious if NO TIME TO DIE's ending will have some effect. The trailers have teased "This one changes everything". Makes me wonder that perhaps Craig's Bond could die (Something even Fleming considered at one point) or even leave it somewhat ambigious as to his fate,(Think the opening of Skyfall or You Only Live Twice but at the end of the movie instead). The latter option could even allow for a sixth Craig film if he was ever to change his mind. (although at this point he's approaching Moore years).

It's possible. But then would they be resetting continuity, or simply making another character in the same universe called Bond?

[ChrisIII]

I suppose they could just continue the Craig continuity with a new actor no explanation as to why he looks different (younger or older) like the old films.

[CosmiComic]

I suppose they could just continue the Craig continuity with a new actor no explanation as to why he looks different (younger or older) like the old films.

That's possible. Continuity seems to be more of a major thing in this era though

[Panic]

It's possible. But then would they be resetting continuity, or simply making another character in the same universe called Bond?

I don't see them doing that. The core of the franchise is that it's an adaptation of Ian Fleming's James Bond, once you make it just a code-name the appeal is lost, imo.

[Frobisher]

I'm kind of curious if NO TIME TO DIE's ending will have some effect. The trailers have teased "This one changes everything". Makes me wonder that perhaps Craig's Bond could die (Something even Fleming considered at one point) or even leave it somewhat ambigious as to his fate,(Think the opening of Skyfall or You Only Live Twice but at the end of the movie instead). The latter option could even allow for a sixth Craig film if he was ever to change his mind. (although at this point he's approaching Moore years).

“This changes everything” always means more of the same, but with some stupid novelty that everyone will be over by the next one.

[ChrisIII]

I don't see them doing that. The core of the franchise is that it's an adaptation of Ian Fleming's James Bond, once you make it just a code-name the appeal is lost, imo.

Yeah, and the basic background/origin still kind of sticks even though it's not brought up that much in the films-orphaned, former navy (or SAS I think for Craig) etc.

[Panic]

I would have expected Bond to be former SBS, though I don't know. In the books he was a former Royal Marine Commando I believe, and these days the best of them would be seconded to the SBS.

[Castle]

I suppose they could just continue the Craig continuity with a new actor no explanation as to why he looks different (younger or older) like the old films.

I always assumed it was already a continuity with different actors since Connery that never needed addressing. although I did come up with my own theory that James Bond 007 was a code or mantle that different men have taken on when they worked for the British Secret Service.