Who's going to replace Daniel Craig as the next James Bond? (2 Viewers)

I’ve always felt that 007 wasn’t just one person but a designation for the top agent. When one dies, another takes his identity and continues on. Otherwise you couldn’t have an agent in his 30s battling russia in the 80s and another the same age still working in 2020.
I was behind this theory as well, but I believe it was shot down as Inaccurate. But it gives you way more flexibility.
 
I’ve always felt that 007 wasn’t just one person but a designation for the top agent. When one dies, another takes his identity and continues on. Otherwise you couldn’t have an agent in his 30s battling russia in the 80s and another the same age still working in 2020.
If memory serves me right, the designation is 00. I remember references to other 00's in some Bond movies. But even if 007 is the only designation, the name James Bond is not, and Bond has a fleshed out background story.
 
Actually, why not have Daniel Radcliffe? He can do it the same way he did Weird Al.

With the lone exception of Craig's "Casino Royale," Bond films have been satirizing themselves ever since Pierce Brosnan took the role, so why not just grab Radcliffe and go full satire? I mean, they just killed Bond in the last film, so why are talking about who will play a man that's dead? How can it be anything but satire at this point?
Look, I don’t know this Daniel Radcliffe person you’re speaking of, so.

His mama named him Harry, Imma call him Harry. :mad:
 
And a drunk falcon/clown emoji collector:

About the rumors of casting a non-white as Bond; James Bond is white, has been white since the beginning, and should remain white. If producers want to make a film about a non-white MI-6 agent, then change the code to 00-something else and call him something else, and they could use the end of the last film (Bond dying) to transition to the new agent.
I don’t think they really have to retire the number, so to speak. I believe Craig made a similar comment about pivoting to a woman.

I understand why it may be an emoji collection post, but I think it does make some sense in a “make it your own” way.

Personally, I don’t care either way if you retire 007 and use another agent, or just give the 007 identifier to someone else, regardless of gender or ethnicity.
 
If memory serves me right, the designation is 00. I remember references to other 00's in some Bond movies. But even if 007 is the only designation, the name James Bond is not, and Bond has a fleshed out background story.
Yes, in fact, a couple of other 00s appear in a couple of the Connery films, maybe one of the Moore films, but I don't think another 00 has been in any of the films since the Timothy Dalton one that starts with the sabotaged exercise on Gibraltar (The Living Daylights).
 
humint has been largely supplanted by elint, biometrics and surveillance, and reaper drones

bond is now dead, and he and any replacements are irrelevant

r.i.p., pls
 
Yes, in fact, a couple of other 00s appear in a couple of the Connery films, maybe one of the Moore films, but I don't think another 00 has been in any of the films since the Timothy Dalton one that starts with the sabotaged exercise on Gibraltar (The Living Daylights).
Wasn’t 006 in Goldeneye
 
It was meant as a joke. Pascal seems to be everywhere these days.
He falls into the same category as Idris Elba although a few years younger and I think the Last of Us is very much going to end up being the "role of a lifetime" that defines Pascal's career maybe moreso then how Oberyn Martel was his career, "breakthrough" role and he kept up the momentum on Narcos for three seasons.

Great, all-around, highly-talented actor and even a bit underrated, as it took him nearly twenty years to rise up the difficult, arduous pole of Hollywood stardom with guest and supporting roles in numerous T.V series and movies. Worked his arse off for years and I'm glad he got his big breaks finally. He's one of those people you're glad and happy for him that he succeeded not just in Hollywood but in life in general.
 
Which is one of the reasons the whole film series has become a joke of itself. At some point, they should have just stuck to being in the 60s/70s instead of this non-aging character who became increasingly cardboard, uninteresting, and without any semblance of reality. Sean Connery was iconic, then Roger Moore pretty much destroyed the character entirely. Timothy Dalton returned to the character Connery had played, but the Broccolis were so eager to cash in on Pierce Brosnan's fame, they returned us (and even worse) to the ridiculous Moore version.
Casino Royale was an attempt to return to the original character, but the scripts after it were so bad it didn't matter.

Yatman, I'd take a "series reboot" returned to the Cold War era over some unexplained "resurrection" of Bond with a different face continuing the nonsensical barrage of "blow up things then recomb my hair" that we've gotten for so many years.
I think the idea of keeping the series in the 60/70s would be great. The “innovations” used in weapons and spy equipment of the period is more entertaining than the sci fi stuff of today.
 
Yes, in fact, a couple of other 00s appear in a couple of the Connery films, maybe one of the Moore films, but I don't think another 00 has been in any of the films since the Timothy Dalton one that starts with the sabotaged exercise on Gibraltar (The Living Daylights).
You had 006 (Sean Bean) teaming up with 007 (Bronson) in the opening scene of Goldeneye. In fact he became the main villain.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom