Fixing Hollywood: The Bond Franchise Needs to Be Shaken And Stirred
Note 1: I originally wrote this essay in 2020, prior to the release of No Time to Die. While it is therefore a little dated in some spots, I think overall it still holds up incredibly well.
Note 2: The movie poster artwork for the James Bond films throughout this essay is from Matt Needle, who is absolutely brilliant. I highly encourage you to check out his stuff, much of which is for sale.
By almost any metric, the James Bond franchise has been a spectacular success. Its 24 films have generated more than $2 billion at the box office ($7 billion when adjusted for inflation). Of course beyond the economics Bond is one of the most well-established characters in pop culture over the last half-century. From iconic imagery to references that have become a part of the lexicon, Bond sits alongside Star Wars and the Marvel Cinematic Universe in terms of overall impact.
And yet…
The tread on the tires seems to be getting thin, doesn’t it? The villains, the femme fatales, the one-liners; none of the recent films has given us much to remember, except perhaps for some heavy-handed product placement. Like an agent who has spent too long in the field, the franchise seems to have slipped from potent to venerable to aged over the last decade. While the reasons for this are myriad — and we’ll go into them in some detail in this essay — I believe there is a way forward for James Bond. But it will require a different solution than what the franchise has typically resorted to: A new actor to portray the lead character. No, I’m afraid this time around it will take more than a handsome actor, or even an arsenal of Q’s gadgets, to keep the Bond franchise in rude health.
The Name’s Bond… James Bond
Before we go about fixing Bond, a little history. The character was created by British novelist Ian Fleming in 1953. Fleming wrote 12 Bond novels, others have written additional books, and you can read the rest of the backstory on Wikipedia. What’s interesting is to understand the context of Bonds’ genesis. Fleming’s signature creation is a vision of post-war Britain emerging into a new atomic age. While we know him as a globe-trotting, cosmopolitan man of adventure, Bond was also quintessentially British — smoking, drinking, eating, shooting, and womanizing his way through one dangerous mission after another. [Edit: March 1, 2023 — The James Bond novels have come under fire for their non-PC themes and are in the process of receiving a rewrite.]
The British spy novel certainly existed prior to Fleming’s work. In some respects, Bond was an update on the Bulldog Drummond character from the previous generation. Eric Ambler, whose early work included the inspiration for the highly regarded film, Topkapi, is another progenitor. But Fleming created something that hit at just the right time. The popularity of Fleming’s novels would help invigorate the spy novel genre, opening the door for Le Carre’s George Smiley, Ludlum’s Bourne (more on him later), and many others.
For most people though, it’s the silver screen Bond that they identify with. For that, we can thank Albert R. “Cubby” Broccoli and Harry Saltzman, the men behind Eon Productions.
When Bond hit the silver screen in the early-60s, Britain was on the cusp of becoming arguably the world’s greatest exporter of pop culture as The British Invasion, led by The Beatles, would soon hit American shores. With ‘Cool Britannia’ starting to emerge, Bond, the film star, became a more suave, sophisticated version of the original literary character, and made Sean Connery a household name.
In much the same way that Star Wars set the tone for science fiction films to come after, James Bond effectively fixed the template for the spy genre. The Man from U.N.C.L.E. and The Saint (starring a pre-Bond Roger Moore) being just two examples.
And now here were are, back in the 2020s and it’s time to do an accounting. What does the Bond franchise, despite its seeming creative frailties, have going for it? Quite a bit, actually.
The Bond franchise has an incredible list of assets. In many cases, they’ve been used to great effect, but there is often room for improvement and updating.
The Bond Theme
Yes, the Mission: Impossible theme music is iconic too. But look at this lineup of artists that have sung a Bond movie theme song:
Carly Simon — Nobody Does it Better
Adele — Skyfall
Sheena Easton — For Your Eyes Only
Duran Duran — A View to a Kill
Paul McCartney — Live and Let Die
And of course, the incomparable Shirley Bassey — Goldfinger, Moonraker, and Diamonds are Forever
And those are the ones that were classics. Also on the list: Madonna, Tina Turner, Gladys Knight, and Sheryl Crow. Incredible.
Predictably, they’ve decided to enlist Billie Eilish for No Time To Die in an attempt to capture the youth audience.
I would have tried something that goes against the grain, while still acknowledging the legacy and heritage of the Bond title song.
A duet would afford the opportunity to pair a current talent with a more established one, thematically connecting the history of the franchise while at the same time looking to the future. Perhaps even more important than the artists, get a top-notch producer who could artistically weave in motifs from some of the old Bond classics.
Quotes
With the possible exception of Star Wars, no franchise has lines more iconic than Bond. “Bond… James Bond,” and “Shaken, not stirred,” are both parts of the pop culture lexicon.
The Bond Girls
It’s 2020 and much about The Bond Girl is problematic, starting with the moniker, Bond Girl. In recent years the franchise has really struggled in this area. The Bond character is, to put it bluntly, a womanizer. They’ve tried to shift this in recent films by marrying him (even giving him a child in the upcoming film), having women rebuff his advances, and by giving female characters greater agency. This last approach can be seen quite clearly in the trailer for the upcoming entry in the franchise.
This is an area where a light touch is necessary. Steven Soderbergh is great at this. The scene in Ocean’s 11 when George Clooney and Julia Roberts meet for the first time on-screen is fantastic because they are so clearly equals. Danny knows he’s the most charming guy on the planet and Tess sees right through his bullshit. In another Soderbergh example, the sexual chemistry is palpable between Clooney and J.Lo in Out of Sight. Does it help to have actors as charismatic as Clooney, Roberts, and Lopez? Of course, but this is James Bond, whoever is in the role is going to be pretty damn charismatic.
We need to see more banter, and not of the cringe-worthy one-liner variety (“No more foreplay.”). The interplay between James and his female counterpart doesn’t need to be drenched in pathos, nor should it shy away from Bond’s playboy proclivities. Just lighten it up. There’s nothing wrong with two consenting adults hooking up. Just make it playful, make it an even match, and make it something they both equally want and enjoy.
No need to give these women eye-roll-worthy names, or make them nuclear physicists, just allow them to give as good as they get.
Memorable Villains
Dr. No. Blofeld. Scaramanga. Hugo Drax. Le Chiffre. A true Rogue’s Gallery. Then add in henchman Jaws, Odd Job, Nick Nack, May Day, and the organization SPECTRE.
But the names above would have been, for the most part, the same names had the list been made 20 years ago. Even the talents of Javier Bardem and Christoph Waltz couldn’t elevate mediocre storytelling and characterization to create villains that broke out beyond the film. [As I was writing this I thought, ‘Oh, Phillip Seymour Hoffman was great as the villain in that one movie! Which one was it? Yeah, Mission: Impossible III.]
Villains are hard. They have to be powerful enough to be credible as a threat to world peace, but not so powerful that they can’t be taken down by the end of the movie by one man. Maybe in the history of modern franchise cinema Darth Vader and The Joker are the only two successful examples.
So let’s go in a slightly different direction here.
While several of Bond’s top villains may have had female hench… people(?), we really haven’t seen Bond have to match up with a memorable female lead villain. It can’t be for lack of good candidates. Charlize Theron, Thandie Newton, Regina King, Cate Blanchette, Tilda Swinton, Lucy Liu… any one of those (and a dozen more I could have named) would make fascinating Bond villains.
I’d love to see Bond go up against a villain where every confrontation wasn’t a proxy to see who had the biggest dick. Would Bond be wrong-footed by a female villain, making a critical error in underestimating her, or not understanding her motivations? Almost assuredly. Of course, there could be added sexual tension, but I don’t know that you’d even necessarily need or want that. Just give me a straight-up antagonist who is a badass in her own right.
You could make up a completely new character, you could use a previous Bond Girl — some former assistant to a chief villain that Bond had dismissed, who is now back to seek revenge on Bond. You could gender-switch and reboot a classic Bond villain — Dr. No doesn’t have to be a man. The point is, you’ve got plenty of options here to bring a previously unexplored dynamic to the franchise.
Allow Myself to Introduce… Myself
Perhaps the greatest achievement of all was the franchise’s ability to switch in new actors to play the lead role. Sure, there are people who were #TeamConnery and others who were #TeamMoore back in the day. But the point is, both were successful. As were Pierce Brosnan and Daniel Craig. Timothy Dalton less so, and we don’t need to mention George Lazenby.
Now compare Bond to his two closet analogs, the modern Mission: Impossible and Jason Bourne franchises. The former seems stuck with a now 57-year old Tom Cruise, while the latter’s attempt to slot in Jeremy Renner as the franchise lead was a damp squib.
It speaks to the over-riding strength of the Bond franchise that they’ve been able to make these movies going on seven decades now.
Death by a Thousand Cuts
And yet…
It just doesn’t feel like the Bond franchise is firing on all cylinders. Perhaps when your leading man says he’d rather ‘slash his wrists’ than play Bond again, you’re justified in thinking maybe something just isn’t right.
Any franchise that’s been around this long is going to have its ups and downs — just ask the folks who run Star Wars. Bond has found itself caught between Scylla and Charybdis to some degree. On one hand, the Austin Powers series, by poking fun at Bond, forced the franchise away from some of its lighter tendencies, as noted in this Ringer piece (it’s worth noting that Bond had already been parodied via Get Smart! and 1967’s Casino Royale, starring David Niven-the actor Fleming had originally wanted to play the role of 007, and others). The Kingsman franchise was also somewhat of a tweak to the nose of Bond, willing to go places the PG-rated 007 franchise would not.
Then in 2002, along came the Jason Bourne franchise with The Bourne Identity, which did away with the ridiculous set pieces and stunts to show a stripped-down, raw secret agent, and audiences responded. But Bond couldn’t exactly decide to double down on the set piece, because Tom “I do my own stunts” Cruise snatched that territory with a near sociopathic level of commitment in the Mission: Impossible series. Everywhere Bond turned, doors were closing.
Add to this mix filmmaker Christopher Nolan, who, with Inception (and from the looks of the trailer, Tenet as well) has claimed ownership of a sort of highbrow, semi-science fiction thriller/heist/action picture genre. Before you dismiss my inclusion of Nolan here, read this piece in which he cites the influence the Bond films had on him as a youth and how Tenet is most definitely a spy film.
The Bond franchise, which could once lay claim to almost all of these different genre film styles, now sees itself being outdone in just about every one of these categories. Now a Bond film can’t outdo M: I on over-the-top stunts, can’t outdo Bourne on gritty fights; can’t be too funny, can’t be too violent, can’t be too smart, and has to tread very carefully around areas of misogyny and colonialism.
No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die!
So, what options are left on the table for Mr. Bond? The franchise appears to have run its course. Unable to go back to its roots, and prevented from pivoting in any meaningful direction by an adherence to its own legacy.
The truth is, the blueprint for the future of the Bond franchise is not only evident, but it’s also already been validated.
The Blueprint
So here we are. The 25th Bond film, No Time to Die, is due out later in 2020 (COVID issues notwithstanding). After that Daniel Craig is almost assuredly gone, so it’s a great time to start fresh. The next film can be used as the launch pad for what EON should have done a long time ago: create the Greater Bond Universe (GBU). What is the GBU, and how does it work? Glad you asked.
The GBU expands the Bond franchise beyond the singular 007 films while keeping those films, and the key players, firmly at the center of it all. But by expanding beyond 007 we address several issues.
While the first post-Daniel Craig Bond film will introduce a new lead actor, it can also introduce new characters. Specifically new Double O agents. This article from CinemaBlend looks at potential contenders for the Bond role but makes a nice list of potential Double O agents. They could be worked into Bond 26 in small roles:
Bond gets a debrief from 002, who is just back from the field. Bond shares a flight to Zurich with 009 and they must deal with some challenge (cue set piece). Just one or two scenes with other Double O agents is all we need here — this doesn’t need to be a buddy cop movie.
But these can’t be the Bond equivalent of a Red Shirt or a Double O agent who does a heel turn (they did that already with Sean Bean and Javier Bardem). No, these Double O agents will play a significant role in the GBU, and thus will need to be played by significant actors. This presents an opportunity to widen the Bond universe from both a storytelling standpoint and a casting one as well.
Remember all the hubbub around the idea of Idris Elba as Bond? And remember all the furor around the idea from some corners of the Internet? Idris does.
Would Idris be great as Bond? I think so (perhaps more so 10 years ago, but the dude is in great shape). No, I think he should stay away from the role for many of the reasons laid out here. In essence, it boils down to I don’t think Idris (or anyone else) should try to fill the role of 007 because they shouldn’t have to deal with the baggage of being the first (Black/Asian/Female/Gay/etc.) Bond. They should be able to create a new character that has the distinction of enriching the GBU on their merits as new creations of these talented actors.
But Idris Elba should definitely be part of the GBU. You know who else should? Sonoyo Mizuno. Jodie Comer. Dev Patel. Lupita Nyong’o. Henry Golding. This isn’t a social justice warrior move, it’s just an honest portrayal of British society. Yes, you should also have Richard Madden. And Gwendoline Christie. The point is, fill the other Double O roles with actors who are smart and different, and charismatic in their own right. Why? Because those actors deserve it. They’ve proven they can handle roles with depth, yes, but also ones that are physically demanding.
At the end of the first post-Craig 007 movie, the idea can be further teased in a post-credits scene in which M thanks Bond for once again saving the world. As Bond takes his leave, off for a well-earned vacation, 004 walks into M’s office, and is told of their next assignment. “Coming Soon.” Fade to black.
“Wait a second, this sounds awfully familiar. Aren’t you just ripping off the Marvel Cinematic Universe here, with M standing in for Nick Fury?”
In a word? Yes.
Kevin Feige has cracked the code on orchestrating a modern franchise. He’s done what DC has failed to do. He’s done what Univeral’s Dark Universe couldn’t (or at least hasn’t yet, let’s see what happens after The Invisible Man). Honestly, there are very few franchises that could follow this formula, but the GBU is perfectly suited for it. It has a tremendous history and a lot of earned loyalty. It has multiple characters that can act as thread, stitching the Universe together — M, Q, Moneypenny, and a whole host of recurring allies. It has multiple villains that can be utilized across the GBU.
So, if GBU Year One starts with Bond 26, you can follow that up with a 004 movie in Year Two. Year Three features two movies (we have some momentum now) with 008 and 002. That brings us to Year Four and we return to 007. But now the stakes have been raised considerably since we last saw James leaving for vacation. The villain we met in Year Two has only increased in power despite the best efforts of the other Double Os who did their own heroic work to negate the villain’s plans. Now we get back to seeing Bond’s POV on this great threat that we, the audience, have grown to know through three other films. Bond 27 ends with the villain all but defeating Bond, setting up Year Five in which multiple Double O agents will team up with Bond to defeat the villain.
The Greater Bond Universe Timeline: Phase One
- 2020: No Time to Die (Bond 25 — final Daniel Craig Bond)
- 2022: GBU Year One: Bond 26
- 2023: GBU Year Two: 004 film
- 2024: GBU Year Three: 002 film, 008 film
- 2025: GBU Year Four: Bond 27
- 2026: GBU Year Five: Team up film, featuring 002, 004, 008, 008
Yes, it’s the MCU, I know, we’ve gone over this already. It’s a formula that works.
“But people aren’t going to go see a movie with a Double O agent they don’t know?”
To that I reply with four words: Guardians of the Galaxy. I’m an OG comic book nerd and six years ago I could tell you there was a Marvel character called Star-Lord (I literally didn’t know until right now that it was spelled with a hyphen), and there was a talking raccoon. That’s what I knew about Guardians of the Galaxy. Since then two GotG movies have made north of $700 million combined. Want another example? What sort of massive, general audience following did Black Panther have before the movie came out and blew the doors off everyone? And it’s not like Chadwick Boseman and Ryan Coogler had the name recognition of DiCaprio and Spielberg. But they are both incredibly talented, knew how to create and present smart material, and they added in all kinds of other amazing actors and it worked. You’re telling me the right director can’t make a movie within the Greater Bond Universe with a known actor and people won’t go to see it?
So, this can work. Lots of variables? Of course. You’ll need great scripts, the rights actors, and equally talented people behind the scenes, but conceptually the GBU could rival Marvel’s efforts in this arena.
Let’s Make a Movie
Ok, let’s take it one step further. Here’s a brief outline for putting my suggestions into action for Bond 26, the first post-Daniel Craig Bond film…
Bond 26 Working Title: Penumbra.
We’re going to go the Skyfall, GoldenEye, Goldfinger, Thunderball, Moonraker route of the vague, one-word title.
Cold Open: It’s Formula One weekend in Monte Carlo, and James Bond is in town. He’s tracking an international arms dealer whose yacht is currently anchored in the famous Port Hercules. Bond makes his move, but the arms dealer narrowly escapes, hopping in an amazing car and racing along the cobblestone streets. The ever-tenacious Bond gives chase, commandeering the nearest vehicle, which just happens to be an Aston Martin F1 race car (yes, the iconic Bond car is actually just about to enter Formula One). Of course Bond can drive an F1 car and he gives chase along the winding roads of Monte Carlo. Much stunt driving ensues. Before the villain can return to his yacht and escape, Bond catches him.
Cue music…
Theme song: Performed by Alicia Keys and Simon Le Bon. That’s right we’re pairing a modern songstress with a great voice with a throwback to one of Bond’s great songs, the eponymous title track to A View to a Kill. We get Mark Ronson to produce the track.
The Plot: We open with Bond being debriefed by M, played by Ralph Fiennes for continuity's sake. In essence, M congratulates Bond for once again saving the world from certain catastrophe. Bond has earned a vacation and he’s off to the Seychelles as, upon exiting M’s office, a new agent, 004, played by Emily Blunt, enters to receive her assignment. They exchange charged smiles and knowing looks. What’s the history there? Bond of course can’t help himself and lingers outside M’s office after casually leaving the door ajar.
M tells 004 that her assignment is in Dubai, where a mysterious figure known only as Carmichael has gotten a hold of the thought-to-be-forgotten plans for the Solex Agitator. As 004 asks how the plans were acquired, we cut to Bond, who flashes back to his adventure in The Man With the Golden Gun the film that introduced the Solex Agitator. It’s a shot-for-shot recreation of that film, but with the new Bond putting Nick Nack in a wicker basket aboard the boat (we don’t exactly see Herve Villachaize as Nick Nack, it’s shot so you can’t identify the actor portraying the character). Then we see Nick Nack escape when the boat arrives at port.
That’s right, we’re bringing back a character from Bond’s past — Nick Nack, the sidekick to Scaramanga in The Man with the Golden Gun, memorably played by Herve Villachaize. For Penumbra, Nick Nack will be played by, who else? Peter Dinklage. It warrants mentioning that Dinklage played Villachaize in an HBO movie in 2018, so this casting certainly isn’t a stretch.
We learn in Penumbra that Nick Nack was more than just a sideshow curiosity in the original film. He was in fact deeply committed to the Solex Agitator project and felt it could be used for good, as originally intended. But after two decades of trying, Nick Nack can get no one to buy into his dream, as countless energy companies see it as a threat to their status quo. Finally, he believes he has found his patron in Carmichael, who unbeknownst to Nick Nack, has nefarious plans for the device.
Nick Nack believes it was Bond who corrupted Scaramanga, who only used the Solex Agitator to protect himself from Bond. Nick Nack believes the world would have already solved the energy/climate crisis if not for Bond.
Bond follows the trail to Dubai, eventually connecting with 004. We learn more about their past. They fight off Carmichael’s security forces as they run around the city-state. Before they can capture Nick Nack and Carmichael, the two villains escape.
Bond and 004 then head to Ankara where they rendezvous with 008 (played by Robert Pattinson) as they track the villains. By this point Bond is putting on a full-court press on 004, but is being rebuffed. While 004 and 008 decide to follow a lead together (wink wink) elsewhere, Bond is left to lick his wounds. At a local hot spot in Ankara Bond meets a mysterious woman known simply as Eclipse (played by Thandie Newton). The electricity is crackling between the two of them. Bond is on the hunt, and is a tad desperate after striking out with 004. Eclipse can smell the desperation on Bond and she lets him know it, but still suggests Bond join her for a nightcap. The next morning Eclipse is gone, and Bond is left with nothing but rumpled sheets around him.
After trips to Budapest and Vienna, Bond, by himself once again, returns to the United Arab Emirates. This time it’s Qatar for a showdown with Nick Nack. James falls for a clever trap, is saved by 004 and 008, and then takes care of Nick Nack for good. But before he can expire, Bond demands to know where Carmichael is. Nick Nack smiles and with his dying breath he mouths, “Eclipse.” A look of realization and horror spreads across Bond’s face.
And just like that we’ve taken elements of classic Bond, added some new twists, and new characters, and set up the next movie for either 004 or 008 (but ultimately both). We’ve also built a new type of Bond villain, one who will be around, perhaps only in the shadows, for several movies until her big moment down the road when all the Double O agents join forces to bring her down once and for all.
I hope you enjoyed this essay. If so, I encourage you to read the works of Matthew Ball, who inspired me to write this with his work, especially and specifically his Marveliad series.
If your pop culture interests lean more towards highbrow science fiction, you may like my essay, The Aesthetics of Science Fiction, What Does Sci-Fi Look Like After Cyberpunk?
