Killing off Daniel Craig's iteration of 007 would pave the way for a complete James Bond reboot. There's no question that the Craig era has revitalized James Bond for a modern audience. After the Pierce Brosnan movies' steep decline culminated in Die Another Day, widely considered one of the weakest Bond adventures in history, a fresh approach was needed. Casino Royale couldn't have been more different to its predecessor, trading in the silliness and punny gags for an intense realism that grounded Bond in a murkier, bloodier world of international espionage. Over the next 15 years, that tone would be carried forward by Quantum of Solace, Skyfall, and Spectre, with No Time To Die set for release in late 2020.
Despite a positive reception overall, the Daniel Craig Bond movies haven't been a unanimous success, with Quantum of Solace in particular falling foul of fans and critics, but despite firing a few duds, the excitement ahead of No Time To Die is palpable. The 25th James Bond offering comes from Cary Fukunaga after original director, Danny Boyle, stepped away from the project, but even after such disruption, a trailer featuring Léa Seydoux's Madeleine Swann and Christoph Waltz's Blofeld (both of whom debuted in Spectre) attracted considerable acclaim. Aside from the familiar quartet of Bond, Q, M and Moneypenny, No Time To Die will also feature Rami Malek as Safin, the main villain of the piece, and Lashana Lynch as Nomi, a rookie double-0 agent.
Unfortunately, that's almost all fans know for sure about No Time To Die at the time of writing, with speculation and theory left to fill the gaps. One recurring rumor claims that Daniel Craig's Bond will father a child in No Time To Die (statistically, it's probably about time) but the most prominent suggestion is that 007 will actually be killed off in a shocking, revolutionary move for the franchise. Although the death of James Bond would certainly ruffle feathers, Eon would have an easier time hitting the rest button ahead of James Bond 26.
No Time To Die Could Kill Off Daniel Craig's James Bond
The death flags are very much out for Daniel Craig's James Bond, but the biggest omen is how fitting a hero's death would be for the current Bond from a narrative perspective. Compared to previous Bond actors, Craig's run of films has been far more self-contained, charting 007 on his overarching journey from a beginner in Casino Royale to a creaking veteran in Spectre. Bond films of yore would traditionally begin with the lead character fully-formed, even if a new actor was making their debut in the role. Since 2005, however, 007 has been a separate character, with Casino Royale a clear "chapter one" in a broader tale about morality, purpose and duty. In No Time To Die, Bond is retired and replaced, an aging relic in a fast-moving world of younger agents, leaving him two possible final chapters: a happy retirement, or a glorious death on the battlefield.
Everything in the past four James Bond movies points towards the latter. From the more human and fallible portrayal of 007 to the tragic demise of Judi Dench's M, the old image of Bond as an unkillable superhero is long gone, replaced with a figure who bleeds more, hurts longer and falls harder than even before. Even the No Time To Die trailer alludes to Bond's mortality, casting a reflective tone on 007 as he heads out to put that famous license to kill to use one last time. And the very fact that Bond comes out of retirement at all proves what other characters in Craig's era have repeatedly made clear - for a man like James, a peaceful twilight in the Italian hills with a beautiful woman simply isn't possible.
If the rumors of Bond spawning a 007 Jr. prove true, this would play neatly into the old spy's death. Bond has traditionally been seen in somewhat of a selfish, self-glorified light, but much like Tony Stark in Avengers: Endgame, fatherhood has a habit of hammering out those traits, potentially fueling Bond to make the ultimate sacrifice.
The Problem With James Bond Continuing Without Killing Off Daniel Craig's 007
Not only would the death of Daniel Craig's 007 make sense in the context of the current film series, it would also benefit the future of the franchise and whichever actor settles their backside into the Aston Martin next. As mentioned above, the continuity of the Craig era has been stronger than with any previous actor. Modern audiences are geared much more towards serialized storytelling than the multiplex patrons of decades past. Removing one Bond actor only to parachute in another with no acknowledgement of the switch doesn't work anymore. In our time of shared universes and infinite sequels, continuity reigns supreme. When Craig finally hangs up his Walther PPK, it's highly unlikely that Idris Elba will suddenly appear, introduce himself as James Bond, and begin chatting with Ben Whishaw and Naomie Harris like being retired and having blond hair was all one big dream.
Whether Daniel Craig's character lives or not in No Time To Die, the next film will surely take place in a separate chronology to avoid any inconsistencies or retcons. Once upon a time, the James Bond franchise was a series of isolated adventures with very little in the way of connective tissue, outside of recurring characters and small references to past missions. The pitfall of telling an intermingled 5-film arc is that once that story comes to an end, a full reboot is the only way forward. As much as Bond's death would bring closure for 007 himself after a lifetime serving in the field, the audience would also feel a sense of finality as the British flag drapes over Bond's coffin, justifying the long journey viewers have taken since the Casino Royale days.
Why It's Easier To Reboot Bond If 007 Is Killed In No Time To Die
Just because the James Bond franchise looks set for a reboot after No Time To Die, that doesn't necessarily mean 007 himself couldn't enjoy a happy ending. The final moments of No Time To Die might see Bond, Swann and the couple's genetically-advantaged child settle down in a pleasant Scottish cottage having killed off all their enemies and left MI6 behind for good, ending the Craig era on a positive note before casting a new actor and starting completely afresh with film 26. The problem with this feel-good ending is that it doesn't quite offer the same clean slate that 007's death would.
If Britain's most famous secret agent is still alive when the credits roll on No Time To Die, fans will inevitably have questions about the future of the franchise. The old debate about "James Bond" being a code name would rear its head, audiences might anticipate the new Bond seeking out Craig's older 007 for help, and confusion would reign over whether the events of the new film are taking place within the same timeline as the previous series, because these are all techniques blockbusters use regularly in 2020. And while whoever takes over from Daniel Craig will inevitably have to endure comparisons to their predecessor, the ghost of 007 would loom even larger if the prospect of Craig's cameo return was hanging in the air.
Killing Daniel Craig's James Bond maps out the future of the franchise clearly with only a single, deadly stroke. Should No Time To Die end with Bond being gently lowered six feet under by his nearest and dearest, the audience would understand that whatever comes next in the franchise will be a fresh start - new characters, a new world, a new Bond. Obviously, this isn't how the James Bond movie series has operated historically. Desmond Llewelyn's Q kitted out four separate incarnations of 007 and never once mentioned his ever-evolving looks or suspicious accents, but for better or worse, that isn't how franchises work anymore, and the death of James Bond is the best way to ensure the future isn't muddied by the past.
