Daniel Craig’s final outing as James Bond in No Time to Die is a great example of why his Bond era is the bleakest in the 007 franchise. Craig’s take on the titular character began in 2006 with Casino Royale, a film that quickly changed the complexion of the previously jovial Bond franchise. One of the best illustrations of this new, darker territory was the death of Vesper Lynd (Eva Green) immediately after Bond decided to retire from MI6 in Craig’s first movie, with her death subsequently fueling the events of Quantum of Solace.

Yet despite Casino Royale's hefty amount of carnage, the movie has one of the lower body counts of the Craig Bond era. Upon closer inspection, the vast majority of supporting players (including both side characters and villains) in Craig's Bond era failed to survive all five films. This is of particular importance because, along with the deaths of many Bond girls, principal characters such as M (Judi Dench) also exited the series through violent means - with movies such as Skyfall and No Time To Die dispensing with the plot armor that has previously saved the Bond franchise's main characters time and time again.

Related: James Bond Needs To Break Its Spinoff Rule For Ana De Armas' Paloma

Yet while Craig's Bond era is undoubtedly gritty, its bleaker take on 007 is not a bad thing. Part of why Craig's somber narrative works so well is because it makes more sense within the context of 007's espionage-based story, which carries far more gravitas than some of its predecessors, such as the Pierce Brosnan Bond era. Although in a ranking of the James Bond movies, Craig’s films are inconsistent (making up some of the best and worst in the franchise), the bleak identity they maintained was to the latest era’s benefit. In this way, establishing real, human stakes early on and continuously through the five movies by killing off significant characters was necessary to bring a contemporary look to the aging series and revitalize the Bond franchise.

Daniel Craig's James Bond Era Introduced Stakes To The Series

Vesper Lynd-Dead-James Bond-Daniel Craig-CPR-Eva Green

Craig's run as Bond was lethal, especially for key characters previous films would’ve undoubtedly left alive. By killing off the person who meant the most to 007 in the first entry, Casino Royale upped the stakes for every other character, with almost every Craig era movie following up on the promise of bloodshed. In past Bond iterations, it was almost a given that the classic James Bond villains would get their just desserts by the end of the movie as the lead character and his team went on to fight another day.

While watching the first 20 James Bond movies prior to Craig's 007 stint, few expected the stereotypical good guys from MI6 to die because they were given a similar treatment to many superheroes of the time. However, by eliminating seemingly indispensable characters, Daniel Craig’s Bond films not only tore apart these assumptions but also humanized the central players of each movie. As a result, Craig era Bond audiences spent each film contemplating what would happen to the characters rather than resting on the assumption that, for the most part, things would work out in the end. The added bleakness in the latest timeline – which drastically upped the stakes – worked so well because knowing that even the most important James Bond characters might not make it to the closing credits humanized them. In this way, contemporary Bond audiences were obliged to care more about the supporting cast, as the possibility of losing them became a reality thanks to one of the most notable changes made by Daniel Craig’s Bond era.

No Main Characters From Casino Royale Survived Craig's Run

Bond cries over a dying M in Skyfall

Although various actors have played 007, none died on-screen except Daniel Craig in a landmark moment that permanently changed the face of the Bond franchise. Furthermore, there isn't a single main character from Casino Royale who made it to the end of the Craig era, with iconic faces such as Judi Dench's M also perishing on Craig's groundbreaking Bond journey. In this way, the most recent era of James Bond movies works as an independent chapter with a beginning, middle, and end. Although it would be difficult to kill off James Bond again, concluding the story of Craig’s character with his death rather than suddenly creating a new version of the British secret agent makes perfect sense and adds a level of continuity previously unseen in prior iterations of the Bond franchise.

Related: Why Bond Actors Third Movies Are Usually The Best

The Darkness Of Craig's Bond Series Was Necessary

James Bond-Daniel Craig -at-Spectre Party-No Time To Die

While Craig's grittier, more human Bond was a stark departure from Pierce Brosnan's lackadaisical 007, the lasting popularity of Casino Royale decades after its release proves it was exactly what the aging franchise needed to keep its momentum going for an entirely new generation. The bleakness and serious nature of Craig’s Bond series immediately had a broader appeal to contemporary audiences, resulting in a whole new generation becoming enamored by the espionage-centric world of 007. While the comical (and sometimes downright goofy) tone surrounding the James Bond series had its admirers, which gave way to Mike Myers’ Austin Powers movies, others felt the spoof-worthy and doltish nature of pre-Craig Bond movies had overstayed their welcome, and they were right. The added stakes for the type of roles that allowed viewers to care more deeply about the cast and to make sure the main characters’ stories were adequately concluded between Casino Royale and No Time to Die are proof that the darkness of Daniel Craig’s Bond era was necessary for James Bond to not only survive, but to prosper.

Next: James Bond 26 Needs To Reverse No Time To Die's Most Annoying 007 Trend