Rumor has it that producers are looking to cast a younger actor as 007 in the James Bond franchise, but is this really what it needs? The Bond film franchise celebrates its 60th anniversary this year and is currently without a leading man, following Daniel Craig's final outing as the character in No Time to Die. Given the dramatic nature of Craig's departure, the next James Bond movie will be a hard reboot as the franchise enters its seventh decade.

It feels like speculation over Daniel Craig's replacement has been going for as long as his time in the role. Names previously suggested include Henry Cavill, Idris Elba, and Tom Hardy, but a newly rumored casting call for a younger James Bond rules out these names. Producers are said to be looking for an actor in their 30s to carry the James Bond franchise through at least three movies. It makes sense logistically, but how would a younger Bond sit alongside their predecessors?

RELATED: Regé-Jean Page's New Movie Dents Those Next James Bond 26 Casting Hopes

To date, six actors have played James Bond in the official movie franchise. It's an incredibly exclusive club, and so it's easy to see why speculation over the next James Bond gains so much traction in the media. The Bond movie producers have apparently begun the search for the seventh 007 and will have exacting standards when it comes to who will play the next James Bond, and the actor's age is rumored to be a key factor in any casting decision.

How Old Previous James Bond Actors Were

The rumors that James Bond film producers are looking for an actor in their 30s represent a back-to-basics approach for the franchise. Sean Connery was only 32 when the first Bond movie, Dr. No, was released in theaters back in 1962. Connery wasn't the youngest actor to play Bond, however, as George Lazenby was 30 years old when he starred in his one and only 007 outing, On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Afterward, then-41-year-old Connery briefly returned for his sixth James Bond movie, Diamonds Are Forever, before being replaced by Roger Moore in Live and Let Die.

Moore is, famously, the oldest actor to be cast as James Bond, starting off at the age of 45. Given how long Roger Moore stayed as James Bond, he was nearly 60 by the time of his final installment, 1985's A View to Kill. Timothy Dalton was comparatively younger when he was cast next, for The Living Daylights, at 41 years old. Dalton's successor, Pierce Brosnan, was 42 when he was cast in 1995's Goldeneye. Interestingly, Brosnan had been offered the role of 007 in The Living Daylights while he was working on Remington Steele in 1987, but the network refused to release him from his contract. If he had been cast in The Living Daylights, Brosnan would have been more in his mid-30s.

The next James Bond actor, Daniel Craig, was 38 when cast in 2006's Casino Royale. This was in line with Ian Fleming's novels, which placed the character in their mid-to-late 30s. Daniel Craig's James Bond story played out for over a decade, leading to jibes about his advancing years in No Time to Die, so it does make sense for Bond 26 to turn the clock back in relation to the character's age.

RELATED: Is Tom Holland Too Young To Play Bond 26’s James Bond?

Why The Next James Bond Actor May Be Younger

Uncharted Tom Holland Young James Bond

Producers are said to be eyeing a younger James Bond actor to guarantee the franchise's longevity for at least three movies. This is a logical approach for relaunching James Bond, and it's reminiscent of Sean Connery and George Lazenby's casting as 007 during the early days of the franchise. There's likely an underlying feeling within the production team that going younger in terms of casting is the right choice of actor for Bond 26 to ensure the movies remain relevant for a new generation. When Daniel Craig was cast as 007, he marked a significant tonal shift that repositioned the character of James Bond for the post-9/11, post-Jason Bourne world. Over a decade later, producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson will want to similarly refresh the franchise for a changing world, and a younger leading man could be the way to do it.

The other benefit of casting a younger actor is that the iconic status of James Bond provides an emerging star with a defining role in their career. This is something that is ignored by the wilder casting rumors of Tom Hiddleston, Idris Elba, and even Tom Holland. Each of these actors already has one or two iconic roles to their name and is unlikely to want to shoulder the weight of another. Not going with an unknown actor for the next James Bond creates an unnecessary distraction. James Bond should be solely 007, not Spider-Man or Nathan Drake moonlighting as 007. Casting a promising young actor at the early stages of their career would give them a chance to shine in one of the biggest roles there is while also putting the focus squarely on the world and characters created by Ian Fleming.

Does The Next James Bond Actor Really Need To Be Younger?

The title screen for James Bond Jr

Whether James Bond needs to be played by a younger actor depends on what's driving Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson's desire for a younger Bond. Their company, EON, attempted to appeal to a younger audience once before, with the animated series James Bond Jr. airing in the early 1990s. It was a colorful, action-packed show that focused on 007's nephew, James Bond Jr., confronting familiar Bond villains. It shared more in common with cartoons like G.I. Joe and MASK than the 007 franchise and was a hollow attempt to appeal to younger viewers that fundamentally misunderstood the place that the Bond franchise has in the hearts of family audiences, particularly in the UK.

A similar move to cast a hip, young 007 for a millennial audience could easily fall into the same trap, but there might be a good narrative reason for following a younger James Bond. Daniel Craig's Bond had a narrative arc that came to a satisfying ending when he sacrificed his life for his country and his family. Daniel Craig's James Bond era broke new ground for the franchise, with more of a focus on the psychology of 007, tackling the death of his parents and his abandonment issues and fear of commitment. These were all aspects present in Ian Fleming's original novels, which similarly gave details on Bond's schooling and younger life pre-MI6. This is largely unexplored territory for the James Bond franchise, which could be better explored with a younger actor.

RELATED: Tom Holland's Young Bond Movie Still Needs To Happen (As Well As Bond 26)

Casino Royale attempted to explore James Bond's early MI6 career, but never quite achieved it due to Daniel Craig being in his late-30s and the character's willingness to retire with Vespa. A younger actor could better explore how the cold, ruthless orphan fits into an intelligence organization like MI6. It would be a logical continuation of the deeper characterization that defined the Daniel Craig era, and could even invert it. Audiences could see a young James Bond earn the Agent 007 name, becoming the blunt instrument of a British intelligence agent that Craig began his Bond journey as.

Who Will The Next James Bond Actor Be?

Jeremy Irvine and Jack Lowden in Benediction

Even before the rumors of a circulated casting call began, names like Idris Elba and Tom Hardy seemed incredibly unlikely. With rumors of a deal that will guarantee James Bond movies on screens until 2037, it makes far more sense to go for a lesser-known actor to rebuild the franchise. This would require an actor who could give their full commitment to the role and who could, like Craig, pursue other interesting roles in their downtime from the James Bond franchise.

One actor who would be perfect for the role is Tom Hardy's Dunkirk co-star Jack Lowden. He's Scottish, like Sean Connery's still-definitive version of James Bond as well as Fleming's 007 from the books, and he is in his early 30s with a strong list of credits under his belt, including a role in the WWE movie Fighting with My Family and the Stephen King-approved Netflix horror-thriller Calibre. If the James Bond movies are to survive for another 15 years, then the franchise needs to invest in younger talent, rather than go for headline-grabbing big-name casting.