Photograph: MGM/Universal Pictures/Eon/Danjaq/Nicola Dove/Allstar Le petit espionįamilial attachments … Daniel Craig and Léa Seydoux in No Time to Die. And let’s make sure the producers of the next Indiana Jones film don’t get any ideas. Let other movies have realism: let Bond be Bond. Bond needs to escape because these movies are escapism. I don’t want to sound too much like Kathy Bates in Misery, but I suspect many will feel this is a slap in the face. It’s a big change, and runs the risk of backlash. This is taking a character that has been presented thus far as a god, and therefore a little ridiculous, and making him mortal. But is fundamentally altering the DNA of their character the way to go? Are there not some lines in the sand you do not cross? This goes beyond “Oh, he doesn’t get the girl” or even “Oh, the villain escapes his clutches”. What are we as a society losing if we can’t rely on James Bond to get out of any tough situation? Surely Daniel Craig, Cary Joji Fukunaga and the 007 producers wanted to put some punctuation at the end of this, the more serious, post-9/11 era of James Bond. But I question - and perhaps you do, too - whether it is right. He says goodbye to his one true love (more on that in a bit) and to his obligations to Great Britain and the Free World. He is blasted to smithereens by missiles on Lyutsifer Safin’s private island, and faces his annihilation with some sadness but also a proper stiff upper lip. James Bond is dead, and no, not in a jokey way like in You Only Live Twice. We did say “with spoilers” at the top of this article, so you have no one to blame but yourself here.

Casino royale villain crossword clue