I agree. The Craig movies were IMO leaps and bounds better than the Brosnon movies. I've liked every single one whereas GoldenEye is the only Pierce movie I can sit through. They really were that bad.
Seconded, even though some of Craig's action scenes were stretching credibility (but what else is new, it's a Bond film!) I still remember GE's teaser (not the haughtyt one with Brosnan walking across the screen, the one with actual film clips that presented a stern serious outing instead of the comedy show that we got. Brosnan sold me as Bond but the scripts were positively dire, all the makers wanted to do was try to re-do Moore's era but for
the nineties. Even "Die Another Day", which had some promise early on, ended up making "Moonraker" look like a classic by comparison when it shouldn't have been that way.)
But onto the newest installment:
A little historical context: Ever since Thunderball having a promo photo with a female Double-0 agent in it and that was 1965 and all, there's no reason Double-0 female agents cannot exist. Nothing's been said (that I know of) that qualifies which of the 9 agents can take which available number, apart from "Who wants to be Agent Double-0 Zero?" as absolutely nobody in the room raises their hands in earnest.
A Double-0 agent's number isn't synonymous with name. So 007 could be a female, though given the legacy of the original franchise I can also fathom why it's also not a bad thing to do a spinoff or sibling show. For me it's just not a big deal as to who's in the role as I've already pointed out why.
Just as long as the movie isn't campy schlock - which only helps date the franchise that much worse; Moore's more comedic outings are barely watchable, Brosnan's comedy routines are atrocious (as well as trying to play "we can do it just like back then only dirtier" - and, worse, the crass comedy are mixed into movies that had some serious moments and proved Brosnan was by no means a bad choice of role. Never mind "Diamonds are Forever", which is worse than some of Moore's more cartoonish outings - it's simply
that bad.
I've been a long time fan and, at least from my seat in the theater, if they play it seriously and not try to go the Moore/Brosnan campville route as a lot of people have preferred the franchise as being gritty... but a lot of audiences fell in love with the Moore and Brosnan eras and might want all the jokey jokes too. Every new lead in the role brings changes, let's see it first. Heck, nobody expected Moore to do The Spy Who Loved Me and For Your Eyes Only, which effectively juggle both the comedy and the seriousness - often by letting the seriousness be the forefront and bringing in some humor without upending the suspense, action, thrills, or anything else. But that's just my take.
For Bond25, I had read Craig's Bond is retired in Jamaica being all drunk. He's called back. New 007 might just be a bait and switch. After all, Broccoli at al told us a year ago that Bond would always remain a man -->
https://www.indiewire.com/2018/10/female-james-bond-barbara-broccoli-daniel-craig-1202010076/#! But forget predictions, it's what's released on screen that counts. None of us knows any of what will transpire on screen.
)
