The Broccolis, of course, are the family who owns the Bond franchise and have been producing the movies since their inception in the '60s. Currently, it is not only up in the air as to whether Daniel Craig will return, but the Broccolis are also continuing to shop the franchise to other studios, potentially leaving Sony out in the cold (though they may very well end up doing the next movie with them again). Point is, their contract with Sony ended after Spectre, as did Daniel Craig's as Bond, and it is still unknown at this point if they're going to get the band back together or potentially start fresh with a new studio, and maybe even a new Bond.

Considering all of the above, Sneider is one of the most plugged-in guys in Hollywood and this is what he's currently hearing - that the Broccolis are considering expanding the Bond brand into an entire cinematic universe. Honestly, I'm so sick of cinematic universes at this point, but I have to admit that this doesn't seem like a terrible idea. That, and it's the only way I can truly see them being able to hit the reset button in a way that feels natural.

That said, it's unclear - and I don't even think the Broccoli's know at this point - if a potential cinematic universe would blossom from the Craig movies (with Craig maybe doing a couple more), or if they would just start anew. Ideally, I would love it if Nolan come aboard to kick off a whole new Bond/Bond universe (basically directing the first movie and setting the tone/vibe, and then letting other directors take over from there), but a Felix or Moneypenny-centric movie with the current cast (Jeffrey Wright and Naomie Harris, respectively) could be cool too. As the thread with that tweet explores, there's a lot of potential either way, with not only the main players but introducing American agents as well. Could be a lot of fun if done right either way.

No matter how they do it - IF they do it - I would imagine it'd be a bit like Star Wars does the main saga movies every other year and the spinoff movies in between. Only I doubt these would be as frequent - maybe the main Bond movies every three years with a spinoff somewhere in between? Who knows.

What do you guys think? Yay or nay to a James Bond cinematic universe? One more Bond movie with Craig and then start anew after that? Or use the Craig movies as a springboard to spinoffs with the current cast? Or, just start anew now - cinematic universe or no cinematic universe - and let Spectre be the end of the Craig era?

G Martin 87 said:

---

Sounds contrived to me. The only other members of the Bond "universe" with any genuine name recognition are Felix, Moneypenny, M, Q, and Blofeld.

---

If they cast Felicity Jones as a young M, then call me N.

I'm not interested in this, but that's never stopped a movie from being made before. They might lose some money, but if it plays right, it could open up a few billion over several movies.

If they do this, I think they'll have another movie or two and have Bond work with Felix and another agent (either 00 or another country). Then have the new agent (and possibly Felix) branch off into some movies together.

If they use a new agent, I assume it will be middle eaastener. It's politically incorrect to have a white male track down ME/Asian Muslim terrorists, so to really open up and use the elephant-in-the-room (terrorists), they'd be smart to add someone with that "look" so they don't get hit with being racist.

Wasn't this part of the motivation behind casting Halle Berry in Die Another Day?

I love Bond, but a cinematic universe is just really dumb. There are what, 24 movies that don't technically have a chronological order. Just keep making movies. Have Craig do 1 more and then I'd like Idris Elba to take over

Love Bond but admittedly not very knowledgeable, how much original Ian Flemming source material is left to make movies from? Or are the Craig movies post Casino Royale not from source material?

Weird thought for new bond. Cillian Murphy?

The post Casino Royal stories are not from source material. I believe Flemings actual material was exhausted long ago.

Aggies76 said:

---

The post Casino Royal stories are not from source material. I believe Flemings actual material was exhausted long ago.

---

There are four short story titles that haven't been used yet. "Risico", "The Hildebrand Rarity", "007 in New York", and "The Property of a Lady". But I think the situations in all 4 have shown up in the movies by now. The auction in "The Living Daylights" was based on "Property of a Lady", for example.

wangus12 said:

---

Have Craig do 1 more and then I'd like Idris Elba to take over

---

While I would absolutely LOVE Elba as Bond, even he has said in interviews that he's too old to take over the role now.

While I don't love the cinematic universe idea, I'll watch Jeffrey Wright in just about anything so can't say I'd hate a Felix Leiter centric film.

This does nothing for me.

israeliag said:

---

Not crazy about the idea but a period piece origin of the 00 program would be fun.

---

I've always been curious to see if they could do this. But I don't see how it wouldn't be cheesy. It would be great if they could pull it off, but I just invision an OSS 117 type movie.

But if they could do something like in the same vein as Munich, I'd be in.

Without details, this does nothing for me. Quite a big Bond fan, but I don't see how they pull this off even with characters from the Craig run who have a small amount of name recognition.

I'd like for them to do at least one more Craig film. I've really loved the arc nature of his run and the move away from episodic films. It's really given them a chance to flesh out Bond as a real character and the films were better for it.

Centering spinoffs around Bond minor characters won't work as others have said. It could dilute the product as a money grab & turn off viewers. The only way a Bond cinematic universe might work is to enhance the back-story of recent (or new) villains:

1) Star Wars "Rogue One" was a period piece that enhances Episode 4, while standing on its own. It gave another perspective of the Empire's devastating strength during Vader's tenure. And being a tragedy, there was no new "hero" to branch into a diluted series.

2) Fast & Furious is rumored to do a spinoff with Jason Statham & Dwyane Johnson (Hobbs). F8 was like a reboot film because Statham (Deckard Shaw & his brother Owen Shaw) were "bad guys" who were really going after the real, even badder guy Rhodes. So they are now good guys, which helps fill in the loss of Paul Walker. Also Vin Diesel & Johnson were rumored to not get along, so this keeps peace within the franchise by separating 2 alpha-male heroes.

The people who go to see Bond movies will still go see them and those who don't won't. No net value here.

Imo, the value of a film universe is exploring a reality in which some of the fundamental assumptions have been changed. The addition of superheroes, mutants, The Force, etc. You can explore the ramifications in depth and save exposition time explaining why everything is so weird.

I don't see the value in creating a universe around a character set in our current reality. That film universe pretty much already exists in the form of Bond, Bourne, and all the other spy films that tell us what is realistic and what is not. Not that it would necessarily be bad, I'm just not sure the concept will stick with viewers.

I think to do this, one necessity it to drop the story back into the heart of the Cold War. I don't think a modern day Bond Cinematic Universe has the charm that a post-war series would.

I wouldn't call it a "universe" but the 4 Craig movies have come closer than any before of providing a semblance of historical thread from ending one to staring another. But a Bond movie is about Bond, villains and Bond girls. And have no interest in a Felix Leiter movie or any other secondary character.

What about an anthology series on hulu/netflix/amazon?

TCTTS said:

---

What do you guys think? Yay or nay to a James Bond cinematic universe? One more Bond movie with Craig and then start anew after that? Or use the Craig movies as a springboard to spinoffs with the current cast? Or, just start anew now - cinematic universe or no cinematic universe - and let Spectre be the end of the Craig era?

---

I didn't really like Spectre, so I'd rather that not be Craig's last Bond movie.

I'd like to see Craig continue as Bond and have the movies continue to explore Bond as he ages. Like someone else said, the Craig movies are the closest to a "beginning and end" of Bond that we've seen and I like it a lot. I think it'd be neat to see the character continue to develop into his later years.

I have no interest in an expanded Bond universe.

I would also avoid going with a younger Bond at this point, mostly because I think the Kingsman movie really nailed that and doesn't seem to be letting up anytime soon.

I would love to see the original books redone in period. The 00 tech would be awesome compared to the way they had to do it in the Connery films. Just reboot the whole thing and keep it accurate to the books. That's 14 movies that follow enough of an arc to file the "universe". Plus the late 50s and early 60s are super cool and nostalgic.

CapCityAg89 said:

---

I would love to see the original books redone in period. The 00 tech would be awesome compared to the way they had to do it in the Connery films. Just reboot the whole thing and keep it accurate to the books. That's 14 movies that follow enough of an arc to file the "universe". Plus the late 50s and early 60s are super cool and nostalgic.

---

Basically the opposite of what Jackie said.

Mad Men meets James Bond?

Would watch.

Spinoffs they could make:

- Valentin Zukovsky gangster movie starring Robbie Coltrane
- Hugo Drax and his Secretary love story
- Boris IT comedy starring Alan Cumming
- Max Zorin's rise to power starring Christopher Walken

I think a Bond movie I'd be interested in seeing might be what we're getting with American Assassin. Motivation, recruitment, and training of someone who becomes the Bond we know and love.