Posted on 08/11/2026 2:28:59 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
James Bond producer Amy Pascal has dropped a little more intel on what we can expect from the actor who will replace Daniel Craig in the iconic spy franchise.
And suffice it to say, it sounds like it’s going to be all change.
Since Craig handed in his licence to kill following 2021’s No Time to Die – his fifth outing as the suave MI6 operative – it has become a national pastime to debate who the next actor will be to take on the part, following in the footsteps of Sir Sean Connery, Sir Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan too.
But after nearly five years of rumours and thwarted reports – we all thought we had Aaron Taylor-Johnson confirmed in March 2024 for a second there – we are still in the dark over who the next Bond will be.
However, Pascal – who was confirmed to be taking the reins on the much-loved film series alongside Harry Potter producer David Heyman after Amazon MGM Studios bought full creative control off longtime producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G Wilson in February 2025 – has now offered a couple of breadcrumbs.
When asked about an update on the timeline for Bond and any casting announcement, the Spider-Man producer told Deadline: ‘I would say the end of the year is a good bet. We are being really, really methodical.’
(Excerpt) Read more at metro.co.uk ...
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
Sean Connery was the only “James Bond”...All the others were just “wannabe’s”
Sean Connery was the only “James Bond”...All the others were just “wannabe’s”
Elliot Page?
James Bond is dead dead dead, they’re just stomping on the body.
These fools never learn.
We don’t want “different.” We want James Bond. A suave self-assured competent secret agent. Not some who-knows-what? Tranny? Lesbian?
Kind of looks like a cross between Judge Pirro, Michelle Tafoya and Judge Marylin Milyan
When it comes to good vs. Evil, just read your "Screwtape Letters", by C.S. Lewis. It keeps you "seeing".
Maybe. He defined the role. Dalton, Brosnan and Craig were all good in the role, though.
Hunchback black female lesbian dwarf?
Broccoli and Saltzman rolling in graves.
How about a Bond based on Stephen Hawking?
“Put a chick in there, and make her gay!”
Boy George is now too politically incorrect.
I do not want really different and will not watch if its really different.
I want really the same.
No can do.
This trend is so vapidly stupid. It’s “the same” that’s really the “different thing” in our lives today. When everything all around us is either bastardized, prostituted, or repurposed, whatever is left untouched is, by definition, the oddity and uniqueness of the day. As usual, the devil has turned reality on its head.
My thoughts:
He’s a former DEVGRU operator who later joined the CIA’s Special Activities Center/Special Operations Group. He can infiltrate a compound, recruit local assets, conduct surveillance, and kill without hesitation—but he looks profoundly uncomfortable in a tuxedo. He understands weapons, terrain, and human fear better than wine, etiquette, or aristocratic society.
Then Britain’s entire 00 network is compromised. Agents are exposed, turned, blackmailed, or under surveillance. MI6 needs someone completely outside the European intelligence ecosystem.
Their request to Washington is beautifully simple:
“Send us your best.”
The American response:
“Our best isn’t exactly house-trained.”
That gives the movie its transformation:
MI6 teaches him languages, etiquette, tailoring, gambling, social engineering, and how to operate without looking like an operator.
He teaches MI6 that sometimes elegance is camouflage—and sometimes the solution really is to kick in the door.
At first, he treats charm as ridiculous theater.
Eventually, he realizes charm is another weapon: quieter than a suppressed pistol and often more effective.
By the end, he can move naturally from a royal reception to a brutal close-quarters fight without either identity feeling false.
The best character conflict would be that Britain wants to polish him, while America still considers him its weapon. MI6 wants discretion. The CIA wants results. Neither side completely trusts him, and both assume they can recall or control him.
They’re wrong.
He shouldn’t suddenly acquire an English accent or become a Bond imitation. Keep the American edges:
He drinks bourbon but learns enough about Scotch to bluff a collector.
He dislikes formalwear until he discovers a bespoke suit can conceal weapons better than tactical gear.
He initially calls everyone by their first name, including people with titles.
He doesn’t seduce women because “Bond does that”; he becomes compelling because he is unusually direct, observant, and dangerous.
His humor is dry and slightly inappropriate—not constant wisecracking.
When the polished mask slips, everyone sees why the CIA warned them.
Most importantly, the polishing should reveal qualities already present. DEVGRU and CIA service would require discipline, patience, cultural awareness, intelligence, and adaptability. He isn’t a dumb brute being taught sophistication. He is an extremely capable man learning a different form of infiltration.
There’s also a great exchange hiding in the premise:
MI6 instructor: “Your objective is to enter the room without anyone realizing you’re dangerous.”
American: “Why?”
Instructor: “Because then you may leave without killing everyone.”
American: “That an order or a suggestion?”
By the final act, he enters that same kind of room in perfect evening dress, manipulates the target, steals the intelligence, turns an enemy asset, and leaves unnoticed. Only later does MI6 discover he also planted explosives—because he’s polished, not domesticated.
I’d title the first movie 007: Special Relationship.
The tagline:
Britain asked America to send its best. It should have been more specific.
The danger is making him too much like Jack Reacher, Jason Bourne, or a generic Navy SEAL action hero. What elevates the idea is the tension between raw lethality and cultivated espionage. His arc isn’t becoming less dangerous. It’s learning that the deadliest weapon in the room doesn’t have to announce itself.
And honestly, this might be one of the cleanest ways to reinvent Bond without simply remaking the same character with a different actor. “007” becomes a British designation temporarily entrusted to an American—the beginning of a joint Anglo-American program—while James Bond remains the legendary man whose absence hangs over the entire story.
Too bad Ian Fleming isn’t alive to tell these secular/socialist WOKE lunatics to stay away from 007.
Such courage to be woke in HollyWierd.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.