Summarize this content to 2000 words in 6 paragraphs By now, you’ve probably heard that Amazon gained creative control of the James Bond franchise in a new joint venture with longtime rights holders Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson, who’ve decided to step back. As soon as the news hit, reactions that ranged from shock to curiosity to all-out fury cropped up on the internet. In short, all of the fandom ain’t happy. Look, I get it. James Bond has surpassed the constraints of a straightforward spy narrative. He’s the one who charted the course and ushered in the genre’s modern era on the big screen. And that’s where he’s endured for the past six decades. Thanks to the Broccoli family’s control over the franchise, 007 has sidestepped the trappings that have come with big corporations mining iconic IP for any number of potential projects — whether prequels or spinoffs. It’s easy to be angry about the news. But what if this deal is a good thing?The future of James Bond is anyone’s guess. Will this be the latest intellectual property to get the Marvel and Star Wars treatment, with small-screen ancillary story universes? Bond’s place has always been on the big screen, and many (including me) fear that this deal will firmly pivot the property from cinematic art to serialized product. Or will Amazon keep the James Bond narrative machine chugging along the way it has been for decades — and keep his adventures solely on the big screen until a specified streaming release? You’ve probably landed on this page after scrolling through countless articles and commentary pieces about how this move is terrible. Instead of leaning into all the negative speculation, let’s go through some of the ways this deal could benefit the James Bond franchise. Ready for a New James Bond? This Is Your Ultimate 007 Guide to How We Got Here Sean Connery as James Bond in Dr. No, from 1962. Sunset Boulevard/ContributorAppealing to a younger audienceI don’t think anyone wants James Bond to be reduced to a sharable TikTok meme. But we shouldn’t ignore the downward trend of box office returns over the years. Keeping James Bond on the big screen has been a gift for the franchise, but perhaps shifting the property to streaming is the right move to keep the franchise’s heart beating for another 60 years. Full disclosure: I’m nearing the big 50 mark, so I’m not here to assume what younger audiences want. But let’s acknowledge the bigger picture: Streamers like Prime Video and Netflix have solidified the attention of at-home audiences, and this entertainment trend isn’t going away. Less of a wait between sequelsAs the production value of James Bond movies has improved over the years, the wait between sequels has grown longer. If you take a look at the early days of the 007 film franchise, a new installment came out nearly every one or two years. That sort of turnaround doesn’t exist anymore — audiences expect bigger set pieces and riveting action sequences. Pierce Brosnan as Bond in 1995’s GoldenEye. Keith Hamshere/Getty ImagesFans waited the longest between movies during the years of Daniel Craig, the most recent Bond. Between Quantum of Solace and Skyfall, there was a four-year wait; between Spectre and No Time to Die, there was a six-year wait. In an era where short attention spans rule, reducing the time fans must wait between installments is key.The serialized TV conundrumLet’s address the elephant in the room. Until Craig took on the character, the James Bond movies didn’t feature a continued story journey for the celebrated spy. As controversial as his take on the role was, this narrative decision disrupted story expectations and potentially opened the door to similar story arcs in the franchise’s future. There’s been much discussion of Amazon’s potential to develop spinoffs that could expand the story universe to focus on iconic characters like Ms. Moneypenny and Q. If the streamer released a series exploring Blofeld’s villainous origins in the same way HBO did for Batman villain the Penguin, I’d be here for it. It all depends on how the story is told.That brings me to the notion of centering a TV series around 007. Let’s remember, this is Amazon, which offers a growing bastion of “Dad TV” shows. The success of properties like Jack Ryan, Reacher and Cross shows there’s demand for serialized adventures that follow heroes whose sole mission is to fight evil and maintain justice for the greater good. It could work. It bears repeating, though: It all depends on how the story is told. James Bond is an icon. He surpasses the genre, and if Amazon considers what’s good for itself and the franchise, the company won’t take any big swings. At least not yet. You know the saying: If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Whatever Amazon chooses to do next, I can’t help but have hope it’ll all be worth it.
!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s)
{if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod?
n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};
if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n;n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version=’2.0′;
n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0;
t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];
s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,’script’,
‘https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js’);
fbq(‘set’, ‘autoConfig’, false, ‘789754228632403’);
fbq(‘init’, ‘789754228632403’);
