Say never again: why Daniel Craig should quit while he's ahead as Bond

Legacy matters in cinema. Last week, a US judge allowed a James Bond fan to proceed with a lawsuit against MGM for failing to include the rogue 007 projects Casino Royale (the 1967 version) and Never Say Never Again in a “complete” box set of movies about the suave super spy. Lawyers for Mary L Johnson, of Pierce County, Washington, argue that most reasonable people would expect these films to be included in a comprehensive collection of Bond movies. And they probably have a point, at least in the case of Never Say Never Again.

Never Say Never Again will always be part of Sean Connery’s legacy as 007. The Scotsman returned to his most famous role in 1983, 12 years after his previous appearance in Diamonds Are Forever. Unfortunately, the film, directed by Irvin Kershner, was produced independently of official rights holder Eon Productions and regular Bond studio MGM, and has never been able to shake off a reputation as the black sheep of the series.

In 1983, Eon and MGM were still bumbling along with a past-his-best Roger Moore – Connery’s second replacement – as Bond. So it was hardly helpful for a competing 007 to arrive in cinemas – especially one battling classic villain Ernst Blofeld (Max Von Sydow) and the evil forces of Spectre – just as the main series released the middling Octopussy.

The early 80s battle of the Bonds is instructive because it reminds us that the 007 producers have struggled to maintain quality levels at times. If Moore’s Bond was firing on all cylinders, Never Say Never Again would not have been able to exploit available space in the public imagination for an alternate version. But by 1983, after a decade of increasingly tepid Bond films, fans were willing to forget that Connery hadn’t been any good in the role since 1965’s Thunderball either, and welcome him back with open arms.

This week’s news that Daniel Craig may be returning to Her Majesty’s secret service will most likely prove just as popular – the actor is widely considered the best Bond since Connery in his 1960s heyday. But should he learn from his predecessor’s mistakes?

If Connery had signed off after his fourth turn in Thunderball, his run as 007 would be even more fondly remembered than it is. Instead, the spiky cool of the early Bond movies evaporated as the series indulged in increasingly over-the-top plots that moved away from Fleming’s novels, and added hokey one-liners. Casual fans of the series forget that You Only Live Twice, with its nutty screenplay by Roald Dahl, spawned more Bond spoofs and send-ups than all the Moore movies put together.

Connery isn’t the only screen spy to have outstayed his welcome. Matt Damon would have been well advised to quit playing Jason Bourne after 2007’s The Bourne Ultimatum, a film that could not have been more climactic if it tried, yet somehow ended up as the third movie in a five-episode saga.

Craig’s four-movie stint as 007 may not have been perfect – the insipid Quantum of Solace (2008) saw to that. But as “box sets” go, it is probably up there with the original Star Wars trilogy, Christopher Nolan’s triptych of Batman films and Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings trilogy as an example of high-quality episodic cinema. If Craig walked away now, his legacy would be assured.

Sam Mendes’s Spectre was clearly intended to be the Englishman’s final turn in the hot seat. It reunited him with a new version of Blofeld (Christoph Waltz), gave him a genuine romance for the first time since the death of Eva Green’s Vesper Lynd in Casino Royale, and completed a character arc that had seen Bond gradually returning to his gadget-loving, Aston Martin DB5-driving roots. But now, just as this particular phase of 007’s story seemed to have reached a natural conclusion, it looks as if it will be dragged out for two more films.

How are regular Bond screenwriters Neal Purvis and Robert Wade supposed to handle the task? Jettisoning Léa Seydoux’s Madeleine Swann at an early stage, or simply forgetting she ever existed, would undercut the satisfying sense of 007’s growing humanity that was created in Spectre, while killing her off would be repetitious and out of sync with the saga’s increasingly cheery outlook. Yet Bond with a wife or long-term partner in tow simply would not be 007 as we know him.

Whichever way they turn, producers will be risking the legacy of the Craig-era 007 in the name of continuing box-office success. Perhaps Eon will find a satisfying way out of the narrative dead ends imposed by Spectre’s storyline. But the more likely outcome is that the finest Bond since the 1960s ends up going out with a whimper rather than a bang.