【Landlady’s Loose Legs】

After months of hemming and Landlady’s Loose Legshawing, Daniel Craig finally made it official: Yes, he's coming back for another Bond movie.

But should he have?

SEE ALSO: Daniel Craig will return as Bond for a 5th and final time

It's clear the Bond producers were eager to get him back. Despite rumors that they were eyeing potential replacements (Tom Hardy was high on their wishlist), they also made it clear they were willing to throw as much money as it took to get Craig back.

Craig, on the other hand, has made it quite clear that he was ambivalent about returning at all, saying during the Spectrepress tour that he'd rather "slash [his] wrists" than pick up that Walther PPK again. And this week's Logan Luckyoffers a little taste of what he's capable of when he's not being dragged, kicking and screaming, into yet another Bond sequel.

James Bond needs Daniel Craig (for now)

Original image has been replaced. Credit: Mashable

It's not hard to understand why Bond wants Craig. His run on the franchise has been a massive success, both critically and commercially. His first outing, Casino Royale, served up a Bond that felt classic and fresh all at once, with a grittier feel that felt right at home in the Bourneera. His third, Skyfall, garnered some of the best reviews andbox office numbers in the series' 55-year history.

True, there have been missteps. The muddled Quantum of Solacewas a disappointment after Casino Royale, and Spectre's attempts to duplicate Skyfall's success yielded mixed results. On the whole, though, the series has a good thing going with Craig. Plus, a decade into his tenure, it's safe to say he's the definitive Bond for a not-insignificant proportion of younger moviegoers.

But Craig can't stick around forever. Eventually, the producers will have to reboot Bond again, at which point they'll face some steep challenges.

First, there's the inherent risk associated with rebooting a beloved property. There's no guarantee that audiences will love Craig's replacement as much as they did Craig. Longtime fans may recall that even Craig's initial casting announcement was met with skepticism – which only abated once Casino Royaleopened and audiences were able to see for themselves that having a blond Bond wouldn't "ruin" the franchise.

Original image has been replaced. Credit: Mashable

Those risks are especially high at a time when Hollywood is lousy with big-budget franchises. Moviegoers in the mood for jet-setting spy action need not wait for Bond to get his act together – they can get their fix in the next Avengersor Kingsmanor Mission: Impossiblefilm. If the new Bond fails to make a strong impression, he could easily get lost in the shuffle.

Then there are the difficulties unique to Bond. The character exemplifies an old-school ideal of straight, white, cis male masculinity at a time when moviegoers have started to question the dominance of straight, white, cis male masculinity in pop culture. Just look at the endless fan campaigns for Idris Elba to replace Craig, or at the rampant speculation that the next Bond could be a woman.

Mashable Top Stories Stay connected with the hottest stories of the day and the latest entertainment news. Sign up for Mashable's Top Stories newsletter By clicking Sign Me Up, you confirm you are 16+ and agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Thanks for signing up!

007's endured as long as he has because he's changed with the times, and he could yet change again. The franchise could go the obvious route of casting someone who isn't a straight, white, cis male, or hedge their bets by keeping those aspects of the character and simply reformulating him to be more in line with modern mores.

Again, though, it's a gamble. By keeping Craig's version around, they get to kick that can down the road a little bit longer.

... But it's time for Daniel Craig to move on from James Bond

Original image has been replaced. Credit: Mashable

Meanwhile, Craig himself seems ready to move on from the role that made him a household name. Those "slash my wrists" comments weren't taken out of context. They were part of a clear pattern during the Spectrepress tour.

Craig eventually softened his stance, explaining that he was just coming off of a grueling shoot at the time ("When asked 20 feet from the end of the marathon, ‘Will you do another marathon?’ the answer is simple. It’s like, ‘No, I won’t'"). But like it or not, promoting Bond is part of the job of being Bond – and a star who can't bring himself to talk up the project in the press can be a problem.

Moreover, while we can't blame Craig for all (or even most) of Spectre's issues, the film feels lazy and tired in a way Skyfalldidn't. If there was anything new to be mined from the current incarnation of Bond, Spectrefailed to find it. It's no wonder Craig, in the movie, looks like he's just going through the motions.

Which is a shame, because when Craig is on, he's on. Look no further than this weekend's Logan Luckyfor evidence. The first trailer for Steven Soderbergh's "hillbilly heist" dramedy includes a cheeky credit for one of its leads: "and introducing Daniel Craig as Joe Bang!!"

Original image has been replaced. Credit: Mashable

It's a joke, obviously. Craig is arguably the biggest name in a cast that includes Channing Tatum, Adam Driver, Hilary Swank, and Katie Holmes. Who, in the year 2017, needs Logan Luckyto introduce Daniel Craig to them?

But after seeing the film, it kinda makes sense. Against all odds, Craig's performance in it earnsthat "introducing" clause. He's nigh unrecognizable as a tatted-up inmate with a thick Southern drawl and an unexpected passion for science (but only, apparently, as it relates to blowing shit up).

Craig's complete and utter transformation is all the more impressive because he doesn't rely on many of the usual crutches that stars like Johnny Depp do – prosthetics, outlandish costumes, thick makeup, or exaggerated tics. Sure, the peroxide-blond hair is a change, as are the messy tattoos and the West Virginia accent. But the magic of his work in Logan Luckyis that he makes all of that look perfectly natural.

While watching Craig as Joe Bang, it's impossible to believe he might be anyone butJoe Bang. Certainly it doesn't seem plausible that this same man might be most famous for donning custom-tailored suits and a posh British accent as a dashing and debonair super-spy.

It's exactly the kind of creative spark that's missing in his most recent work as Bond, and it makes the announcement that he'll play Bond again feel like a bit of a letdown.

We can't know why Craig agreed to return. Maybe he wanted the steady work and the massive paycheck. With some of the numbers that were thrown around in the tabloid press, who could blame him?

Hopefully, there's something creatively fulfilling in it for him, too – perhaps the powers that be have finally figured out the next step for his take on the character, or just presented him with plans too fun and exciting to resist. However, we're already at the point, now, where the prospect of seeing what Craig does outside the franchise is more intriguing than the prospect of seeing what else he'll do within it.

007 still has use for a performance as reliably likable as Craig's. But it may be time for Craig to leave behind 007.

---

Featured Video For You

---

The Daniel Craig ‘Casino Royale’ was very faithful to James Bond novels

---