Whereas he provides off extra “extraordinarily divorced” vitality than we’re used to seeing from the standard 007 baddie, the parallels between Bezos and the typical Bond villain are, at the very least, fairly humorous. His bald head, immense wealth gained by means of ruthless industrial ways, obsession with area, need to govern world occasions by means of expertise, and disdain for world governments… Bezos doesn’t simply resemble a Bond supervillain; he’s the type of “protected, however predictable” Bond villain one in all Amazon’s algorithms might produce primarily based on all accessible knowledge.
However Bezos’ supervillain credentials lately took a darker, extra fascinating flip in ways in which might instantly affect the Bond collection. His determination to dictate the editorial route of The Washington Publish (which Bezos purchased in 2013) not solely remembers the maniacal machinations of Tomorrow By no means Dies villain Elliot Carver (a scrumptious Jonathan Pryce); it raises severe questions on Bezos’ need to make use of influential media to additional his personal agendas.
To be honest, Amazon has produced and permitted all kinds of initiatives that don’t essentially characterize the views of its founder; they even sometimes mock his actions and the tradition that allows them. Simply take a look at what The Boys will get as much as. But it’s abruptly so much more durable to image a vivid future for the traditional Bond villain archetype of previous at a time when legacy media is more and more being weaponized in service of that obscure battle generally known as the “tradition wars.”
However the way forward for Bond villainy is about greater than Jeff Bezos. The Daniel Craig Bond period noticed these films pivot away from extra grandiose supervillains with huge personalities, elaborate lairs, and campier aesthetics. The villains of Craig’s tenure typically had a private connection to Bond and have been usually extra grounded. That shift represented each the will to make the Bond films barely extra serialized and the final cultural shift towards blockbusters that felt extra “reasonable.” Each 2006’s On line casino Royale and 2005’s Batman Begins rebooted these collection’ after the height of their silliness and made them acceptable to get pleasure from amongst those that apparently see themselves as very severe individuals.
Whereas I and others have argued that we may use some extra absurd Bond films once more, it’s not clear if the cultural pendulum has swung far sufficient in that route fairly but. What is obvious is that the casting and characterization of the subsequent Bond villain might inform us rather a lot concerning the tone and inventive route of every part that follows.
Will we have now one other barely extra grounded Bond villain with ties to the character’s previous who helps weave an ongoing story? Will James Bond go “lone wolf” towards a corrupt authorities he can not belief in a storyline that can completely don’t have anything to do with any billionaire’s beliefs? Will that villain have a lair? Will they’ve an allegiance to an actual nation or political ideology? What’s going to they consider algorithms? Will a veteran actress lastly get the possibility to have somewhat enjoyable as an over-the-top foil?
