The endless James Bond search is worse than a presidential election cycle

Using history as a guide, next month somebody will likely announce their candidacy for the US presidency, kicking off a long, exhausting, two-year race to the White House.But that election cycle will be a brisk and happy stroll compared to the never-ending slog to find the actor who will replace Daniel Craig as James Bond.I’m so sick of it.I couldn’t believe the headlines this week — that sources told the trades that the final four contenders are Callum Turner, Josh O’Connor, Jack Lowden and possibly Jacob Elordi.“No Time To Die” was released five years ago this month.

You mean to tell me it took half a decade to winnow the field to the same three British men and one Aussie who are already in everything? It’s required this much time to land on such bland and disappointing candidates? Hey — you know what that sounds like?!The delay and rumored result almost makes you root for Blofeld.I wanna angrily rip off my bowler hat and whip it at a statue in disgust, or grind my steel teeth on a structurally important wire.The iconic 64-year-old franchise has dangerously toyed with the thin line between building anticipation and totally alienating the public. Bond has always wisely kept a royal-family-like “never complain, never explain” mystique that the ridiculous search has completely blown up.

Come to think of it, much like the royal family’s!First because of a stated effort to reinvent the character for modern times (ugh) and then headline-making corporate tumult, there’s been an unprecedented holdup. There has never been this great a gap between Bond movies before.That can’t be good.MGM has waited so long and has been so precious over the choice that I question if Gen.

Z has any connection to 007 whatsoever. When the last film came out, the oldest member of that cohort, the dominant moviegoing demographic today, was 24; the youngest, 14.And the public wasn’t really schlepping.

to the cineplex a lot back in 2021, so I imagine the youth ...