Aaron Taylor-Johnson is the favorite to play 007 in the upcoming Bond 26. His casting would provide a neat solution to a recent franchise dilemma.

SUMMARY

 Aaron Taylor-Johnson’s youth could mean Bond 26 takes place before No Time to Die for the sake of franchise continuity.
 Taylor-Johnson’s age makes him a perfect fit as a younger Bond, ensuring greater longevity in the role.
 Although his casting may solve some post-Daniel Craig issues, other problems still need to be considered by the Bond franchise.

Aaron Taylor-Johnson is rumored to be taking over the iconic role of James Bond in the upcoming Bond 26, and his casting could help to solve a major post-Daniel Craig canon dilemma.

Taylor-Johnson has long been a favorite to play Bond, and if recent reports are to be believed, the job is already his, should he want it.

Every James Bond actor brings something unique to the role and Taylor-Johnson would be no different, but the casting would also provide a helpful solution to a recent franchise problem.

Canon has always been a tricky topic in James Bond’s world, as Eon’s movies never explicitly confirm whether each actor plays the same single character or separate versions of Ian Fleming’s spy.

Scenes such as Roger Moore visiting Tracy Bond’s grave, following her death in George Lazenby’s On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, implied the former.

Ignoring the changing eras and Bond’s lack of aging, it was just about plausible to believe all actors were playing the same Bond.

Thanks to 007’s death in No Time To Die‘s ending, this is now impossible, but casting Aaron Taylor-Johnson may hold the solution.

Aaron Taylor-Johnson’s Age Means Bond 26 Can Take Place Before No Time To Die

It Would Help To Retain The Franchise’s Continuity

The most recent Bond film, 2021’s No Time To Die, ended with a dramatic departure from the tried-and-tested classic Bond formula.

In the film’s closing minutes, Bond sacrificed himself by taking a direct hit from a barrage of submarine-launched missiles.

While James Bond’s death ultimately provided Daniel Craig with a fitting end to his era, it brought about a number of problems.

With Bond dead, the story cannot move forward – not in the conventional way, at least. Fortunately, Aaron Taylor-Johnson’s youth means there is a solution: Bond 26 should take place before No Time To Die.

If No Time To Die is viewed as the definitive final adventure in Bond’s life, then Bond 26 with a younger actor could, theoretically, take place at some point before it.

Despite already enjoying a long and successful movie career, Taylor-Johnson is, in fact, only 33 years old. With Taylor-Johnson in the role, Bond’s next mission could be set before the events of No Time To Die.

When exactly in Bond’s lifetime the film would take place is something that would need to be worked out.

However, if No Time To Die is viewed as the definitive final adventure in Bond’s life, then Bond 26 with a younger actor could, theoretically, take place at some point before it.

Because Taylor-Johnson is younger than Daniel Craig for the majority of his 007 tenure, it could be believable.

Aaron Taylor-Johnson Is The Perfect Age To Be A Younger Bond

At Only 33, He’s Still In His Prime

The ages of every James Bond actor vary, but if he were to be cast as 007, Taylor-Johnson would be the youngest actor to play the part since George Lazenby, who was exactly 30. Of course, Bond 26 is likely still a few years away from being released, meaning Taylor-Johnson might be in his mid-thirties by the time audiences actually get to see him in character, but the advantages of casting a younger actor are both obvious and plentiful.

Bond Actor
Age When Their First Film Was Released

Sean Connery
32 years old

George Lazenby
30 years old

Roger Moore
45 years old

Timothy Dalton
41 years old

Pierce Brosnan
42 years old

Daniel Craig
38 years old

Firstly, a younger actor playing Bond ensures greater longevity. The franchise only releases films every few years, meaning that an actor only gets a handful of performances before age catches up with them.

Daniel Craig played the role for fifteen years, starting in his late thirties and finishing in his early fifties, but he only starred in five movies during that time.

The younger a Bond actor is, the more films they can make before aging out of the role. Roger Moore kept going until he was 58, which even the actor himself later admitted was too long (via MI6-HQ).

Casting Aaron Taylor-Johnson Doesn’t Solve All The Bond Franchise’s Problems

Other Solutions Still Need To Be Explored

Though Aaron Taylor-Johnson’s James Bond casting would provide a solution to the franchise’s biggest canon question post-Daniel Craig, it doesn’t fix everything.

A No Time To Die prequel, though theoretically possible, opens up even more questions. For starters, Taylor-Johnson looks nothing like Daniel Craig.

Getting audiences to believe that Taylor-Johnson’s Bond is the same man that took on Le Chiffre and eventually died on a Japanese Island is going to be difficult.

Secondly, unless the film is a period piece, the world around Taylor-Johnson’s Bond would look very different, creating a discrepancy between eras.

Sean Connery may have been the first James Bond, but he’s also arguably responsible for the confusion surrounding the character’s timeline.

Then again, Bond films have never kept a particularly tight continuity. No explanation has ever been given as to why the character of Bond has had six different faces over the years, or why he regresses in age every now and again.

Furthermore, after 62 years and 25 films, it seems a bit late for the Bond franchise to suddenly start caring about continuity now.

Consequently, whether Taylor-Johnson gets the part or not, and whether Bond 26 is a sequel, reboot, or prequel, the James Bond universe is never going to make complete sense.