Steven Knight’s recent description of James Bond as “folklore” is one of the most interesting ways I’ve ever heard someone frame the character. I usually avoid the persistent continuity debates surrounding Bond, but the term at least partly applies to 007. Folklore seemingly endures because it adapts while still holding onto the qualities that make it instantly recognizable, which is something that Bond has done for more than sixty years. The challenge for Bond 26 will be embracing that flexibility without turning Bond into someone overly intangible.

Of course, the unspoken reason we’re hearing this kind of language now is because of Bond’s ill-advised death in No Time to Die. That atrocious ending inherently invited a more abstract interpretation of the character, and I suspect Knight’s comments are partly laying the groundwork for how they plan on moving the character forward. I just hope they don’t go to the extreme and devolve Bond’s legendary persona to some mythical figure.