Who should get Bond? Should she get the tattoo? – Chiswick’s Angsty Aunt

Our very own Angsty Aunt is back to tackle two looming inevitabilities: the end of Daniel Craig’s reign as Bond, and your teenager’s first tattoo. Should you step aside or step in? If you’ve got a dilemma, domestic, cinematic or otherwise, get in touch by clicking here.

“Who should be the next James Bond?”

At this point, any James Bond would be enough. It’s felt like an age since No Time To Die, and longer since we had ourselves a proper good Bond film.

I confess, I’ve only ventured as far as the Daniel Craig era. I have attempted to indulge Brosnan, Dalton, Lazenby and all the rest, without much success.

I’ll never argue with someone on grounds of nostalgia, but I simply can’t get into them. The misogyny is too pronounced, the stunts slightly too farcical, the special effects far too dated, even for the time.

Admittedly, the bar is quite low.

All this to say my lack of expertise comes at the cost of familiarity. I don’t really know what a good Bond actor should be, beyond the obvious symptoms. Then again, with Amazon’s takeover, this may not be too as big a disadvantage as it would have been in years gone by. The franchise is in flux. Its future, anyone’s guess.

The appointment will need to hit the ground running. When it comes to one of the biggest, and surely the most iconic, franchise roles in cinema history, there’s little room for manouvre.

From my understanding, Daniel Craig’s Bond seems to have facilitated the transition of 007 into the modern era of moviemaking quite well. His successor will need to continue that.

The most recent series has seen greater diversity in the cast and more investment into their backstories. Skyfall was the best example of this.

Despite this, there is a reason Casino Royale was Craig’s most popular film among critics and fans alike. It was Bond at its procedural best, brutal and raw. I’d suggest it is where casting directors should start. Especially given the context of Amazon’s takeover, short-term success may champion opening with a wider vision that could struggle to get off the ground.

However, this still does not answer the question: who should do it?

When considering the above, my personal choice would be Tom Hardy. He shares with Craig a blend of softness and raw masculinity. This measured characteristic has been heavily toyed with in the most recent instalments.

However, there is no doubt, through films like Mad Max and Legend, that he also has the grittiness required for the role.

He also looks pretty sauve in a tux (check the internet), another factor that can’t be ignored.

The three, for me, are a powerful combination for whatever comes next. With so much creative uncertainty and with Amazon needing to make a big impression, Hardy’s acting range could also come in handy.

I could see him convince as a tortured boy done good, with a similar chip on the shoulder that Craig had in Casino Royale. Equally, he could dazzle as a polished candidate, forced to embrace the chaotic nature of a double-0.

Most of the frontrunners I’ve seen look like poster boys. Their skin is too smooth, their hair too well kept. Tom Hardy doesn’t look out of place in a perfume ad, but he has a gruffness that is hard to come by these days.

With the announcement that Dune and Bladerunner 2049 director, Denis Villeneuve, has been confirmed as the director for the next film, we should expect brutality with finesse. It’s one of his trademarks.

Who would you pick?

“My daughter (17) wants a tattoo for her 18th birthday present, but I hate tattoos and am concerned that she will regret it. What should I do?”

Let her.

Okay, I could probably be more helpful than that. In my opinion, the train has already left the station. Consenting to the tattoo is the path of least resistance.

I think it’s good for parents to show measured retreat over this stuff. Someone’s 18th is a significant state change into adulthood. It is in all likelihood the most important birthday she’ll ever have.

I have no doubt that navigating that first challenge of freedom as a parent is tricky. Your approval, or lack thereof, over this first big decision may have a significant long-term impact.

Before we turn 18, no means no, more or less. But now, no simply means: I don’t want you to. Especially with something like a tattoo.

If you refuse outright, what relationship does it set up for the future? Most likely, it’ll come across as putting up a wall, the kind an 18 year old lives to climb over. Probably best not to turn that into a habit.

You could negotiate a waiting period, but it sounds like she already knows what she wants. Delayed satisfaction is a sort of lose-lose for everyone. She will probably still be upset, or get it as soon as she gets a taste of further freedom – be that through university, travelling, or moving out.

On the flip side, throwing whatever birthday money you can at her and wishing her the best of luck – perhaps in a game of bluff – could backfire in a dozen ways. And it also may not be what she’s looking for if she’s communicating all of this to you.

Ultimately, when she becomes an adult, she can use her money to get whatever she wants. But, as my parents often remind me, parenting never stops. Wanting your approval is still an important part of that state change.

It also helps that, by consenting to the tattoo, you can control how much you invest in it. Anything more, it’s her money on the table. It’s a partnership of sorts.

So, all possibilities considered, this feels like the best option. It follows the path of least resistance whilst allowing you to stay in the loop, which 18 year olds very much need.

Memories of my uni days still haunt me.

The path to adulthood has to be a cooperative one. Total absolution of responsibility throws your daughter into the deep end. Conversely, trying to retain full control will only create distance, which has never benefitted any relationship. (Here, I mean distance in the sense of secrecy)

That tattoo is likely happening one way or another. Again, without knowing all the facts, it seems that the best course of action is to let her, and be there for as much or as little as she needs you for.

Of course, this all relies on the tattoo not being particularly outlandish, radical or otherwise to the detriment of her life. But given the lack of specification, I’m assuming she wants something fairly standard and inoffensive.

If this is the case, I’d urge letting her go ahead with it. It’s not going to ruin her life, and the trust consent gives both of you will pay dividends for years to come. It means when you really do feel the need to intervene, she’s much more likely to pay attention.

I can only hope the tattoo looks good.