Bond Continuity Theory: CR is a continuation of the Brosnan era and is not a reboot
sinlum
Posts: 118MI6 Agent
Ok so here is where the mud slinging is probably going to take place. I hold the controversial view that CR is NOT a reboot and is simply following on the same chronological timeframe as all the other films. There is no separate universe for the Craig films – it is the same one that continues on from the Brosnan era. Bond is an experienced agent returning to the secret service following DAD rather than being a rookie gaining his 00 licence for the first time.
I realise I am not the only person who shares this view. Some others have previously said similar things but I intend to present a full analysis of the film and use evidence from the film to back up my viewpoints.
I present you two versions.
The short version is an overview of the questions I came up with. If you don’t want to be overtasked, just read the short version and discuss the questions I pose.
The long version, unfortunately is very long, and might be a tough read. It is my in-depth analysis of the questions I raised from the film detailing why it is more logical for Bond to be an experienced agent in the film rather than being a rookie. There are also my comments on other things that happen in the film that also help to back up my viewpoints.
The Short Version:
1) Why is M the same person from the Brosnan films and why does she have the same office?
2) Why does M send a rookie Bond to kill Dryden, a person in such a prominent position?
3) How does Bond know it takes 2 kills to get 00 status if he is a rookie?
4) What does Bond mean when he says “Yes, considerably” in response to what Dryden says to him previously?
5) If the film is about Bond becoming a 00 agent, why is there no scene detailing the moment he actually gets his 00 status?
6) Why does Bond, a rookie agent, seem to be working alongside Carter, another rookie?
7) If this film is meant to be a prequel, why is it specified many times that the year is 2006 and why does M say she misses the Cold War? (This question only applies to people who believe Casino Royale is a prequel to the other films in the series).
8) Why doesn’t M have Bond arrested when he breaks into her house and accesses her computer if he’s just meant to be a rookie?
9) When M is speaking to Bond in her house, why do many of her comments seem to imply Bond has been in the service longer than what is shown on screen? (More details in the long version)
10) Why does M go to the Bahamas to visit a rookie agent?
11) Why does M say to a rookie Bond “Well, I knew you were you”?
12) Why doesn’t M just send Bond simply as a card player to wipe Le Chiffre out? Why does he need to go as a 00 agent?
13) Why would M risk a rookie agent continuing on to beat Le Chiffre after nearly being poisoned and told to get to hospital?
14) Why would Bond resign so quickly from a relative short time in the secret service after falling in love with Vesper whom he has known only for a few days?
15) Why does M say to Bond that they need him back after just this one mission?
Comments
Bear in mind there's a difference between a rookie (i.e. someone new to the service) and an experienced agent who hasn't yet reached the highest status of 00 agent. M has known Bond for a while; he's no rookie, she just hasn't promoted him to 00 yet (which we see happen during the title sequence).
The long version:
Events post DAD
1) Why is M the same person from the Brosnan films and why does she have the same office?
M says to Bond on the ship in DAD that he is to go to the evaluation centre on the Falklands Islands. Bond’s 00 licence is also rescinded.
I propose as Bond left the service once before in LTK and the fact that he lost his licence again following DAD means that he has to do the training sessions again from the beginning in order to convince M and the heads at MI6 that he is serious about returning to the service. After 6 months leave after DAD, Bond spends 2 years at the evaluation centre. This would take him until mid 2005. Following another 6 months leave, Bond is then sent to Prague by M to hunt down Dryden.
Bond has the same M from DAD and so she still has the same office. The other staff members have left the secret service likely from changes in MI6 and the fact that Bond was removed from the service.
If the producers were trying to establish Craig’s Bond as a reboot it seems a bit confusing to use the same actor and use the same office for M like before. It’s clear in GE that M’s appointment is relatively new and the GE mission is most likely the first one she assigns to Bond as M so CR most likely also does not proceed GE.
CR Opening Sequence
2) Why does M send a rookie Bond to kill Dryden, a person in such a prominent position?
The mission to kill Dryden seems more suited to involve a more experienced 00 agent. Generally speaking a rookie is more likely going to make more mistakes than an experienced agent. This mission seems quite important because if Bond messed up, Dryden would escape and leak all the secrets he knows of MI6.
If Bond and M have a shared history from the Brosnan era, M can put her trust in Bond to hunt down Dryden. Dryden even highlights the fact that M would have have sent a 00 if she was so sure he was bent. He claims he would know anyone promoted to 00 status being section chief and Bond’s file shows no kills. I theorise when Bond went to the evaluation centre his record was wiped clean and only M has access to his previous records – something which Dryden does not have access to.
3) How does Bond know it takes 2 kills to get 00 status if he is a rookie?
This kind of information seems quite sacred so how would Bond know this unless he had some shared history with the secret service. I theorise M must have confirmed this to him when she sent him to find Dryden and so his mission is to make the two kills on his new record so he can get his licence back. Again she would only tell Bond this if she had some past history of his service as an agent.
4) What does Bond mean when he says “Yes, considerably” in response to what Dryden says to him previously?
In the dialogue in the office, Dryden says “Made you feel it did he? You needn’t worry. The second is…”
Bond shoots him and then says “Yes, considerably.”
What is going on here in the exchanges if Bond is a rookie? I suggest that Dryden thinking Bond is a new agent meant to say that the first kill makes you feel remorse and the second makes you feel normal. But as Bond is back in the service after a number of years he has the feeling of the enjoyment of killing. That’s why he says “considerably”. Again he would say this only if he was an experienced agent rather than being a rookie.
Title Sequence
5) If the film is about Bond becoming a 00 agent, why is there no scene detailing the moment he actually gets his 00 status?
All that is shown is “James Bond - 007 status confirmed”. This is simply the change in the system (most likely by M) that Bond has got his 00 licence to kill again.
The title sequence also shows Bond fighting blanked out characters. I suggest that these reference Bond’s training missions on the Falklands Islands.
Madagascar
6) Why does Bond, a rookie agent, seem to be working alongside Carter, another rookie?
Bond seems to be more experienced than Carter and indeed it is Carter who is the one who has a gun. If Bond is re-entering the service, it makes total sense that he would be more experienced than Carter.
The bombmaker’s mobile phone has the year 06 on it which confirms this happened after all the other Bond films (if we assume each film takes place in the same year it was released). Later in the film, there are other phones and the surveillance camera footage in the Bahamas hotel all reference the year being 06 (interestingly this is one of the few films that seems to specify which year the events are taking place). I think this rules out that this film is a prequel to any of the other films.
M in the corridor
7) If this film is meant to be a prequel, why is it specified many times that the year is 2006 and why does M say she misses the Cold War? (This question only applies to people who believe Casino Royale is a prequel to the other films in the series).
M says in this scene “I give him 00 status and the man celebrates by shooting up an embassy. Is the man deranged?” Why would she say Bond is celebrating getting his 00 status unless it was something special to Bond? Again if he is regaining his 00 status it makes sense she would say this rather than talking about him as a rookie.
M also says she misses the Cold War. This in my view is definite confirmation that the film is set after 1991 and is definitely not a prequel to the Connery films or any of the other films.
M’s House
8) Why doesn’t M have Bond arrested when he breaks into her house and accesses her computer if he’s just meant to be a rookie?
Bond knows he’s in trouble from the mission in Madagascar and breaking and entering then accessing her computer would just send her over the edge. She would immediately have Bond arrested if he was rookie. Bond uses M’s private computer to access the data on the mobile he recovers. He finds out M’s address and what M stands for. Why would he do all that as a rookie agent? Again if he’s rejoining the service as an experienced agent, it makes more sense for him to do these things. Rejoining the service is not as special to Bond since he has already had so many missions in the past. If he gets caught now he has nothing to lose. His reputation has already been wiped from the records following DAD. If Bond was a rookie, he would be throwing away a potentially exciting career just for the sake of curiosity.
In their exchange Bond says “I’ll shoot the camera next time” and M replies with “Or yourself”. This could be a slight homage to what she said to Bond in DAD.
9a) Why does M say to Bond that has an overdeveloped trigger finger?
If Bond was a rookie, he would only have killed a couple of people by this time. If he was an experienced agent following on from the Brosnan era, this comment would make more sense.
9b) Why does M say “I knew it was too early to promote you”?
From the rookie perspective, this comment seems ridiculous for M to say. She decided to send Bond, a rookie, to kill Dryden and then grant him 00 status. So the events of the film are ultimately her fault since she has poor judgement of her rookie agent. If this was a post Brosnan era Bond, her comment would make more sense since she would feel unsure about Bond getting his 00 licence again based on the two kills at the start of the film. She knows he has been a great agent in the past but is unsure about his current status in life at the present time.
Bond says “Well I understand 00s have a very short life expectancy so your mistake will be short lived”. Bond probably finds this out from accessing the data on M’s computer. He probably realises that 00s don’t last long in their positions so he could find this info out even as a veteran agent. Again he would probably go searching through the databases more as an experienced agent since getting caught would do less damage to his attitude to the job.
M says “This may be too much for a blunt instrument to understand”. I think here she is having a dig at Bond implying he has lost his sharpness.
9c) Why does M say “I want you to take your ego out of the equation and to judge the situation dispassionately”?
She also adds “I have to know I can trust you and that you know who to trust”. Again these comments she makes seem to be referring to Bond as a more experienced agent than a rookie.
She tells him to think about your future and would consider feeding Bond to the bastards who want Bond’s head. Again why would you put a rookie though this? I theorise that she thinks if she puts Bond in a precarious situation, he can really be tested on his devotion to returning to the secret service. Again she could easily just have Bond put under house arrest and to decide to not proceed with him any further if he was a rookie but she doesn’t do this because he isn’t.
The Bahamas
Bond knows the Aston Martin is from 1964. It’s definitely not the same Aston Martin as Bond’s as it has left hand drive.
Bond knows M’s username and password. Again why is he not court marshalled for this unless she trusts his intuition from the past missions?
10) Why does M go to the Bahamas to visit a rookie agent?
M goes to see Bond in the field again just like in DAD. It would make more sense that she does speak with him in person since she wants to show that she cares about where he stands with MI6. Doing it in person would show that she is taking Bond seriously. If Bond was a rookie, why would she make all the effort to go to visit him? Surely a simple phone call would suffice. Going to visit him shows that she cares about the situation he’s in.
M arranges for a chip to be put into Bond’s arm so she can track him. M knows that Bond is the best card player in the service at Villers. (He must have been going there for some time to get that status! Again another nod that he this is the veteran Bond and not some rookie).
M asks Bond if he can remain emotionally detached. And then “That’s not your problem is it Bond?” Again why would she say that unless she knew about his past?
The clincher question:
11) Why does M say to a rookie Bond “Well, I knew you were you”? Again it would make much more sense she would say this to an experienced agent and it implies she had sent him on previous missions.
Casino Scenes
Bond is assigned a proper mission with weapons and an Aston Martin DBS.
12) Why doesn’t M just send Bond simply as a card player to wipe Le Chiffre out? Why does he need to go as a 00 agent?
If his mission is just to beat Le Chiffre at cards, why does she send him as a 00 agent with weapons and a car? Why does she need to give a rookie these additional items? My theory is that she gives him these extra bits of kit so Bond can be seen as taking is on a proper mission with a potential licence to kill. That’s why he’s on the secret service and why he has rejoined. Also the Aston Martin he gets is a newer model from the one in DAD so it makes sense that Bond continuing from the Brosnan era would be given a newer model of the same car brand.
Bond likes the martini he instructs the barman to make. It is never mentioned in the previous films that the martinis he drinks are made this way. This is probably a new cocktail he thinks of as he is playing the poker game.
After Bond is saved from the poison, Bond says to MI6 and M who is also on the line that he will go to hospital but after he has won the game.
13) Why would M risk a rookie agent continuing on to beat Le Chiffre after nearly being poisoned and told to get to hospital?
M seems to allow Bond to continue the game with Le Chiffre even though he was told to go to hospital. Again it would make more sense for her too allow this if she knew about his past actions. His survival from DAD would be a good indicator that she knows Bond has the mental and physical stamina to continue quite normally after being poisoned.
Final Scenes
Bond seemingly falls in love with Vesper over the course of a few days.
14) Why would Bond resign so quickly from a relative short time in the secret service after falling in love with Vesper whom he has known only for a few days?
Bond has finally got his “dream job” of being a 00 agent. Why would he give it up so quickly over Vesper in such a short space of time? If he was an experienced agent coming back into the service it would make more sense in my view. He’s probably killed hundreds of people and the whole return to the service still makes him feel incomplete. He falls for Vesper in a similar way to Tracy in that it’s his way out to find a new life. It makes sense this would happen to an agent who has years of previous experience but is not fully sure about continuing rather than a complete rookie throwing in the towel after just a few days after meeting their dream woman.
M says at the end that “Vesper knew you were you”. I mentioned this earlier but again featuring it twice in the film suggests that this Bond is the continuation of the Brosnan Bond.
M says that Bond doesn’t trust anyone and that he has learned his lesson. He needs to return to the service because they need him.
15) Why does M say to Bond that they need him back after just this one mission?
This mission didn’t actually work out well for MI6. Le Chiffre was killed and Vesper their lead was also killed. Moreover all the money from the poker game was recovered by Mr White and not by Bond. M says the trail has gone cold. Why is Bond so highly valued by M considering the failings of the mission?
It would make far more sense that she says this to a more experienced Bond. Considering he let his weakness shine through by trusting Vesper, M knows that Bond has that remorseless edge which M knew from past missions.
Bonus Points: Some people say that the Bond theme only plays at the end because Bond is a fully developed agent after the events of the film and therefore it must be the first Bond adventure. However the Bond theme subtly plays in various scenes in the film:
A little Bond theme plays when he wipes out Dimitros at the poker table.
When Bond puts on his dinner jacket, the Bond theme plays on the bass.
The Bond theme plays when Bond is revived in the car by Vesper.
That's the end of this marathon essay 😂
Yes maybe the term "rookie" might be the wrong term to use. I mean it more as a "new" Bond rather than the "old" Bond she knows from the Brosnan era. If Craig is a "new" Bond in a rebooted universe I accept the fact that he must have been in the service for a while before he gets his 00 licence but this fact never specified in the film.
Some interesting points, but unfortunately
q3) I doubt an agent training to become a OO would be unaware that it takes two kills to becone one, which you suggest. It is even cryptically in the title "OO"
q4) You are over thinking this. Dryden earlier in the conversation says something like "He made you feel it". We, the audience are watching Bond struggling to eliminate his first kill, so we know Bond "felt it". The "Considerably" line is referring to "Considerably easier" which the Dryden kill is.
After that, even though you write some interesting stuff, you were not winning me over
Villiers (not "Villers") is a person, not a place. He's the one beside M in her first scene, and elsewhere.
I would argue that MI6 would probably not make this fact appear so transparent. It might risk other agents going around trying to get a OO licence just from getting two kills. Also it is implied in the films that only a select few become OO agents so it is somehow an exclusive club of the best agents. I would argue that agents would be told about the section and the importance of the two kills only after they have gained their first two kills. In Bond's case, as he is returning to the service according to my theory, M would probably figure that Bond knows that gaining the first two kills at the start of the film would enable him to get his licence back.
I forgot about the Dryden comment also - Dryden doesn't know what happened with his first kill so I doubt Dryden means the kill was a struggle. I interpret the line as having a meaning on a moral level - made you feel the regret of killing someone?
Bond then sense "Yes, considerably" because it's his kick for being a OO agent.
Thanks for that. Learning something new all the time. I always figured she was referring to some kind of country club.
I'll give you an example of why James Bond isn't a rookie agent in CR. Let's imagine an officer who's been in the British Parachute Regiment for years. He then manages to qualify for the SAS. He is then a new special forces officer, but he is absolutely not a rookie soldier. It's pretty much the same with James Bond in CR. He's been a naval officer, then a SBS officer, a service that works with the secret service and has some crossover skills. Next he transfers to the MI6 and works there for some years as an agent. Only then does he transfer to the 00-section. He had years working in covert operations and as an agent at the time. He's an experienced agent.
The system isn't that any MI6 agent who happens to kill someone is automatically a 00-agent. My impression is that an agent applies to be a 00 or is invited to try. Then the agent is wetted and trained very hard. If he/she handles the setting and training well the agent is given two persons to asassinate. The targets are of course horrible people picked by people like M and probably other people high up in the government. If the 00 candidate asassinate the two targets successfully he/she is now accepted as a full 00-agent. It's like a final exam.
Dryden, who is a station chief, knows of this system.
On point 5)
The plan was to have a PTS that showed in a stylized way Bond being formally accepted as a 00. It would show his papers entering a folder, such as his education, navy experience and the two kills. Then the folder gets a OO-stamp. At the end a man would take the folder and put it in a safe or archive. EON later decided it wasn't visually exciting enough and probably not necessarily.
You do however have a good point about Judi Densh's M. It didn't make sense to have her stay on as M in CR. I think there is a computer game (one from Brosnan's tenure?) that mentiones another name for her M. If this is canon she's simply playing two different persons. The real and simple reason is most likely that Densh is such a great actress and EON liked her so much they simply let her stay.
Judi M for Brosnan is usually referred to as Barbara Mawdsley - this is from Raymond Benson; never acknowledged in the films (nearly) but we have to call her something to distinguish her from
Judi M for Craig is Olivia Mansfield. It's written on the box containing the bulldog which Moneypenny gives Craig in SF.
Olivia is Judi Dench's middle name; Mansfield was part of the name of the first real life M (actually "C").
Sinlum - while I don't think this one is a strong theory from you, I like what you're doing. You're a new member who posts a lot and starts new threads. You're a fresh pair of eyes and you offer new perspectives and your posts encourage debate. This is good. 😃
Yes I'm really enjoying these threads too - thanks Sinium!
To be a slightly pedantic irritant(!); I see it mentioned that Craig's Bond was in the SBS a lot, but actually his fictional biography which was written for the promotion of CR actually had him avoid the standard SBS units to serve with a Special Forces unit, which in real life hadn't existed since WW2.
@emtiem is correct in his counterargument: CraigBond may be a rookie double-oh, but he's not a rookie agent of MI6. several of your list of points make it sound as if he's just applied to a Want Ad for top secret government assassin and he's just been given the job and still on probation. I'm quite sure at one point M actually says "I knew it was too early to promote you", thats the clue: he's been working for M for some time and only just been promoted, sometime during the main credits.
I know your rule is the books should not be referenced to explain gaps in the films' logic, but it may help to remember that Fleming tells us that Bond was an agent as early as 1939, then was promoted to double oh sometime in 1950. So eleven years before he earned that promotion (Fleming is problematic because those first two kills happened during WWII, so why'd they wait at least five years to give him that promotion?). Craig looks pretty Craggy, as the antiCraig faction used to say, so he may well have also been working as a lowlevel agent for eleven years before finally getting his break.
why's M send a double-oh to gamble against Le Chiffre when all that was needed was a good card player? thats explained in the dialog: he's the best card player in MI6, "believe me I wish it wasnt so". M actually wished she had the choice to send someone else (too bad Evelyn Tremble wasnt available)
why does M travel to visit a rookie agent? because he's on an important mission, and making a right cockup of it. he's also been acting outside of orders, this is really a matter of discipline, she needs to get hold of this loose cannon and get him under control.
a lot of the first half of the film is about how bad a job he's doing as a double oh. M comments several times he's leaving a trail of corpses without getting any information first ( he keeps having to check their cell-phones to learn anything). its like he's been given this high security license to kill, and he therefor assumes his job is to kill people, whereas its a discretionary choice when absolutely needed. it isnt til the end of the next film he's learned some selfcontrol and allows M to take Vesper's old boyfriend alive.
and if I'm reading the theory correctly, he's not only a rookie agent, but also BrosnanBond returning to his old job. how can both be true? certainly BrosnanBond would not be making all these errors in judgement we watch CraigBond make, he's already saved the world twenty times. how did BrosnanBond leave the service again? something to do with the start of Die Another Day when M said she didnt want him released from the Korean prison at all? he does act on his own for the first half of that film, but I thought by the time he'd flown to Iceland he was working with MI6 again. but lets say he's still not an official agent again for four more years, I still dont believe experienced BrosnanBond is going to be killing people in an embassy or other stunts we watch CraigBond pull.
Casino Royale is problematic in that Craig looks too old for some of the behaviour he displays, and that behaviour is crucial to the plot. And he acts too young for the experience he should have accumulated for this promotion. He acts more like a teenager would when given such responsibility, so its understandable one might think this was his first job ever. And he falls for Vesper like he's never been with a woman before.
if we're going to err on one side or the other, is he a rookie agent, or is he BrosnanBond returned, rookie agent makes more sense. But that really doesnt make sense either since he looks so Craggy and should have accumulated more years of experience before getting that promotion. Thats the films fault for being somewhat confused, and some of those contradictions go back to Fleming.
One word: Felix Leiter.
Okay, that was two words, but you get the drift.
Actually, no. I don't get the drift. I'm not drifting. I'm driftless. 🥴
I share the view that Bond has some backstory with the secret service prior to the events of CR even with the reboot universe but everything you mention is not specified or implied anywhere in the film. (Please correct me if I am wrong).
Right which is what I was also trying to say earlier. Not everyone becomes a 00 after getting two kills. However I would say that agents would only be told of the possibility if they had already killed two people. Otherwise it could up as a bit of lose info that might get around if agents don't go through with the kills. In Bond's case, according to the continuation theory, Bond knows about the 2 kills since he completed them years before already.
You're joking right? I find it odd in general though if CR is meant to be an origin story with a rebooted version of Bond, we don't get any concrete info that this is indeed Bond's first mission and he is a new 00 agent.
Right and I do wonder if someone on the writing team (maybe Michael Wilson) decided to use Judi Dench again in order for there to be subtle hints that this might not be an origin story with a rebooted new Bond. SF provided more evidence that Craig's Bond could be the same Bond as old with the classic DB5 being shown with gadgets.
I wonder if the reboot thing is something they have done pretty much every time with a new actor then later decided to bridge the actor's run with overarching continuity. If you look at all the actors first films following Connery they all seem to indicate a soft reboot and then a film or moment later on in their run, you find hints of continuity:
OHMSS - Lazenby breaks the 4th wall with his "other feller" line thereby giving birth to the codename theory. Also he doesn't recognise Blofeld (but I tried to reconcile this one already). Then later in his office, he goes through the items from three of the Connery films so it indicates he's the same Bond as Connery's.
LALD - Bond doesn't drink a martini but smokes cigars and brushes off the Mrs Bond moment involving Rosie Carver. Then in TSWLM, Bond drinks martinis again, wears his classic tux and Anja talks about his naval history and his wife being killed. In FYEO, Bond visits Tracy's grave.
TLD - Has virtually no continuity with any of the other films except Bond drinks a martini and wears a tuxedo. Then in LTK, he meets with an old Felix Leiter and Leiter mentions Bond was married once before.
GE - also feels like a modern reboot but then in TWINE Bond mentions his family motto.
I do wonder with Craig that they tried to stress the reboot aspect even more just so he wouldn't be compared so directly with any of the other actors in he series but yet put in a few nods to suggest he might still be the same old Bond from before.
I could have watched SF for a million years and never noticed the name underneath the box. This difference in the names is interesting but it does not seem apparent in the films that Dench is playing two different Ms.
I assume you mean Bond doesn't recognise Felix Leiter and therefore the film must be a reboot? I do have another theory concerning Felix Leiter coming soon....
No, I'm not joking. I'm not sure if this is from the DVD commentary or interviews, but this was the plan.
Michael Wilson wasn't on the CR writing team, but that's not important. I believe Campbell says it makes no sense keeping Dench as M, but they kept her because she's so good. I think it's that simple. But why would the writers place subtle hints that this wasn't a re-boot?
Before Craig there were little continuity from movie to movie. There were however a few direct references to earlier movies, for example Bond's marriage to Tracy being mentioned in LTK. This never happens in Craig's movies. There are some indirect references to pre-CR movies, but I think that's different. The writers said the DB5 has the gadgets in NTTD because Bond and Q worked on it in their free time. However Craig's Bond never says things like: "I remember tracking Goldfinger to Switzerland in this car". That would be a direct reference.
There were also some changes when a new actor was introduced because the movies have to change somewhat with the times and because the actors have different styles and strengths. Craig will always be compared to the other Bond actors. It comes with the territory and Craig must've known it. So Craig giving the impression it's a re-boot to avoid comparisons makes no sense to me.
'To use Royal Navy slang, Number24- er, James Bond was adrift."
John Gardner, Licence To Kill. Opening line.... well, almost.
You're right. It's not clear to the movie goer that she's playing two different persons. I think we just have to accept that there are many changes from movie to movie that don't make sense and many indirect references to pre-2006 movies in Craig's movies that don't make sense.
Michael Wilson may not be on the writing team but I think he serves as some kind of supervisor. I remember he with Barbara Broccoli talked in one interview about the dilemma of having to face a blank page with no script at the start of the production of every James Bond film.
I think decisions like who stars in the film are most likely a joint effort and I believe there was more behind the decision for Dench to continue in the role than simply her being a good actress.
There have only been a few direct references to events in previous films. Most references tend to be more like Easter Eggs. It's the same with the Craig films:
CR - Bond has the same M as before
SF - Bond seems to have the same classic DB5. Q says "Were you expecting an exploding pen? We don't go in for that kind of thing anymore" - subtle nod to GE
NTTD - Bond says "We have all the time in the world" to Madeleine - reference to OHMSS. Bond drives the Aston Martin Vantage from TLD.
Regarding Craig's appointment though - I think there was a a bit of controversy around his selection which hadn't been seen since Lazenby. Brosnan, whether you like him or not, was beloved by the masses and was a fairly well established actor outside of the Bond films. Craig had only appeared in a few minor roles in a select number of films and it was his performance in Layer Cake that allegedly swayed Barbara Broccoli to consider him as a serious candidate. Considering the producers were now in the position to adapt the first Bond novel, I think they just ran with the line that it was easier to make everyone believe they would start the timeline again with an origin story in a different universe since it would reduce the number of direct comparisons made of Craig's performances with the other actors, notably Brosnan's.