Deputy Prime Minister Suphajee Suthumpun reviewed passenger services at Suvarnabhumi Airport, focusing on bottlenecks and enhancements under the Visitor Economy strategy, including improved security and real-time data sharing.

Key Points

• Deputy Prime Minister and Commerce Minister Suphajee Suthumpun visited Suvarnabhumi Airport on August 17 to enhance passenger services under the government’s Visitor Economy strategy, aimed at improving travel experiences and boosting economic value.
• The visit included Tourism Minister Surasak Phancharoenworakul and Deputy Transport Ministers. They focused on improving immigration processes and passenger handling, including upgrades to automated passport gates and staffing adjustments during peak times.
• To enhance security, tourist police will oversee baggage claim, monitor tour groups, and use CCTV with an intelligent command center. The Visitor Economy strategy emphasizes spending from various travel sectors, with agencies tasked for short-term improvements and longer-term issues addressed at the government level.

Deputy Prime Minister and Commerce Minister Suphajee Suthumpun visited Suvarnabhumi Airport on August 17 to review passenger services and address bottlenecks under the government’s Visitor Economy strategy, seeking to improve travel experiences and generate greater economic value.

Suphajee was joined by Tourism and Sports Minister Surasak Phancharoenworakul, Deputy Transport Ministers Siripong Angkasakulkiat and Phattrapong Phattraprasitt, and Weerasak Kowsurat, chairman of the Deputy Prime Minister’s Advisory Board. Officials reviewed immigration and passenger handling, including plans to improve automated passport gates, adjust staffing during peak periods, and share flight and passenger data in real time.

Tourist police will increase oversight at baggage claim areas, conduct joint patrols, and monitor tour groups, transportation services, illegal guides, and unauthorized solicitation. Authorities also plan to use CCTV and an intelligent command center to improve security and response times.

The Visitor Economy strategy looks beyond arrival numbers to spending from leisure, business, education, wellness, and other travel. Agencies will receive responsibilities and timelines for short-term improvements, while issues involving legislation, major infrastructure, or long-term investment will be considered at the government level.

Source : Suvarnabhumi Airport Targets Better Tourist Experience

For twenty years, being found online followed a familiar pattern: rank on the first page, get clicked, win the enquiry. That pattern is now shifting.

A growing share of searches ends with an AI-generated answer rather than a list of links – Google’s AI Overviews summarise results directly, while assistants such as ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity are increasingly used to ask for recommendations in plain language.

For national brands, this is a content problem. For local businesses, it is something more fundamental: when someone asks an assistant for a good electrician nearby, the answer is assembled from whatever information about local businesses the model can find and trust. Being visible now means being the business that information points to.

From ranking to being cited

The practical difference is between ranking and being cited. Traditional SEO aimed to place a page as high as possible, so a person would click on it. AI-driven discovery works differently: the assistant reads across multiple sources and produces a single, summarised answer, often naming only two or three businesses.

That compresses the shortlist considerably. Where a searcher might once have scrolled past ten results and formed their own view, they may now be handed out three names and a short reason for each. Getting that set is the new objective, and it depends less on a single optimised page than on the overall picture of your business across the web.

There is a second change worth noting. Because assistants answer in conversation, people ask in fuller sentences – “who can fix a leaking flat roof in south London this week” rather than “roofer london”. Businesses whose online information covers those specifics, including services, service areas and availability, are easier to match that kind of question than those describing themselves in generic terms.

What feeds AI answers about local businesses

The encouraging news for local businesses is that the inputs are mostly familiar. AI tools are drawing on the same signals that have underpinned good local SEO for years – they are simply weighting consistency and corroboration more heavily.

• Accurate, consistent business information – your name, address and phone number matching everywhere they appear. Conflicting details make a business harder to verify, and a model with doubts is more likely to name a competitor it can confirm.
• A complete Google Business Profile – categories, services, hours and location remain a primary source for local information.
• Genuine reviews – both the rating and what customers actually write. Review text is a rich source of detail about what a business does well.
• Structured data – schema markup that states plainly what your business is, where it operates and what it offers, in a form machines can read without guessing.
• Substantive content – pages that clearly answer the questions customers ask, rather than thin marketing copy.
• Corroboration from elsewhere – mentions in directories, trade bodies, local press and supplier sites that independently confirm your business exists and does what it claims.

What local businesses should do now?

None of this requires a dramatic change of strategy, but it does reward doing the basics properly and keeping them current.

Start with an audit of how your business appears across the web and fix anything inconsistent – old numbers, previous addresses, listings you no longer control. Complete your Google Business Profile in full. Build a steady, ethical habit of requesting reviews and replying to them. Add local business schema to your site, so your details are machine-readable. Then invest in content that genuinely answers customer questions, since that is what gets quoted rather than skimmed.

Two habits are worth adopting alongside that. The first is treating your business information as something that needs maintaining rather than setting once: details drift, staff change, services expand, and stale listings quietly undermine everything else. The second is writing plainly. Content packed with marketing language is harder for both people and machines to extract a clear answer from a page that simply states what you do, where you do it and what it costs.

It is also worth testing the reality: ask ChatGPT or Google for a recommendation in your sector and area and see whether you appear. It is a rough check rather than a reliable metric, but it quickly reveals whether the information about your business is clear enough to be picked up. Specialist local seo london support can be useful here for businesses competing in dense urban markets, where the shortlist is short, and the competition is heavy.

Agencies that have built around this shift take a broader view of visibility than rankings alone. Make Me Local, established in 2013 and based in West Wickham, Kent, describes its approach as “Search Everywhere Optimisation” – visibility across Google, AI platforms, social and voice – and has worked with more than 230 UK businesses across trades, home services, clinics and professional firms.

The direction of travel

AI search is still developing, and anyone claiming to have it fully solved should be treated with caution. What is clear is that discovery is fragmented across traditional search, AI assistants and social platforms, and that businesses with accurate information, real reviews and genuinely useful content are best placed whichever way it settles.

That is the reassuring part. The work that makes a business visible to an AI assistant is largely the work that makes it credible to a customer – being easy to find, easy to verify and clearly good at what you do.

Sylvester Stallone has named “First Blood,” the 1982 film that launched the Rambo franchise, as the best action movie he has ever made, a distinction that comes as the film continues to be ranked among the greatest entries in the entire action genre more than four decades after its release.

“First Blood” arrived just six years after Stallone’s breakout role in “Rocky,” cementing his status as one of Hollywood’s most bankable action stars. Directed by Ted Kotcheff and based on David Morrell’s 1972 survival thriller novel, the film starred Stallone as John Rambo, a retired Vietnam War veteran and former Green Beret pushed to his breaking point. According to the film’s IMDb plot summary, “A drifting veteran must weaponize the wilderness to survive a relentless manhunt led by a small-town sheriff who pushed his fragile psyche past the point of no return.”

The film has held up strongly with both critics and audiences over the decades. “First Blood” currently carries a 7.7 out of 10 rating on IMDb and an 86% score on Rotten Tomatoes, figures that have helped cement its reputation as one of the most enduring and well-regarded action films of its era. Archie Fenn of MovieWeb described the movie’s outsized cultural impact in a review cited by Men’s Journal. “To call First Blood one of the most lauded action movies of all-time would be an understatement,” Fenn wrote. “The movie kicked off a billion-dollar franchise, turned Stallone into a Hollywood icon, and has a legacy as one of the most influential action films of the 1980s.”

Stallone himself offered a candid assessment of the film’s place within his own extensive filmography during a 2026 interview with GQ, explicitly calling it the best action movie of his career. “Inadvertently, I’d consider [‘First Blood’] the best action film I’ve ever done,” Stallone said. He went on to explain what set the film apart stylistically from other entries in the genre, describing it as one of the earliest examples of a “pure” action film built primarily around physical performance rather than dialogue-driven storytelling. “And I think it might be one of the first, when you say ‘pure’ action films,” Stallone said. “You’ve had car chases. You’ve had gunfights. But I mean, it’s all action. You’re speaking with your body, your looks, your intentions, and the other characters are doing the dialogue. You are in action the whole time.”

That description reflects the film’s distinctive approach at the time of its release, which relied heavily on Rambo’s physicality, survival instincts and largely nonverbal characterization to drive the story forward, a stylistic choice that helped distinguish “First Blood” from many of the more dialogue-heavy action films that had preceded it.

The success of “First Blood” launched a franchise that would continue for nearly four decades. The studio followed the original film with “Rambo: First Blood Part II” in 1985, another commercially successful entry that expanded on the character’s story. “Rambo III” arrived three years later in 1988, set against the backdrop of the Soviet-Afghan War. The franchise then went quiet for two decades before returning with a fourth installment, simply titled “Rambo,” in 2008. The series concluded more than a decade later with “Rambo: Last Blood” in 2019, bringing the character’s on-screen story to a close after a run spanning 37 years from the release of the original film.

Despite the franchise’s overall commercial success across its five-film run, “First Blood” has remained the entry most consistently singled out by critics, fans and now Stallone himself as the series’ definitive high point, both artistically and in terms of its broader cultural influence on the action genre.

Stallone’s career has been defined by a string of similarly influential action roles beyond the Rambo franchise, including his portrayal of boxer Rocky Balboa across the “Rocky” film series, which began in 1976 and helped establish his career before “First Blood” further solidified his status as one of the genre’s most recognizable leading men. His filmography since has spanned decades of action-oriented projects, with “First Blood” continuing to stand out even within that broader body of work as a film Stallone himself now identifies as his personal creative high-water mark within the action genre specifically.

The continued critical reappraisal of “First Blood” more than 40 years after its release reflects a broader pattern in how certain foundational action films from the late 20th century have aged, with movies originally marketed primarily as commercial entertainment increasingly recognized by critics and film historians alike for their technical craftsmanship, thematic depth and lasting influence on the genre’s subsequent development. “First Blood’s” exploration of a veteran’s psychological trauma and alienation following the Vietnam War, layered beneath its action sequences, has similarly drawn ongoing critical attention as a factor distinguishing it from more purely spectacle-driven entries within the broader action film canon.

With Stallone’s recent comments reaffirming the film’s significance within his own extensive career, “First Blood” appears likely to continue drawing renewed attention from both longtime fans and newer audiences discovering the Rambo franchise, particularly as retrospective rankings and critical reassessments of classic action cinema continue to place the 1982 original among the genre’s most influential and enduring achievements.

“Lioness” returns Sunday, Aug. 23, with its fourth episode of the season, titled “Murder Hornets,” continuing the Taylor Sheridan-created spy thriller’s tense, dual-timeline storyline surrounding CIA operative Joe’s disappearance and the widening geopolitical crisis unfolding around her capture.

The episode premieres on Paramount+, following the series’ established weekly Sunday release schedule since the season debuted Aug. 2. Because the release is tied to Pacific time, the episode becomes available at different local times depending on region, arriving during the early morning hours in the United States, with several international markets receiving access later that same Sunday morning or afternoon.

According to a recently released teaser trailer, “Murder Hornets” opens in the show’s present-day timeline, roughly six months after the attack on Joe’s residence that set this season’s central mystery in motion. The teaser shows CIA officials Meade, Mullins, Westfield, Hollar and Mason gathered in a situation room to discuss what is described as a worst-case scenario, according to a breakdown of the footage published by DMT Alkies. That conversation is juxtaposed against shots of Joe, played by Zoe Saldaña, still strapped to a metal bed frame, with what has been described in coverage as a drinking bird device dripping water onto her forehead, evoking the show’s ongoing depiction of her captivity.

According to that same teaser breakdown, the situation room discussion centers on how close intelligence officials can allow the crisis to escalate before it becomes unsalvageable. With each passing moment, tracking down Joe becomes increasingly difficult, raising the stakes for characters Mason and Hollar as they weigh how far the situation can be pushed. The breakdown further speculates that, to prevent a worst-case outcome, the U.S. government may be forced to consider extreme options, potentially including direct conflict with Russia, or even the prospect of eliminating Joe herself to prevent her from revealing additional classified information, a possibility the character Mullins is described as resisting.

Nerd Alert’s spoiler-free preview of the episode framed the coming installment around a ticking-clock structure, describing “a brutal 36-hour countdown” that begins once “a captured asset fights back and the team shatters the rules of engagement,” according to the outlet’s preview. The piece opened with a quote from the ancient Greek historian Thucydides: “War is a violent teacher,” setting a tone consistent with the season’s broader exploration of geopolitical brinkmanship and institutional pressure.

The episode arrives directly following Season 3’s third installment, titled “The Bear Is Infected,” which ReadySteadyCut described as pivoting away from traditional battlefield action to deliver what the outlet called “a masterclass in the nuances of geopolitical strategy,” exploring how modern conflicts between nations increasingly play out through disinformation campaigns and compromised officials rather than direct military confrontation. That earlier episode explored the concept of undermining a superpower not through conventional warfare but by, in the show’s own framing, “infecting the bear with disease,” a strategy that included a heavily dramatized use of a so-called “honey pot” operation. By the end of that episode, a plan orchestrated by Nicole Kidman’s character, Kaitlyn, described within the show as an effort to “hunt mice by setting the barn on fire,” caught up with the present-day timeline, culminating in Joe being shown strapped to the metal bed frame that continues to feature prominently in the Episode 4 teaser.

Central to the season’s unresolved mystery is the fate and true loyalties of Ukrainian double agent Oleksandra Balakin, a storyline ReadySteadyCut’s preview suggested could see significant developments beginning with Episode 4. According to that outlet’s analysis, the coming episodes may finally reveal whether Oleksandra genuinely worked in cooperation with the CIA throughout the operation, or whether, upon realizing her cover had been compromised by a press leak, she instead handed Joe over to hostile forces in order to save herself and secure a safe exit from the country.

Beyond the central espionage plot, “Lioness” has continued weaving in the personal toll Joe’s CIA career has taken on her family throughout the season. According to Primetimer’s preview coverage, Joe and her husband, Neal, played by Dave Annable, remain deeply affected by the violent incident that occurred at their own home earlier in the season. Despite her family’s pleas for her to step away from the dangerous work altogether, Joe has continued to resist walking away, unable to sit idle while the threat against her and her loved ones remains active, even as that same commitment to her CIA duties has placed continued strain on her relationships at home.

Season 3 of “Lioness” was created by Taylor Sheridan and stars Zoe Saldaña, Morgan Freeman, Michael Kelly and Nicole Kidman, with Saldaña and Kidman also serving as executive producers alongside Sheridan. The season’s structure has moved between two timelines throughout its run: the present-day aftermath of Joe’s capture, and the earlier events that led directly to it, a narrative approach that has allowed the show to gradually reveal how the season’s central crisis unfolded while simultaneously tracking the escalating present-day effort to locate and recover her.

With only eight episodes making up the current season, “Murder Hornets” arrives roughly at the season’s midpoint, positioning the show closer to its eventual finale than some viewers might expect given the still-unresolved questions surrounding Joe’s fate, Oleksandra’s true allegiance, and how far U.S. officials are ultimately willing to go to manage the widening crisis. CarterMatt’s preview of the episode cautioned viewers to brace for a mission that only grows more intense as the season progresses, warning of potential deaths, betrayals and further dramatic turns as the remaining episodes unfold.

As “Lioness” continues its Sunday release pattern on Paramount+, “Murder Hornets” is expected to further clarify how close intelligence officials are willing to push the current standoff, whether Joe’s rescue remains a realistic possibility, and how the broader conflict involving Russia, China and compromised intelligence networks continues to escalate heading into the second half of the season.

OTTAWA — Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced Saturday that Canada will impose retaliatory tariffs on the United States, matching Washington’s newly imposed 50% levy on $20 billion worth of Canadian goods dollar for dollar, after days of intense trade negotiations between the two longtime allies collapsed late Friday.

Speaking to reporters in Ottawa, Carney said the new Canadian tariffs will target U.S. steel, dairy, appliances, agricultural equipment, pulp and paper, and electronics, along with certain other products previously targeted by U.S. tariffs against Canada. The measures are set to take effect Sept. 8. “Canada will match Washington’s new tariffs dollar for dollar in order to protect Canadian workers, farmers, families, and businesses,” Carney said.

The breakdown in talks came after the Trump administration imposed new 50% tariffs covering roughly $20 billion in Canadian goods, or approximately 5.5% of Canada’s total exports to the United States, affecting sectors including wine, furniture, dairy products, cement, clothing, fishing rods and hockey equipment. President Donald Trump responded to Carney’s retaliation announcement in a post on Truth Social, writing, “Canada wants the benefits of being a State, without being one!!!” Trump also claimed Canada has charged U.S. farmers “massive amounts” of tariffs for years, adding, “No more!!!”

Carney said the negotiations broke down after the United States proposed conditions his government found unacceptable, despite what he described as positive momentum in earlier talks. “In recent days, the United States proposed new terms that were uneconomic, unfair and undermined the net benefits for Canada, and called into question the reliability of any deal,” Carney said, adding that the U.S. demands included restrictions on Canada’s ability to pursue new trade agreements with other countries. “We cannot accept what they’ve offered, and we will not give what they’ve asked,” he said. Carney further alleged that U.S. negotiators made unacceptable threats concerning the French language and Quebec culture, referring to Canada’s French-speaking eastern province.

Carney said his government would release further details of its retaliatory response in the coming days, and separately indicated Canada would announce support measures next week for industries directly affected by the new U.S. tariffs, support he said could remain in place for years.

The economic consequences of the escalating trade dispute are expected to be significant for Canada, which relies on the United States for nearly 70% of its total exports. Al Jazeera’s David Mercer, reporting from Calgary, described the anticipated fallout. “Costs are going to go up, prices are going to go up, unemployment is going to go up as well,” Mercer said, adding that some small and medium-sized Canadian businesses have been warned they may be forced to declare bankruptcy as a result of the tariffs. At the same time, Mercer noted, Carney has sought to frame the trade war as an opportunity for Canada to diversify its economic relationships. “He’s been around the world, he’s been talking to countries in Asia, in Europe, shoring up new trade relationships, wanting to diversify Canada’s economy and Canada’s trade relationships with other countries around the world just to get away from that dependency that Canada has traditionally had on the United States,” Mercer said.

Public opinion in Canada appears to broadly support Carney’s harder line. A poll conducted by Leger last week found that 56% of Canadians favored a tougher approach toward the United States in trade talks and opposed making further concessions.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford, one of the most vocal Canadian critics of the U.S. tariffs, voiced support for Carney’s decision to retaliate. “I’m glad he didn’t sign that deal because it was a bad deal. It was a bad deal for Ontario. It was a bad deal for the auto sector, the steel sector, and manufacturing sector,” Ford told reporters Saturday.

Reaction among ordinary Canadians reflected a mix of defiance and concern. Stuart Edwards, a resident of Port Colborne, Ontario, said the trade war would “hurt everybody” and called the situation “just sad.” He placed blame squarely on Washington. “We have a bully in Washington, and he’s just hitting us all with the big stick all the time,” Edwards said. “And we’re not going to put up with it; Canada isn’t. We’ll fight back.” Pamela Coulis, from Fort Erie, Ontario, expressed worry about the practical financial impact of rising prices. “I think probably the gas will go up even more, and all products, from food to, I don’t know, wood, everything else,” she said.

Diamond Isinger, a former special adviser to ex-Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, argued that retaliation, despite its costs, represented Canada’s only viable path forward. “It’s going to cause pain and challenge for Canadians and Americans alike — in terms of the actions that, unfortunately, the US has taken as well as Canada’s retaliation. But ultimately this was the way forward; this was the only realistic next step,” Isinger said. She argued that the Trump administration tends to respond most effectively to firm resistance. “Because the US administration responds best, of all the responses that they could have, to all the actions that a government like Canada could take, to strength,” Isinger said. “So, we could not simply accept 50 percent tariffs going forward. We had to move forward with our own retaliatory package.”

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer indicated Saturday that no further talks with Canada are currently planned. “We’re moving forward with measures that respond to Canadian retaliation,” Greer told Fox News, adding, “They’ve always had the best deal, and they still would have an even better deal, but they didn’t want that.”

The escalating dispute has also drawn criticism from Democratic lawmakers and governors in U.S. border states, including Minnesota, New York and Washington, who have blamed Trump for triggering economic disruption that will raise costs for American businesses and consumers. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul criticized the administration’s approach in a post on the social platform X. “Needlessly picking fights with our allies and raising prices here at home. That’s Trump’s economic policy in a nutshell,” Hochul wrote.

The Business Roundtable, a group representing roughly 200 chief executives of major U.S. corporations, also warned that the new tariffs risk raising costs for American businesses and families, and urged both governments to resume negotiations. As of Saturday, no new talks between the United States and Canada had been scheduled, leaving both economies bracing for the mutual tariffs set to take effect Sept. 8.

Theo James, star of “The White Lotus” and Netflix’s “The Gentlemen,” has ruled himself out of contention to play the next James Bond, telling British GQ he believes he has aged out of consideration for the role even as speculation about who will succeed Daniel Craig as 007 continues to intensify.

“I’m definitely too old now, for one,” James told the outlet, addressing months of fan and industry speculation that had positioned him as one of the more prominent contenders for the role. James, 41, made his comments as part of a broader interview in which he explained his reluctance to take on a franchise commitment of that scale and public visibility.

James elaborated on his concerns about the level of fame that would accompany the role, framing his hesitation specifically around the impact such visibility could have on his family. “Imagine, suddenly, you and I cannot walk down the street. What that does to your children, who are trying to find themselves in the midst of hyper-scrutiny and fame. None of that, to me, is worth it,” James said. He acknowledged the appeal of a role like Bond in the moment, while ultimately concluding it wasn’t a trade-off he was willing to make. “At the time, it’s very intoxicating, being offered some huge, sexy part that would change your life forever. But it really wouldn’t ultimately be worth it,” he said.

James went further in describing the permanence of the fame that comes with playing one of cinema’s most recognizable characters, suggesting there would be no returning to a more private life afterward. “That would be an example of a place you could never come back from,” he said.

Despite James’ own assessment that he is too old for the part, his age would not have placed him outside the historical range of actors who have taken on the role. Daniel Craig was 38 when he debuted as Bond in 2006’s “Casino Royale,” while his predecessor, Pierce Brosnan, was 42 when he first played the character in 1995’s “GoldenEye.” At 41, James would have fallen comfortably within that established range.

James is not the only prominent name to have publicly stepped back from Bond speculation. Henry Cavill, 43, has similarly downplayed the likelihood that he would take on the role, according to MovieWeb, adding to a growing list of previously rumored contenders who have distanced themselves from the search.

The search for Craig’s successor has taken on particular significance given how long the actor held the role. Craig officially departed the franchise following the 2021 release of “No Time to Die,” a film that had faced multiple delays due to the coronavirus pandemic before finally reaching theaters. Craig had confirmed well before that release that the film would mark his fifth and final outing as Bond, a run that began with his 2006 debut in “Casino Royale.” With Craig’s tenure now concluded, producers face their first opportunity to recast the character in more than two decades.

That search carries added weight given how producers approached Craig’s own casting. When Craig was selected for the role, he was widely considered an unconventional choice at the time, but the decision to reset the “Casino Royale” storyline to depict an earlier chapter in Bond’s career gave Craig significant creative latitude to reinterpret the character on his own terms. By contrast, MovieWeb noted that earlier actors who took over the role from established predecessors faced the more difficult task of both honoring prior portrayals and finding their own distinct interpretation of the character, a dynamic that has fueled continued public fascination with who might eventually inherit the role this time around.

Filmmakers behind the franchise are reportedly hoping that whoever is ultimately cast can sustain a tenure in the role comparable to Craig’s 15-year run, rather than the shorter stints of predecessors such as George Lazenby, who appeared in only one Bond film, or Timothy Dalton, who starred in two. Given that expectation, MovieWeb noted that if James had been cast despite his stated reservations, he could theoretically have remained in the role until around age 60, based on the kind of extended tenure producers are said to be seeking.

No official timeline has been announced for when a new Bond will be revealed, though some reports have suggested an announcement could come before the end of 2026, according to MovieWeb’s reporting.

James’ comments have added fresh fuel to ongoing public speculation about who might ultimately take on the role, a debate that has continued to generate significant fan engagement across social media and entertainment forums. Names frequently floated by fans and industry observers in connection with the search have included actors such as Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Tom Hiddleston and Richard Madden, among numerous others, reflecting the intense public interest that has surrounded the search for Craig’s successor since his departure from the franchise became official.

With James now formally removing himself from consideration, joining Cavill in publicly stepping back from the speculation, the pool of widely rumored contenders continues to narrow even as producers have offered no official confirmation regarding their actual shortlist for the role. Until an official announcement is made, public speculation surrounding James Bond’s next on-screen incarnation is likely to remain one of the most closely watched ongoing storylines in Hollywood casting news, particularly as the franchise approaches what would mark its first new Bond casting in over 20 years.