Are these all prequels?

[javi1024]

so if casino royale is about Bond's first mission as a 00, and the next film will follow these events, does that mean all of Craig's movies will be about the early bond and they wont take place "chronologically" after Die Another Day? cuz as far as i know the studio isnt ignoring the previous films like Batman and Superman.

 

[st barbara]

so if casino royale is about Bond's first mission as a 00, and the next film will follow these events, does that mean all of Craig's movies will be about the early bond and they wont take place "chronologically" after Die Another Day? cuz as far as i know the studio isnt ignoring the previous films like Batman and Superman.

Maybe they'll redo ALL of the "James Bond " novels, in the order in which they were written by Fleming (That'd be nice !) and maybe after that they'll do the Bond books written by Amis, Gardiner and others. (I can dream, can't I ?)

 

[Kritish]

I hope they simply start over, the old bond films were way too inconsistant.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Casino Royale is a Batman Begins styled reboot, not a prequel

 

[javi1024]

so it is a reboot. well that sucks. i guess that explains why people want them to remake Live And Let Die, Goldfinger, and alot of others.

 

[Riven]

As if the Bond continuity was ever consistent... This is as much a reboot or a prequel as much as any other Bond film was a sequel to the previous one.

 

[javi1024]

well there have been films that make references to previous films (mainly about his marriage). obviously they havent been sequels like Godfather, Star Wars, or any other series, but you can still see them all as happening one mission after another.

casino royale changed how he acquired his aston martin and ignores the appearance of the first female M (they had a whole scene about it in Goldeneye).

 

[blargyyblarg]

It doesn't really matter, just think of them as a bunch of missions that are not connected at all (besides Casino Royale).

 

[bigcomicbookfan]

ummm so i cant post a new thread so ill just vent here. this is a comic book forum am i correct? so, if you all claim to be real hardcore comic fans (um, yeah right...), why would we be discussing JAMES FRIGGIN' BOND HERE?? wtf is right. i agree with all the rest who are complaining. REMOVE THE JAMES BOND SECTION. NOW. this is for animated comics only. not movies. not video games. not james bond. GET RID OF IT OR RISK LOSING ONE OF THE ORIGINAL SITE MEMBERS.

 

[Roaring_Hulk!]

ummm so i cant post a new thread so ill just vent here. this is a comic book forum am i correct? so, if you all claim to be real hardcore comic fans (um, yeah right...), why would we be discussing JAMES FRIGGIN' BOND HERE?? wtf is right. i agree with all the rest who are complaining. REMOVE THE JAMES BOND SECTION. NOW. this is for animated comics only. not movies. not video games. not james bond. GET RID OF IT OR RISK LOSING ONE OF THE ORIGINAL SITE MEMBERS.

WTH? this isn't a comicbook-forum

 

[JamesBond007]

Casino Royale is definitely a reboot. The thing about the past Bond movies is that they never directly contradicted each other. Events in one movie were never wiped out by events in another. But with Casino Royale, there are several direct contradictions. Bond got his Aston Martin from Q in Goldfinger. In Casino Royale, he wins it in a poker game. Bond and Felix Leiter first met in Dr. No, then he lost a leg in Licence to Kill. In Casino Royale, Bond and Felix, both legs intact, meet for the first time. In GoldenEye, Judi Dench replaced Robert Brown, who had himself replaced Bernard Lee, who was first seen in Dr. No, when Bond was already an experienced 00-agent. In Casino Royale, he's just been promoted to 00-status, and M is played by Judi Dench, which is wrong, she should have been replaced, having made the role her own or not she should have been replaced. Finally, Casino Royale is very definitely set in the modern day. There's a direct reference to 9/11. Dr. No is very definitely set in the 60's. So no, Casino Royale is very definitely not a prequel, it is a reboot. It is Bond Begins

 

[odiin]

ummm so i cant post a new thread so ill just vent here. this is a comic book forum am i correct? so, if you all claim to be real hardcore comic fans (um, yeah right...), why would we be discussing JAMES FRIGGIN' BOND HERE?? wtf is right. i agree with all the rest who are complaining. REMOVE THE JAMES BOND SECTION. NOW. this is for animated comics only. not movies. not video games. not james bond. GET RID OF IT OR RISK LOSING ONE OF THE ORIGINAL SITE MEMBERS.

http://www.darkhorse.com/search/search.php?sstring=james+bond&type=comic

Now kindly GTFO.

Thank you.

 

[odiin]

Casino Royale is definitely a reboot. The thing about the past Bond movies is that they never directly contradicted each other.

No contradictions?

Go watch You Only Live Twice, then go watch On Her Majesty's Secret Service.

How about we agree that it doesn't matter when or where a Bond movie takes place, or that this isn't consistent with that, none of that matters. Each movie is meant to be enjoyed on it's own and what happens in previous films doesn't matter. Regardless of whether Casino Royale is a reboot, or a prequel, or a sequel, or a half-eaten can of spam, it's still the 21st James Bond film adventure, and that's all that matters.

 

[Logan]

Can't remember where or when i heard this, but i heard that the next two and Casion Royale, were supposed to be a trilogy.

If these are all prequels, and they might add in some of the more popular villains in this, i would love to see another Blofeld trilogy, OHMSS was great, and so was YOLT, but DAF was rubbish and it doesn't really clear things up

 

[Brian Braddock]

ummm so i cant post a new thread so ill just vent here. this is a comic book forum am i correct? so, if you all claim to be real hardcore comic fans (um, yeah right...), why would we be discussing JAMES FRIGGIN' BOND HERE?? wtf is right. i agree with all the rest who are complaining. REMOVE THE JAMES BOND SECTION. NOW. this is for animated comics only. not movies. not video games. not james bond. GET RID OF IT OR RISK LOSING ONE OF THE ORIGINAL SITE MEMBERS.

You are, quite clearly, an uneducated, ignorant and deluded ass.

 

[odiin]

Can't remember where or when i heard this, but i heard that the next two and Casion Royale, were supposed to be a trilogy.

If these are all prequels, and they might add in some of the more popular villains in this, i would love to see another Blofeld trilogy, OHMSS was great, and so was YOLT, but DAF was rubbish and it doesn't really clear things up

Not possible because they don't have the rights to the Blofeld character, that's why "Blofeld"'s face was never shown in the beginning of For Your Eyes Only (I'm pretty sure it was FYEO, but it could have been another Moore film) and was never referred to by name.

 

[Logan]

Not possible because they don't have the rights to the Blofeld character

Why? Who has the rights to him???

that's why "Blofeld"'s face was never shown in the beginning of For Your Eyes Only (I'm pretty sure it was FYEO, but it could have been another Moore film) and was never referred to by name.

It was FYEO

 

[odiin]

I forgot the guy's name but he worked on the movie Thunderball which is where Blofeld is introduced in the novels, and there was some big legal battle and he got the exclusive rights to Thunderball, including the Blodfeld character so the EON series was no longer allowed to use the character, and the guy who had the rights pretty much tried to milk it for all it was worth by remaking Thunderball in the '80s under the name "Never Say Never Again" and trying to push it off as a new movie, and apprently he had planned to do it again just recently but this time with Pierce Brosnan to cash-in on the press surrounding the new James Bond and the initial backlash associated with Daniel Craig. He ended up dying last year though, so I guess his family members and estate own the rights now.

Maybe someday EON will try to get them back like they did with Casino Royale, but I don't know. They've already made their official Thunderball adaption so I'm not sure if they would want to fight it just for the use of Blofeld.

 

[jwm21]

kevin mclory i think was his name i could be wrong

 

[odiin]

That is correct, thank you.

 

[David Rice]

so if casino royale is about Bond's first mission as a 00, and the next film will follow these events, does that mean all of Craig's movies will be about the early bond and they wont take place "chronologically" after Die Another Day? cuz as far as i know the studio isnt ignoring the previous films like Batman and Superman.

The studio is ignoring the previous films.

 

[Brian Braddock]

The studio is ignoring the previous films.

Agreed. This is the only logical conclusion we can make considering Bond only got his 00 status in CR.

Basically, the other films havent happened.

As far as the new approach goes; he hasn't been married, matched wits against Blofeld, used alligators as stepping stones or driven an invisible car.

 

[David Rice]

Agreed. This is the only logical conclusion we can make considering Bond only got his 00 status in CR.

Basically, the other films havent happened.

As far as the new approach goes; he hasn't been married, matched wits against Blofeld, used alligators as stepping stones or driven an invisible car.

Yes, I think Sony said that they wanted a reboot. I can't remember where, but I think they did. Casino Royale was the first book and I'm not really sure were they are going to go from here because the new book is Live and Let Die.

 

[*ANTHONY*]

I think they should show the begining of "SPECTRE". Maybe make it that LeChiffre had a brother or Vesper's boyfriend started the organization.

 

[David Rice]

I think they should show the begining of "SPECTRE". Maybe make it that LeChiffre had a brother or Vesper's boyfriend started the organization.

I don't think SPECTRE is even in the first few books.