James Bond 24

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm glad that Logan will be the sole writer for 24, Wade & Purvis overall Bond works has its ups and down but after 5 Bond films, a break is definitely beneficial, anyway given Logan's solid track records I'm interested to see what he can come up himself.
Yeah, it is no coincidence that the Bond films got better when they weren't sole writers.

Regwec has already given you a reply better than I can.
I like your view on the matter. But don't you find it strange that Bond anno 1981, visited the grave of his wice Tracy that died in 1981 and he even had the same M as the other Bonds, from 1973 and up to that year (he's said to be on "vacation" during the time of the film).
Did Bernard Lee-M have two different 007 at the same during 1969, both of them married a woman called Tracy, and both wives were killed??
I thought the grave stone read 1969?

Yes, it is very strange. That is my point. That is why it doesn't really work. Same character, different interpretation is really the only thing that makes sense.

You are, but while you have invented a way of explaining them to yourself to render each of the actors' movies viable within their own mini-series, I don't think the inconsistencies need to explained, since they are inevitable in a series that has run so long.
The lack of continuity in and of itself makes it pointless really. They can drop something and pick it up when ever they want. They showed this with Skyfall, when we know when Craig's Bond's continuity started.

It believe took them 12 years to touch on Tracy again. Why? Because they thought it'd be a cool PTS.
 
... And it's strange that Lazenby had identical missions as Connery, because of the gadgets he had saved as souvenirs.
Perhaps there were six Goldfingers, six Blofelds, sixe Jawses etc too? And each "clone" did exactly the same thing. Six villains even had the same crazy idea with creating a new breed of humans up in space :p

I thought the grave stone read 1969?
Have already corrected it :)

It believe took them 12 years to touch on Tracy again. Why? Because they thought it'd be a cool PTS.
No, only 8. The marriage was mentioned in TSWLM
 
Last edited:
Maybe they did. Several parallel Bond universes with the same, yet different personas. Which begs the question: which is Bond prime?
 
... And it's strange that Lazenby had identical missions as Connery, because of the gadgets he had saved as souvenirs.
Perhaps there were six Goldfingers, six Blofelds, sixe Jawses etc too? And each "clone" did exactly the same thing. Six villains even had the same crazy idea with creating a new breed of humans up in space :p
You should read some comics. Or better yet, play Bioshock Infinite. Continuity is a funny thing.

But your entire point is kinda of moot when we see the same Bond from Casino Royale have a completely different DB5, and then having the DB5 from 60s in 2012. In the world of the smart phone. How old is James suppose to be in Skyfall that he would have used a DB5 for actual missions? When was Bernard Lee his M, considering he has only had one M? Did she change sex? How did he meet Q in 2012, as a younger man then him, and then yet still got the car from him in the 60s. :funny:
 
Maybe they did. Several parallel Bond universes with the same, yet different personas. Which begs the question: which is Bond prime?
Not only is Bioshock Infinite awesome, it also solves all the problems of James Bond continuity. :hehe:
 
Same character, different interpretation is really the only thing that makes sense.
That one I agree with.

Every "Bond mission" has been interpreted differently, but it's still the same person. Believe it or not, but Moore's Bond was actually out for revenge in 1989. And Dalton's Bond was dealing with voodoo in the early 70s.


But the films have either cut out violent elements and replaced them with humour/one-liners, or the other way around.
 
Last edited:
Maybe they did. Several parallel Bond universes with the same, yet different personas. Which begs the question: which is Bond prime?
But the same M showed up in more than one universe.
Every M has had more than one Bond.
And what about Never Say Never Again? Does it take place in Connery's universe, if we exclude Thunderball from that? It could make sense, because he could have stopped doing field work not long after DAF.

Hey wait a minute!!! Maybe there are several Connerys too. There's a new Felix Leiter each time.
But that would mean that LALD and LTK were in the same universe, because of David Hedison. Or maybe he had a twin who was abducted by aliens and taken to another dimension, but both brothers ended up as CIA agents, and both of them worked together with James Bond.

Well, now it's time to stop discussing this and get back to the topic.
Craig is, after all, the only guy who's not the same person as the other five :)
 
Oh, not the timeline thing again. There is one Bond and one timeline. Ignore the Laz saying "this wouldn't have happened to the other fella," that's just the movie people being cheeky. It's one guy Ian wrote, the movies just did the stories out of order which screwed the timeline, then them trying to distance themselves from the Nov 11, 1918 birth date.

Ian's Bond has a definitive timeline. Kinsley Amis kept to it. When Gardner was brought in his books were set in the 80's so he essentially moved James from the 50's to the 80's and only aged him 10 years. Deaver's last book has him being born in 1980 instead which makes him serving in WW2 navy intelligence a challenge, or his dada and uncle being WW1 spies tough.

Actors age, actors die, contracts are not renewed, fans think it's a different universe.
 
Last edited:
Oh my god, Darth, we've gone over this before. :funny:

Connery to Brosnan is one Bond, is one single continuity. They didn't reboot the character until Daniel Craig's movie. It was never about the character's age, but more about the adventures. They have more of a rolling timeline with a few inconsistences (such as Blofeld not catching Laz's Bond earlier because of being faithful to the book, or the age of the actor), as with any single series that goes 40+ years but ultimately it's once character.

And about the DB5 from Skyfall, I wouldn't think about that too hard. It was more of an Easter Egg to the fans than anything else.

Moore's Bond references Tracy, and she is referenced by Felix in Dalton's License to Kill. Connery and Brosnan's Bond strongly hint at Tracy (Connery fursiouly searching for Blofeld in Diamonds Are Forever, Brosnan's Bond getting very defensive about losing someone he loved in The World is Not Enough).

Not to mention Lazeby's Bond having all the stuff and reminiscing about missions that Connery's Bond took when after he thought he resigned from MI-6. Also, in the beginning of Goldeneye, the reason Bond was getting tested about his mental state by the psychiatrist was because of the events of Dalton's License to Kill.

You can make as many theories as you want, but none of them will ever hold any weight and like
 
Yes, I have never heard anyone suggest the "reboot with each actor" theory before, least of all anyone involved with any of the productions.
 
Connery to Brosnan is one Bond, is one single continuity. They didn't reboot the character until Daniel Craig's movie. It was never about the character's age, but more about the adventures.
It's what I believe too. Why else would the new M call "Brosnan Bond" a relic from the cold war if he was a new guy with no history with MI6?
I've heard some people explain the age differences with James Bond being a code name for several agents. They simply don't get that James Bond is the name of the character, and that 007 is the code name.

I fear something though. Hollywood has gone nuts with reboots and this will sink everything to the bottom of the sea. After Craig's future departure, it will start from the beginning again (hopefully without a long origin tale). Spider-Man has already gone through this.
The old times can't be brought back, where a change of lead actor didn't mean "another character" (like all the previous Bonds.... and the Batman films of the 90s). Nowadays, a new face just can't take over from where the former left. :(
 
Last edited:
With Batman it's a different story, the franchise was dead for 8 years. It needed a reboot. As for Nolan Batman I don't want Blake as Batman so they were right to reboot. I rather have Nolan & Bale return but that's not gonna happen so again WB right to reboot. New Batman with different take.
 
With Batman it's a different story, the franchise was dead for 8 years. It needed a reboot.
You don't get my point, do you?
I said that before the reboot trend hit Hollywood like a virus, a character could be recast without the film going back to the beginning. I took the previous Batman franchise as an example. There were just plain, ordinary sequels.... even if the actor changed over the curse of time.

Why isn't this possible any longer? If an important guy is leaving after a trilogy's been done, it could also be the director, then the studios can't imagine to continue with somebody else.
 
Last edited:
Bond being replaced each time was really just the same as how MArk Ruffalo replaced Ed Norton or Cheadle replaced Howard etc.

Feige has even said about when RDJ retires from the IM franchise they would just James Bond it rathet than reboot. Now if Bond is a reboot each time a new actor comes along his comment wouldn't make sense about RDJ and IM.
 
Oh s**t! 2015 is packed! Had no idea this was coming out in Nov 2015.
 
I hope they get to film in India or Australia this time around.
 
I hope they get to film in India or Australia this time around.
Australia before India any day of the week.
What's the point of going back to previous places all the time, and not something new?
No, I demand Sydney, Cape Town, Athens, Rome or anywhere in Canada or New Zealand to happen soon :)
 
The Sun are reporting the title of Bond 24 is Devil May Care, named after Sebastian Faulks' centenary novel. :funny:
 
I would like "Nobody lives Forever", since in ever 007 movie Craig has had, the bond girl dies.
 
DMC was a good book. Gorner was a good villain with a good plan and he had the classic Flemin disfiurment (monkey paw left hand if i remember ... or was that Brokenclaw Lee) and nice tech with the ecranoplan. Plus Bond plays him in tennis like the old golf or cards face off.

Nobody Lives Forever was good too. A great Gardner Bond book.
 
You don't get my point, do you?
I said that before the reboot trend hit Hollywood like a virus, a character could be recast without the film going back to the beginning. I took the previous Batman franchise as an example. There were just plain, ordinary sequels.... even if the actor changed over the curse of time.

Why isn't this possible any longer? If an important guy is leaving after a trilogy's been done, it could also be the director, then the studios can't imagine to continue with somebody else.

I agree 100 percent.Hollywood Is crazy with reboots.

Die Another day was like Moonraker.Just as Roger Moore did a more earth bound film with For your eyes Only Pierce Brosnon could have done the same or Danial Craig could have taken over without a reboot.

after Batman & Robin Warner Brothers could have brought In new team and actor as batman and continue like Bond used to.same as Spider-man could have done after Spider-Man 3.

At present these are franchises that are longest

1:Star Wars
2:Mission Impossible
3:X-Men

Bond has lost that honor since It rebooted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
200,767
Messages
21,805,337
Members
45,625
Latest member
papapasmurfsmur
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"