Re-start?

Casino Royale will throw out the entire history of Bond from DR No through
Die Another Day out the window,have Bond get his double o stautas In 2006.
Judi Dench will be M,and have Bond In his first Mission. So this Is not the 21st
Bond film It Is the 1 of the alternate Bond,and In fact through Casino Royale he ciyld be called a Bond In Name only. And they wonder why some are having trouble with all this.
 
marvelrobbins said:
Casino Royale will throw out the entire history of Bond from DR No through
Die Another Day out the window,have Bond get his double o stautas In 2006.
Judi Dench will be M,and have Bond In his first Mission. So this Is not the 21st
Bond film It Is the 1 of the alternate Bond,and In fact through Casino Royale he ciyld be called a Bond In Name only. And they wonder why some are having trouble with all this.

Here's a radical and scary thought........If this is a restart throwing out the entire history........what if they 're-imagined' (warning: 're-imagined' is a trademark of Tim Burton) the entire run of films in order, starting with Dr.No next obviously.

The idea's too obsurd to contemplate but,

...........I wouldnt put it past them.
icon12.gif
 
SUPERBENITEZ said:
Here's a radical and scary thought........If this is a restart throwing out the entire history........what if they 're-imagined' (warning: 're-imagined' is a trademark of Tim Burton) the entire run of films in order, starting with Dr.No next obviously.

The idea's too obsurd to contemplate but,

...........I wouldnt put it past them.
icon12.gif
If they did that, I would not pay money to see them.
 
droogiedroogie2 said:
If they did that, I would not pay money to see them.

I wouldnt either yet there where a lot of people who saw DAD!! Says it all really................:down
 
Yeah, and one of them was me. What I was saying is, there's no reason to reimagine a Bond movie that's been done. No reason at all. But I'll always pay to see the new Bond so I can judge it on its merits.
 
One of them was me too........twice!!! (just to see if it got any better the 2nd time. It didnt!!)

All i'm saying is that over the years the Bond films have become forulaic as hell due to the producers seemingly wanting to playing it safe to ensure Box office. We saw nothing new, nothing daring, nothing fresh, like in the earlier films.
I would put it past the producers to try and 'play it safe' again. Use no imagination and just remake the old ones.

I'm praying that Casino Royale makes me change my view of the producers.
 
Catman said:
What continuity? The only continuity is in From Russia With Love which takes place 6 months after Dr. No.
It may be possible that they now want to start putting an actual continuity with Bond, starting from the beginning, no?
 
The reason Bond has lasted over 40 years is because there isn't any continuity. They are not gonna start doing that now. And, you can't compare Bond to a comic book because comics actually have a continuity. Jason Todd died in the late `80s and he was just resurrected with that history still applied. Bond only has one film that had some continuity.

And, yeah, in comics and novels characters can age at slow rate but not on film and TV. How many versions of Batman have you seen since 1939? The Batman Begins series will probably last a few films and they'll start all over again.
 
The only continuity wasn't just From Russia with Love was it? How about Valentin Dmitrovich Zukovsky? He reappeared in The World is not Enough after he debuted in Goldeneye. That seemed like it was obviously in the same time era, happening only years after the events of Goldeneye.
 
Masut said:
The only continuity wasn't just From Russia with Love was it? How about Valentin Dmitrovich Zukovsky? He reappeared in The World is not Enough after he debuted in Goldeneye. That seemed like it was obviously in the same time era, happening only years after the events of Goldeneye.

Noticed how Felix appeared in Dr. No, skipped From Russia With Love, then he appeared in Goldfinger and Thunderball but didn't appear till Diamonds Are Forever. Yeah. . .these films must be connected. (note the sarcasm)
 
Yeah, Felix will be in CR as well. Probably the best thing about the reboot.
 
The Game said:
From my understanding, CR is a prequel of sorts, as during this movie he gets his 00 status and we see him start to develop his skills

I haven't read through this entire thread, so excuse me if this has been said already but if this is a prequel, how the hell are they going to explain the presence of Judi Dench as M, that is, if she is playing M...? I mean it was clearly explained that she didn't become M until Goldeneye...this is really confusing me....:confused:
 
Golgo13:The Hitman said:
I haven't read through this entire thread, so excuse me if this has been said already but if this is a prequel, how the hell are they going to explain the presence of Judi Dench as M, that is, if she is playing M...? I mean it was clearly explained that she didn't become M until Goldeneye...this is really confusing me....:confused:
I get a feeling this is what will confuse many other people when the movie comes out.
 
Kurosawa said:
Yeah, Felix will be in CR as well. Probably the best thing about the reboot.

Yeah, I'm glad Felix is in the film. Jack Wade is alright but he ain't no Felix. lol. In Dr. No Felix was supposed to be the American James Bond. Of course he lost that angle, but he still became someone Bond needed on his side.
 
I think you guys are missing what they are "restarting". There not restarting the story lines or anything they are making the films more in depth and plot/character driven like they started out as with Connery. The newer ones had become to...I dunno glitzy i guess you could call it and really one dimensional so they want to go back to making them what they used. Golden eye was alright, not the best. Pierce B is not even close to the best Bond IMO.

If this has been posted already well...sorry.
 
Gerard Way said:
No way, man! Die Another Day was THE brosnan bond film.

DAD was the worst Bond film since the beginning of the series, it sent the franchise into a hiatus and turned the character into a joke.
 
CTYLER85 said:
Sean Connery should play "M"

It would be distracting and unecessary. No former Bond actor should reappear as different character.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"