How Many Bonds?

[MacWage]

Q-> Quatermaster
M-> based on term for head of Brit intelligence during WW2. He was known by a letter, which actually was his initial. I forgot what it was, or his name. However, I'm sure someone here will know it and relate it.


My own idea->is supposed to be one Bond, though the character has changed and developed several times over during the decades. Thus, I could understand the ideas of several Bonds. The movie references are intended for the audience, as a tongue-in-cheek reference to a change in the "continuity."

Always a Bond fan,

[RedDevilWill]

Well, in the more recent ones, starring Pierce Brosnan, there is some continuity. The actually replace Q but in one of them, Q is training his replacement. In the next movie released, Q is now the new person whose name currently escapes me. In that sense, there is some continuity but that's probably the extent of it.

Correct long running features such as the Bond franchise, IMHO, should be viewed as serials whose length is defined by the tenure of the lead actor. Within those finite serials, there should be some continuity, as it expands character development and makes the ongoing experience rewarding for those fans who have an emotional investment in the characters. However, collectively, the serials all tell the story of the same man in service to his country. This allows both the movie makers and fans to share a collective experience, to establish character and film content, and that familiarity and knowledge ensures both fan base and movie makers a satisfying entertainment experience.

NSNA is a great film, and a nice view of an aging superspy, a rare bird in American movie fiction. The nature of the story - while refreshing - still serves as a reminder of the audience's mortality.

For storytelling purposes in print fiction, it's a good idea to establish post-film continuity: in print, characters rarely age except by editorial decree, creators can 'unhinge' the characters from a fixed point in time, and taking the films as in-continuity along side the Fleming books expands the canon and allows for a greater scope of stories to be told. All Bond movie changes have been driven by two factors - Lead changes and a filmmaker failure to evolve the films 'look' naturally. In print, fiction is created in the moment by the author, and should reflect the environment around him/her as well as the world he/she is building, thus evolving naturally.

Oh, it was John Cleese as the new Q, Careful, Monty Python fans are a rabid bunch.

Will

[mbhandy]

I saw Casino Royal yesterday and I willl have to watch it one more time to get all the twists.

MrBill

[Chef]

Well I have not yet seen the new Bond film but my understanding is that any previous continuity has been thrown out the window and the series is being "reset". The current "M" who was introduced as the new "M" when Brosnan came on board is now the "M" who is promoting Bond to "00" status for the first time. In other words they are going back in time, while staying in the present. They must have gotten Stephen Hawkings to cunsult on that one.

[Rigged]

Casino Royale (the new one) hints that James Bond is a code name and that previous James Bonds have been killed in action. To earn the title, the new Bond had to prove himself to be a very special kind of spy -- a "blunt instrument" to use M's words. I actually like that idea.

In fact, he's just been promoted to "00" status and he's still being evaluated. M's not so sure he measures up.

In a way, the movie is putting the new Bond on probation the same way the audience does for each new Bond.

I think Daniel Craig is the best Bond ever.

[MacWage]

Casino Royale (the new one) hints that James Bond is a code name and that previous James Bonds have been killed in action. To earn the title, the new Bond had to prove himself to be a very special kind of spy -- a "blunt instrument" to use M's words. I actually like that idea..

THAT is the idea discussed in another thread.
I thought that was an intriguing idea. Some posters cited all sorts of ideas from the movies where this notion fixes a few "contradictions" in the films.

Side note, interesting that James Bond was played by:
A Scot, an Australian, an Englishman, a Welsh born Englishman, an Irishman, and another Englishman.


In my "Train World" (The fictional world created, and its extensions, related to my Lionel "O" Guage layout), I am planning a site where representatives of the "Brit" spy world are at one location. Using 1/43 cars, I am representing:

John Steed-> old style dark green Bentley
Emma Peel-> yellow Lotus Elan
Austin Powers-> Union flag Jag XKE

The "James Bond" squad:
-Silver Aston Martin DB5 (Connery)
-Dark green Ford Mustang (Lazenby-> mixing Riggs mustang with his DBS)
-Dark green Lotus Esprit (Moore- only "affordable" one I could get)
-Dark gray Porsche 959 (Dalton-Mixing elements of Audi and his Aston)
-Silver BMW 507 (Brosnan-Stand in for the Z8, to fit rest of layout)
-???? (Craig, not sure what would be appropriate w/o repeating DB5, might wait til next movie)

Plus my own:
Angus MacNeil- Blue Austin-Healey "Bugeye/Frogeye" Sprite
(Not yet named one)- Union flag (old style, Mini Cooper (NO, NOT Daddy Powers!!!)

There is also going to be 2 or 3 different style Batcaves, so realism is not the point.

[Captain]

But they don't need to make "James Bond" a code name... If you read the original Ian Flemming books... James is one particular agent. It's really his name. He is a "Double-OH" Agent for MI6, meaning he has a license to kill on his missions. He is one of several agents with such a designation, as we have seen because there have been more than one "other 00" agents killed, attacked, or spoken about in the other films (usually killed). He may be the "best of breed", but James Bond was intended to be one particular person... that's what makes the stories so amazing... this one guy can do all of this! As for continuity or changing peoples and whatnot, that happens... heck I've read comic books since I was a wee lad, and there's times when continuity is just thrown out the window... and if the story is intriguing enough, I don't mind.. Admittedly I haven't seen Casino Royale yet.. but I think it might be a little early to call him the best ever. Of course I don't need to see it to say he'll be better than Timothy Dalton, and probably better than Roger Moore!

[McClef]

Continuity in the films has never been a major strong point when you look at all the different Felix Leiter's and Blofeld's there have been.

Just take each film as it comes and enjoy it for itself is probably the best approach.

[beowulf67]

Continuity in the films has never been a major strong point when you look at all the different Felix Leiter's and Blofeld's there have been.

Just take each film as it comes and enjoy it for itself is probably the best approach.

That's the best way to do it. Enjoy the show and don't take it too seriously.
In OHMSS when he says, "This never happend to that other guy" I always took that as a wink to the audience sort of saying, "Yes, I know I'm not him, but play along."

After all it is just fiction.

I did like the new Bond, I think if the stories stay good and believable and don't devolve into "Moonraker" he'll do good. He's not Sean Connery but then who is? Well, besides Sir Sean of course.

[Colin]

James Bond (who is played by, now 6, different actors)?

that would be 6 officially, but 7 if you include Niven in the 1967 Casino Royale :
Sean Connery (1962–1967; 1971)
George Lazenby (1969),
Roger Moore (1973–1985),
Timothy Dalton (1987–89),
Pierce Brosnan (1995–2002),
Daniel Craig (2006–Present).

I still haven't see the new Bond, but it sounds like there are some interesting twists. One day soon I hope.