EON Productions has done a "retcon" on "For Your Eyes Only"!

2

Comments

  • Posts: 11,119
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's not really a retcon. We all knew it was Blofeld and we all knew it was an FU to Kevin McClory. EON's just finally admitting it since they have the rights.

    Hence they include the film in the steelbook release and say it's one of the films that feature S.P.E.C.T.R.E.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's not really a retcon. We all knew it was Blofeld and we all knew it was an FU to Kevin McClory. EON's just finally admitting it since they have the rights.

    Hence they include the film in the steelbook release and say it's one of the films that feature S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

    That's a marketing call. Not a retcon. ;) A retcon would be EON suddenly coming out and saying Auric Goldfinger was a Member of SPECTRE and worked on his own preferably.
  • Posts: 15,125
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Regarding the omission of DN I find it regrettable. That said, it is debatable whether Dr No was a partner of SPECTRE or a full fledge member.

    Dr. Julius No to James Bond: "I am a member of S.P.E.C.T.R.E."

    But in FRWL doesn't Kronsteen says he is an associate?
  • Posts: 11,119
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's not really a retcon. We all knew it was Blofeld and we all knew it was an FU to Kevin McClory. EON's just finally admitting it since they have the rights.

    Hence they include the film in the steelbook release and say it's one of the films that feature S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

    That's a marketing call. Not a retcon. ;) A retcon would be EON suddenly coming out and saying Auric Goldfinger was a Member of SPECTRE and worked on his own preferably.

    I tend to agree with Bill Koenig.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's not really a retcon. We all knew it was Blofeld and we all knew it was an FU to Kevin McClory. EON's just finally admitting it since they have the rights.

    Hence they include the film in the steelbook release and say it's one of the films that feature S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

    That's a marketing call. Not a retcon. ;) A retcon would be EON suddenly coming out and saying Auric Goldfinger was a Member of SPECTRE and worked on his own preferably.

    Precisely.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's not really a retcon. We all knew it was Blofeld and we all knew it was an FU to Kevin McClory. EON's just finally admitting it since they have the rights.

    Hence they include the film in the steelbook release and say it's one of the films that feature S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

    That's a marketing call. Not a retcon. ;) A retcon would be EON suddenly coming out and saying Auric Goldfinger was a Member of SPECTRE and worked on his own preferably.

    I tend to agree with Bill Koenig.
    Well that's fine but I disagree that's it's entirely a SPECTRE movie when only the PTS pertains to SPECTRE. The rest of the film has nothing to do with it.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's not really a retcon. We all knew it was Blofeld and we all knew it was an FU to Kevin McClory. EON's just finally admitting it since they have the rights.

    Hence they include the film in the steelbook release and say it's one of the films that feature S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

    That's a marketing call. Not a retcon. ;) A retcon would be EON suddenly coming out and saying Auric Goldfinger was a Member of SPECTRE and worked on his own preferably.

    I tend to agree with Bill Koenig.
    Well that's fine but I disagree that's it's entirely a SPECTRE movie when only the PTS pertains to SPECTRE. The rest of the film has nothing to do with it.

    Yeah. All they're doing is acknowledging what everybody knew, but they weren't legally allowed to clarify. It's a film that features Blofeld. No retcon involved.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    RC7 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's not really a retcon. We all knew it was Blofeld and we all knew it was an FU to Kevin McClory. EON's just finally admitting it since they have the rights.

    Hence they include the film in the steelbook release and say it's one of the films that feature S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

    That's a marketing call. Not a retcon. ;) A retcon would be EON suddenly coming out and saying Auric Goldfinger was a Member of SPECTRE and worked on his own preferably.

    I tend to agree with Bill Koenig.
    Well that's fine but I disagree that's it's entirely a SPECTRE movie when only the PTS pertains to SPECTRE. The rest of the film has nothing to do with it.

    Yeah. All they're doing is acknowledging what everybody knew, but they weren't legally allowed to clarify. It's a film that features Blofeld. No retcon involved.

    Exactly as I said.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Murdock wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's not really a retcon. We all knew it was Blofeld and we all knew it was an FU to Kevin McClory. EON's just finally admitting it since they have the rights.

    Hence they include the film in the steelbook release and say it's one of the films that feature S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

    That's a marketing call. Not a retcon. ;) A retcon would be EON suddenly coming out and saying Auric Goldfinger was a Member of SPECTRE and worked on his own preferably.

    I tend to agree with Bill Koenig.
    Well that's fine but I disagree that's it's entirely a SPECTRE movie when only the PTS pertains to SPECTRE. The rest of the film has nothing to do with it.

    Yeah. All they're doing is acknowledging what everybody knew, but they weren't legally allowed to clarify. It's a film that features Blofeld. No retcon involved.

    Exactly as I said.

    Well, yes. Well put!
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Murdock wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's not really a retcon. We all knew it was Blofeld and we all knew it was an FU to Kevin McClory. EON's just finally admitting it since they have the rights.

    Hence they include the film in the steelbook release and say it's one of the films that feature S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

    That's a marketing call. Not a retcon. ;) A retcon would be EON suddenly coming out and saying Auric Goldfinger was a Member of SPECTRE and worked on his own preferably.

    I tend to agree with Bill Koenig.
    Well that's fine but I disagree that's it's entirely a SPECTRE movie when only the PTS pertains to SPECTRE. The rest of the film has nothing to do with it.

    Yeah. All they're doing is acknowledging what everybody knew, but they weren't legally allowed to clarify. It's a film that features Blofeld. No retcon involved.

    Exactly as I said.

    Also DN was a film centred around a SP operative, where FYEO isn't, so to include the latter and not the former makes a mockery of any suggested continuity. They should just stick to running fast and loose. Bond and continuity is fine in it's vagueness.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    It isn t the SPECTRE films that get released. It is the Blofeld films. And that should tell you something, those of you who still don t think Blofeld will appear in the upcoming film.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    RC7 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's not really a retcon. We all knew it was Blofeld and we all knew it was an FU to Kevin McClory. EON's just finally admitting it since they have the rights.

    Hence they include the film in the steelbook release and say it's one of the films that feature S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

    That's a marketing call. Not a retcon. ;) A retcon would be EON suddenly coming out and saying Auric Goldfinger was a Member of SPECTRE and worked on his own preferably.

    I tend to agree with Bill Koenig.
    Well that's fine but I disagree that's it's entirely a SPECTRE movie when only the PTS pertains to SPECTRE. The rest of the film has nothing to do with it.

    Yeah. All they're doing is acknowledging what everybody knew, but they weren't legally allowed to clarify. It's a film that features Blofeld. No retcon involved.

    Exactly as I said.

    Also DN was a film centred around a SP operative, where FYEO isn't, so to include the latter and not the former makes a mockery of any suggested continuity. They should just stick to running fast and loose. Bond and continuity is fine in it's vagueness.

    I just read the article again and noticed Dr. No wasn't in it. That is pretty odd. But they should just call it the "Blofeld appearence movies." or something. Whatever. It's just saying what we already knew.
  • Posts: 232
    RC7 wrote: »
    trevanian wrote: »
    Strange that FYEO is referenced as a Spectre film, but not DN.

    That shows how shortsighted this retcon really is. It's more about referring to all these as 'guy with a cat' films (assuming he has one in this, that is.)

    Precisely. It's not even really retconning. Retconning would be something along the lines of them suggesting Silva was a member of SPECTRE. There's no narrative continuity surrounding Blofeld in FYEO. It's just a gag.

    So Bond visiting Tracy's grave in FYEO is just a gag too? Sorry, I think it's a bit short-sighted to write it off as a reason-example.

    Blofeld is not just in a wheelchair. Bond did that to him during the bobsled chase in OHMSS.

    Aren't you creating your own canon here? If Blofeld is in a wheelchair because of the end of OHMSS, then how is he getting around in DAF, are they ALL his 'doubles'? I've always figured this is them deciding he barely survived DAF.
  • Murdock wrote: »
    It's not really a retcon. We all knew it was Blofeld and we all knew it was an FU to Kevin McClory. EON's just finally admitting it since they have the rights.

    It's a retcon. Eon snipped out a line where the villain says this was "the 10th anniversary of our last encounter." To leave it in would mean they'd no longer have "plausible deniability." The line stayed in the comic book adaptation.

  • Put another way, Eon went right up to the line in suggesting it was Blofeld without staying it was Blofeld. They snipped the "10th anniversary" line (which would imply Diamonds Are Forever) because that went just over the line.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,306
    trevanian wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    trevanian wrote: »
    Strange that FYEO is referenced as a Spectre film, but not DN.

    That shows how shortsighted this retcon really is. It's more about referring to all these as 'guy with a cat' films (assuming he has one in this, that is.)

    Precisely. It's not even really retconning. Retconning would be something along the lines of them suggesting Silva was a member of SPECTRE. There's no narrative continuity surrounding Blofeld in FYEO. It's just a gag.

    So Bond visiting Tracy's grave in FYEO is just a gag too? Sorry, I think it's a bit short-sighted to write it off as a reason-example.

    Blofeld is not just in a wheelchair. Bond did that to him during the bobsled chase in OHMSS.

    Aren't you creating your own canon here? If Blofeld is in a wheelchair because of the end of OHMSS, then how is he getting around in DAF, are they ALL his 'doubles'? I've always figured this is them deciding he barely survived DAF.

    I always thought the wheelchair was because Bond smashed him into the oil rig.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's not really a retcon. We all knew it was Blofeld and we all knew it was an FU to Kevin McClory. EON's just finally admitting it since they have the rights.

    It's a retcon. Eon snipped out a line where the villain says this was "the 10th anniversary of our last encounter." To leave it in would mean they'd no longer have "plausible deniability." The line stayed in the comic book adaptation.

    It's not a retcon, it had no impact canonically and it's clearly Blofeld. It's merely clarifying the fact.
  • Posts: 11,119
    trevanian wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    trevanian wrote: »
    Strange that FYEO is referenced as a Spectre film, but not DN.

    That shows how shortsighted this retcon really is. It's more about referring to all these as 'guy with a cat' films (assuming he has one in this, that is.)

    Precisely. It's not even really retconning. Retconning would be something along the lines of them suggesting Silva was a member of SPECTRE. There's no narrative continuity surrounding Blofeld in FYEO. It's just a gag.

    So Bond visiting Tracy's grave in FYEO is just a gag too? Sorry, I think it's a bit short-sighted to write it off as a reason-example.

    Blofeld is not just in a wheelchair. Bond did that to him during the bobsled chase in OHMSS.

    Aren't you creating your own canon here? If Blofeld is in a wheelchair because of the end of OHMSS, then how is he getting around in DAF, are they ALL his 'doubles'? I've always figured this is them deciding he barely survived DAF.

    That's exactly what I'm doing here a bit ;-). I just....think....DAF is great fun. But it falls so entirely out of place after OHMSS. FYEO imo is the best sequel to OHMSS. Continuity-wise and style-wise.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    It isn t the SPECTRE films that get released. It is the Blofeld films. And that should tell you something, those of you who still don t think Blofeld will appear in the upcoming film.

    Yes, but then it can't be Waltz because that would make no sense at all and even be an absolute disaster story wise, Oberhauser is Bond's childhood acquaintance.

    I still believe Andrew Scott will be revealed to be Blofeld, I just can't see any other way IF Blofeld does appear in Spectre.
  • Posts: 709
    trevanian wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    trevanian wrote: »
    Strange that FYEO is referenced as a Spectre film, but not DN.

    That shows how shortsighted this retcon really is. It's more about referring to all these as 'guy with a cat' films (assuming he has one in this, that is.)

    Precisely. It's not even really retconning. Retconning would be something along the lines of them suggesting Silva was a member of SPECTRE. There's no narrative continuity surrounding Blofeld in FYEO. It's just a gag.

    So Bond visiting Tracy's grave in FYEO is just a gag too? Sorry, I think it's a bit short-sighted to write it off as a reason-example.

    Blofeld is not just in a wheelchair. Bond did that to him during the bobsled chase in OHMSS.

    Aren't you creating your own canon here? If Blofeld is in a wheelchair because of the end of OHMSS, then how is he getting around in DAF, are they ALL his 'doubles'? I've always figured this is them deciding he barely survived DAF.

    Conspiracy theory time - Assuming the Blofeld of FYEO is the same one whose neck was broken and becomes wheelchair bound after OHMSS, then DAF's Blofeld could be an impostor. The real one pays the fake one(s) to go and do some Blofeld-like stuff since he knows Bond will be looking for him. So the real one is able to hide out for a decade constructing his master plan for revenge (er, which involves a wire that Bond just unplugs).
  • edited August 2015 Posts: 232
    It isn t the SPECTRE films that get released. It is the Blofeld films. And that should tell you something, those of you who still don t think Blofeld will appear in the upcoming film.

    Yes, but then it can't be Waltz because that would make no sense at all and even be an absolute disaster story wise, Oberhauser is Bond's childhood acquaintance.

    I still believe Andrew Scott will be revealed to be Blofeld, I just can't see any other way IF Blofeld does appear in Spectre.

    I think it would be an absolute disaster story wise too, but that doesn't mean it ain't gonna go down in that fashion.

    I'm already thinking that this whole Craig reboot era is going to get filed under something like 'grand unified theory of Bond' phase when somebody does a 75th anniversary essaybook on Bond films.

    It'll probably be the chapter SEPARATING WHEAT FROM CHAFF: Reconciling MI6's Jungian Archetypes with the Freudian Oedipal Dilemma Arising in PostColdWar 007 Screenjobs.
  • PropertyOfALadyPropertyOfALady Colders Federation CEO
    Posts: 3,675
    It'll probably be the chapter SEPARATING WHEAT FROM CHAFF: Reconciling MI6's Jungian Archetypes with the Freudian Oedipal Dilemma Arising in PostColdWar 007 Screenjobs.

    All I can say is '?'
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Why is that a disaster? Obviously Bond has many missions we never see not potentially involving SPECTRE ...I mean in pretend land lol.

    CR and QS already involved an organization we know from the trailer that exist in the same world as SPECTRE. The only unfortunate would be Silva which like Gold finger should be left alone but nevertheless is mentioned in the SPECTRE list above. Maybe not idk.
  • Posts: 232
    The feeling I have from perusing some stuff online and seeing the trailer is that we are indeed looking at something where all of the Craig era ties together here in a way that to some will seem elegant and to others will seem so ridiculous that the credibility gap will be large enough to pilot a starship through.
  • Posts: 232
    It'll probably be the chapter SEPARATING WHEAT FROM CHAFF: Reconciling MI6's Jungian Archetypes with the Freudian Oedipal Dilemma Arising in PostColdWar 007 Screenjobs.

    All I can say is '?'

    I was just trying to make up something that was appropriately highfalutin' sounding, thass all.
  • PropertyOfALadyPropertyOfALady Colders Federation CEO
    Posts: 3,675
    trevanian wrote: »
    It'll probably be the chapter SEPARATING WHEAT FROM CHAFF: Reconciling MI6's Jungian Archetypes with the Freudian Oedipal Dilemma Arising in PostColdWar 007 Screenjobs.

    All I can say is '?'

    I was just trying to make up something that was appropriately highfalutin' sounding, thass all.

    I see. Jolly good. :)
  • Posts: 11,425
    Isn't Dr NO more of a Spectre movie than FYEO?
  • RC7 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's not really a retcon. We all knew it was Blofeld and we all knew it was an FU to Kevin McClory. EON's just finally admitting it since they have the rights.

    It's a retcon. Eon snipped out a line where the villain says this was "the 10th anniversary of our last encounter." To leave it in would mean they'd no longer have "plausible deniability." The line stayed in the comic book adaptation.

    It's not a retcon, it had no impact canonically and it's clearly Blofeld. It's merely clarifying the fact.

    Retcon. They tried to pretend it wasn't Blofeld for legal reasons. One more snipped line from the screenplay. After Bond drops the Blofeld-like guy down the chimney, Bond says, "Happy anniversary." That, too, is in the comic book adaptation, based on the script Marvel had at the time.

    If you want to say it's not a retcon, fine. The fact is, Eon is now changing its story.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    RC7 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's not really a retcon. We all knew it was Blofeld and we all knew it was an FU to Kevin McClory. EON's just finally admitting it since they have the rights.

    It's a retcon. Eon snipped out a line where the villain says this was "the 10th anniversary of our last encounter." To leave it in would mean they'd no longer have "plausible deniability." The line stayed in the comic book adaptation.

    It's not a retcon, it had no impact canonically and it's clearly Blofeld. It's merely clarifying the fact.

    Retcon. They tried to pretend it wasn't Blofeld for legal reasons. One more snipped line from the screenplay. After Bond drops the Blofeld-like guy down the chimney, Bond says, "Happy anniversary." That, too, is in the comic book adaptation, based on the script Marvel had at the time.

    If you want to say it's not a retcon, fine. The fact is, Eon is now changing its story.

    They never awknowledged or denied it was Blofeld. Roger Moore said it was Blofeld on the Ultimate Edition FYEO commentary. A retcon would be EON suddenly saying Goldfinger worked for SPECTRE. EON's just confirming what has been known as a marketing gimmick. The SPECTRE collection which is missing Dr. No in it for some reason.
  • eddychaputeddychaput Montreal, Canada
    Posts: 364
    I don't think a retcon MUST imply that a part of the story is changed. The fact that FYEO is now a SPECTRE film is little more than a marketing ploy, retcon or not. The FYEO story stands on its own regardless of whether EON had changed the facts surrounding the pre-title sequence or not. I think we're getting bogged down in semantics here.

    I say tomato, you say tomato, let's call the whole thing off
Sign In or Register to comment.