It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Some 'fear' it is. Ha ha, you couldn't make this shit up. Brilliant.
Finally you deliver on your evidence? Pretty persuasive.
'@Mendes4lyfe I knew you'd come.'
To paraphrase the comedian .....
" Some scientists make a statement, then go off to find evidence and facts to
Support their argument ! ...... I'm not like that. I say what I want and know I'm
Right. To look for evidence...... I don't bother with all that..... It would only show
Disbelief in Myself !" :))
I think Mendes and Oddjob are followers of the Church of Sean. :D
'Noooo!'
Welcome to the Age of Bond Enlightenment.
The last refuge of the religious nutter.
Just because you cannot prove something doesn't exist it doesn't automatically follow that therefore it must exist.
:)) And Reg Holdsworth is actually Blofeld!
The whole Bond and Corrie universes are intertwined since 1962.
No one has come out and said that's not true so therefore it must be at least credible right?
Wait I am sorry have you seen Licence to kill and Die another day?
Both films bond is not 007 not even slightly and yet he is still called James Bond. And before you say Iceland was a sanctioned mission in die another day re watch it again Q points out clearly "it's called the future so get used to it 000"
Not 007 000 so clearly if the joke is meant to be believed M might of brought in a new agent to be 007 yet James Bond is still James Bond!!!!!!
'Just because you cannot prove something doesn't exist it doesn't automatically follow that therefore it must exist.'
Total strawman, I never said it did. I didn't even say that meant it was credible. I said it would have been very easy to establish each Bond was the same, yet for some reason it never happened.
Also, no one read the second part of my post. The 'other fella' in OHMSS. Bond not knowing chinese in TND. I could go on but I'm sure you know the inconsistencies already.
1. He can speak it fluently but can't read the characters which makes sense as I know of a lot of people in China who can speak English flawlessly but when pres noted with an English book it becomes clear they can't read English just speak it (like I can wih German and Hebrew)
2. With all bond does its possible even probable that by the events of college his language skills might be extremely rusty as he doesn't practice his skills every day (a common trait of the film bond and Fleming Benson Deaver and I believe Gardener's bond was a complete waste of down time between missions not spending it relearning skills but rather drinking and being remorseful that he wasn't on assignment)
So Wizard it appears we not only have to drop flowers at the graves of all former collegues but now we have to relearn any language we may have learned in school years ago so we can read and write it fluently how does one expect to save the world or indeed do anything if one is studying language and dropping flowers of at every grave site known to man.
WRONG
WRONG
WRONG
James Bond is an officer of the temporal police force send back to correct the timeline. He already failed 5 times, his 6th attempt is seen in CR to SP so far.
The only mystery here is what the temporal police is so desperately trying to correct.
If the 6th attempt fails too, the next one will look like this:
Because they are making films about a bloke called 'James Bond'. The clue is that they are a series of films about the same character and they presumably think that their audience has an IQ slightly higher than a stale bread roll. What is you want to understand this? A title card like the 'The name Zorin does not refer to a real company' one in AVTAK saying 'For the terminally thick, although the guy playing him is different this is still a film about James Bond hence it starts with the GB, has the Bond theme and everyone refers to him as James Bond throughout FFS.'
If it confuses you when a different actor plays Bond I really recommend you give Inception a wide birth.
This is the backbone of your case is it?
Why can 'The other fella' not be a knowing wink to the audience before the film starts properly. Or is everything presented in the films all part of an interlinked story?
In that case I'd be interested to hear how you account for the jet's afterburner smashing that screen in the TND PTS then? Presumably you imagine there's Chinook flying behind Bond's plane carrying a massive pane of glass beneath it?
Why can Bond not recognising Wai Lin's keyboard be either:
1. Its of a dialect he doesn't know (his degree was Oriental languages so perhaps he knows Japanese, Cantonese, Mandarin, Thai, Nepalese etc but not every single Chinese dialect).
2. A sloppy continuity error between films made 30 years apart by completely different people, none of whom obsess about these things like we do.
Over this many films made over so many years inconsistencies and mistakes are bound to creep in but that's all they are - mistakes.
But you think they are all carefully crafted and deliberate pointers in a Da Vinci Code-esque conspiracy to reveal the truth to perceptive viewers is a more credible explanation do you?
But I'm puzzled. I take it the code theory-defenders are familiar with continuity errors in movies. Every movie has them - on IMDb, they're gathered under "goofs". Objects being moved between cuts, bottles filling/emptying miraculously ... I understand you accept this as an unavoidable consequence of the movie industry: movies are edited from many takes and retakes and some continuity errors may occur.
Now, it is equally unavoidable that a franchise on a fit secret agent running over several decades has to recast the major role. That's not even a continuity error - it's either that or stopping the franchise alltogether. Unless we would like a 90-year old Bond (don't understand then why people are complaining about Moore in AVTAK?). And despite the best efforts of the franchise writers, producers and directors to enchance the continuity of the character as various actors play the part (visiting graves, referring to dead spouses ...), you'd rather pass that by and go against the intentions of the film crew.
I find that your urge for consistency and continuity is lacking some consistenty itself, if I'm permitted to say so.
By the way, YOLT was set in Japan, the keyboard in TND was in Mandarine: that's two different languages as was already pointed out by someone else some pages ago.
As for "the other guy" by Lazenby. It's a technique that is not as common in movies as it is in theatre, called breaking the 4th wall by stepping out of the imaginary world and directly adressing the audience - as also has been pointed out by several members. Woody Allens "The Purple Rose of Cairo" is completely built on that concept. Very good movie, you should watch it.
Please tell me, if you don't believe this 4th wall approach, are you then saying that James Bond is aware of camera crews following him around on his adventures? Not very beneficial for his undercover work. If not, your approach to the matter again is not so consistent.
There was a camera crew in Saida s dressing room and they didn t even bother to hide, like they did in FRWL and DAD. I wonder what that was about, were they working for MI6? Was it the equivalent of the homer device, microchip or smartblood from other films?
He had probably seen some of the films. You know, the series where Sean Connery and George Lazenby played him.