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
Sure I can explain it:
They're out of order.
How's that?
Have you ever tried reading a book with a wasp around you? It's distracting.
No that only works if 67 - 69 - 71 are not the years in which the films were released. Okay we can say that now, years later. But what about if you lived during that time. Some of the older members must be seriously confused due to this.
Also, in For Your Eyes Only, Moore's Bond clearly recognises Blofeld's voice when Blofeld attacks him, not to mention that I have no idea why Blofeld would be trying to get revenge on any random person paying respects to Tracy. Unless, of course, the codename theorists think that Blofeld's son hired a look-a-like called Earnest Savoury Biofield to wear a neck brace, sit in a wheelchair and kill everyone who put a flower on Tracy's grave.
Which brings me to this - wouldn't it be suspicious if different-looking people came to pay respects to Tracy's grave and all of them claimed to James Bond? There'd be at least Lazenby and Moore's iterations, and probably Connery's as well given how he was interested in getting revenge in the DAF PTS.
Er, I don't really see your point. I mean Rogue One comes out in a few months, are people confused that that film is set before the events of episode IV? Maybe some are, I guess.
What's the correct order then? If Connery dies in YOLT, is DAF set before YOLT?
No Connery dies after Diamonds. Diamonds and Majesty's are simply switched. I mean, I guess they don't necessary die. Since they are already brainwashed, they could just be mind wiped again and pushed out of a van onto the motorway or something. But the point is they stop being James Bond after a certain point.
And before anyone says that switching Diamonds and Majesty's is impossible because in the Diamonds PTS Bond is getting revenge for Tracy, there's no hard evidence for that. In fact, he doesn't even mention being married. He could have simply been tracking down Blofeld after YOLT. Don't you think the filmmakers left it ambiguous for a reason? They have certainly been having alot of fun at our expense over the years, that much is clear to me now.
Damn you! I'd forgotten about the whole 'Pushing agents out of a transit onto the M1'. There's a wikipedia page somewhere that outlines this very protocol.
Well, I'm guessing that to be a 00 you have to be in peak physical condition. I haven't done the research on this, but I heard somewhere that human beings are at their peak physically in their early and late thirties. So if one of those guys was lucky enough to make it to 38, he was pretty much expendable, because someone younger and better was ready.
By the way, I find it funny how when I bring up evidence, barely anyone actually addresses my points. Instead they dismiss them with mockery and go on demanding to know where the evidence is. I have written three different posts now, each bring new information to discuss, and I have yet to see anyone definitively refute a single thing I have said.
No, just different levels of cognitive ability. Functioning and malfunctioning.
Evidence and conjecture are mutually exclusive. I would seriously pay good money to see you defend someone in court. It would be thoroughly entertaining.
You know, people as narrow-minded as you only do themselves more harm in the long run. But if you want to berate and deride a fellow Bond fan for holding an opinion thats different from your own, that's your prerogative.
I know, you're a visionary etc...
They made it as clear as day by deliberately leaving things ambiguous throughout the films? Alright then.
It isn't mathematics, it's art.
Ha ha.
"You're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly upon our own point of view."
There is a message there that I think you would benefit from absorbing.
Wait, now he's going to tell us non-believers that "I find your lack of faith disturbing."