›

007 Legends Announced

1…4243454748…110

Comments

  • ZHalfterZHalfter
    edited August 2012 Posts: 198
    Agent007391 wrote:
    ZHalfter wrote:
    Its not that we want chronology its that Brady does not understand that Casino Royale was the first bond book and all the other missions happened after it...they did the same thing in the reboot with Craig but they made it into a 2 part movie(QOS). What the game will be is that they are trying to tell us that CRAIG IS BOND for now and that after his first mission he had a lot of others...(monnraker, DAD, etc.). And he also now had the new "mission" Skyfall. Im not saying the missions as they announced them will be in "chronological" order im just saying that now that Craig is the new Bond (REBOTED THE SERIES IN 2006) that after CR and QOS he had these missions, including Skyfall...If anybody dosent understand just ask :D :D :D

    Okay... Some things I have to say.

    1) QOS is a direct sequel, not a second part. EON didn't make both CR and QOS at the same time and then split them up (and if they did, damn them for making us wait two years for what they already had filmed).
    2) We all understand that Craig is Bond, who doesn't understand that?
    3) I'm hoping we all understand that Bond had assignments between QOS and Skyfall. It's a little difficult for me to believe (even when bringing these past missions into the present) that Craig's Bond had 50 years of experience in 4 years, but if that's EON's feeling, I guess I can accept it.
    4) I actually don't have a 4, I just didn't want to end at 3.

    Lol and you are right about it being a direct sequel and its not necessarily 50 years, those are the movies...all the bond missions happen in a few days except for CR and a few others if you think about it. Do you think he could have done 5 missions in 5 years when they are only a couple days long each??
  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    edited August 2012 Posts: 2,044
    I think it is like @ZHalfter said. The missions in this game are set in the Timespace between QoS and SF. Just like Bloodstone and GE:RE is. So Bloodstone is set in 2010, ans Moonraker perhaps the same year, and so on. And in that way the movies have never happend.
    That's how I like to think it is.
  • ZHalfterZHalfter
    edited August 2012 Posts: 198
    MrBond wrote:
    I think it is like @Z Halfter said. The missions in this game are set in the Timespace between QoS and SF. Just like Bloodstone and GE:RE is. And in that way the movies have never happend.
    That's how I like to think it is.

    Yes because Casino Royale and QOS are the starting point in the Bond franchise...no matter how you look at it.
  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    Posts: 2,044
    ZHalfter wrote:
    MrBond wrote:
    I think it is like @Z Halfter said. The missions in this game are set in the Timespace between QoS and SF. Just like Bloodstone and GE:RE is. And in that way the movies have never happend.
    That's how I like to think it is.

    Yes because Casino Royale and QOS are the starting point in the Bond franchise

    Yes, and then QoS is set in 2006 and SF in October/November 2012. And all these games in between.
  • ZHalfterZHalfter
    Posts: 198
    Yes that is what I think exactly! Good to see someone sees "the right way" ;)
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    My point is, this is a game narrative. The films do not follow this chronology they are just separate entities. It's an experiment with a game as opposed to actual Bond lore, so to speak.
  • VolanteVolante
    Posts: 774
    ZHalfter wrote:
    Yes that is what I think exactly! Good to see someone sees "the right way" ;)

    There is no 'right way' to look at this until it is officially said that 'these missions took place inbetween QOS and Skyfall'. Until then, everything regarding the timeline of the game is speculation based on personal opinion.
    RC7 wrote:
    My point is, this is a game narrative. The films do not follow this chronology they are just separate entities. It's an experiment with a game as opposed to actual Bond lore, so to speak.

    I 100% agree with this.

    They're missions in a game. They don't have to have a mapped out chronology with regards to the films, nor a timeline of when each mission took place with regards to other games.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    Samuel001 wrote:
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Most odd but there should be a story reason for this change.

    I'm struggling to think of a story reason for her skin colour changing.

    It's a game. I'm sure they'll think of something and no one will like the answer!

    I think you're giving them too much credit here, I doubt they'll explain it. I mean, can you think of a "story reason" for her race changing?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Most odd but there should be a story reason for this change.

    I'm struggling to think of a story reason for her skin colour changing.

    It's a game. I'm sure they'll think of something and no one will like the answer!

    I think you're giving them too much credit here, I doubt they'll explain it. I mean, can you think of a "story reason" for her race changing?


    Maybe she got reconstructive surgery too. /:)
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    Maybe, but I still think it's stupid and they won't bother explaining it.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    Maybe Jinx got Gene Therapy. :p
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    Maybe, but I still think it's stupid and they won't bother explaining it.
    It's Activision we're talking about here, not Rockstar.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,356
    People are up in arms over Rockstar too, for releasing the GTA trailer 'far too early'. No one can do any good today!
    Murdock wrote:
    Maybe Jinx got Gene Therapy. :p

    That was my thinking.
  • ohmss42ohmss42
    Posts: 29
    its a game. people need to calm down about continuation, this is meant to be a tribute for the anniversary
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Murdock wrote:
    Maybe Jinx got Gene Therapy. :p

    That was my thinking.

    But why would Jinx have gene therapy? And if she does, why would they put that in, it wasn't in the film, it would've been much easier just to keep her race the same.

    If they come up with a good explanation, fair play to them, but I think they've just changed the characters appearence like they did in the GE remake (and maybe in this), but they've taken it a step further this time and changed her race.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited August 2012 Posts: 13,356
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Murdock wrote:
    Maybe Jinx got Gene Therapy. :p

    That was my thinking.

    But why would Jinx have gene therapy? And if she does, why would they put that in, it wasn't in the film, it would've been much easier just to keep her race the same.

    We'll find out in the game, I guess. Fingers crossed it's just an earlier version of the game that's been shown, it may have already been fixed in the most recent version.
  • BritishChap007BritishChap007
    Posts: 555
    Samuel001 wrote:
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Murdock wrote:
    Maybe Jinx got Gene Therapy. :p

    That was my thinking.

    But why would Jinx have gene therapy? And if she does, why would they put that in, it wasn't in the film, it would've been much easier just to keep her race the same.

    We'll find out in the game, I guess. Fingers crossed it's just an earlier version of the game that's been shown, it may have already been fixed in the most recent version.

    Chances are Berry wouldn't let them/she was to expensive, so they wanted to make sure she didn't come close to looking like her. All the other girls are screen accurate, so it must be Berry related
  • X3MSonicXX3MSonicX https://www.behance.net/gallery/86760163/Fa-Posteres-de-007-No-Time-To-Die
    Posts: 2,635
    At least they could make a Black woman, doesn't needs to be Halle.
  • BritishChap007BritishChap007
    Posts: 555
    X3MSonicX wrote:
    At least they could make a Black woman, doesn't needs to be Halle.

    A lawyer could probably still argue it was Halle, in that case
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    edited August 2012 Posts: 12,837
    X3MSonicX wrote:
    At least they could make a Black woman, doesn't needs to be Halle.

    Exactly. They didn't change the races of any other characters (and they replaced basically the entire cast), in the new GE games. I think it's a pointless change that won't be explained, which they shoved so she looked as different to Berry as possible.
    BritishChap007 wrote:
    X3MSonicX wrote:
    At least they could make a Black woman, doesn't needs to be Halle.

    A lawyer could probably still argue it was Halle, in that case

    I don't see how. "She's black so she must be Halle Berry!!!" pretty stupid argument.
  • 00Beast00Beast
    Posts: 4,762
    ZHalfter wrote:
    MrBond wrote:
    I think it is like @Z Halfter said. The missions in this game are set in the Timespace between QoS and SF. Just like Bloodstone and GE:RE is. And in that way the movies have never happend.
    That's how I like to think it is.

    Yes because Casino Royale and QOS are the starting point in the Bond franchise...no matter how you look at it.

    I like this theory as well, in fact I had wondered how Legends was incorporating these three into their SkyFall timeline. Certainly six of Bond's most memorable missions, given the facts which @Agent007391 listed out earlier. If this does work as a flashback when Bond is in the water, I believe it will work pretty well and be really cool.
  • BritishChap007BritishChap007
    Posts: 555
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    X3MSonicX wrote:
    At least they could make a Black woman, doesn't needs to be Halle.

    Exactly. They didn't change the races of any other characters (and they replaced basically the entire cast), in the new GE games. I think it's a pointless change that won't be explained, which they shoved so she looked as different to Berry as possible.
    BritishChap007 wrote:
    X3MSonicX wrote:
    At least they could make a Black woman, doesn't needs to be Halle.

    A lawyer could probably still argue it was Halle, in that case

    I don't see how. "She's black so she must be Halle Berry!!!" pretty stupid argument.

    Yeah. A black woman, playing Halle Berry's part, in Halle Berry's movie, wearing her outfits, saying her lines.

  • dragonskydragonsky
    Posts: 2,491
    Felix Leiter was black and white in the movies. So who cares about Jinx in the game.
    After all this game is not totally unrealstic cause in real life MJ changed colour so .. :)
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    BritishChap007 wrote:
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    X3MSonicX wrote:
    At least they could make a Black woman, doesn't needs to be Halle.

    Exactly. They didn't change the races of any other characters (and they replaced basically the entire cast), in the new GE games. I think it's a pointless change that won't be explained, which they shoved so she looked as different to Berry as possible.
    BritishChap007 wrote:
    X3MSonicX wrote:
    At least they could make a Black woman, doesn't needs to be Halle.

    A lawyer could probably still argue it was Halle, in that case

    I don't see how. "She's black so she must be Halle Berry!!!" pretty stupid argument.

    Yeah. A black woman, playing Halle Berry's part, in Halle Berry's movie, wearing her outfits, saying her lines.

    Sean Bean didn't sue them because Trevelayn was still white did he? Like I said, it's a stupid argument. They could've kept her skin colour the same and changed her appearence.
  • ZHalfterZHalfter
    edited August 2012 Posts: 198
    that is true living royale but i guess maybe since halle berry refused they thought...what the hell! make her white! You know? Change it up a bit. Even though they should have kept her as she was(black)
  • DamnCoffeeDamnCoffee
    Posts: 51
    I don't see why everyones getting so offended about this. Halle Berry is an awful actress anyway, and she was bloody awful in Die Another Day, which made the film even more awful than it already was. It doesn't really bother me.
  • ZHalfterZHalfter
    edited August 2012 Posts: 198
    DamnCoffee wrote:
    I don't see why everyones getting so offended about this. Halle Berry is an awful actress anyway, and she was bloody awful in Die Another Day, which made the film even more awful than it already was. It doesn't really bother me.

    I dont know how you could say that...you are just one of those people who didnt like the CGI's im guessing...well its a pretty good movie otherwise. Awful is a strong word.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    DamnCoffee wrote:
    I don't see why everyones getting so offended about this. Halle Berry is an awful actress anyway, and she was bloody awful in Die Another Day, which made the film even more awful than it already was. It doesn't really bother me.

    It's not that they changed the actress from Halle Berry, I knew she wouldn't be in the game and unlike some other people (like Sean Bean, Robert Davi, all the Bond actors, etc), I don't mind her getting replaced.

    The problem is that they changed the characters skin colour for (as far as we know), no reason.
  • DamnCoffeeDamnCoffee
    Posts: 51
    ZHalfter wrote:
    DamnCoffee wrote:
    I don't see why everyones getting so offended about this. Halle Berry is an awful actress anyway, and she was bloody awful in Die Another Day, which made the film even more awful than it already was. It doesn't really bother me.

    I dont know how you could say that...you are just one of those people who didnt like the CGI's im guessing...well its a pretty good movie otherwise. Awful is a strong word.

    I dislike Die Another Day because of the direction, writing, acting, almost everything about it is bad. Even if the CGI is bad, I wouldn't have minded it if was been told around a good story, but it's just too over the top for my taste. Funny that the two virtual reality moments were the most realistic parts of the film.
  • ZHalfterZHalfter
    Posts: 198
    DamnCoffee wrote:
    ZHalfter wrote:
    DamnCoffee wrote:
    I don't see why everyones getting so offended about this. Halle Berry is an awful actress anyway, and she was bloody awful in Die Another Day, which made the film even more awful than it already was. It doesn't really bother me.

    I dont know how you could say that...you are just one of those people who didnt like the CGI's im guessing...well its a pretty good movie otherwise. Awful is a strong word.

    I dislike Die Another Day because of the direction, writing, acting, almost everything about it is bad. Even if the CGI is bad, I wouldn't have minded it if was been told around a good story, but it's just too over the top for my taste. Funny that the two virtual reality moments were the most realistic parts of the film.

    Well damncoffee thats just your opinion and ill stick to mine. Good day!
Sign In or Register to comment.