James Bond - Not a Man, but a Codename

135

Comments

  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854

    Plus, the Daniel Craig Bond is a reboot, who may have had the same adventures between QoS and SF.

    Please don't tell me you're a believer in the codename theory. Oh well, here we go again.

    The infamous This never happened to the other fellow line really annoys me...

    No, I'm not a believer in the codename theory (and how does Craig being a reboot lend credence to this?). But, as 007 Legends suggests, the Craig Bond may have had the adventures of the previous five in the rebooted timeline.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,334

    Plus, the Daniel Craig Bond is a reboot, who may have had the same adventures between QoS and SF.

    Please don't tell me you're a believer in the codename theory. Oh well, here we go again.

    The infamous This never happened to the other fellow line really annoys me...

    No, I'm not a believer in the codename theory (and how does Craig being a reboot lend credence to this?). But, as 007 Legends suggests, the Craig Bond may have had the adventures of the previous five in the rebooted timeline.
    I had that feeling while watching SF as well, especially when he takes out the GF/Thunderball DB5. And, to be honest, I like that idea. It makes the universe in a way coherent, disregarding of course all the actual references to the years in wich the films were made.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 1
    It had been during the early months of the Great War of 1914-1918 that Smith-Cummings, as head of Britain’s Foreign Secret Service Bureau (SSB) later known as MI6 had employed a young female operative from Marseille. At that time he had also come to rely on Lieutenant Sidney George Reilly, MC, who would later be famously known as the ‘Ace of Spies’. Reilly was a Jewish Russian-born adventurer and secret agent of dubious character who had been based in Saint Petersburg. He had been employed by both Scotland Yard, and the SSB, although he is alleged to have spied for at least four nations.

    After Reilly's death in 1925, the London Evening Standard published a Master Spy serial in May 1931 imparting his exploits. Later, Ian Fleming would supposedly use Reilly as his model for James Bond, although it has to be wondered if the young Marseille prostitute and MI6 operative was not that inspiration. Named Jehanne Blanche, her pseudonym was ‘Jane Blonde’, a nickname given to her by Royal Navy sailors after their ship HMS Blonde. Perhaps, given the chauvinism of the age, that a male entity was used by Fleming in her stead.

    Whatever the truth, the history of that age and the story of an ‘Amulet’ brought Jehanne into contact with her true self.

    For those interested the story 'The Amulet' will be published in 2014 as an account of MI1 and MI6 operatives in WW1. It includes the short life also a Private Arthur Edgar Newcombe who got tied in with them, and was killed in December 1917 at Jerusalem.

    Mod edit: double post merged.
  • Posts: 169
    James Bond as code name was actually part of the plot (as much as there was one) in the 1967 Casino Royale. That gives me some idea of how seriously the theory (as much as it is one) should be taken.
  • Apologies for dragging up such an old thread, but I always had a theory that I thought was worthy of sharing.

    Yes, the codename is total BS and anyone who has half a brain knows this. But common sense also dictates that you can't go from being an old man in AVTAK to being mid-late 30's in TLD. Some idiots have made an argument that the Dalton/Brosnan films occur between the Connery/Lazenby years and the Moore years, which is even dumber than the codename theory for obvious reasons. My theory consists of three separate timelines for Bond and mostly revolves around Tracy's death (and Vesper's, to a lesser degree).

    The first is the original 1962-1985 timeline from DN to AVTAK. It makes chronological sense, as Bond is early/mid 30s in DN and mid/late 50s in AVTAK. Character-wise, it fits in perfectly because one presumes the events of literary CR have already happened shortly before DN, which along with FRWL features the hardened but grounded, efficient, womanizing superspy that Vesper's death had molded Bond into. As Connery's movies progress and get more ridiculous, Bond gradually loses his hardened edginess and grows into a more tender character until OHMSS, when he is finally ready to settle down with Tracy. Tracy's death, however, is emotionally shattering for Bond. Rather than go off the deep end in a rage, he instead masks his sadness with humor and lightheartedness while avoiding any real emotional connection's with others, exhibited by Bond selfishly seducing Solitaire in LALD, the many, many Bond girls of the early Moore era and Bond's awkward reaction when Anya brings up Tracy. This explains the campiness of DAF-MR. As Bond grows older and wiser, he begins to realize he must finally come to terms with Tracy's loss and be a more responsible human being, which explains the grave scene in FYEO, Bond's admonition of Melina not to pursue revenge, his rejection of Bibi's advances, and the movie's more realistic tone. Once FYEO is over and Bond has more fully come to terms with Tracy's death, he returns to his camp but is more the wiser, which explains why OP and AVTAK are still campy but not as downright ridiculous as MR and TMWTGG. Bond retires after the events of AVTAK.

    The second timeline is the current one with Craig, and the one that requires the least explanation. There is an official reboot, and Bond returns to the beginning of his career as a 00. Bond is hardened after the events of CR and pursues revenge in QoS, and is still a rather joyless character in SF.

    The third timeline in my theory is that of the Dalton/Brosnan era. The beginning of Dalton's tenure as 007 reboots the franchise following Tracy's death. Put more simply, the events of DN-OHMSS happen to all the Bonds except Craig. However, TLD-DAD are an alternate timeline. AS for the historical background, we assume for this timeline's purposes that the events of DN happened in 1979 (assuming TLD takes place after OHMSS). As for Dalton's character, instead of simply depressing bond, in this timeline Bond is enraged and angry due to Tracy's death. This explains Dalton's darker, more brutal approach to the character. Bonds relationship with Kara in TLD is more emotional than usual because of Bonds fragile emotional state after Tracys death. The events of LTK are easier to explain in this timeline. Bond, still deeply affected by Tracy's death, goes rogue after what happens to Felix, with the similarities it has to his own marriage, and begins a brutal revenge. After this saga is over Bond retreats into a more subdued style but the hardness still remains in him as well as the occasional camp, which explains why Brosnans Bond is more of a jack of all trades. Chronologically this also makes sense as Bond is in his mid 30s in 1987 for TLD and is around 50 for DAD in 2002.

    I am aware that there are flaws in my theory, but I always found it to be interesting.
  • Posts: 6,022
    All well and good, except for Felix Leiter in LTK.
  • @Gerard what about him?
  • Posts: 15,231

    Apologies for dragging up such an old thread, but I always had a theory that I thought was worthy of sharing.

    Yes, the codename is total BS and anyone who has half a brain knows this. But common sense also dictates that you can't go from being an old man in AVTAK to being mid-late 30's in TLD. Some idiots have made an argument that the Dalton/Brosnan films occur between the Connery/Lazenby years and the Moore years, which is even dumber than the codename theory for obvious reasons. My theory consists of three separate timelines for Bond and mostly revolves around Tracy's death (and Vesper's, to a lesser degree).

    The first is the original 1962-1985 timeline from DN to AVTAK. It makes chronological sense, as Bond is early/mid 30s in DN and mid/late 50s in AVTAK. Character-wise, it fits in perfectly because one presumes the events of literary CR have already happened shortly before DN, which along with FRWL features the hardened but grounded, efficient, womanizing superspy that Vesper's death had molded Bond into. As Connery's movies progress and get more ridiculous, Bond gradually loses his hardened edginess and grows into a more tender character until OHMSS, when he is finally ready to settle down with Tracy. Tracy's death, however, is emotionally shattering for Bond. Rather than go off the deep end in a rage, he instead masks his sadness with humor and lightheartedness while avoiding any real emotional connection's with others, exhibited by Bond selfishly seducing Solitaire in LALD, the many, many Bond girls of the early Moore era and Bond's awkward reaction when Anya brings up Tracy. This explains the campiness of DAF-MR. As Bond grows older and wiser, he begins to realize he must finally come to terms with Tracy's loss and be a more responsible human being, which explains the grave scene in FYEO, Bond's admonition of Melina not to pursue revenge, his rejection of Bibi's advances, and the movie's more realistic tone. Once FYEO is over and Bond has more fully come to terms with Tracy's death, he returns to his camp but is more the wiser, which explains why OP and AVTAK are still campy but not as downright ridiculous as MR and TMWTGG. Bond retires after the events of AVTAK.

    The second timeline is the current one with Craig, and the one that requires the least explanation. There is an official reboot, and Bond returns to the beginning of his career as a 00. Bond is hardened after the events of CR and pursues revenge in QoS, and is still a rather joyless character in SF.

    The third timeline in my theory is that of the Dalton/Brosnan era. The beginning of Dalton's tenure as 007 reboots the franchise following Tracy's death. Put more simply, the events of DN-OHMSS happen to all the Bonds except Craig. However, TLD-DAD are an alternate timeline. AS for the historical background, we assume for this timeline's purposes that the events of DN happened in 1979 (assuming TLD takes place after OHMSS). As for Dalton's character, instead of simply depressing bond, in this timeline Bond is enraged and angry due to Tracy's death. This explains Dalton's darker, more brutal approach to the character. Bonds relationship with Kara in TLD is more emotional than usual because of Bonds fragile emotional state after Tracys death. The events of LTK are easier to explain in this timeline. Bond, still deeply affected by Tracy's death, goes rogue after what happens to Felix, with the similarities it has to his own marriage, and begins a brutal revenge. After this saga is over Bond retreats into a more subdued style but the hardness still remains in him as well as the occasional camp, which explains why Brosnans Bond is more of a jack of all trades. Chronologically this also makes sense as Bond is in his mid 30s in 1987 for TLD and is around 50 for DAD in 2002.

    I am aware that there are flaws in my theory, but I always found it to be interesting.

    Still better than the codename theory. A theory is as good as the evidence supporting it.

    IMO, I always considered Bond to be in a lose continuity like comic books: whatever happened or happens happened to the others, but you retcon the past to fit present timeline. So Brosnan Bond did fight Doctor No, for instance, only he fought him not in 1962 but in a different time. Of course this changed with the Craig era, but even there at least some stories can be integrated to it.
  • Posts: 6,022
    @Gerard what about him?

    Well, that's the same Felix than in LALD. So...

  • Gerard wrote:
    @Gerard what about him?

    Well, that's the same Felix than in LALD. So...

    I don't think that makes a difference. Like Bond, Felix is one character who is portrayed by different actors, so which actor is Felix in each movie is inconsequential

  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    @hilderbrand_rarity, wasn't Dalton in his 40's during the filming of TLD? Or were you just proposing that the character of James Bond is in his mid 30's for that film?
  • @pachazo he was (41 in TLD) but going by Connery's age in DN, he would be about 39 in TLD. Small enough not to matter.
  • I've always hated the codename theory. The only Bond I think the argument holds water with is Daniel Craig rebooted era.

    There is strong evidence to support the idea here:

    - M is still the same woman from the previous films. This would explain Dench's reappearance. She was M with the old Bond and the new one.
    - Bond talks to Mathis before he dies about his codename, therefore acknowledging the use of codenames something that had never been discussed in a Bond film before.
    - Bond having the old Bond's Aston Martin DB5.

    However, if we do follow this line of thought than Craig's Bond is 'Fleming's Bond' and therefore the true Bond as he is the only one to have Fleming's character's backstory (Andrew Bond is explicitly revealed to be Craig's Bond's Father). This would mean the other Bonds were not the same man that Fleming was writing about.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    - M is still the same woman from the previous films. This would explain Dench's reappearance. She was M with the old Bond and the new one.

    No, not really. She's played by the same actress, but the similarities go that far. M in GoldenEye (a new M, I might add) remarks the words "a relic of the Cold War" with a pretty obvious dislike of the Cold War. In Casino Royale, M nearly yells "Christ! I miss the Cold War!" suggesting that M has been in her position for decades at the time. Also, the two women, though played by the same actress, have very different personalities. M during the Brosnan era is, despite being stern with Bond, shows a very obvious concern for him from the first moment he's on screen, and Bond himself appears very respectful of her (though he finds her incapable of truly doing the job at that time). M during the Craig era extremely dislikes Bond at the time of their first meeting, and only just seems to start respecting him come time of Quantum of Solace. M in the Brosnan era is also a mother, which isn't really hinted at during the Craig era (though I don't count that as evidence).
    - Bond talks to Mathis before he dies about his codename, therefore acknowledging the use of codenames something that had never been discussed in a Bond film before.

    I don't know why, but I really don't take that conversation seriously. I have no evidence to explain my feelings, it could happen to be the fact that Bond dumps him in the trash afterward, but I really don't take this one seriously. Plus, he is always referred to as "Rene Mathis", even after the revelation that Mathis is his cover name (could just be the last name of "Mathis" that is the code name).
    - Bond having the old Bond's Aston Martin DB5.

    There's plenty of time between Casino Royale and Skyfall for Bond to have his DB5 decked out with gadgets (and swap the driver's seat). Considering Bond never reacts with surprise that there is a Q Branch, it could very well be that he's had more than just his car supped up. The car seems to be the film version of Bond's Saab (from License Renewed), which just crops up out of nowhere and has gadgets in it.
  • Posts: 1,817
    René Mathis is a French name but he seems to be Italian not only because Giannini is but the character speaks Italian fluently and goes to Talamone on his retirement. But I don't know how could anyone infer that because Mathis could be a codename, James Bond is also. That's a perfect example of a logical fallacy.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,344
    Oh dear, I see this one has reared its ugly head again, though I do myself plan to do a paper on this one at some point and I'll give my reasoned opinions on it there.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Dr_Yes wrote:
    James Bond as code name was actually part of the plot (as much as there was one) in the 1967 Casino Royale. That gives me some idea of how seriously the theory (as much as it is one) should be taken.

    Yes, doctor. Tamahori claimed he took inspiration from FRWL, but surely he must have mixed it up with CR. He might as well have added canned laughter. I think DAD would have improved from it ever so slightly.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited January 2014 Posts: 18,344
    Dr_Yes wrote:
    James Bond as code name was actually part of the plot (as much as there was one) in the 1967 Casino Royale. That gives me some idea of how seriously the theory (as much as it is one) should be taken.

    Yes, doctor. Tamahori claimed he took inspiration from FRWL, but surely he must have mixed it up with CR. He might as well have added canned laughter. I think DAD would have improved from it ever so slightly.

    That just shows what a complete idiot Tamahori is then, that he took inspiration from a James Bond spoof film that's not even part of the official Eon series of Bond films. What was he on at the time?!
  • Posts: 15,231
    Who knows? Poor quality drugs paid with his ahem, personal services.

    I said it before, if Bond is a codename, then Blofeld is a devil possessing human bodies and his cat is a familiar spirit.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,682
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Tamahori... What was he on at the time?!
    Everything except the ball.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited January 2014 Posts: 18,344
    QBranch wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Tamahori... What was he on at the time?!
    Everything except the ball.

    Indeed. I assume from the crossdressing scandal below that he was in favour of the Blofeld in drag scene in DAF. Perhaps he was merely re-creating a scene from the film that was his main source of inspiration for DAD?

    http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/02/04/1138958948432.html

    http://www.mi6-hq.com/news/index.php?itemid=3468
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,682
    Let's just skirt the issue, shall we?
  • Posts: 15,231
    Dragonpol wrote:
    QBranch wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Tamahori... What was he on at the time?!
    Everything except the ball.

    Indeed. I assume from the crossdressing scandal below that he was in favour of the Blofeld in drag scene in DAF. Perhaps he was merely re-creating a scene from the film that was his main source of inspiration for DAD?

    http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/02/04/1138958948432.html

    http://www.mi6-hq.com/news/index.php?itemid=3468

    Except that with Tamahori, Bond would have cross-dressed.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    Ludovico wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    QBranch wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Tamahori... What was he on at the time?!
    Everything except the ball.

    Indeed. I assume from the crossdressing scandal below that he was in favour of the Blofeld in drag scene in DAF. Perhaps he was merely re-creating a scene from the film that was his main source of inspiration for DAD?

    http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/02/04/1138958948432.html

    http://www.mi6-hq.com/news/index.php?itemid=3468

    Except that with Tamahori, Bond would have cross-dressed.
    Daniel-Craig-2.png


    Sorry couldn't resist. :))
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,252
    I've posted this before but it's been a while. James Bond is not a code name. and there have been only 2 re-boots to the film series. The James Bond portrayed by Connery, Lazenby and Moore are all the same person; the Bond we see in Dr. No is the same we see in A View to a Kill. The James Bond portrayed by Dalton and Brosnan is the same person; this is the first re-boot. Then we have the second with Craig's Bond. As far as Dench's M, that is just an actress portraying the same character in two separate timelines. It can be a bit confusing but the two are unrelated.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    talos7 wrote:
    I've posted this before but it's been a while. James Bond is not a code name. and there have been only 2 re-boots to the film series. The James Bond portrayed by Connery, Lazenby and Moore are all the same person; the Bond we see in Dr. No is the same we see in A View to a Kill. The James Bond portrayed by Dalton and Brosnan is the same person; this is the first re-boot. Then we have the second with Craig's Bond. As far as Dench's M, that is just an actress portraying the same character in two separate timelines. It can be a bit confusing but the two are unrelated.

    Although in the Everything or Nothing game, Brosnan's Bond, says that he fought Max Zorin which makes Brosnan's and Moore's Bond the same.
  • Posts: 15,231
    People confuse reboot and retroactive continuity. They are not mutually exclusive and sometimes the lines between the two is extremely thin, but they are not the same. James Bond had plenty of retcon, but very little reboot.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,252
    Murdock wrote:
    talos7 wrote:
    I've posted this before but it's been a while. James Bond is not a code name. and there have been only 2 re-boots to the film series. The James Bond portrayed by Connery, Lazenby and Moore are all the same person; the Bond we see in Dr. No is the same we see in A View to a Kill. The James Bond portrayed by Dalton and Brosnan is the same person; this is the first re-boot. Then we have the second with Craig's Bond. As far as Dench's M, that is just an actress portraying the same character in two separate timelines. It can be a bit confusing but the two are unrelated.

    Although in the Everything or Nothing game, Brosnan's Bond, says that he fought Max Zorin which makes Brosnan's and Moore's Bond the same.
    Is the game considered cannon? Brosnan's Bond cannot be Moore's

  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    talos7 wrote:
    Murdock wrote:
    talos7 wrote:
    I've posted this before but it's been a while. James Bond is not a code name. and there have been only 2 re-boots to the film series. The James Bond portrayed by Connery, Lazenby and Moore are all the same person; the Bond we see in Dr. No is the same we see in A View to a Kill. The James Bond portrayed by Dalton and Brosnan is the same person; this is the first re-boot. Then we have the second with Craig's Bond. As far as Dench's M, that is just an actress portraying the same character in two separate timelines. It can be a bit confusing but the two are unrelated.

    Although in the Everything or Nothing game, Brosnan's Bond, says that he fought Max Zorin which makes Brosnan's and Moore's Bond the same.
    Is the game considered cannon? Brosnan's Bond cannot be Moore's

    I don't know if the game is considered canon. I mean I would consider it as canon, since it has Brosnan, Dench and Cleese voice acting in it. And I consider it to be Brosnan's swansong even if it's a game. But then again I don't believe in canon. Canon is what "you" the viewer thinks.
  • edited March 2014 Posts: 13
    My personal favorite theory as to why Bond never ages is that the pre-reboot films have a "sliding timescale." You know, like Marvel and DC have? So as time went on, his adventures took place later and later in the Cold War (which doesn't really mess with much; it was really long, after all). I seem to recall the GoldenEye video game guide corroborating this by moving up the date of Bond's marriage, but I can't remember what the new date was and its canonicity is probably pretty flimsy anyway.
Sign In or Register to comment.