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
In that world, such space stations and rocket bases do exist.
But in no world, does a steering colum move from one side of the car to the other.
Like I said, its a purposeful continuity error. Its not even an accident. Like it or lump it, that's what it is.
And its also telling that in no part of the SF movie, does anyone even attempt to explain why Bond has such a car, never mind why he might have two (the CR car and this one) because it can't be explained.
The whole scenario is an-joke jammed into the film, for our amusement. Groann.
Actually maybe the CR car, will make an appearance in SP, as we know it didn't get blowed up at SF Manor. :))
As @haserot pointed out before. Who cares?
;)
Mendes for some weird reason had to jam the whole DB5 scenario in. Maybe it was an excuse to get the JB Theme music into the film, so fans wouldn't gripe, as he didn't want to feature it, in any of the normal parts of the movie.
Actually, I would bet this is the case. These re-boot films are meant to be different than the original films- no gun barrel etc. So we only get the JB Theme full volume in a cheesy non-sensical trip down old-Bond memory lane.
Mendes excuse for not including the gun-barrel is lame as they come too. ie he could have included gun-barrel quite easily if he actually wanted to. 20 other film directors managed to do it.
I give him good credit. He serves up his bs with straight face.
Hopefully he can dispense with the games this time, and give us a good re-boot of this flawed re-boot series.
Original timeline.
DN - AVTAK
First Reboot.
TLD -DAD
Second Reboot.
CR - So on.
Austria (pre-titles sequence, then a few scenes after the title sequence, such as Turkey in SF, but longer)
London, England
Rome. Italy
Mexico City, Mexico
Tangier, Morocco
Erfoud, Morocco (Babs and Michael explained how they've tried to make the endings more isolated/outlandish, and what more than a dessert?)
This is just a guess, right? There is no way Austria will be a minor location.
I hope we get the clapperboard pictures like we got with SF. Would be fun if we got a Picture with a bowl of cat food in the background
My own thoughts are that it will be...
Rome, Italy: (PTS: Mr White in Italy, anyone, plus the amount of action rumoured makes me think it'll be the PTS)
London, United Kingdom: (MI6, possibly in the PTS, briefing and throughout the film)
Morrocco: (I believe this will be the first location Bond is sent to, plus first appearance of some of the new characters
Austria: (The final location and set for the finale
London and MI6 will obviously be seen throughout the film and we might even get scenes in other locations seen throughout the film.
Oh crap, I think it could feature as a scene that doesn't involve Bond and involves maybe either the villains or some of the secondary characters? We don't have much to go on with the Mexico scenes.
Blofeld's oil rig was in Baja California.
Baja California is in Northwestern Mexico.
Timeline wise, no actually.
I use Bond's marriage to Tracy as an important continuity aspect, that went all the way until DAD really. There were several, distinct references to Bond's past love life in: TSWLM, FYEO and LTK. More indirect ones in DAF (PTS) and TWINE ("Have you ever lost a loved one before Mr Bond?").
Moreover, the PTS from GE looks very similar to the PTS from TLD, and they are actually set in the same timeframe: 1986/1987. Bond even wears the same black jumpsuit. Bond also says in GE: "Your predecessor kept a bottle of cognac in there", obviously referring to Robert Brown as "M".
Then there are references in the first three Bond films. These references, in FRWL ("For the revenge of our operative....Dr. No") and GF ("They almost get you on Jamaica Felix, didn't they?"), obviously refer to the events in DN.
So for me, the first timeline, the first "Bond era" goes from:
--> 1962 until 2002
Then the completely rebooted "2nd Era", with a brand new timeline:
--> 2006 until present
I wonder how many people actually agree with that. For me, especially continuity-wise, the Craig-era is absolutely top-notch. I love it. And I think it was a damn good idea to completely reboot everything. Not just elements, but entirely reset the Bond-timeline.
Therefore I'm convinced Tracy will never show up again. At least not during Craig's outing as Bond. Craig's Bond has her own "Tracy", and that was Vesper. He actually refers to it indirectly in SF.
I just can't help thinking that she will be a villain of some sort. Don't forget, Sciarra means "Troublemaker". That tells you something. Moreover, when I saw her during the press presentation, her hair, looks, and especially when I heard her talking, I started to become convinced that she will play at least an important henchwoman, Klebb-Style, Volpe-style.
Madeleine Swann for me looks more and more like the first Bond-girl during the tenure of Craig that will be bedding Bond at the very end of the film. First blond one since Kara Milovy also :-).