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
I actually see them as the same cars really. Are you.....thát strict on these tiny continuity errors, if in essence continuity within the Craig era has been handled much better then with all previous Bond films? Really, if you are so harsh on these things, then Judi Dench's "M" should have been killed off already in DAD.
By the way, there has been some consistent little good continuity in SF as well:
--> "Don't touch your ear!" Bond's habit of saying things during spying with ear communication. In CR and SF
--> "I know when a girl is afraid, is in fear, and pretends not to be." Bond understanding women's souls. In CR and SF.
I prefer to highlight these little bits of continuity. And at the same time think that Bond's db5's in CR and SF are the same. And who knows....maybe there's a special cinematic secret agent in Bond's universe as well ;-). Don't forget the little bit of James Bond theme played on a flute in "Octopussy"...
Guys, this is all very logical really. Like OHMSS, the timeframe within the narrative of SPECTRE will be very clear as well now. The story must be set in the fall and winter of 2014/2015. Most likely between October to December/January. Otherwise there's no sense in Bond visiting the snowy Alps of Austria. So, it seems very logical that the Mexico sequence will be set in November in the screenplay :-).
Tiny continuity errors? It's the DB5 from GF. It makes no sense. It's purely crowd pleasing, which is a shame. And the lecture on continuity, I don't need it.
I wonder how many people in here were so furious about the inclusion of the gadget-laden DB5 in SF. Perhaps a lot, but not me.
I didn't mind it at all.
Personally I'd like to see Lazenby or Dalton's model make an impromptu appearance, or even the white Lotus. I like all these cars better than the vaunted DB5.
I didn't mind it though. Continuity has been out the window with the Aston since GE, when Brosnan drove that DB5 with the champagne cooler in Monaco (fantastic scene that one though).
I'm not even starting with Dench's M if we want to talk continuity, so really it's all up sh!+$ creek as far as I'm concerned
A different look entirely from SF...
http://www.contactmusic.com/ben-whishaw/pictures/3c43d3f1/ben-whishaw-ben-whishaw-films-scenes-for-new-james-bond-movie-spectre_4585905
I didn't mind it at all.
Personally I'd like to see Lazenby or Dalton's model make an impromptu appearance, or even the white Lotus. I like all these cars better than the vaunted DB5.
I didn't mind it though. Continuity has been out the window with the Aston since GE, when Brosnan drove that DB5 with the champagne cooler in Monaco (fantastic scene that one though).
I'm not even starting with Dench's M if we want to talk continuity, so really it's all up sh!+$ creek as far as I'm concerned[/quote]
Still, to have some continuity, it's a great idea to do something with the DB6. I find it quite the forgotten Aston Martin really...
I was simply saying that it was a shame the DB5 was not handled better. I wasn't decrying the continuity of the Craig films, wholesale. You have a habit of fabricating questions on behalf of other people.
I'm sorry, I didn't see any. Not that it matters, I don't need to you to prove that it didn't bother you, I can see why it wouldn't. It certainly doesn't keep me up at night, I just find it lazy.
Correct.
I know that. But not in Obertilliach, Kartitsch at around 1,500 m altitude. Snow melts away around March/April up there. Hell, even in Obertilliach crew was facing problems due to lack of snow there.....
I doubt that Obertiliach will feature as Obertiliach in the movie. A snowy mountain could double for almost any other snowy mountain.
Well, I am quite certain it will be Austria in the film. Not Aspen, Colorado.
Er, no. Bond aren't set at any particular time of year and I'd bet Spectre isn't any different. There's never been any attempt for the climates at different locations to make 'sense' like that.
Otherwise the suggestions about him being long in the tooth aren't accurate. He'd have only been a 00 for about 5 years.
Also the exploding pen quip by Q fits in with Goldeneye.
Yeah you're right. Let me stay a bit on topic. I think it's logical IN ANY CASE that the Mexico sequence in the film is set in November. Just like the Palio scene in QOS was set in August. Ok?
There is also Bond's "What makes you think this is my first time?" line. The first few times I saw SF I thought it was merely a cheeky reponse to being touched on the inner thigh by a man. But then I realized it had to do with being tied to a chair, as happened in CR.
Exactly, lovely pieces of continuity. That work perfectly, as they also are simply cheeky remarks...BUT with history behind it.
@hthomas I don't think we will ever get to know when the time will be. But the important thing is we will see it on Wednesday!! :-) :-)
They are indeed lovely, and allude to a standalone Craig trajectory. That's why I have a problem with the DB5. All 20 before Craig I see as pretty much standalone, they add the odd reference here and there, but essentially there is no real continuity. The Craig films don't only have narrative continuity, they have great character continuity. Again, it's why I really don't like the inherent laziness of Mendes turning the CR DB5 into the GF DB5 in SF. I've heard all the arguments about Bond never making sense re. continuity, but the Craig films went out of there way to address this and SF continues in that vein for the most part. It's just silly instances where Mendes goes a bit too fanboy.
This isn't exactly correct if you think about it.
Judi's M was his boss as a new 00 and was also his boss in SF. However, he gets an Eve Moneypenny in SF. How do we reconcile that with MP from DN (is it a codeword?) & male M from GE.
Continuity really is totally up s3!+'s creek with Bond - so anything goes.
As I said earlier, Judi's M saw to that.
You'll have to explain @bondjames, I'm not sure what you mean. I'm suggesting that the Craig films seemed to be delivering their own take that was independent of what had gone before, the odd tip of the hat here and there, but narratively consistent within itself. What do you mean re. MP in DN. Apologies if I'm being slow, I just genuinely don't understand what you're getting at.
Sorry for not being clear. I'm referring to continuity. In DN we had a male boss and a female assistant called MP.
In SF we have the same female M who was Bond's boss at the start of his 00 tenure (meaning DN could not have happened yet) and then we have the introduction of an MP.
So unless the assumption is that DN starts after SF, it does not make any sense. However if DN (or GE for that matter) starts after SF, what was the referrence to exploding pens made by Q?
I guess the point is that the Craig era is not really consistent with the other eras. That's my point. It may be consistent internally within the Craig era (meaning the SF Aston either is not the CR Aston, or it is one that Q branch tricked out for Bond between CR & SF) but it is not internally consistent with the other eras.
Or it's a just a different car.
Why must people think they are the same, or it's a different universe? It's two different cars, I don't understand what's complicated.
Holy f***ing shit and I thought i was alone on this. Yea it has a few minor errors, but there are plenty of such problems even before dc, and it overall just makes more sense/ is more enjoyable especially with the whole old theme.