Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
1962-2002 Returning characters continuity - Felix, Moneypenny and others
gumbolt
Now with in-office photocopier
I was getting stuck into this on another thread but was taking that thread (even further) off topic so I thought it would be helpful to set this up. We have all probably heard (and dismissed) the James Bond code name theory. But what about the returning characters from DN to DAD?
Felix Leiter - Six different actors for six movies - DN, GF, TB, DAF, LALD and TLD. Yet all clearly the same man, due to Bond's visual recognition of him and obvious friendship. Of course David Hedison returned for LTK to break the casting pattern. And it could be implied that Leiter's absence from the Brosnan era and the creation of CIA agent Jack Wade writes Felix out into retirement following his injuries in LTK. My view is that Felix from DN to LTK was the same man, with the same continuity as Bond (same man, different actors, compressed time).
Moneypenny - Three actors from DN to DAD. When Caroline Bliss assumed the role, her character seemed to know Bond pretty well already, suggesting neither Dalton nor her were playing people new to their jobs. So I think the character was just youthed up. Same with Samantha Bond and Brosnan. So I think Moneypenny is like Felix and Bond - same character, different actor, same continuity, compressed time.
M - I think it can be argued that Robert Brown's M was a different character. I think he was the Admiral from TSPWLM and he got the job after Sir Miles left the series. Clearly Brown's successor was a different person, with express reference made to her predecessor in the role.
The Minister - We often forget about Geoffrey Keen's character, the Minister Freddie Gray. I raise this not because of different actors (I don't think Julian Fellowes' turn in TND was meant to be the same person) but the political continuity. Gray was defence minister from TSWLM to TLD - 1977 to 1987. The UK government changed from Labour to Conservative in 1979 so how did Gray remain in post? Did he switch parties? Was he a member of the Lords and somehow managed to serve in two (very) different governments? In 1981, he is clearly shown to be serving in Mrs Thatcher's government at the end of FYEO, so the series recognised the broad political landscape. Maybe the producers decided this was not a change they needed to reflect onscreen.
Q - This should be nice and simple. Major Boothroyd appeared in DN and for the next movies he was played by a different actor. When Boothroyd began to plan his retirement, a different man worked under him and then replaced him.
Tanner - I'm not sure about this one. Am I right to say that Tanner first appeared in FYEO and did not appear again until GE and TWINE? In which case, he might be the same character but Michael Kitchen's portrayal was much closer to Fleming's description of Tanner as Bond's friend. In FYEO, he is basically a charmless M substitute. I suspect this is where continuity gets challenging because the appearances were so far apart and very different. There is also the stopgap nature of the FYEO appearance.
Blofeld - And finally, Ernst. The big problem here is that Bond dons a pair of glasses and himself needs to verify Blofeld's identity undercover in OHMSS, having met him face to face in the previous movie. Why did they not recognise each other? This makes no sense at all and I cannot get my head round it. It flies in the face of the accepted "same character, different actor" principle. During the movie, we can clearly see that Bond is the same man when he goes through his desk. Even if Blofeld had surgery, he would have recognised Bond surely? Right - I'm giving up and throwing this open to others.
Felix Leiter - Six different actors for six movies - DN, GF, TB, DAF, LALD and TLD. Yet all clearly the same man, due to Bond's visual recognition of him and obvious friendship. Of course David Hedison returned for LTK to break the casting pattern. And it could be implied that Leiter's absence from the Brosnan era and the creation of CIA agent Jack Wade writes Felix out into retirement following his injuries in LTK. My view is that Felix from DN to LTK was the same man, with the same continuity as Bond (same man, different actors, compressed time).
Moneypenny - Three actors from DN to DAD. When Caroline Bliss assumed the role, her character seemed to know Bond pretty well already, suggesting neither Dalton nor her were playing people new to their jobs. So I think the character was just youthed up. Same with Samantha Bond and Brosnan. So I think Moneypenny is like Felix and Bond - same character, different actor, same continuity, compressed time.
M - I think it can be argued that Robert Brown's M was a different character. I think he was the Admiral from TSPWLM and he got the job after Sir Miles left the series. Clearly Brown's successor was a different person, with express reference made to her predecessor in the role.
The Minister - We often forget about Geoffrey Keen's character, the Minister Freddie Gray. I raise this not because of different actors (I don't think Julian Fellowes' turn in TND was meant to be the same person) but the political continuity. Gray was defence minister from TSWLM to TLD - 1977 to 1987. The UK government changed from Labour to Conservative in 1979 so how did Gray remain in post? Did he switch parties? Was he a member of the Lords and somehow managed to serve in two (very) different governments? In 1981, he is clearly shown to be serving in Mrs Thatcher's government at the end of FYEO, so the series recognised the broad political landscape. Maybe the producers decided this was not a change they needed to reflect onscreen.
Q - This should be nice and simple. Major Boothroyd appeared in DN and for the next movies he was played by a different actor. When Boothroyd began to plan his retirement, a different man worked under him and then replaced him.
Tanner - I'm not sure about this one. Am I right to say that Tanner first appeared in FYEO and did not appear again until GE and TWINE? In which case, he might be the same character but Michael Kitchen's portrayal was much closer to Fleming's description of Tanner as Bond's friend. In FYEO, he is basically a charmless M substitute. I suspect this is where continuity gets challenging because the appearances were so far apart and very different. There is also the stopgap nature of the FYEO appearance.
Blofeld - And finally, Ernst. The big problem here is that Bond dons a pair of glasses and himself needs to verify Blofeld's identity undercover in OHMSS, having met him face to face in the previous movie. Why did they not recognise each other? This makes no sense at all and I cannot get my head round it. It flies in the face of the accepted "same character, different actor" principle. During the movie, we can clearly see that Bond is the same man when he goes through his desk. Even if Blofeld had surgery, he would have recognised Bond surely? Right - I'm giving up and throwing this open to others.
^ 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
Bond Mk1 - 1962 until 1989 is the same character, same timeline (except for Bond obviously ageing too much).
Moneypenny 1962 until 1989 is the same character, but played by 2 different actresses.
M - 1962 until 1989 is the same character played by 2 different actors.
Felix Leiter - 1962 until 1989 is the same character (including the actor playing the same character from LALD and LTK).
Q - 1962 until 1999 is the only character to be the same across Mk1 and Mk II Bond timeline.
Bond Mk II - The Brosnan Bond era is a reboot in every sense of the word, Long gap between films, new production team, new actor, a new M, a different Moneypenny character to the previous lovestruck one, and a different Bond, that doesn't have the same past as the previous one, other than knowing the previous M was a male.
Q is the only character that resides in both of these timelines.
Bond Mk III - The Craig era is another complete reboot. A different Q, new Moneypenny (that actually is similar to the Louis Maxwell character) but there is confusion with M.
Is she the same M from the Brosnan films? She is certainly played as the same character, and by the same actress.
Felix Leiter from CR and QoS - different character from the one Mk1 Bond knows and loves.
Blofeld - villain that started in FRWL and ended in FYEO. There was rumours that he would appear again in a Craig film, but we have yet to see this emerge.... ;)
Bottom line is, after 1989 the timeline gets skewed, Marty McFly style.....
;))
There are two timelines 1962-2002
and 2006-2015
In the first timeline we have two different M's, the Lee/Brown M, and the Dench M.
What became of original M, who knows? Retired I guess.
Otherwise we have, Bond, MP, Leiter and Tanner chugging along thru the years played by different actors, and Q too, as Peter Burton and Llewellyn played the same character.
Via the magic of cinema, the characters are malleable. They change a bit, sometimes more than a bit, and remain omnipresent thru time.
Amazing. :)
@gumbolt
I think you've got the Freddie Gray thing sussed out.
Fellows is a different Minister because he is not referred to as Gray. Therefore no reason to think that he is Gray. Gray managed to survive different governments. Very adaptable clearly.
I believe Lee and Brown are the same M simply because there is no attempt to say otherwise.
Like Charles Grey, Joe Don Baker, Maud Adams and other more bit-part players, Brown plays two different characters in the series.
What confuses is that his original character could have had a career trajectory leading him to the M job, but that connection is never established.
Rather M is simply not around for one movie and then returns without missing a beat.
Tanner appeared in TMWTGG. I don't believe he speaks but he's there for the mission office briefing.
It's the same character, Tanner. He just changes as we go along, from mute to brash loudmouth to more normal Fleming-like Tanner
The OHMSS Blofeld is simply cinematic contrivance.
Bond's disguise is just that good apparently. Poor Ernst doesn't quite recognize him.Alas.
Very fortunate for the filmmakers. This allows them to stay with the Fleming novel narrative.
Amazing.
Brosnan is a bit of a soft reboot, with character changes to move with the times (MP & even Bond). It's almost like they're trying to leave the past behind. No Felix & no mention of Tracy either. DB5 starts to make an appearance mysteriously as Bond's personal car, with BMW (?) filling in for official duties.
Craig is another reboot, this time a hard one.
Having said all that, timeline analysis on Bond films is a mug's game. It just doesn't make any sense & it's not meant to.
Right I think that was by design. To provide a thread of continuity with the last Ernst appearance.
Didn't Rog wear Casio at some point? I could be mistaken though.
Except the actual sense of the word?
New M, yes, and that's addressed directly onscreen, but Brosnan is clearly playing the same Bond as Connery, Lazenby, Moore, and Dalton. He's been with MI6 well before Dench's M assumes the role—not only noting her predecessor's cognac in the cabinet but also serving in a PTS mission 9 years before the main events of the film. Furthermore his family motto is "The World Is Not Enough" just like Lazenby's and there's the obvious Tracy reference in TWINE as well. And if any doubt is left in anyone's mind regarding the point, the Q scene in Die Another Day irrefutably drives it home.
1. Connery, Lazenby Moore.
2. Dalton Brosnan
3. Craig....
Yes, I think so. As I said in my previous post, timeline analysis is a bit of mug's game with Bond. It's not something to think about too critically.
In 1962 Dalton was 16 years old, Brosnan 9 , Craig not even born, therefore they cannot be the same Bond as Connery, were as Lazenby and Moore could be.
People like to point out things that are consistent in the different timelines , Bond being married for example, as proof of a connection. The truth is as long as the character and the source material is the same, the same events can happen in different timelines.
Part of the confusion comes from the same actors playing the same characters in different timelines. Brosnan's M is not Craig's M even though played by the same actress. With that as a given there is no reason to think this can not apply to any given actor and any given character in any given incarnation.
Again we are talking about fictional characters in fictional worlds and we are all free to have our own viewpoint.
I do have to say the way you choose to title this thread was very smooth, manipulative, but smooth. By starting it 1962-2002 you try to create a given, a fact, when it is an opinion.
The filmmakers presented Connery in DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER as the same man as in FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE. The same Bond. And Lazenby, and Moore, and Dalton, and the rest.
To me it's unnecessary (and more impossible) to separate and compartmentalize each Bond actor or style of film. I'm watching the films for the James Bond character, I don't want to pull him apart and diminish him however wildly the styles swing over the years. As they say in fencing, what's the point?
I always thought when Bond dodged Elektra's inquiry regarding if he had ever lost a loved one was a reference to Tracy. Especially considering the film is called The World Is Not Enough, the whole ski sequence in the film, Elektra cuts her ear lobes off.
You could argue that it's a reference to Paris Carver from TND. But given the obvious inspiration to OHMSS it's pretty hard not to assume it was meant in reference to Tracy.
I'm not too hung up on it as I said because I don't believe a strict linearity exists in the Bond universe. Just loose connectivity.
Having said that, I do believe Brosnan's era was a bit of a reboot, with a Bond, M & MP who were all quite different (whether by deliberate interpretation or just due to their acting approach) from what had come before, and with limited direct link (rather than mere allusions) to the past.
Wow!! That is a statement! :))
Just watch the scene in DAD where he is given his new watch and all the stuff in R's laboratory. It's obvious.
DN to DAD is one timeline.
1962 -2002
And 2006-reboot to 2015
The rest of it, is us fans jigging around with the films and having some fun.