I don't think of Bond films having any continuity. I think of Bond sort of like Robin Hood or Batman. There's a loose mythology/character outline and cast of supporting characters, and whoever is running the show at the time (both lead actor and the behind the scenes people) do their interpretation. And while you might accept different interpretations of Robin Hood and Batman as canon separately, they usually can't both be canon in one universe. Batman (1989) and Batman Begins can't exist in the same universe. You just accept them as separate visions. That's pretty much the way I look at the Bond series, almost every different actor represents a reboot/re-imagining of the series. And each film usually adds to and draws from that overall mythology in their own way, and I try to appreciate them for what they bring to the series, as opposed to where they fit in with any type of continuity. And this extends beyond just the films, as you also have the literary James Bond, some video games with cool plots, etc. I consider it all equal, even if some I don't like. And so I consider "Never Say Never Again" a legitimate Bond film, even if not part of the "official" series. Broccoli/Saltzman didn't invent James Bond, the character is bigger than their series. It's a entertaining story about what would happen if an aging 007 were thrown into a Thunderball-esque situation. Since plot elements have been reused in Bond films before, almost to the point of being remakes (YOLT/TSWLM for example), the fact that it's a remake is no big deal. While watching NSNA you just put Thunderball out of your mind. This interpretation didn't go through those events.
See you guys at the 10 year prison reunion - Ben Richards
reply
share
clark_gillies
9 years ago
I would say 3 of the first 4 movies have continuity (only Goldfinger is stand alone from this period) and really its only when we get to the Moore years that this is taken away.... but I think by this stage they had run out of books and had to come up with fresh and new idea's.... from this period the only thing that links up to any previous movie is the intro to "For Your Eyes Only".
This is something that seems to be creeping back into the series.
reply
share
AdmiralTugBenson
9 years ago
I wasn't saying I take every film as stand alone. I take each era/actor as stand alone, a reboot/re-imagining each time they recast. But even then, it's sort of a case by case basis. As some films within one actor's reign don't always fit in well. I'd say the continuity was already messed up before the Moore era, as they had Bond meeting Blofeld in OHMSS after they had already battled in YOLT. They shot the books out of order and just didn't make any alterations to that part of the plot. And for 3 films in a row from YOLT through DAF, Blofeld appeared as 3 different actors with 3 different approaches/looks. It's pretty much a different character each time. By the way, I like all of this about the series, I'm not complaining about the continuity, I don't need it. Constantly changing the way it does is probably what has kept it around and interesting all these years. It's a loose mythology that isn't a slave to continuity, which allows filmmakers freedom to keep the character fresh.
See you guys at the 10 year prison reunion - Ben Richards
reply
share