[Marsh.]

But Bond doesn't stick to an established universe or canon anyway.

One or two movies almost carry on from the other but other than that, the rules chop and change all of the time anyway. Even when there isn't a change of lead actor.

James Bond is not an example of having a strong canon. It's like Doctor Who, the rules and backstory changes to suit the whims of the person in charge of it at any given time.

The lead characters skin being a different colour really is nothing in comparison.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

But Bond doesn't stick to an established universe or canon anyway.

One or two movies almost carry on from the other but other than that, the rules chop and change all of the time anyway. Even when there isn't a change of lead actor.

James Bond is not an example of having a strong canon. It's like Doctor Who, the rules and backstory changes to suit the whims of the person in charge of it at any given time.

The lead characters skin being a different colour really is nothing in comparison.

It doesn't have a strong canon but it has only changed once. Ending with Brosnan and rebooting with Craig. There have been established ties between all of the previous movies. Yes, there are numerous examples of canon "flexibility" already in Bond, as you mentioned is the case with Doctor Who, but the fact that it already exists doesn't mean that it *should* exist or that it should be encouraged... I hate it when the goalposts are moved. Even little bits for convenience. For example, it bugs the **** out of me that they make a big deal about "wordless spells" being difficult in the early Harry Potter stories and then by the end, every dopey Hogwards kid with half a wand is throwing them around with a flick of their wrist...

I digress.

Rule changes mid-game are bad. Always bad. Bad for the story, bad for the viewer.

But again I have no problem with the "new standard" for Bond being a reboot with each new actor. I don't actually mind reboots. I'm quite comfortable with separate canon universes co-existing, even. The annoying skinny kid from Gotham, and Ben Affleck, can be Batman at the same time. I'm cool with that.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Rule changes mid-game are bad. Always bad. Bad for the story, bad for the viewer.

But again I have no problem with the "new standard" for Bond being a reboot with each new actor. I don't actually mind reboots. I'm quite comfortable with separate canon universes co-existing, even. The annoying skinny kid from Gotham, and Ben Affleck, can be Batman at the same time. I'm cool with that.

Yeah, I agree with this.

I think a lot of people subscribe to the theory of each James Bond not being the same person but a spy assigned that code name or whatever.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Yeah, I agree with this.

I think a lot of people subscribe to the theory of each James Bond not being the same person but a spy assigned that code name or whatever.

I like it as a theory but there are a few small links in the "classic" pre-Brosnan films that fairly explicitly state that they're the same guy. Mentions of old missions / enemies / gadgets, things like that. Not so much with Brosnan but I'm sure the dead wife gets mentioned at some point? I dunno. I found all of the Brosnan films except Goldeneye pretty boring . And Goldeneye is really only an exception because, of course, Sean Bean is a legend unmatched in cinema.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I like it as a theory but there are a few small links in the "classic" pre-Brosnan films that fairly explicitly state that they're the same guy. Mentions of old missions / enemies / gadgets, things like that. Not so much with Brosnan but I'm sure the dead wife gets mentioned at some point? I dunno. I found all of the Brosnan films except Goldeneye pretty boring . And Goldeneye is really only an exception because, of course, Sean Bean is a legend unmatched in cinema.

I just don't like Brosnan. He's dull yet cheesy at the same time.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

I just don't like Brosnan. He's dull yet cheesy at the same time.

* marsh watching mama mia*

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

* marsh watching mama mia*

Second worst movie ever made.

(The worst is "Sex and The City 2")

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

* marsh watching mama mia*

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

I just don't like Brosnan. He's dull yet cheesy at the same time.

..well we've just fallen out big time matey...






.....

[Anaesthesia]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I like it as a theory but there are a few small links in the "classic" pre-Brosnan films that fairly explicitly state that they're the same guy. Mentions of old missions / enemies / gadgets, things like that. Not so much with Brosnan but I'm sure the dead wife gets mentioned at some point? I dunno. I found all of the Brosnan films except Goldeneye pretty boring . And Goldeneye is really only an exception because, of course, Sean Bean is a legend unmatched in cinema.

Yeah I agree. I kind of lost interest in the films though when they ran out of original books to film. Bond IS just a franchise now, it wasn't back in t'day.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Yeah, I agree with this.

I think a lot of people subscribe to the theory of each James Bond not being the same person but a spy assigned that code name or whatever.

Yes I thought that was it too otherwise how can it span so many decades?
If it's meant to be the same guy then how can he be the same age in the 60s,70s,80,90s, and so on.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Yes I thought that was it too otherwise how can it span so many decades?
If it's meant to be the same guy then how can he be the same age in the 60s,70s,80,90s, and so on.

Exactly this.