How Many Bonds?

[MacWage]

I was discussing Bond in another forum, and an idea was mentioned that I never noticed before.

Are there more than one Bond?

OHMSS-> On beach, "This never happened to that other guy!"

In the Cinematic Bondom, is there only one James Bond, or are there several, like a "special Bond team." Is "James Bond" the collective ID for numerous agents on special missions, or is there only one, very adventurous and very lucky James Bond (who is played by, now 6, different actors)?

By the way, this idea is PRESENT in the 60s Casino Royale, where the Nivem character, the "real" James Bond describes an agent taking his identity (then he describes Sean Connery). They then proceed to push it further.

Thoughts?

[RedDevilWill]

Just my opinion: One Bond. Within the movies, he's had many faces, only due to personnel changes. All the same character, the same man. The prologue to OHMSS is simply a throw away sequence to introduce the audience. Non-canon, just like the original Casino Royale.

Where you stand on Never Say Never Again is personal choice, but I always considered it an enjoyable oddity that fits nicely when not concerned about continuity, just entertainment. I think that's a good idea for modern serial fiction: disregard a continuity and enjoy the storytelling.

Again, just my view. Your mileage may vary.

Will

[MacWage]

I think that's a good idea for modern serial fiction: disregard a continuity and enjoy the storytelling.

Strict Continuity???????????????


In Bond??????? NEVER!!!!!!!!!!


James Bond has never worried a whole lot about continuity. That way, Moneypenny and Bond are eternal flirting, for 40 YEARS!!!!!

On of the interesting parts of the DK Bond book is the attempt to establish continuity post-facto.

[souzaphone711]

Well, in the more recent ones, starring Pierce Brosnan, there is some continuity. The actually replace Q but in one of them, Q is training his replacement. In the next movie released, Q is now the new person whose name currently escapes me. In that sense, there is some continuity but that's probably the extent of it.


-Nate

[auld argonian]

Bond has been replaced by another actor.
Q has been replaced by another actor.
M has been replaced by another actor.


Doctor Who has been replaced how many times?

Dracula has been played by Bela Lugosi, John Carradine, Jack Palance, Christopher Lee and Gary Oldman...just to name a few.

There has even been two Willie Wonkas.


Best

AA

[McClef]

M has been replaced by another actor.

Correction: by another actress

[davedove]

Doctor Who has been replaced how many times?

But in Doctor Who they explained the new actor by working it into the storyline and having the character regenerate into a new body.

Bond, like many fictional heroes, is still going strong in the prime of his life for almost 50 years now.

Never Say Never Again, although outside the main Bond continuity, was an interesting way to insert a little realism to the story - even superspies get older.

[MacTavishOfJapan]

For me there is only one Bond.

They actually alluded to the change in M in Goldeneye so to me that's not a replacement actor but a new character. One of the problems I could foresee with Casino Royale.

[RedDevilWill]

Well, in the more recent ones, starring Pierce Brosnan, there is some continuity. The actually replace Q but in one of them, Q is training his replacement. In the next movie released, Q is now the new person whose name currently escapes me. In that sense, there is some continuity but that's probably the extent of it.

Correct long running features such as the Bond franchise, IMHO, should be viewed as serials whose length is defined by the tenure of the lead actor. Within those finite serials, there should be some continuity, as it expands character development and makes the ongoing experience rewarding for those fans who have an emotional investment in the characters. However, collectively, the serials all tell the story of the same man in service to his country. This allows both the movie makers and fans to share a collective experience, to establish character and film content, and that familiarity and knowledge ensures both fan base and movie makers a satisfying entertainment experience.

NSNA is a great film, and a nice view of an aging superspy, a rare bird in American movie fiction. The nature of the story - while refreshing - still serves as a reminder of the audience's mortality.

For storytelling purposes in print fiction, it's a good idea to establish post-film continuity: in print, characters rarely age except by editorial decree, creators can 'unhinge' the characters from a fixed point in time, and taking the films as in-continuity along side the Fleming books expands the canon and allows for a greater scope of stories to be told. All Bond movie changes have been driven by two factors - Lead changes and a filmmaker failure to evolve the films 'look' naturally. In print, fiction is created in the moment by the author, and should reflect the environment around him/her as well as the world he/she is building, thus evolving naturally.

Oh, it was John Cleese as the new Q, Careful, Monty Python fans are a rabid bunch.

Will

[mbhandy]

I saw Casino Royal yesterday and I willl have to watch it one more time to get all the twists.

MrBill