153 replies to this topic

[007 Magazine]

Contributors to this thread may be interested to read Luke Williams' heavily illustrated examination of both Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace in the latest issue of 007 MAGAZINE ARCHIVE FILES.

Available from http://www.007magazi...zine.htm#cr-qos

007 MAGAZINE PUBLICATIONS
www.007magazine.com

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

Sadly, the most reasonable explanation to the jump on time between 2006's CR and a direct sequel that pretend to follow the action of CR's finale 20 minutes later, but actually happens in 2008; is- as some people have argued earlier- that the last scene of Craig debut already happened two years in the future of 2006, thing that obviously wasn't stated in CR, because when they were making it they didn't see the need of make a direct sequel, that iniciative only started after the success of CR as a way of capitalize it. Hence, we have to settle with a Bond movie that for the first time in the history of the series, not originally but after the premiere of its direct sequel, happens in the future... a very tacky display of a forced bit of science fiction, I would say.

Edited by Mr. Arlington Beech, 03 August 2011 - 07:50 AM.

[univex]

Contributors to this thread may be interested to read Luke Williams' heavily illustrated examination of both Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace in the latest issue of 007 MAGAZINE ARCHIVE FILES.

Available from http://www.007magazi...zine.htm#cr-qos

007 MAGAZINE PUBLICATIONS
www.007magazine.com

Just ordered it, thanks

Edited by univex, 03 August 2011 - 10:07 AM.

[univex]

Sadly, the most reasonable explanation to the jump on time between 2006's CR and a direct sequel that pretend to follow the action of CR's finale 20 minutes later, but actually happens in 2008; is- as some people have argued earlier- that the last scene of Craig debut already happened two years in the future of 2006, thing that obviously wasn't stated in CR, because when they were making it they didn't see the need of make a direct sequel, that iniciative only started after the success of CR as a way of capitalize it. Hence, we have to settle with a Bond movie that for the first time in the history of the series, not originally but after the premiere of its direct sequel, happens in the future... a very tacky display of a forced bit of science fiction, I would say.

You are right in all of your thoughts there Mr. Beech. But I don´t see the need to dwelve much on it, just open your mind to it and let go So Bond hasn´t got "Godfather" continuity, so what? (why is it that every time I say so what I hear Mikkelsen say it? ) I actually don´t find that to be QOS greatest flaw. But I understand it can be to some. I find it funny how the so called "conitnuity" works in the Bond cannon because I actually think they´ve found the "fountain of youth" there - just stop worrying about it and live on like every day was the first and the last - see? isn´t it a nice living filosophy? No science fition there Cheers Mr. Beech