167 replies to this topic

[JCRendle]

Good find - whoever wrote the dossier certainly knows Bond, or at least done their homework. The Dossier gives points from the FRWL dossier and the obit from YOLT

[JCRendle]

According to Dalton's Bond's Passport (shown earlier in the thread) and Brosnan's Bond's medical records from TWINE here are each Bond's ages in their first films.

Dalton's Bond - 39 in LTK
Brosnan's Bond - 34 in GE, 25 in GE PTS
Craig's Bond - 38 in CR

Bond a 00 agent at 25? Something tells me they hadn't thought it through well enough.

[JB007YH]

they better have done their hw, its our bond their messing with!

[K1Bond007]

"The plane skirted the great eye-tooth of Mont Blanc, a few hundred yards to port, and Bond looked down at the dirty grey elephant's skin of the glaciers and saw himself again, a young man in his teens, with the leading end of the rope round his waist, bracing himself against the top of a rock-chimney on the Aiguilles Rouges as his two companions from the University of Geneva inched up the smooth rock towards him."

Ian Fleming, From Russia With Love
Ch. 13, "B.E.A. takes you there..."

Haven't seen the CR site, but someone said Fleming never said Bond attended the U of Geneva. Maybe not, but he certainly had close friends who did!

Keep dancing,
Bonita

In my post I said it was ambiguous, which it is. It doesn't say he went there. I started a thread on this months ago. See this thread. Read the second post.

[Bryce (003)]

Bond is forever in his late 30's.

I never thought they covered it that much in the films, Connery and Laz both played it at their ages, but Rog had 2-3 years on Sean and both Tim and Pierce were 40 + a bit.

The sad fact for me as a long time Bond fan was realising the new Bond was, for the first time in my life, younger than my actual age by about three + months.

Then again it ain't too bad being 38 but I'd always thought I'd be pushing 50 before this happened. DOH!

[killkenny kid]

Bond is forever in his late 30's.

I never thought they covered it that much in the films, Connery and Laz both played it at their ages, but Rog had 2-3 years on Sean and both Tim and Pierce were 40 + a bit.

The sad fact for me as a long time Bond fan was realising the new Bond was, for the first time in my life, younger than my actual age by about three + months.

Then again it ain't too bad being 38 but I'd always thought I'd be pushing 50 before this happened. DOH!

Man, how do you think I feel.

[Santa]

Yes, I wish they hadn't given a year for his birth, it brings up all sorts of continuity issues for the trolls to lose their knickers over.

How? It's a Reboot. There is not continuity to the previous films.

Absolutely right- and if you look at the discussion above you'll notice that Bond's birthdate has changed for each version so far anyway- the last two were born in 1948 and 1961 separately. Another birthdate changes absolutely nothing.

It changes nothing for me, I consider Bond to be perpetually late thirties, but it adds grist to their mill i.e. "There is not continuity to the previous films".

[Bonita]

"The plane skirted the great eye-tooth of Mont Blanc, a few hundred yards to port, and Bond looked down at the dirty grey elephant's skin of the glaciers and saw himself again, a young man in his teens, with the leading end of the rope round his waist, bracing himself against the top of a rock-chimney on the Aiguilles Rouges as his two companions from the University of Geneva inched up the smooth rock towards him."

Ian Fleming, From Russia With Love
Ch. 13, "B.E.A. takes you there..."

Haven't seen the CR site, but someone said Fleming never said Bond attended the U of Geneva. Maybe not, but he certainly had close friends who did!

Keep dancing,
Bonita

In my post I said it was ambiguous, which it is. It doesn't say he went there. I started a thread on this months ago. See this thread. Read the second post.

Yes, yes, it is quite ambiguous if you wish it to be. Or clear if you wish to take it at face value. Maybe it shouldn't be taken at face value. My guess - and it is just a guess since I never met Fleming - is that at the time he thought it would be great to have Bond educated at the U. of Geneva. Later, he wrote up an obit and just forgot the previous mention. Or maybe he just ignored it. But I don't think he was simply trying to be clever, or ever had Bond's youth mapped out in his head, waiting to spring his Young Bond series on all of us. No, he faced the blank page and dashed it off as best he could. Just like Roald Dahl decided Bond did a little stint at Cambridge, and forgot (or didn't care) that Fleming never mentioned this. Point is that you can't always reconcile Fleming in 1956 with Fleming in 1963, and certainly not with Eon Productions at any point. You can't believe the guy driving the Sunbeam in Dr. No is the same guy scooting down a mountain in a cello case 25 years later, or the same guy driving the invisible car in DAD. Whatever it says on the CR site, it is what it is. At least they didn't have Bond attending Fortum's Secondary School for Wayward Girls. And hopefully it means someone is putting some thought into something. It is, I guess, how "they" see Bond for this film. At least they see him as a character with a past, with a record, with a life beyond the personality of the star. The best news is that from what I am reading, the questions are over birth signs, birth years, and whether Fleming said Bond went to the U of G. It isn't whether the core elements of Bond have been done right.

keep dancing,
Bonita

[K1Bond007]

Yes, yes, it is quite ambiguous if you wish it to be. Or clear if you wish to take it at face value. Maybe it shouldn't be taken at face value. My guess - and it is just a guess since I never met Fleming - is that at the time he thought it would be great to have Bond educated at the U. of Geneva. Later, he wrote up an obit and just forgot the previous mention. Or maybe he just ignored it.

Well Bond was in the "neighbourhood" at about the time this rock climbing deal went on. He was in Austria being taught to ski by his "father figure", but immediately after that (age 17) he went into the RNVR. That could explain why he was there rock climbing with friends who went to that school. I don't think he had much time to go to the U of Geneva so if he did then he was ... probably "brushing up on a little Danish" so to speak. The timing of it all just doesn't add up, IMHO. Then again it's also questionable how much rock climbing, skiing, and whatever he could be doing in 1941 while World War II raged on, not to mention his period in Paris in presumably 1940, the same year France (and thus Paris) fell to Nazi Germany.

I've never read Pearson's book for whatever plausible reasoning he may have come up with.

[David Schofield]

Well Bond was in the "neighbourhood" at about the time this rock climbing deal went on. He was in Austria being taught to ski by his "father figure", but immediately after that (age 17) he went into the RNVR. That could explain why he was there rock climbing with friends who went to that school. I don't think he had much time to go to the U of Geneva so if he did then he was ... probably "brushing up on a little Danish" so to speak. The timing of it all just doesn't add up, IMHO. Then again it's also questionable how much rock climbing, skiing, and whatever he could be doing in 1941 while World War II raged on, not to mention his period in Paris in presumably 1940, the same year France (and thus Paris) fell to Nazi Germany.

I've never read Pearson's book for whatever plausible reasoning he may have come up with.

Agree 100%. Fleming contradicts chronology on many occasions.

Pearson gets round the Paris viginity bit of course by having Bond born in 1920 so the event can take place in 1936.

[medrecess]

Man Tim Dalton is looking very good in that pic.He hasnt lookes as good on screen

[spynovelfan]

First of all [cough] codename theory is validated to a degree by this, sorry. [/cough]

- Sea Service (1 year)
- Early Naval Intelligence Service (1 year)
- SBS Training
- Placed in 030 Special Forces Unit (parallels Fleming's 030 Assault Unit during WW II). This seems to function more like a SAS unit, but this fictional unit is in SBS. Serves in Iraq, Somalia, Iran, Libya covertly and actively in Bosnia.
- RNR Defense Intelligence Group (he takes specialized courses at Oxford [first in oriental languages] and Cambridge during this period). Works in Libya, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Afganistan, Cyprus, Indonesia, China.

MI6 (30-38)

This is roughly how I outlined reconciling SAS servivce with Fleming in this thread:

http://debrief.comma...showtopic=29337

Someone said it's SAS not SBS. SBS was originally a part of the SAS. They parted ways for a while, but they are now under the same command structure. SBS units often work with the SAS, and the 'A' in SAS does not signify air - that was the cover for the organisation.

Fleming made loads of mistakes in continuity - the biggest is telling us in FRWL that Bond had never killed in cold blood, which directly contradicts CR and the origin story they are following with this film. EON also changed Bond's bio from the off, because in Fleming he was in the Royal Navy Volunteer Reserves (as cover) not the Navy itself. Note, too, that the year of Bond's favourite Dom Perignon changes as the films go on.

Incidentally, the SAS are heavily associated with Vickers, who Bond's father worked for, of course.

[Tarl_Cabot]

I also love the fact that he was involved in Iraq, a hugely unpopular war; Bond the character doesn't give a toss about Hollywood's politics because his job is to kick butt and take names and I love that Eon didn't pander to them.

Bond served in Iraq during the Gulf War not the current one.

I believe it revealed he gathered pre-war intelligence in 2002.

[marktmurphy]

I also love the fact that he was involved in Iraq, a hugely unpopular war; Bond the character doesn't give a toss about Hollywood's politics because his job is to kick butt and take names and I love that Eon didn't pander to them.

Bond served in Iraq during the Gulf War not the current one.

I believe it revealed he gathered pre-war intelligence in 2002.

He served in the first as well- they mention Operation Granby: which is the '91 Gulf War. Bond was 23 and in the Navy at the time.

[Tarl_Cabot]

I also love the fact that he was involved in Iraq, a hugely unpopular war

Which of the wars would you call 'popular', I wonder?

WWII, Afganistan '2001 could qualify as acceptable and neccessary wars supported by the general public. "Popular" isn't the right word I suppose.

[JCRendle]

Fleming based some of Bond's pre-service war work on his own work during the war - where he too reached the rank of Commander without serving at sea

In 1939, on the eve of World War II, Rear Admiral John Godfrey, Director of Naval Intelligence of the Royal Navy, recruited Fleming (who at the time held the rank of reserve subaltern in the Black Watch) as personal assistant. Initially commissioned as a Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve lieutenant, he was subsequently promoted to Lieutenant commander, then as Commander. Fleming travelled to Whitby, Ontario to train at Camp X, a top secret training school for Allied forces. While in Naval Intelligence, Fleming conceived, and was author of Operation Ruthless, a plan

[spynovelfan]

Fleming based some of Bond's pre-service war work on his own work during the war - where he too reached the rank of Commander without serving at sea

I don't think he based it on anything he did other than the rank of Commander in the RNVR. In DR NO, Bond recalls hearing German fire in the Ardennes. Neither Fleming, 30AU or SOE were present at the Battle of the Bulge. The SAS were, though, and they were assisted by Phantom Regiment. David Niven was in Phantom. I think it's more likely Fleming based Bond on several people, and didn't bother researching to carefully if it all fitted together. Continuity really didn't bother him that much - he concentrated on making the book he was writing as exciting as possible. EON do the same.

Just seen the stuff you've added on Fleming's background. Fascinating, of course - but very little of it appeared in Bond's background in his novels. He used the Estoril casino stuff (which some have disputed), the Bulgarians' attempt on Bond is taken from an operation he knew about, and he used some settings in North America he had visited. But Fleming didn't have Bond go to Camp X, in AU30, dealing with Hess or anyone like him, taking part in any operations in Spain or Gibraltar or miuch else you've mentioned. In fact, between his conversations with Vesper and Mathis about obaining his licence to kill in his first novel until the final pages of his penultimate novel, Fleming gave us almost no biographical information about his character at all. What we do have is scant, and seemingly contradictory.

[Skudor]

I've written to Scotland Yard and the FBI, asking them to close these awful Casino Royale sites down, on grounds of incitement to fanwankery.

:-)


Clearly they picked 1968, since this is DC's year of birth. Fair enough. Frankly, though, I wish they'd simply let it be and not included any dossier on Bond. I prefer not to have a nice tidy list of these things.

[spynovelfan]

[quote name='JCRendle' post='558119' date='20 May 2006 - 17:29']
Ian Fleming's Bond Dossier

BOND, JAMES
HEIGHT: 183 CENTIMETRES
WEIGHT: 76 KILOS
SCAR ON RIGHT SHOULDER
SIGNS OF PLASTIC SURGERY ON BACK OF RIGHT HAND
EXPERT PISTOL SHOT, BOXER, KNIFE THROWER
DOES NOT USE DISGUISES
LANGUAGES: FRENCH, GERMAN
VICES: DRINK, BUT NOT TO EXCESS, AND WOMEN

NOT THOUGHT TO ACCEPT BRIBESTHIS MAN IS A DANGEROUS PROFESSIONAL SPY WHO HOLDS A SECRET SERVICE NUMBER WITH THE

[Mister Asterix]

According to Dalton's Bond's Passport (shown earlier in the thread) and Brosnan's Bond's medical records from TWINE here are each Bond's ages in their first films.

Dalton's Bond - 39 in LTK
Brosnan's Bond - 34 in GE, 25 in GE PTS
Craig's Bond - 38 in CR

Bond a 00 agent at 25? Something tells me they hadn't thought it through well enough.

[mra]Just because Bond was 38 in TWINE doesn

[JCRendle]

[quote name='Mister Asterix' post='558915' date='22 May 2006 - 16:25']
[quote name='JCRendle' post='558719' date='21 May 2006 - 21:25']
According to Dalton's Bond's Passport (shown earlier in the thread) and Brosnan's Bond's medical records from TWINE here are each Bond's ages in their first films.

Dalton's Bond - 39 in LTK
Brosnan's Bond - 34 in GE, 25 in GE PTS
Craig's Bond - 38 in CR

Bond a 00 agent at 25? Something tells me they hadn't thought it through well enough.
[/quote]


[mra]Just because Bond was 38 in TWINE doesn

[Loomis]

First of all [cough] codename theory is validated to a degree by this, sorry. [/cough]

Well, fans have had almost 40 years to get used to the strong possibly that "James Bond" is but a codename, ever since Blofeld failed to recognise "James Bond" in OHMSS (despite encountering him in Japan just two years earlier), and the hero of that film shot his mouth off about "the other fella".

Why most fans resist and rail against the codename theory is a mystery to me. The spectacle of Dench's M (whom we've seen in four films now) introducing a brand new Double-O called James Bond in CASINO ROYALE (complete with clearly spelled-out timelines in the piece of "canon" that is the website dossier, which do not give reactionary fans the getout of "Oh, but perhaps CR happened before DIE ANOTHER DAY/DR. NO/whatever") clinches it, surely?

[Bonita]

I've written to Scotland Yard and the FBI, asking them to close these awful Casino Royale sites down, on grounds of incitement to fanwankery.

:-)


Clearly they picked 1968, since this is DC's year of birth. Fair enough. Frankly, though, I wish they'd simply let it be and not included any dossier on Bond. I prefer not to have a nice tidy list of these things.

It would be much better if they didn't publish anything on Bond at all. Gives too much away. And the films put too much of a human face on him. In fact, maybe we should start a campaign to destroy all the films, continuation novels, articles and books about Bond, and, even Fleming's novels. It would certainly keep the character more mysterious.

Sorry for the sarcasm.

IMHO, if you don't have a strong conception of who Bond is, what you get is some guy in a tux doing a lot of smirking and winking and leering because they don't know who Bond is. Or you get some guy overacting at Bond, trying to peel back the layers of the onion and sometimes missing the mark. Don't get me wrong, there have been things I have liked about all the actors who have played 007, and things I liked about all the continuation authors. But all the screenwriters and actors and novelists have had to find some identity for 007, because they weren't Fleming. They didn't have it in their blood the way he did. And when they've gotten too far off the mark, things devolve into pastiche. Would Bond actually adjust his tie underwater? Or is it worth it because it's an amusing parody of something Bond did more naturally on a tank in St. Pete? Now everyone has different things they like about 007. On different days I like different movies. But they are all different to some degree. In this one, they've decided to try to map out a background, which at least means they've given this incarnation of the character a little bit of thought. It is their last chance to do an original Fleming for the first time. I'd rather this one not be pastiche. It doesn't seem like it will be, and for me, one of the signs of that is the site where it is obvious a lot of care has been taken and a lot of Fleming has been referenced.

keep dancing,
Bonita

[JCRendle]

How does it clinche it? It gives his parents names, his family name is Bond - he has always been called James Bond, even before he joined MI6, so that goes against the codename theory

[avl]

First of all [cough] codename theory is validated to a degree by this, sorry. [/cough]

Well, fans have had almost 40 years to get used to the strong possibly that "James Bond" is but a codename, ever since Blofeld failed to recognise "James Bond" in OHMSS (despite encountering him in Japan just two years earlier), and the hero of that film shot his mouth off about "the other fella".

Why most fans resist and rail against the codename theory is a mystery to me. The spectacle of Dench's M (whom we've seen in four films now) introducing a brand new Double-O called James Bond in CASINO ROYALE (complete with clearly spelled-out timelines in the piece of "canon" that is the website dossier, which do not give reactionary fans the getout of "Oh, but perhaps CR happened before DIE ANOTHER DAY/DR. NO/whatever") clinches it, surely?

No no no no no. No more code-name. Suspension of disbelief and reboot. Works for me.

[Loomis]

How does it clinche it? It gives his parents names, his family name is Bond - he has always been called James Bond, even before he joined MI6, so that goes against the codename theory

Not if you take the view that the entire dossier was cooked up by MI6 and it's all just what the brainwashed "James Bond" has been made to believe about himself.

[Harmsway]

How does it clinche it? It gives his parents names, his family name is Bond - he has always been called James Bond, even before he joined MI6, so that goes against the codename theory

Not if you take the view that the entire dossier was cooked up by MI6 and it's all just what the brainwashed "James Bond" has been made to believe about himself.

I still think the "codename theory" is nothing but jumping through hoops to make sense of a series that has no real continuity, and in doing so, creates something pretty ridiculous.

I find it just easier to believe in no continuity at all.

[avl]

How does it clinche it? It gives his parents names, his family name is Bond - he has always been called James Bond, even before he joined MI6, so that goes against the codename theory

Not if you take the view that the entire dossier was cooked up by MI6 and it's all just what the brainwashed "James Bond" has been made to believe about himself.

Like most fan theories that is more convoluted than a Blofeld plot. But Loomis if it helps you to rationalise the confuesd-to-the-point-of-non-existence continuity of the EON films with an invented conspiracy-theory backstory, fair enough

[Loomis]

I find it just easier to believe in no continuity at all.

Yes, that's probably the best way to look at things. My point, though, is: why is the codename theory the work of the devil, yet those fans who denounce it tend to say "Oh, well, Bond never ages, you know, and the hero of DIE ANOTHER DAY is exactly the same guy as the hero of DR. NO, and I'm darn well gonna consider Craig as the same chap too, whatever nonsense may be written into the script about this being *gag* his first mission"?

I mean, he's not Connor McLeod.

I think Michael G. Wilson put it best when he talked of Bond as "a series of serieses". There we are - all continuity "issues" solved, and no need for any fanwanking.

[Mister Asterix]

[quote name='JCRendle' post='558921' date='22 May 2006 - 10:31']
[quote name='Mister Asterix' post='558915' date='22 May 2006 - 16:25']
[quote name='JCRendle' post='558719' date='21 May 2006 - 21:25']
According to Dalton's Bond's Passport (shown earlier in the thread) and Brosnan's Bond's medical records from TWINE here are each Bond's ages in their first films.

Dalton's Bond - 39 in LTK
Brosnan's Bond - 34 in GE, 25 in GE PTS
Craig's Bond - 38 in CR

Bond a 00 agent at 25? Something tells me they hadn't thought it through well enough.
[/quote]


[mra]Just because Bond was 38 in TWINE doesn