Those houses definitely do not match. That being said, the Bond franchise, Craig era included, really loves its continuity errors. I mean Quantum of Solace is supposed to take place an hour after Casino Royale and yet Bond is wearing a different suit in QoS as opposed to the one from the end of CR and the ending of CR takes place at Lake Como, whereas the opening of QoS is in Siena…6 hours away. I guess Bond could’ve driven that far with White in the trunk or without a door, but it seems to be quite a stretch. So I could see this being the same house even if they don’t match. I mean the logic isn’t as bad as Bond taking a train from Cairo to Sardinia or the Mustang entering the slim alley on 2 wheels and then coming out of it on the other 2 wheels.
I was thinking about this, I tend to remedy it by assuming Bond has been driving for much more than an hour (which isn’t stated in the film, so there is leeway) having stopped off somewhere for the night, where he got changed (maybe putting White in a cupboard) then continued on (where White’s guards, and the audience, caught up with him)
Mind you, that doesn’t deal with Craig’s hair being noticeably longer and, his physique being much leaner.
You are right Arbogast, it’s never mentioned in the film that it is supposed to be an hour later. The bigger issue is actually in QoS itself vs. the ending to CR: the chase in the PTS takes place at Lake Garda, not Lake Como. However…Lake Garda is also like 4-5 hours away from Siena, so that means Bond makes the entire drive from Lake Garda without a door and White in the trunk. Granted this isn’t anymore ridiculous than anything else in the Bond canon. More just that Spectre erm Quantum never sent more goons? Either way, it doesn’t hamper my viewing of the film. Marc Forster does that enough on his own.
Ok, fair point. I think, at the end of the day, the producers should just shut their mouths and not say anything. The whole idea of QoS starting an hour after CR came from Michael G. Wilson, I believe, or maybe Forster, I can’t remember exactly. But we saw these types of issues several times over the last few years, with the worst offenders being Star Trek Into Darkness and Spectre. Fans could guess things that were supposed to be spoilers absurdly easily, like Cumberbatch playing Khan and Oberhauser actually being Blofeld. I mean, come on, would you really call a film Spectre and not include the guy who runs SPECTRE?! The reveals then fell doubly flat because we all knew they were coming and the producers come off looking ridiculous. Abrams learned his lesson and then just refused to ever comment on The Force Awakens. Hopefully EON and Fukunaga can just remain tight-lipped and just let the film reveal itself.
I’m having a deja vu! Didn’t we have a long, long debate about CR/QoS continuity in the old forum?
How many unused Fleming material threads were there in the old forums? Like 20 at least I think.
Can somebody please translate (summarize) the gist of the video for those of us who are language challenged?
Brilliant.
I’m interested in what was said when they showed the drawing of the swimmers underwater and the line coming down from the hole in the ice???
He says that the lake has notably clear water, and that means it’s possible to film underwater and see what’s happening. He’s speculating that some of the filming will be underwater.
Their catalogue names do sound like Eon’s secret list of future villains.
The fenced off broken ice… I wonder if it’s simply broken ice that’s fenced off for safety reasons, or if it’s been broken in a specific way for the shoot?
If the latter it’s a large whole - perhaps a car sized whole! Perhaps an electric car sized whole!
Thank you. I figured it was just speculation but was interested nevertheless.
In anticipation of Stromberg’s very helpful translation of the Matera article being moved to this spoiler thread…
Wow, what a train of spoilers… Or, is it simply the misguided ramblings of a journalist with no intel?
Might as well get into the spirit of it until we know otherwise! And if I read it correctly, he’s referring to Boyle’s draft…
So, married at the end, hey?!
My first thought was, considering the ‘Bond dies’ rumours, perhaps it switches the OHMSS roles. Bond is killed and Swann (or whomever the bride is) holds him, telling a policeman that he’s just tired.
This would tie into the article’s other even more bizarre suggestion that ‘bond’s successor’ is at the scene witnessing it… whaaat!
Well, If that successor is his wife (Swann, or the female agent rumoured to be helping him), then is this perhaps a more permanent death for Bond, with ‘Jane Bond’ (or whatever) taking revenge in Bond 26?
I don’t see Swann being the woman to lead Eon’s franchise in a post Bond world, so I’d lean towards his widow being this new agent that helps him out.
And if so it’s a bit much to have Bond separate from/grieve Swann, then marry another all in one story, so it’s probably more likely that Swann turns out to be a villain of some kind (which means retro-fitting SP to paint her this way).
Either way the article makes it sound as though it’s another character, rather than Bond, leading the charge in B26.
Or, perhaps when the article’s author says that ‘the successor will witness Bond’s marriage’ it’s meant as the actor succeeding Craig has already been chosen and will be on set watching (for some reason). Of course this is incredibly unlikely.
Anyhow, I’m sure the article’s writer has simply gotten it all wrong, or needs some clicks and his spoilers are nothing but tosh.
But if this garbage is true, then I salute you, Mr Craig, for putting one’s foot down and saying, ‘Not on my watch!’ to messers Boyle & Hodge.
I can’t imagine that EON would ever allow Bond to die. It’s why we always get these elaborate death scenes as opposed to Bond just being shot. There is no series without James Bond and James Bond is not a code name. If Bond were to die, then there’d have to be some kind of reckoning to bring him back in Bond 26. Either he’d have to have been shown to have survived (meaning the ending would be a lie) and with no Melisandre in sight (I’m fairly certain Moneypenny is not a follower of the Lord of Light) that option is out. M could’ve made Bond a horcrux, I guess Bond could regenerate…again? It’s all a bit wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey. That would leave another reboot and another origin story and honestly who would want that? No, the best is for Bond to survive. After all, he needs to bring balance to the force.
His successor… or his assassin? His assistant? His superior?
Please no death scene, please…
Which all make far more sense than ‘successor’!
Not to question Stromberg’s very kind translation for us all, but this word in particular - could it possibly be read as something other than successor?
They could make Craig’s run a self contained chapter in the franchise. He dies at the end — they recast and start again!
If the audience responds well then it’s the new format. It would certainly make each actors last outing that much more interesting - not knowing if he lives or dies.
I think I’m starting to like the idea!
I don’t think they even need to hard reboot with an origin story. They simply simply recast and keep going with a soft reset.
But no, Bond certainly shouldn’t be a code name. If that were attempted, then all the audience would be thinking thereafter is, ‘what’s this guys real name’. And when that’s revealed James Bond is pointless. It would castrate the brand.