if judy dench made her first appearance as the replacement"M" in Goldeneye,how can she possibly appear in casino royale,which is a prequel?
2006-11-16 12:34:24 · 14 answers · asked by silverfox_388 2 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
oooooooh!thats a big word monkeyman!
2006-11-16 12:47:54 · update #1
Because, the entire Bond Franchise has more continuity holes than a 2 ton wheel of swiss cheese.
The only reason that Goldeneye featured a line about her being a new M is the fact that she was a Woman and all M's before had been men. Had they not cast a woman in the role, that line would have never been spoken. Its just liek why John Cleese was called R in his first bond Movie, but Q in Die Another Day, and chances are should Q be needed for and of Craig's Bond Movies he will return as though there had never been any other Q
2006-11-16 15:22:21 · answer #1 · answered by janssen411 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I thought the movie shouldn;t have even been a bond movie. The gun was wrong, the drink was wrong, M was the wrong one, no Q, no moneypenney, the title squence where the gun is shot down the barrel was redone (in a bad way), the siloette title squence had faces and not silotets, there were to bond girls but you never met or heard the evil, plus the whole movie was about bond saving the world by stopping terorists from winning money on a poker game. The acting was good, but the thought behind it was pathetic. And the scene where they went up the cranes and jumped down was beoynd rediculus, the other bond movies might have had some scenes of things that are unlikey to happen, but jumping down from at least a 10+ story crane in 4 jumps in way to unbelivable. The plot line behind her majastys secrect service was better, maybe crieg should go redo that one since all that one needed was a decent actor
2006-11-20 11:10:03 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because the people at the top said thats the only actor they didnt want to replace, cos she's so fantastic, or something to that effect.
and Janssen..........it was only Bond who joked about John Cleese's character being R because he was Q's apprentice in that film, he was never officially called R........and as Desmond Llewelyn (actor who played Q) died shortly after making that film, R was then promoted to Q - as he was the apprentice. And as Bond has known John Cleese firstly as R and then Q, then it wont be as if there had only been one Q - specially as the two Q's are quite different characters.
2006-11-19 23:54:02 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The director, Martin Campbell, said he couldn't see anyone else in the role of M, even if it did screw up the timeline of the film.
2006-11-16 12:36:48 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Does it actually matter whether they have cocked up in that department or not, the film is going to be good anyway. What your are saying is quite true.
2006-11-16 19:14:51 · answer #5 · answered by davidalanjones1990 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
small imperfection in a fantastic film, best opening to a bond film ever. Daniel Craig is hard as nails.
2006-11-16 22:41:02 · answer #6 · answered by John H 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't think it is really an argument in existentialism... it's just an action movie - if you spot holes in the plot you are paying too much attention.
2006-11-16 12:44:12 · answer #7 · answered by monkeymanelvis 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Star 4 U!
2016-03-28 22:59:54 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are loads of continuity mistakes in it, right down to the guns used, etc. Don't sweat it, honey!
2006-11-16 12:36:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
i wont see this cause of the ugly guy whos bond.and i like oo7 but he just ruined it for me :{
2006-11-16 12:44:28 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋