Inconsistencies and contradictions in the Bond film series
sinlum
Posts: 118MI6 Agent
Hi all, I am trying to compile a list of all the inconsistencies and contradictions that have come up between the films.
Here is a list of the most popular inconsistencies and contradictions I am aware of. Can you share any more that you know of?
Goldfinger
- Felix Leiter is noticeably different and much older than in DN. (The change in Leiter’s appearance and character applies to all other Leiters featured in the other films)
You Only Live Twice
- Bond says that he has never been to Japan before to Mr Henderson although in FRWL he said to Tania that he was once in Tokyo with M
On Her Majesty’s Secret Service
- Lazenby’s Bond looks different to Connery’s (this applies to every actor change)
- Bond remarks on the beach “This never happened to the other feller” implying he is different to Connery
- Bond uses a bulkier and slower safe cracker then in YOLT
- Bond and Blofeld do not recognise each other from YOLT
Diamonds Are Forever
- Bond does not seem to suffer from the emotional impact of losing Tracy in OHMSS
Moonraker
- Bond never uses the wrist dart gun ever again despite it being probably the best gadget ever
Goldeneye
- Bond drives his DB5 again from GF but with a different number plate
Tomorrow Never Dies
- Bond can’t use Wai Lin’s computer despite saying to Moneypenny in YOLT that he took a first in Oriental languages at Cambridge
Casino Royale
- Bond gets his 00 licence for the first time thereby implying that Craig’s Bond is starting a new timeline from the previous films
- Bond has the same M from the Brosnan era despite Craig's Bond being in a different timeline
Skyfall
- Bond drives the same DB5 from GF although Craig’s Bond is meant to be in a different timeline
No Time To Die
- Bond says to Madeleine “We have all the time in the world” from OHMSS although Craig’s Bond is meant to be in a different timeline
- Bond drives the same Aston Martin V8 Vantage from TLD although Craig’s Bond is meant to be in a different timeline
Comments
This earlier post may be of interest.
I was watching TLD earlier, and it’s quite funny that Bond says “there’s nowhere to put down” when the plane is running out of fuel towards the end of the film, and yet he then pilots the plane over a very large, flat area which even has an empty road running across it to drive the jeep out the back!
I am more looking at inconsistencies across different films rather than inconsistencies contained in single films.
The window problem in TND is interesting though.
Just out of interest I came across this physics forum (as I am no expert in this field):
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/hammer-vs-bullet-joes-debate-on-energy-delivery.245891/
Someone there posted "A hammer can deliver more energy with a single impact, but a bullet can deliver multiple impacts at a distance".
Just theorising: It's possible Q created some kind of technology that could counteract single impact blasts on the shields of glass but only with one blast at a time. Therefore the car could be protected from single hits such as from a sledgehammer. However when the glass receives multiple blasts from machine gun fire, the technology can't react quickly enough to stop the screen from shattering.
sinum said: Bond drives his DB5 again from GF but with a different number plate
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
this ones easy: the car was introduced as having a rotating license plate amongst other gadgets, certainly my miniature toy version of the Goldfinger car has rotating license plates
and I would think over the years Q changes those alternate plates, both to keep the designs uptodate, and to replace ones that have been compromised by the frequent highspeed chases and other traffic bylaw violations Bond gets up to while undercover
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
sinum said: Bond never uses the wrist dart gun ever again despite it being probably the best gadget ever
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
do they ever reuse the gadgets that saved Bonds life in a previous film? seems silly when thought about realistically, some of these gadgets could have saved the world in the first five minutes of a followup film, yet Q seems to lose interest once theyre used once and moves on to his next inspiration, like an artist who has no interest in his old works.
I think its not til the Craig era when we see previously established gadgets continue to be used, like the injected homing device that makes Nomi say "ouch"
of course Lazenby has a few of them in his desk, and we see a bunch of them cluttering up Q's lab in Die Another Day, but even then he doesnt pull the crocodile disguise off the wall and suggest it might come in useful this mission
@caractacus potts
I wonder if it's possible to breathe underwater just through your mouth without a noseclip. I don't know.
Bond's briefcase from FRWL is referenced in GF when it gets 'damaged' when examined by Goldfinger's staff and confiscated.
I would argue that the briefcase could be damaged like any other. It's never revealed that it is especially destruction proof. Also the flight attendant in GF may have lied to Bond about the case so he wouldn't be able to have access to it.
Well that's what I mean: they've clearly found that it contains concealed weapons etc. so have taken it away from him.
So it's not really an inconsistency or a contradiction.
No, but we were talking about gadgets appearing in more than one film.
Or is he referring to Prince Charming from Cinderella? As he’s left holding a shoe…
This was already talked about in another thread about OHMSS. It might also be a reference to the final scene of the film "The 400 Blows".