› ›

HERE BE SPOILERS - Skyfall Codename Conspiracy

1…1213151718

Comments

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited April 2016 Posts: 9,117
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    dogrowup007 wrote: »

    Please tell me, if you don't believe this 4th wall approach, are you then saying that James Bond is aware of camera crews following him around on his adventures? Not very beneficial for his undercover work. If not, your approach to the matter again is not so consistent.

    There was a camera crew in Saida s dressing room and they didn t even bother to hide, like they did in FRWL and DAD. I wonder what that was about, were they working for MI6? Was it the equivalent of the homer device, microchip or smartblood from other films?

    =))

    Genius.

    Well there you go then. Laz talking directly to them and the fact you actually see them in TMWTGG proves it for for me. The Bond films are actually some sort of Bear Gryls reality show.

    As a wise man once said: 'I wish I could dismiss it, but the evidence is right there.'

    The irony being there's actually more direct evidence for this ridiculous hypothesis than there is for the codename theory!


  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    A code, within a code ? :D
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    You've cracked it people! The Bond films are some kind of "Big Brotheresque" reality show where each Bond is eliminated by the prying public!

    "Sean Connery, this is Davina. You're live on channel Mi6; please do not swear."
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited April 2016 Posts: 4,116
    Oddjobs_hat wrote: »
    The fact that it has never been contradicted is an indirect proof, because it would have been very easy to establish that each Bond is the same. What's more, there are numerous things in the series which suggest they are not the same person. But these you just dismiss as continuity errors so there is no debate when minds are so closed.

    Except the producers didn't ever intend for Bond to be a codename. It's just a dumbass theory with no basis.

    I think Indiana Jones is a codename because the young Indy doesn't look like the old Indy and neither look like the dad.

    I believe the real Indy wasn't even an archeologist but a spy posing as an orthologist. That spy that original Indy is of course the real James Bond.

    See how stupid your codename sounds.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    So a question to @Mendes4lyfe and @Oddjobs_hat:

    Given the overwhelming evidence of the camera crew in TMWTGG and Laz talking directly to them at the end of the OHMSS PTS (can we also include Sean winking at them at the end of NSNA? Not official but still...) are you happy to admit that the reality show theory 'is just too substantial to be completely false. I wish I could dismiss it, but the evidence is right there.' ???

    Note I am not saying that you agree that the theory is true (as I have never said that you think that the codenam theory is true) merely that you surely believe the evidence is sufficient to point to the theory having some credibility.

    The evidence is thin and tenuous in both instances so I don't see how you can pick and choose which one you accept and which one you refute. If you are happy to accept feeble evidence in one case then you are surely duty bound to accept it in the other.



  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,690
    Let's not forget the visible crew vans during the bungee jump in GE, which proves that Pierce Brosnan is playing Pierce Brosnan playing James Bond.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    I must have must something lol. So we have some sort of Big Brother theory now?
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    The Big Bond theory perhaps ? :)
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited April 2016 Posts: 4,116
    Thunderpussy wrote: »
    The Big Bond theory perhaps ? :)

    I love that show :).

    Maybe The Big Kiss Kiss Bang Bang Theory?? Nah yours is better.

    May I ask a stupid question? Why would any Bond fan want the codename theory to be true... or even entertain the idea?
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    All suggestions gratefully accepted. :D
    except the REALLY Crazy ones from Mendes and Oddjob ! :))
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited April 2016 Posts: 9,117
    I'm a Secret Agent Get Me Out Of Here?
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,690
    Stop! Or Mendes4Lyfe will shoot you with his codename theory!
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Is that a Codename theory or are you just happy to see me?
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    This is my hand, no it's a gun. Watch it shoot codename theories. :))
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Mendes and Oddjob are trying to smuggle this theory into MI6, just like a
    Celebrity couple smuggling a couple of dogs into Australia. ;)
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    Oddjobs_hat wrote: »
    Bond not knowing chinese in TND.

    This is explained in TND novelization, he had lied to Moneypenny to impress her.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited April 2016 Posts: 8,077
    In CR, M mentions how much she misses the cold war when in GE she describes Bond as a relic of the cold war. So presumably, this is the same M as before. Perhaps this was just a slight coincidence, that M happens to mention the cold war in both films, it's possible that's all it is. There is another possibility however. What if I told you that EON used this reboot as an opportunity, like they did with OHMSS, the first time they recast Bond. Lazenby was cast as Bond, and someone probably mentioned that it would be funny if this guy was a completely different guy than Connery, so they threw it a line about it for fun. That was when Bond became a codename for the first time. So after OHMSS, EON decided to run with this codename thing, they made sure not to debunk it, and every now and then they throw in another little easter egg for us fans, to show that the theory is still workable. So they snuck that line into CR, as another little wink to those of us in the know. If you think about it, it's very clever. They used the reboot to show us a Bond JUST getting his 00 status. Then they throw in a line that links back to pre-reboot, just to flirt with us fans. So suddenly the same M has served two Bonds, and the later Bond is just starting, hence Bond is codename. It's genius, and it's something they only could have done with a reboot. Otherwise it's too blatant. Again, EON aren't treating this seriously, but they are doing it deliberately. It's almost like a running in-joke. The alternative is that this is all just coincidence, which as a hypothesis I find to be a little reaching. I still think the Brainwashing theory that I outlined a few pages back is the one EON is working from, otherwise, as people have pointed out, the FYEO pts would seem to definitively debunk everything. Whatever the case EON are certainly having some fun at our expense, they've got us all shouting at each other.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    =)) I love your sense of the absurd.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    In CR, M mentions how much she misses the cold war when in GE she describes Bond as a relic of the cold war. So presumably, this is the same M as before. Perhaps this was just a slight coincidence, that M happens to mention the cold war in both films, it's possible that's all it is. There is another possibility however. What if I told you that EON used this reboot as an opportunity, like they did with OHMSS, the first time they recast Bond. Lazenby was cast as Bond, and someone probably mentioned that it would be funny if this guy was a completely different guy than Connery, so they threw it a line about it for fun. That was when Bond became a codename for the first time. So after OHMSS, EON decided to run with this codename thing, they made sure not to debunk it, and every now and then they throw in another little easter egg for us fans, to show that the theory is still workable. So they snuck that line into CR, as another little wink to those of us in the know. If you think about it, it's very clever. They used the reboot to show us a Bond JUST getting his 00 status. Then they throw in a line that links back to pre-reboot, just to flirt with us fans. So suddenly the same M has served two Bonds, and the later Bond is just starting, hence Bond is codename. It's genius, and it's something they only could have done with a reboot. Otherwise it's too blatant. Again, EON aren't treating this seriously, but they are doing it deliberately. It's almost like a running in-joke. The alternative is that this is all just coincidence, which as a hypothesis I find to be a little reaching. I still think the Brainwashing theory that I outlined a few pages back is the one EON is working from, otherwise, as people have pointed out, the FYEO pts would seem to definitively debunk everything. Whatever the case EON are certainly having some fun at our expense, they've got us all shouting at each other.

    Every time I read a post of your's I can't help but think of Anders Behring Breivik.
  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    Posts: 6,432
    There is barely any continuity in the Bond films, its the same character though the writers really made little effort to link one film to the next bar a few rare occasions. Its only in modern cinema has this need to link everything together come about, its futile to attempt to apply a very modern concept to films from 40 years ago.
  • gumboltgumbolt Now with in-office photocopier
    Posts: 153
    But in SF they mention that M was in charge of MI6 Hong Kong in 97 during the handover to China, so she could not have been the same person who was M from 95-02. So instead you have a different character played by the same actor - and this does not help the codename theory. The codename theory was,in my view, debunked in TSWLM which is the first time - I think - that Tracey is mentioned since OHMSS. By the way, talking of Dench's M (or M's), take a look at the underground station dialogue between Dench and Brosnan in DAD and the dialogue in M's house between Craig and Dench in SF. Very similar in places. Just saying.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    fire_and_ice wrote: »
    There is barely any continuity in the Bond films, its the same character though the writers really made little effort to link one film to the next bar a few rare occasions. Its only in modern cinema has this need to link everything together come about, its futile to attempt to apply a very modern concept to films from 40 years ago.

    You're wasting your time. I'm sure there were many people who inadvertently conversed with Josef Fritzl about the merits of a happy home life.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Walecs wrote: »
    Oddjobs_hat wrote: »
    Bond not knowing chinese in TND.

    This is explained in TND novelization, he had lied to Moneypenny to impress her.

    That's called a filmmaker error.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    Oddjobs_hat wrote: »
    Bond not knowing chinese in TND.

    This is explained in TND novelization, he had lied to Moneypenny to impress her.

    That's called a filmmaker error.

    As others have mentioned before, Chinese and Japanese are very different.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Sort of like Yorkshire and Lancashire . :D
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    Tomayto, tamahto.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited April 2016 Posts: 9,117
    RC7 wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    In CR, M mentions how much she misses the cold war when in GE she describes Bond as a relic of the cold war. So presumably, this is the same M as before. Perhaps this was just a slight coincidence, that M happens to mention the cold war in both films, it's possible that's all it is. There is another possibility however. What if I told you that EON used this reboot as an opportunity, like they did with OHMSS, the first time they recast Bond. Lazenby was cast as Bond, and someone probably mentioned that it would be funny if this guy was a completely different guy than Connery, so they threw it a line about it for fun. That was when Bond became a codename for the first time. So after OHMSS, EON decided to run with this codename thing, they made sure not to debunk it, and every now and then they throw in another little easter egg for us fans, to show that the theory is still workable. So they snuck that line into CR, as another little wink to those of us in the know. If you think about it, it's very clever. They used the reboot to show us a Bond JUST getting his 00 status. Then they throw in a line that links back to pre-reboot, just to flirt with us fans. So suddenly the same M has served two Bonds, and the later Bond is just starting, hence Bond is codename. It's genius, and it's something they only could have done with a reboot. Otherwise it's too blatant. Again, EON aren't treating this seriously, but they are doing it deliberately. It's almost like a running in-joke. The alternative is that this is all just coincidence, which as a hypothesis I find to be a little reaching. I still think the Brainwashing theory that I outlined a few pages back is the one EON is working from, otherwise, as people have pointed out, the FYEO pts would seem to definitively debunk everything. Whatever the case EON are certainly having some fun at our expense, they've got us all shouting at each other.

    Every time I read a post of your's I can't help but think of Anders Behring Breivik.
    RC7 wrote: »
    fire_and_ice wrote: »
    There is barely any continuity in the Bond films, its the same character though the writers really made little effort to link one film to the next bar a few rare occasions. Its only in modern cinema has this need to link everything together come about, its futile to attempt to apply a very modern concept to films from 40 years ago.

    You're wasting your time. I'm sure there were many people who inadvertently conversed with Josef Fritzl about the merits of a happy home life.

    A Brevik and a Fritzl reference in consecutive posts. Rip snorting stuff. I salute you Sir!!

    This has to be the most fun thread of all time!
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    In CR, M mentions how much she misses the cold war when in GE she describes Bond as a relic of the cold war. So presumably, this is the same M as before.

    'Presumably'? A whelk would be embarrassed to have your grasp of logic.

    How about they are two totally separate characters who have worked in intelligence for 30 years and thus have both experienced the Cold War separately.

    Or is this another new theory you're throwing out there? That anyone who remembers the Cold War must be M?

    Presumably your little glove puppet Oddjobs_hat will be along in a minute to back up your claims on the basis that you can't contradict it so it must be true.

    Just a quick query - is that you finally delivering on your evidence because if it is I think someone sold you a pup. What you've been left with there my friend is a bucket of horse semen. I think they saw you coming. Still if you plant those beans they also sold you I'm sure they will turn into a giant beanstalk.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    RC7 wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    Oddjobs_hat wrote: »
    Bond not knowing chinese in TND.

    This is explained in TND novelization, he had lied to Moneypenny to impress her.

    That's called a filmmaker error.

    As others have mentioned before, Chinese and Japanese are very different.

    Very true. Maybe I should further up before responding.

    I'm just so anxious to respond to stupidity.
  • dogrowup007dogrowup007
    Posts: 108
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    What if I told you that EON used this reboot as an opportunity, like they did with OHMSS, the first time they recast Bond. Lazenby was cast as Bond, and someone probably mentioned that it would be funny if this guy was a completely different guy than Connery, so they threw it a line about it for fun. That was when Bond became a codename for the first time.

    @Mendes4Lyfe Please clarify: do you see "the other guy" line as a comment from Lazenby on Connery, or as a comment from the character James Bond in 1969 on a James Bond prior 1969? It can't be both.

    If you choose the former, you debunk the code-theory, because then you accept that an actor steps out of character and refers to his predessessor actor colleague.

    If you choose the latter, then you're actually saying James Bond is part of some sort of reality-show, being followed by a camera crew, because he is clearly speaking towards the camera, adressing "someone". In this case your code-theory may still stand, but then there's some news we may have to break to you ... gently.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited April 2016 Posts: 8,077
    dogrowup007 wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    What if I told you that EON used this reboot as an opportunity, like they did with OHMSS, the first time they recast Bond. Lazenby was cast as Bond, and someone probably mentioned that it would be funny if this guy was a completely different guy than Connery, so they threw it a line about it for fun. That was when Bond became a codename for the first time.

    @Mendes4Lyfe Please clarify: do you see "the other guy" line as a comment from Lazenby on Connery, or as a comment from the character James Bond in 1969 on a James Bond prior 1969? It can't be both.

    If you choose the former, you debunk the code-theory, because then you accept that an actor steps out of character and refers to his predessessor actor colleague.

    If you choose the latter, then you're actually saying James Bond is part of some sort of reality-show, being followed by a camera crew, because he is clearly speaking towards the camera, adressing "someone". In this case your code-theory may still stand, but then there's some news we may have to break to you ... gently.

    Neither. The character isn't addressing any one, I don't think. He's talking to himself.
This discussion has been closed.