Myths of James Bond | Debunking the Codename Theory
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ก.ค. 2024
- In the first of a new series of videos looking at the larger public misconceptions about the 007 series, we look at the James Bond codename theory and character continuity from Dr No to Spectre.
If you'd like to support the channel then please follow the link below:
/ calvindyson
Also feel free to follow me on other social media:
/ calvinmdyson
/ calvindyson - บันเทิง
Goldeneye: "You're a relic of the Cold War."
Casino Royale: "Christ, I miss the Cold War."
Though, the contexts are different, and the latter is more of a humorous line.
The M in Goldeneye is Barbara Mawdsley, while the M in Skyfall (and therefore Casino Royale as well) is named Olivia Mansfield. They are technically two separate people in two separate universes, but both played by Judi Dench.
@@Blokewood3 how do you know that? That's extraordinary. I never heard of that before.
@@jamesleonard6890 I am reporting this second hand, but in Skyfall the gift box Bond recieves from M has the name "Olivia Mansfield" on it, and according to the James Bond wiki the name "Barbara Mawdsley" is in the script and novelization of Goldeneye, but not actually said onscreen.
@@Blokewood3 Thank you. Must keep an eye out.
Marvel fans: Edward Norton and Mark Ruffalo CAN’T be playing the same Hulk, right?
James Bond fans: Hold our beers.
That's not really the same thing. The different incarnations of The Incredible Hulk are based on the same source material, but don't form a continuity like the Bond movies do.
ghenulo Ed Norton and Mark Ruffalo play the same version of Bruce Banner from the same continuity.
Otto von Doom 😂😂
@@DCMarvel2009 In particular, RDJ's Tony Stark and William Hurt's General Ross come over from the Hulk movie. And in The Avengers, SHIELD have been tracking Banner since the end of the 2008 film. The events are also spoken about by Sitwell in one of the Marvel One-Shot short films.
Now's a good time to plug my head canon that the Norton/Ruffalo Hulk is the same Eric Bana Hulk from the Ang Lee movie. The director of the Nortion Hulk movie always intended it to be a direct sequel but got overruled by Marvel, who forced him to add an opening credits sequence that retcons his origin from that movie, BUT the rest of the script is completely unchanged and they even reference the Lee film by having it start in Brazil with Banner already the Hulk. So, I choose to just ignore the opening credits and place the three in the same timeline, given how loose and broad-strokes the continuity with that particular incarnation is already. I just like the idea that the MCU actually started all the way back in 2003 and nobody noticed, plus I really like the Ang Lee Hulk.
I find it amazing that despite how much evidence you find, there are still some people who think Bond is a codename.
I think it's one of the reasons I've needed to make an extra video on the subject!!
Or (moviewise) there is zero evidence.
They probably think the earth is flat too
All just comes down to piss poor continuity on the part of the film makers
"think it is" and "think it could open up some interesting storytelling possibilities" are two very different things
The fact that Bond already has a codename (007) should be enough to quash this silly theory.
007 /isn't/ a codename, it's a /designation/. Bond is one of the 00s which is a licence to kill.
@@julianmhall Semantics
@@thepenultimateninja5797 No, accuracy. A codename is /not/ a synonym for a designation.
@@julianmhall Ok, but James Bond is a specific person, not a code name.
@@thepenultimateninja5797 Exactly /my/ point. You said 007 is a codename and it isn't.
I always took the line about Bond being on holiday in Diamonds as being he was on compassionate leave after Tracy was murdered. The beginning of that film was him getting revenge on his own time.
It makes sense either way.
I always took the holiday as Bond doing the hunt for Blofeld this time not as work (as he was at the beginning of the previous film), but as pleasure. It's a nice linking distinction between them. Still bit insensitive of M to rebuke Bond about getting on with work now. Although that's another message to the audience: normal service has been resumed.
Another reason to hate the theory: it devalues ‘The Spy Who Loved Me’. That scene where Anya confronts Bond for killing her lover - his reaction is very much coming from a place of empathy, of knowing the hurt that comes from having a loved one killed. So while he’s not sorry over his actions, as it was kill or be killed, he can understand why Anya feels the way she does. That’s why they brought Tracy up earlier in the film: to show the audience that Bond is still hurting from that - sowing the seeds which are reaped in the confrontation scene. Which is one of the best scenes of Roger’s tenure, IMO, his performance is brilliant.
If Roger’s Bond is a different guy from George’s Bond, that scene, heck that whole undercurrent throughout the whole film, makes no sense.
Also: Tracy's Grave in FYEO was actually written in to introduce a new actor as Bond. At the time they weren't sure if Roger was coming back, as his multi-picture contract had been completed.
David James Yes, I do believe they asked Timothy Dalton, who took one look at _Moonraker_ and said no, and they stuck with Roger cause NSNA was lurking over them. Shame cause FYEO could’ve made for a pretty good Dalton film.
@@BenCol I know Tim said no to OHMSS as he quite maturely thought an actor of his age (25) shouldn't be playing Bond, but I hadn't heard about any offers before Living Daylights. Mel Gibson was asked to do FYEO and said no (something he'd continue to do on every Bond film up to GoldenEye). NSNA was def the reason EON got cold feet over James Brolin who had the role in Octopussy, then Cubby got out his cheque book and gave in to Rodge's fee request.
Yes, Dalton would have been excellent in FYEO. Interestingly on FYEO Maryam D'Abo started a regular role of acting alongside Bond auditioners, all the way up to Living Daylights.
The thing that ends the whole codename theory is Daniels craigs dad being called __ Bond , his family is Bond
@@foodreacts837 Indeed, Andrew was his name.
"unless James Bond is a timelord" well... Timothy Dalton did play Rassilon, a timelord, in the Doctor Who episodes "The End of Time"
And Bernard Horsfall, who played MI6 agent Shaun Campbell in OHMSS, was a Time Lord in ‘The War Games’ and ‘The Deadly Assassin’.
As soon as one watches Doctor Who, every actor replacement can be potencially Timelord shannaniganery
BenCol he also played. Bill Bastt in the Saint episode The Death Game with Roger Moore.
So it's settled James bond is a timelord case closed.
SweenyTodd98 Anthony Ainley, who played The Master in the 80’s, played one of the two British patrol officers who pronounced Bond dead in the pre-credits scene in You Only Live Twice, specifically the one who says “Well, at least he died on the job”
The original script for Goldeneye more directly references Tracy with a subtle difference to one of Trevelyan's lines: "...if you find forgiveness in the arms of all those willing women...for the dead one that you couldn't protect."
Either way, James Bond is a single person. Always has been. The "codes" are the Double-0 numbers assigned to agents who achieve that "rank"
I didn't know that about the original script! I suppose I prefer the version that's in the film where he refers to multiple dead women. Which is more accurate I suppose given that at least one Bond girl usually dies along the way!
Glad to see you address this, but surprised you didn't mention Casino Royale 1967, which while not canon, and being a comedy, is obviously the source of the code name mythology. Great video Calvin. 👍
@@allenhilburn8686 Yeah, it just kills me that this codename theory means people are actually taking that ridiculous movie seriously.
Personally, I’ve always felt the code name theory works best for Bond. Or else these new villains, threats, they’d be wondering how Methuselah is still able to win! Short of Q finally inventing a legit fountain of youth, or a portrait decomposing in the Bond family attic, it makes more logical sense that it’s a new man under an old name.
It would also be the same for Felix Lichter and his constant changing of roles (and ethnicity) in the series. And don’t get me started on Joe Don Baker being an asset for Bond, then a hack adversary in a later film! Ugh!
Jim Taylor Actually, Joe Don Baker was the adversary FIRST and THEN an asset.
Great video! I like the idea that it’s the same guy (except Craig I guess). On a semi related note, I’d love to see Bond return to the 60’s with retro gadgets. Cheers Calvin!
Mr Sunday Movies
Caravan of Garbage Never Say Never Again when No Time to Die comes out?
Spooky Lemon He did do the Brosnan movies for that though
That's like saying "I like the idea of a spherical earth"
Why except Craig? In Skyfall (if i am not wrong) Q talks about explosive pen from GoldenEye, also first 2 Craig movies are prequels to the series so they are chronologically before Dr. No, the series continues after Brosnan era with Skyfall
Wat da heck
In the video game Everything or Nothing - Willem Dafoe’s villain is a protege to Max Zorin.
Bond, being played by Brosnan references A View to a Kill, saying he “once played a game of bridge with Zorin, and Zorin lost.”
Counting the video games as canon is a slippery slope. According to 007 Legends, Craig's Bond experienced Goldfinger, On Her Majestys, Moonraker, Licence to Kill, and Die Another Die, which just doesn't check out.
@@HOTD108_ Eh, 007 Legends sucked ass so I’m willing to discount it. And 007 Legends was also during the Craig era which explicitly now is a separate timeline while Everything or Nothing can be considered the final story of the original timeline.
There’s one thing you missed in the code name theory. The reason why we had multiple Bonds as 007 is the fact he’s a android. After each version gets destroyed, MI6 have to replace the face and body model but not the mind, which can hold the memories from the 60’s to the present day.
Ahh of course! How could I miss that! ;)
Calvin Dyson Just a thought
That would make the name "James Bond" a code name for all of the different androids. Thank you.
It could also explain how he can only live twice.
@Stellvia Hoenheim Canon is more a guideline than an actual rule, welcome to the world Doctor Who fans have been living in forever.
Did you know that the Fourth Doctor's foreskin is on display in a museum? That's canon.
Embrace the absurdity of it all.
The best theory: Each Bond takes place in an alternate universe _(like most movies are alternate universes mostly based on our own but with slight differences, usually centered around the lead characters)_ . Some Bond alternate universes are only slightly different from each other, and some are similar to a different Bond universe but with key events taking place 50 or so years later. Some universes have high-tech that doesn't exist in our world, while other universes are very close to our modern-day tech. But in every universe, there's a man named James Bond who has been at work as a secret agent for some time already (at the time of the first film of that Bond).
You are my hero, that's EXACTLY how I read it.
No, that theory is dumb. The real truth is that James Bond is actually a Time Lord who simply regenerates into different incarnations, which explains the changes in appearance as well as how he can stay in the field for so long. Bond must've been exiled to the planet Earth for some kind of fuck up (similar to the 3rd Doctor), banned from traveling through time. He got a job at MI6, who know about his origins but simply cover it up.
wouldnt explain finding sean's stuff in the office
I always just assumed that Bond was a fictional character who gets recast every so often.
Dutch Bond Fan said the same thing in his video:
th-cam.com/video/64lzFdhvnkk/w-d-xo.html
To me it's the same as comics. The assumption is that time based canon shifts as time passes in real life. For example, Batman's parents dying is just something that happened "in the past" of today, rather than the past of 1940.
The series' loose continuity is one of the reasons James Bond has become so popular and continues to stay relevant for decades. Its moved beyond simple storytelling and has becoming a part of our culture reflecting current manliness and values.
LOL....Does that mean he is METRO-SEXUAL Now???!!😳😳😳😳😂😂😂😂
@@kulwantrandhawa3766 always has been 👨🚀🔫👨🚀
@@kulwantrandhawa3766what does that even mean?
"On Her Majesty's Secret Service", the film many use as evidence for the Code Name Theory, while at the same time being the film that debunks it. Funny how such paradoxes work.
More people debunking the Code Name Theory, the happier I am.
I don't see how OHMSS provides any evidence, unless you don't understand the concept of a joke.
Its a joke pure and simple.
There's another scene from OHMSS that people often overlook, when Blofeld confronts Bond after blowing his cover:
Ernst Stavro Blofeld: Merry Christmas, 007.
James Bond: [as Hillary Bray] I'm Sir Hillary Bray.
Ernst Stavro Blofeld: No no no, **Mr. Bond**. Respectable baronets from the College of Heralds do "not" seduce female patients in clinics.
Bond works on the same sort of timeline as Comic books do. The past did happen, though 'when' is constantly changing.
Some like to think that Blofeld in For Your Eyes Only has a neck brace due to his sub being repeatedly slammed into the control tower in Diamonds Are Forever. And regarding Judi Dench in both the Craig and Brosnan eras, official material claims that she has different names in those eras: Olivia Mansfield and Barbara Mawdsley
There is subtle differences in Dench's M's too. Barbara is very much the 'new broom' and is initially distrusting of Bond but a mutual respect grows. Olivia is from 'the old guard' and her relationship with Bond is a lot more maternal than Barbara's.
I'd just rather see these movies as 6 different series of stories of one character, and they reference several similar elements of his backstory simply because it's the character's backstory. Like Batman's parents dying when he was a kid, Superman's home planet being destroyed, Spider-Man's uncle dying, and so on.
That's how I've always seen them.
Yes, yes, yes.........my lord I thought I was the only one that thought this.
that works.
Thats also how i see them
Yes! 100% right. There's two options: 1. The story 'resets' when each actor changes, like you said (apart from SC and GL) or 2) Just don't think about it. All this stuff about code names and convoluted timeline crap is completely unnecessary to the JB films.
2:27 Lazenby can also be referring to another 00 agent. Not necessarily referring to Connery bond.
Probably 008.
Or the previous 007. There was someone with that number before Bond, presumably.
lol....001....002....003....004....005....006.5...???!!!🤣🤣🤣🤣
Also what often gets missed is that Judi Dench is playing two different characters in two different timelines. Example:
Goldeneye: "If I want sarcasm Mr. Tanner I'll speak to my children."
Skyfall: "My husband and I never had children."
She could have had children with someone aside from her current husband in Skyfall. I.e., a previous partner.
Clickbait websites: How could James Bond only be one man if he changes appearances and never ages across decades?!
Comic book fans: What's your point?
literally just say...... *THEY CAN'T CAST ONE DUDE TILL HE IS 70 CAN YOU, NO YOU HAVE TO GET NEW ACTORS* these kids piss me off
Exactly. Look at how many actors played Bruce Wayne/Batman. No one questions if Bruce is a codename.
Mark Ryan To be fair, Val Kilmer and George Clooney are the only ones to have played him in the same continuity.
You see this, this, is my BOOMSTICK
@@57yearoldjamesbond Nope. Val talks about events from the Michael Keaton movies. He even still has nightmares of pre-Joker killing his family. Nicole Kidman references Catwoman.
This was a very well thought out video, dealing with the ridiculous code name theory. In my opinion people should just accept that the James Bond films are not a series. They are multiple films dealing with the same man, not really requiring any significant continuity between movies. There have been a plethora of actors playing a Robin Hood, deerslayer, Sherlock Holmes or any of the musketeers. And all of them have portrayed the same character, and it didn’t make an iota of difference how that actor looks, acting is storytelling and make belief. So the need to have an explanation for different actors playing the same man, is the same as crying for reboots for classic movies.
Broke: Codename Theory
Woke: Codename Theory is wrong
Bespoke: James Bond is actually a ghost, body-surfing his way across actors
My god, this explains everything!
@@JOCoStudio1 Exactly. It explains comments about his new appearance, even by Bond himself, while simultaneously explaining why he keeps all his memories.
@@firetarrasque4667 This is stupid
He is like doctor fate from dc !
What does 'woke' have to do with anything?
Additionally, there's this line from On Her Majesy's Secret Service when Bond is removed from Operation Bedlam:
"But sir, Blofeld is something of a must for me!"
It's doubtful a man who has just assumed a title would care about a man he's never met or dealt with.
Along with M saying “you’ve had two years to hunt him down.” Which tracks with YOLT being two years prior. I just don’t let it bother me. I see it as the two of them being two arrogant to admit the game was up right from the start lol
Never been able to get why people insist on this notion. It's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. No-one ever seems to have an issue with multiple actors as Batman. Especially in the Burton/Schumacher era when we had 3 different actors as Bruce Wayne but the same ones as Alfred and Commissioner Gordon. Both are characters that exist outside of any hard and fast continuity and are open to multiple interpretations but they're always the same guy.
Harvey Dent even changes race.
With the Burton/Schumacher Batman movies, it's possible that one person could have played Batman in all those movies. There's no way the same person could have played James Bond in Dr. No and Die Another Day due to how many years apart the movies came out.
The Batman Begins movies feel like another adaptation of the comic, Batman Forever and the Dark Knight Rises do not exist in the same timeline.
Yet with Bond, they kind of have it both ways. Act as if James Bond married someone once and barely aged in 40 years. Yet at the same time, the Pierce Brosnan character exists where the Soviet Union has already collapsed.
Right - George Clooney and Michael Keaton and Christian Bale all play Batman. But unlike with the Bond films, current filmmakers don't insist that the events of every movie happened to every incarnation of Batman. In Skyfall, James drives the old Aston Martin from Goldfinger. That'd be like if Christian Bale said to Jim Gordon: "Look, I know who the Joker is. It's Jack Napier, the guy who fell in that vat of chemicals earlier. Same guy who killed my parents."
The Batman movies more or less wipe the slate clean and reboot continuity whenever they get a new actor (they're about to do it again). Ditto with Spider-Man. We accept that Tom Holland is Spider-Man. If all of a sudden, Tom Holland said "Man, this reminds me of when Harry Osborn sacrificed himself to save me from Venom," we'd all be super confused, because even though those events happened to Spider-Man, they didn't happen to *Tom Holland's* Spider-Man.
But for some reason, every James Bond film is supposed to exist in the same timeline and same universe as every other James Bond film, and that opens up all kinds of weird paradoxes. The fan theories are just a fun way of resolving those paradoxes.
@@tombombaddie I think it's because these days we expect reboots, whereas previously that didn't really happen. The Burton and Schmacher Batman's are def meant to be the same.
LOVE the idea for this series!
I feel codename bollocks will arise again since the NTTD ending. The severity of it will depend on how they'll handle the next film though I feel.
If anything NTTD should have finished off the codename theory as someone who's not called James Bond is given the 007 title as Bond is living in retirement. The next film will almost certainly be a different continuity and supporting cast to make it obvious it's a reboot.
@@jamesatkinsonja I think now would be a great opportunity for a period piece set back in the 60s or 70s.
I’ve always found the code name theory to be absurd for the many reasons you pointed out. People get way too bent out of shape regarding chronology; just enjoy each film for what it is.
Well said, Nick!
Yeah, just laugh off the fact that James Bond has been a secret agent for over 50 years and never seems to age one bit. I guess the people who created this theory didn’t want to do that.
Film theories are fun. Fan theorists are enjoying the films, just not necessarily on your terms.
It's actually easier to enjoy if you do think of Bond as a codename, rather than applying comic book logic and believing the same spy was having these adventures for 60 years.
Imagine if NTTD decided to really embrace the code name theory. As he is no longer an agent, when he walks into MI6, M says "Ah hello Barry, welcome back". :)
Damien Fenton And then looks at his shoulder and says “Does this make up for the ‘this never happened to the other fellow’ line, other Barry?”
Or even worse, Boris
Imagine it ends where Bond is in the office and some other guy steps in, obviously a black guy, and becomes the new ''bond''. That is the only thing I am dreading.
At least, this would explain the face of the security guard (I guess?) when he introduces himself in the trailer 🤔
It actually can happen. If as a codename we of course understand only a number and not particular name of character, after leaving MI6 in the end of "Spectre" James Bond have left a number. Than a new agent could get his number, and wherever I read this earlier in "No Time To Die" Bond will be not 007, but only temporarily reinstalled field agent. Well, whatever happens - we will see in November :)
When George Lazenby says this never happened to the other fella I think it’s the same situation as Baron semedi when he’s sat on the front of the train It’s not meant to be taken as Canon
There's a universe where Tom Baker is my favourite Bond.
Funny you should say that, because Tom slammed the character of Bond once in an interview IIRC...slamming him for his morality and the way he treats women. This from a guy who was quite a roisterer himself from what I understand...and was such an epic boozer that Keith Moon would've said "Whoa, man, dial it back!"
There is a universe in which Fleming heeded Boothroyrds advice and gave Bond a 38 airweight revolver instead of the PPK and that revolver became synonymous with the character. As a firearms enthusiast, I dream of that universe alot.
Sean Connery in the Tardish?
Dr. Who: I’m one man over many different time lines and regenerations.
James Bond: Hold my martini 🍸.
Conclusive evidence to debunk the codename theory: in "Die Another Dodo", Q tells Bond that the watch is his 20th, not his 4th (at last, a reason to be thankful for DAD). Also, Bond asks Q if the jetpack from Thunderball still works.
For the holiday reference in DAF, I always took it to be the 2 week holiday that M granted Bond in OHMSS, showing that Bond is the same person in both films. Finally, Bond's vodka martini habit follows him throughout the series. Everyone from Dr. No to Zukovsky knows what he drinks, so it must be the same person. Any more proof needed?
I think this might be Calvin’s best video to date. Concise, logical and very entertaining. I look forward to further entries in this series.
The even showed the tombstones in Skyfall to settle this forever. It's not a codename
Apparently Daniel Craig Bond is the beginning of a new timeline, so he could just be the first one, then he gets replaced for the next movie.
@@Whoknowsuknow The question is if Bond is codename. This gets debunked as it is explicitly shown to be his family name.
@@unlimitedayoproduction2452 why would they do that if it is supposedly just a code name
@@Whoknowsuknow It can't be, because in the same movie he reminisces over his Aston Martin DB5 from Goldfinger, showing that Craig's Bond is supposed to be the same person as Connery's Bond.
Every Bond is brainwashed to believe that the events of OHMSS happened to him. There never was a Teresa. The tombstone is fake. How could Daniel Craig, fighting terrorists in the modern day, have been married to a woman who died in the late 1960s?
Thank Cub Michal G. Wilson shot down Lee Tamahori’s idea to have Sean Connery pop up in ‘Die Another Day’.
LT: Hey guys! I’ve got this really cool idea! What if all the Bond actors were playing different people? We could bring back Connery’s Bond to tutor Pierce’s Bond! ‘Cause it’s the 40th anniversary and the 20th film and all that!
MGW: No, we can’t have that. They’re not separate people, Lee. It’s one guy, always has been.
LT: But what if-
MGW: Damn it, Lee, I said no! We’re not throwing 40 years of storytelling down the drain just so you can meet Sean Connery!
LT: No, I promise you Mike, it’ll be really cool!
MGW: That’s what you said about that kitesurfing scene. And how did that go?
LT: ...OK, no Connery.
I want to find that print interview where Tamahori gets schooled by the interviewer. Would love if it had been filmed!
@Vicodyn You can't physically make films of 20 years of James Bond's missions in 20 years. The illogicality is believing you can.
@Vicodyn Bond films are supposed to be of the present, they've never been period pieces, and so unless Bond is 30 in Dr No and 70 in Die Another Day, which wouldn't work with him being a field agent, then they have to take place over about a 15 year time period. Bond starts off aged about 30 in Dr No in 1962, but to keep it in real time, a 45 year old Bond in Die Another Day, would mean it would have to be set in 1977. This would draw attention away from the Bond film as a fantasy set in a world viewers relate to and recognise and could imagine themselves in, rather than it being something it isn't, a nostalgia piece.
Sounds like it would have been awesome.
I treat each Bond adventure as it's own standalone story just involving James Bond. I never cared for the continuity. I just watch the films purely on an entertainment scale.
In No Time To Die I'll be disappointed if Blofeld isn't in a full body cast with an electric wheelchair and a poo bag, only for him to be pole-vaulting and dancing the tango in the one after.
Live and Let Die connects to the Connery Bond with Quarrel Jr.
In a way, Bond is like a comic book character due to the different interpretations of him from the films, novels, and video games. I've never taken the codename theory seriously and never felt like the films were like one giant story (until the Craig era made that with Spectre). You're watching Bond's everyday adventures regardless of the actor.
I agree and Spectre I disliked for the marvel connections of the characters if you will it was lazy writing
On the subject of Judi Dench as M, in the script of GoldenEye (and the novelisation I belive) she is named Barbara Mawdsley, while props in Skyfall reveals M in the Craig movies to be named Olivia Mansfield. So I see it as two different women played by the same actress. I also feel that how she protrays the both M's differ in some ways, so I have no problems seeing them as different characters.
Not that far out of a theory, considering Joe Don Baker played a Bond villain and then CIA agent who definitely aren't meant to be the same characters.
I think the fourth wall breaking stuff is because Bond is really just that good. Sometimes your such a bad-ass that you can look at the camera of your reality.
My Theory is, that every single Bond agents are from different universes.
A Parallel Universe Theory would be rather fitting for the James Bond Franchise
The reason blofeld has a neck brace/wheelchair in "for your eyes only" is because he was seriously injured in the end of "diamonds are forever" and didn't die
Ben Bennett and breaks his neck again.. No it was a retarded decision to try to bring back a character they didn’t have the rights to still not Blofeld in my book
James Bond is a Time-lord Theory:
James Bond, Moneypenny, Felix Leiter and Blofeld are all Timelords.
Bond. 1. Sean Connery. Pretty straight forward, he, along with a handful of other Timelords were exiled from Gallifrey and forced to live on Earth. Their high intelligence awarded them jobs in MI6 and other established organisations. The causes of Bond 1's death is unknown.
Bond. 2. George Lazenby. Freshly regenerated for OHMSS, this is his only mission in this incarnation. After the death of his wife, he resigns from MI6 and goes into hiding. With aid from the Doctor, who is acquainted with Bond (Just go with it) Bond 1 (Sean) travels to the future to try and convince himself to rejoin MI6. After a lengthy talk with Bond 2, Bond 1 decides to stick around in the future for a while and track down Blofeld to avenge the death of his wife. Meanwhile, Bond 2 commits suicide, in a bid to regenerate and start afresh. He regenerates into Bond 3.
Bond 3. Roger Moore. Straight forward again. With a new body and outlook on life, he returns to MI6 and starts again. This is the longest serving Bond and things go fairly well for him. He even gets to kill Blofeld himself this time around, and Blofeld is seemingly gone forever. During his time however, Bond 3 is shown a vision by a trickster of what his life could have been like on Earth had he been human (Never Say Never Again), Bond 3 refuses the temptation and defeats the Trickster. Eventually, like Bond 1, a fatal, yet unseen, mission forces him to change. Moneypenny also regenerates for the first time too.
Bond 4. Timothy Dalton. Not around for long, this Bond's tenure is cut short after he is summoned back to his home world Gallifrey. The Timelords foresee a great war on the horizon and have made plans to resurrect one of the founding fathers of Gallifrey to lead them into battle, Lord Rassilon. They need to sacrifice a Timelord to do so, and deem Bond as a fitting warrior for Rassilon to take the form of. Bond is restrained and forced to oblige. Before it is done he is recused by an intervening Doctor who rescues him and helps him escape Gallifrey. Bond's sacrifice was enough to resurrect Rassilon, but it was incomplete, rendering Rassilon's mind unstable. The damage Bond took was enough to trigger his regeneration, and as The Doctor takes him back to Earth, he changes once again.
Bond 5. Pierce Brosnan. A new Bond, a new Moneypenny, a new decade. Other than a heartbreaking farewell to Q, his oldest friend since the 1960s, everything goes pretty well for Bond 5 overall. That is until yet again, he and the other Earthbound Timelords are forced back to Gallifrey to fight in the biggest war the universe has ever seen, the Time War. The fate of everything was at stake at this time, and with the walls of reality breaking, gateways to other worlds were created, millions of converging timelines overlapping each other. Bond 5 fights til the final days of the war, until he can't anymore. He is eventually brought down, but this time, with a burst of energy, regenerates into the form of a child. Found by the War Doctor, unconscious on the wastelands of the battlefield, The Doctor, knowing he is about to destroy Gallifrey himself as a means to end the war, decides to save the life of his old friend, as a way of coping with the tragedy that's about to come. He takes Bond to shelter, wipes his memory of his previous lives, and is about to transport him through a gateway to a parallel Earth. Just then, he is stopped by another Timelord, Felix, currently on around his 8th or 9th incarnation. Felix tells the Doctor he will take Bond and watch over him from afar on this new earth, and ensures he follows a similar path to his predecessors, as he's too useful a warrior not to serve under MI6. The Doctor agrees and Felix leaves the orphan child at the Skyfall estate in parallel Scotland, there to be raised by a parallel Bond family and start anew.
Bond 6. Daniel Craig. Whether this Bond is aware that he is alien is unknown. Perhaps he was converted into a human using a Chamelion Arch. Until this Bond is killed, we won't know. Perhaps he'll regenerate. Perhaps he'll finally die and be replaced. We don't know. What we do know is this Bond is from a parallel world, serving a new one, with no recollection of his previous selves. He began as a child and grew to become an agent for MI6. He gains the Double 0 status, and seemingly starts the cycle all over again, without realising he's doing so. The only other Timelord on this Earth is Felix, though Bond isn't aware of this, or that alien life even exists at all. The Moneypenny and Blofeld of this Earth are 100% human. Whatever happens to this Bond in the end, he is safe from the grasp of the Timelords and the travesty of the great war. His problems are his own now, without the interference of higher powers.
Yes... I have a lot of time on my hands...
ShoogaMoogaMan this would sort of make sense if it weren’t for just one thing....
The James Bond film series has been referenced numerous times in the show
@@EditedAF987 I don't know if it was ever mentioned in the classic series but I like to think by the time of the new series, the Daniel Craig films exist, and the events of that parallel world become movies in the Doctors world.
@@EditedAF987 Remembrance of the Daleks reference the tv series Doctor Who itself.
Will be excitedly looking forward to more of these!!!!!
Another huge piece of evidence that goes against the codename theory is 'Commander Bond'. With the possible exception of Lazenby (unless someone else can correct me on this) I can remember at least one time in every actor's tenure where they are explicitly referred to as a Commander - are we supposed to believe all these separate men happened to have the same naval rank? That'd be mighty coincidental! We even see Connery, Moore and Brosnan in uniform. Craig's reference is subtle, it's in Skyfall when M is typing up his obituary, you'll catch it if you pause.
Lazenby is referred to as commander Bond by M's Butler when Bond visits M at his house the Butler knocks on the door an announcing "Commander Bond to see you"
@@ralphroshia9247 Well spotted. That's the full set then!
@@jomo999 Thanks just glad to help
I don't agree with the theory, but if people are stating Bond is a creation, then his Naval Rank would be too.
What if being a Commander in the Navy is a pre-requisite to being given a "license to kill" double-O status. Anyone at a higher rank would be too interested in their military career to accept an MI-6 posting and anyone below Commander either does not qualify or is given the field commission of Commander when they get their double-O status. Simple, it's called "writing."
If you move Diamonds Are Forever to immediately after You Only Live Twice, chronologically swapping it with On Her Majesty's Secret Service, then doesn't this solve most of the continuity issues between Connery and Lazenby?
Nice to see this update from the previous video ! If someone ever tells us that James Bond is a codename now, it is our duty to show him this video ! Now, I can't wait for the other episodes !
Enjoyed this! Looking forward to seeing what other topics you’ll cover!
I think a big part as to why this theory is so popular is that many people just can’t accept the floating timeline. “He’s in his 30s during the Cold War, so how can he still be in his 30s in the late 90s after the Soviet Union collapsed? He can’t not age!” I think canon has become a lot more important to people nowadays, especially since comic book films became popular - with the rise of nerd culture, we’ve seen the rise of the importance of canon (because it is the nerds who care about these things). I think it’s harder to brush these questions as to why hasn’t he aged in 40 years under the rug than it was in the past, especially as we now have home media and can watch the whole series at our leisure. It would’ve been harder for 60s and 70s audiences to have kept track of continuity going into a new Bond film when the last time they saw the preceding film was two years ago (I assume - I was born in the 90s).
Now why the codename theorists haven’t come up with a theory to explain why Bart Simpson has been 10 years old since 1989, I don’t know. Because he’s animated, I guess - as long as Nancy Cartwright’s still kicking about, he’s allowed to not age.
Strangely, a key source for this whole theory is _Casino Royale ‘67_ where David Niven’s Bond berates M for passing his name onto a new agent when he left (wink, Connery, wink) and then giving every MI6 agent the codename ‘James Bond 007’ later on in the film. The fact that film gave us this stupid little “theory” is just another reason for disliking it.
Very glad you enjoyed it BenCol! Very accurate description of nerd culture leading to the increasing importance of canon. I remember being bothered by movie series from the 80's etc like Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street etc and their disregard for any kind of cohesion or serious continuity between a lot of their installments. Now it just seems like the horror sequel mentality is to just ignore everything except the original film and just keep on making sequels to that (I'm looking at you, Texas Chainsaw Masacre!) but I suppose we will be getting Halloween Kills later in the year!
Yet people are happy to go along with a Batman who was the same Bruce Wayne in 1940 as he is today.
Also “the Rock” with nic cage and Sean Connery has a part to play here with John Mason being an obvious bond copy.
I think of it as he's a character, he doesn't exist outside of the films, so you just plop him into the next one without him having aged in between.
And these same people blithely accept a shifting timeline in Marvel Comics!
I've also heard we should think of Dr. No to A View to a Kill as one era of Bond since Connery, Moore & Lazenby are of the same age with Moore looking quite old in his last few films. Then The Living Daylights thru Die Another day is another era with Dalton/Brosnan also being about the same age since a man from the 60s would be too old to spy in the 90s. The. of course comes the Craig era as a full reboot.
Also in Spectre when Bond looks through the stuff from Skyfall he finds a document that says “order of temporary guardianship” and it clearly says at the top “Bond, James” I haven’t heard anyone else mention this, but it’s crystal clear evidence that Bond is a person not a code name
Honestly, my biggest problem with the codename theory is Felix. Unless Leiter is a codename as well, it really can't work. Plus, when the character reappears in Casino Royale, it's clear that this is the first time they've met, which places it in a separate timeline as Dr. No also established that Leiter and Bond had never met. I'm surprised that no one else seems to remember that bit.
Great video. I would like to add to this that there is this British kind of "compound storytelling" wherein a mythos is constructed by numerous people over very long timelines. You see this with Arthurian fantasy, even Lancelot is mostly a self-insert fan fiction character, and the knights change as the morality of the times interpreting them change. We see this with Doctor Who as well, only that time the alterations and regeneration are woven into the narrative itself (yet the continuity is all over the place). As such, James Bond does exactly the same thing with constructing a mythos that is continually refined, reinterpreted and adapted as new writers come and go, and cultural notions coil and shift with the passing of time. Heck, you can even say Zelda does the same thing if you really stretch the concept to the breaking point.
Personally, I consider the originals as one universe. Then Brosnon and Craig as their own. License to Kill seems like a fitting end considering he's not an agent anymore by the end of it.
Just found your site and now I’m addicted. Keep up the great Bond work!
Fantastic video Calvin I’ve just noticed that you didn’t mention the reference of Max Zorin and Jaws in Everything Or Nothing
Ahhh yes I did neglect to mention that reference! That game does somewhat serve as Brosnan's 5th proper Bond adventure and I like to consider it canon in some ways.
@@calvindyson And Nikolai Diavolo (Willem Defoe) was mentored by Max Zorin :D
Eyyyy!!! It's literally just dawned on me that this is part of a new series! Very excited! Also THANK YOU FOR DEBUNKING THIS. It's so unbelievably obvious that Connery - Brosnan are definitely meant to be the same person. Have a feeling this video will be dropped in the inbox of many mistaken people very soon!
I never believed the whole codename theory and that Dr. No to Die Another Day are indeed set in a linear timeline. Then of course the Craig films set in a rebooted timeline, especially now given how No Time to Die ends.
Dude, seriously, you're so effing good at this.
Stumbled upon your channel and binged because you're entertaining as heck and every new video fairly cements that.
Good on you, man :)
ps shut up i haven't been drinking you're drinking
One finds that a lot of Bond films simply tip the hat to Bond's family history or his past to show a warmer and sentimental side to him. It meant to show that he is a layered character.
This is apparent when you see how Vesper is used in the subsequent films as a heartstring to create a poignant moment ( which, in my opinion, works in QoS, and doesn't in Spectre )
Clearly every iteration of Bond wants to borrow from the literature but also wants to something of their own.
Every new actor is a soft reboot of Bond, and I find that they are enjoyable as that.
Just like how new and brilliant directors come in and make their own versions of the Bond novels, it represents what they love about Bond, which makes every movie unique.
The same way every actor puts his own mind into Bond and fuses it with the literature and creates a new character.
As long as the broad stokes of who Bond is, and what he is meant to do remain constant, his life, past, and personality seem to be up for grabs for the next guy to take them along...
I was going to say “Literally watch Skyfall.” But this is much better.
With Diamonds are Forever i've always considered the line about the vacation as a tie in to the fact that while Lazenby wanted to resign, Moneypenny changed his request so he could instead go on vacation, and the line where M says "May I remind you 007, that Blofeld is dead. Finished!" suggesting that his revenge against him was over, which explains his actions on the pre title sequence, and that he should focus on his work from that moment on.
Also in Everything or Nothing there's a connection between Pierce Brosnan and Roger Moore's Bond, when asked about Max Zorin, Bond says "We played bridge once, he lost".
Amazing new series, Calvin. Can't wait for other episodes! Also, good choice to start with the codename theory and how ridiculous it is.
When you realize this guy's in his 20s but he looks 14
I don't think a recast means that the character who played him
Like nobody said that Val Kilmer and George Cloony are diffrnet Batman's just because they don't look like Micheal Keton so why is James Bond a codename
I always thought of Connery to Brosnan as the same James Bond and Craig as the same man just on a alternate time line similar to what happened in Back to the Future part 2
Fantastic video, looking forward to the rest of the series!
Thanks :) glad to hear!
I feel that the Codename theory still stands, even after this video. A big reason I feel like it could stand is because a codename would be more than just the name. The James Bond name would have to have a back story. A man with a dead wife and a family motto of "The World is Not Enough" seems fitting for a spy. Vague enough to allow each spy to fill in their own personalities but a solid rigid outline. The friendship with Felix could be explained by saying each 00 agent has their own American counterpart. It's just a fun fan theory, I enjoy looking at it both ways. It just feels like "its one character" is a wave of the hand explanation
Great idea for a series, can’t wait to see what you cover next! I‘ve never really minded the fact that he goes from his 50s to his 30s or that Judi’s M was in two time lines. I don’t think I really need a convoluted explanation for that in order to enjoy the films.
Finally, FINALLY.
So happy you've made this, Calvin.
i've heard it said that the director of die another day Lee Tamahori intially had a thought or idea or confirming that james bond is a codename by having Sean Connery cameo as a retired 007. thank god that never happened
Brilliant brilliant video Calvin!
It’s funny that there was just very casual continuity until Craig’s films.
But for today’s audiences in this era of long running series filled with connections such as the MCU,
I’m afraid that continuity is going to be a permanent part of the series from here on...
The biggest takeaway is that 007 doesn’t stand up to or warrant scrutiny.
Let's not forget also that in Die Another Day there are several references to previous films, mainly in the form of past gadgets in Q's lab, hinting that Brosnan's Bond remembers the old days.
Great video! Can’t wait for a new myths video
9:46- To be fair, if James Bond was a Time Lord, that would also explain him changing appearances.
"...unless James Bond is a Time Lord." Well, there you go...actually I'd rather believe that than the codename theory!
It does mean accepting Daleks, Cybermen, Silurians, Sontarans, Autons etc. are part of the Bond universe, though, and that just feels wrong to me.
@@BenCol Oh, come on, you can't tell me you wouldn't LOVE to see Bond face off against The Master. (Preferably the Sacha Dhawan version. He practically started off his tenure by playing The Master as a Bond villain anyway.)
Jennifer Schillig Well the Master was originally a Bond villain type - Roger Delgado had the Nehru jacket and the cool demeanour and everything.
So Bond vs. the Master? Yeah, it could work. Just as long as it isn’t Eric fucking Roberts.
But Bond vs. the Macra? Vs. the giant maggots? Vs. the Myrka? No, that’d be a bit too weird for Bond - a giant Earth squid is my limit.
Mary Poppins is a time lord too
There was a script element that would have explained the continuity error in OHMSS that was dropped, perhaps unfortunately so. In early drafts, they were going to explain the difference in appearance between Connery and Lazenby by having Bond undergoing plastic surgery to escape detection. So I imagine it probably would have opened with Lazenby's face mummified in bandages, something akin to Mr. Angelo, and then pulling them off before he goes to rescue Tracy at the beach. For whatever reason they dropped it from the script and we all have to live with the continuity error.
This was really fun Calvin. Thank you
You should make a list of things that you'd include in the *perfect* James Bond movie! "Perfect" is subjective, obviously, but I'd like to hear your opinion. What would your dream Bond film be like?
Lucas Bender I probably would’ve preferred if Roger Moore’s films had a bit more darkness in them like when he kicks the car off the cliff In for your eyes only
Ironically, whenever the makers have tried to make the "perfect combination" film, it seems almost too easy. It's the unique, driven films with their own I character which are remembered. I really do get your feeling for wanting the best of all in one film. I think they tried something like that in Spectre and it was so hokey that I fear them wanting to make "A Bondian" Bond film.
@@herculepoirot1916 If being unique is your definition of a perfect Bond film, then that's your definition of a perfect Bond film. I'm not asking for most overthe top quintessential Bond film. I'm asking for the one he'd love most. What would that film have to leave out/include?
What would be the purpose of the code name? He uses it all the time. Whether he's on the job, at home, with friends. He even uses it on the job against enemies who would be familiar with it as opposed to another codename. In Miami Vice, Don Johnson's character's codename was Sonny Burnett, but his friends and coworkers called him by his real name: Sonny Crockett. See, the codename was to protect him in his civilian life. If James Bond uses his "codename" in both his civilian life and on the job, what good would it be?
My personal explanation is that all of the different actors are in different continuities, but only with slight differences.
This explains why Blofeld doesn’t recognise Lazenby’s Bond - YOLT hasn’t happened (at least not in the same way as Connery’s) to Lazenby’s Bond, but he has still gone through DN, FRWL, and TB.
Moore’s Bond, meanwhile, had his own OHMSS, but the only differences were the particular mannerisms and personality traits that Moore’s portrayal of Bond had.
To suggest that the name James Bond is a codename, must then mean that many other primary characters; Blofeld, and Felix Leiter for instance, must also be code names, as they too have been played by various actors over the years... "We need a 'Blofeld' - you'll do, get out there and kill Bond", "But, I've got hair?", "No matter...get going"....
No it's a ridiculous 'idea'!
You're quite correct; these details are all continuity issues, that were ignored from film to film so as not to draw attention to them!
Nice video :-)
When he is sensitive about his wife's death in multiple movies, multiple actors, you can tell Bond in all the pre-Craig EON movies is the same guy.
As with some others in the comments, I feel like DAF fits well after YOLT and before OHMSS. Nowhere in DAF do they reference Tracy or a wife, and Blofeld changing his appearance in OHMSS (even slightly) makes sense after he looked so different in DAF.
And then makes sense that he is both bald and in a neck brace in FYEO. Swapping DAF and OHMSS not only doesn’t mess with continuity at all, it actually fixes more stuff lol
Also Moneypenny makes a joke about a wedding ring in DAF that comes off as crass if Bond's just become a widower. And M chides Bond for being on leave, just after his wife died!
Good theory in reversing the order of DAF and OHMSS....but then how do you rationalize Bond's angry vendetta at the start of DAF if it's not revenge for Tracy's death?
MeanMrMayo That he wants to get Blofeld? As they don’t event say why he’s doing it, I don’t think it needs much thought. Plus yeah as above, swapping them makes Moneypenny not seem like some insensitive heartless person who wants an engagement ring from someone who just lost their wife lol
I think the most important thing to remember is that these are stories. Absolute fiction based on the world at the time. James Bond is not real, nor are his adventures. The way I see it is that at the start of every Bond film we look at it and go "what if this happened". After all, that's how it all started!!!! Awesome video Calvin!
Another great video Calvin! Keep up the good work and stay safe :)
The Codename thing is a quaint little thing that shouldn't be taken seriously.
However, I am a staunch defender of the "Codename Theory" as a headcanon rather than a theory. Indeed, theory is the wrong word, as it implies it is the intended scheme of the Bond-Saga all a long. I know full well that the films were made as more or less separate entities connected in name and by a series of characteristics (and tropes). If continuity exists, then it's mostly within the tenure of a single Bond-actor (Brosnan-films have a nice little continuity). One could very well argue that there never was the intention of creating a strong continuity at all! However, personally, I like the codename "theory"/headcanon because it addresses the change in appearance and attitude/personality between actors as well as the the fact that James Bond is forever young (or at least still able to carry out his duty like Bond in A View to a Kill...). I like the idea of the secret service looking for a certain "archetype" when assigning 00'-status. In Bond they look for a suave, somewhat sarcastic yet cunning and resourceful person to fill the role. Needless to say, no single person behaves the same, and in my view, Lazenby's Bond represents a young initiate who gets way in over his head, and is ultimately broken, bringing and older and more experienced Bond out of retirement (hence why Connery is so pissed off in the start of Diamonds, I guess). I like the idea that the loss of his wife is "adopted" into the mythos of Bond, so much so to put off the Russians and anyone else who believes that Bond's ultimate weakness must be attachment.And Moore merely pays respects to Tracy, perhaps on behalf of his former colleague. In the same vein, I see Blofeld as more of an archetype/myth, who may or may not exist at all (what with all the Doppelgangers).
I know this headcanon has many holes, and is nowhere near perfect. And I don't really take it too seriously anyhow, as enjoyment of the films precedes any need for rationalising what is going on. I appreciate all the fourth-wall breaks and subtle nods to the audience as they are; something that exists more outside the screen than on it.
I enjoy this type of analysis either way. I don't go around preaching that the codename thing is the definite answer to all inconsistencies, as it itself is inconsistent. We all enjoy Bond in our own way. Only thing I think most agree on is that Casino Royale marks a definitive reboot.
Sorry, I know this comment is old, but I just wanted to say I completely agree with you and I'm happy to find someone that thinks similarly about the whole thing!
I definitely agree that the codename theory is obviously not what the filmmakers intended, so I don't actually believe in it per se. It's obviously not true and there's a bunch of evidence that proves it isn't. But like you said, it's just a fun headcanon thing. The fun comes from trying to make the codename thing work and to come up with different explanations for all the evidence that points against it. Think of it like solving a puzzle. You just have to put all the pieces together. I just think the idea that the Bond movies have all been part of the same timeline since 1962 in real time with different men being Bond is really cool.
I'd even include the Daniel Craig era in this headcanon. It still works for me there too. Having Judi Dench as M in both the Brosnan and Craig films helps as well. There's also a scene in Skyfall where Silva tells Bond that he was stationed in Hong Kong from 1986 to 1997. If we pretend the codename theory timeline is real, it would mean that he started at Hong Kong during Robert Brown's time as M and was abandoned by MI6 in 1997. That was the year Tomorrow Never Dies takes place in when Judi Dench was M, so it still fits. On top of that, the major focus of TND's plot is that Britain and China are being played against each other by Elliot Carver and a war almost breaks out between the two countries. It would make sense that an MI6 agent would be captured and tortured by the Chinese considering what was happening. I know that the main reason why Silva was tortured in Skyfall was most likely due to the Hong Kong handover that happened that year, but again, if we go by the "codename theory timeline", it's not inconceivable that the conflict between the two countries in TND could've been a factor.
Just little things like that. It's all in good fun. I wish more people wouldn't take this "theory" so seriously. Seems like Bond fans get riled up anytime this theory is mentioned, but if you treat it as purely a headcanon thing, it's pretty fun to think about!
EDIT: I also wanted to mention that in this proposed timeline, I see the Blofeld from FRWL to FYEO to be the original REAL Blofeld. I see the Blofeld from 2015's Spectre to be a "copycat" Blofeld. We also learn that Blofeld isn't even his real name in the film, so it makes sense. Maybe it was a "passing of the torch" kind of thing, so to speak.
What about when Silva serenaded Bond with “underneath the mango tree” in Skyfall
Love how you included some of the 007 nightfire soundtrack in the background💯💯 Excellent content!
My theory is that Diamonds was supposed to be pre-OHSS which could explain the neckbrace in OHSS and later For Your Eyes Only
I wouldn't mind "Diamonds are Forever" being written out of the continuity. And "Spectre", for that matter. Those movies bring little to the series besides devaluing Blofeld.
I actually like the idea of connecting the Craig era to the original timeline by placing all previous movies between Quantum and Skyfall. Whenever I watch the Craig films in order, I find it frustrating that just when Bond has gone through enough character development to be regarded as fully fleshed-out post-origin-story 007, they jump ahead to him being already old and washed up. It's like they skip over all the good stuff. So maybe I should watch the movies in that order next time I do a full Bond series marathon. Maybe I would enjoy Skyfall more if it came at the back of all the classic Bond adventures instead of right after the origin story.
I totally agree. Craig's Bond bookends all the other Bonds.
It would have been better if it were, though. Though, granted, either way he's a famous spy, and a famous spy is doing spying wrong.
Holy remake, Calvin!
There is also another thing: a codename is not a name of character (James Bond). The codename is a number in this case 007. On the beginning of Anthony's Horowitz "Forever and a day" (based on Ian Flemings notes and which is prequel to "Casino Royale") there is clearly stated on the beginning of the book "007 is dead". And then they bring James Bond who take over a codename and begin his first mission for MI6.
It makes sense that after 007 dies or retires, someone else gets that number. But obviously not the name.
Yeah, you can't apply anal 2020 geek continuity rules to movies from the 60's, 70's, 80's... they really didn't care as much back then! They just threw in an "other feller" wink to camera and got on with it, one movie at a time, as you said. But he's clearly the same guy. They take more care over it now because they know the fans are geekier and paying attention (and yes they might want to reboot the universe and create a new timeline now and then) but the general rule of thumb with these movies has always been they are set in the present day, whenever it happens to be, and are about the same man played by whoever happens to be Bond at the time. And his personal history more or less shifts through time with him. And don't overthink it! ;-)
Perfect comment Gav, you’ve hit the nail on the head!
Continuity be damned, I like the idea that, rather than it being a codename, MI6 just happens to have a lot of agents whose birth names just happen to be "James Bond"
Dracula, Frankenstein, Tarzan, Sherlock Holmes and... James Bond. All the immortal cultural franchises have shifting timelines and continuity. I believe The Code name theory is basically a product of fan fiction. Everyone is now playing "The Great Game."
Love this !!!! 🇨🇦🍸 Jeff - great analysis - great Video.