Bond in the Time Machine

jorgemjorgem DTWPosts: 98MI6 Agent
What do you think about seeing James Bond in the time machine?

We have already seen his car go underwater, go invisible, played as a remote controlled car, fly, use as a sled, built in missiles, x-rays, ejector seat, anti-pursuit weapons and bulletproof devices. So what's next? Do you want the Q-branch make Bond's Aston-Martin (which is built in time-traveling device) go back in time in order to escape the bad guys? Compare DAD, the car was only temporary invisible, but with a time traveling device, Bond's car would dissappear in the present times. But where in time would he go? 1962? 1969, the day he got married for only a brief time?

Maybe he should go back to 1969. The film title will never be called Bond To The Future. Major Boothroyd (Q) meets Doc Brown.

James Bond with a mix of Back to the Future.

Comments

  • Thunderbird 2Thunderbird 2 East of Cardiff, Wales.Posts: 2,818MI6 Agent
    edited April 2009
    I speak as a fan of Trek, Stargate, Bab5, The X Files, Thunderbirds...

    Bond dabbles in Science Feasable. Not outright Science Fiction. (The carplane from TMWTGG being a frownable exception)
    This is Thunderbird 2, how can I be of assistance?
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,792MI6 Agent
    I love si-fi but not in Bond sure it's science based for some of the stories and tec etc,But not overly full on si-fi.Just look at Indy and the crystal skull for me anyway the alien story line just didn't fit with the other Indy movies.
    "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
  • minigeffminigeff EnglandPosts: 7,884MI6 Agent
    i think bond has, and always should, have some close relation to reality.

    time travelling bond/ teleporting bond etc would just kill it instantly.

    i wanna see bond driving fast cars and shooting bad guys in a world i recognise, not some place where warp drive exists.
    'Force feeding AJB humour and banter since 2009'
    Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
    www.helpforheroes.org.uk
    www.cancerresearchuk.org
  • walther p99walther p99 NJPosts: 3,416MI6 Agent
    jorgem wrote:
    What do you think about seeing James Bond in the time machine?

    We have already seen his car go underwater, go invisible, played as a remote controlled car, fly, use as a sled, built in missiles, x-rays, ejector seat, anti-pursuit weapons and bulletproof devices. So what's next? Do you want the Q-branch make Bond's Aston-Martin (which is built in time-traveling device) go back in time in order to escape the bad guys? Compare DAD, the car was only temporary invisible, but with a time traveling device, Bond's car would dissappear in the present times. But where in time would he go? 1962? 1969, the day he got married for only a brief time?

    Maybe he should go back to 1969. The film title will never be called Bond To The Future. Major Boothroyd (Q) meets Doc Brown.

    James Bond with a mix of Back to the Future.

    No
  • JADE66JADE66 Posts: 238MI6 Agent
    jorgem wrote:
    What do you think about seeing James Bond in the time machine?

    We have already seen his car go underwater, go invisible, played as a remote controlled car, fly, use as a sled, built in missiles, x-rays, ejector seat, anti-pursuit weapons and bulletproof devices. So what's next? Do you want the Q-branch make Bond's Aston-Martin (which is built in time-traveling device) go back in time in order to escape the bad guys? Compare DAD, the car was only temporary invisible, but with a time traveling device, Bond's car would dissappear in the present times. But where in time would he go? 1962? 1969, the day he got married for only a brief time?

    Maybe he should go back to 1969. The film title will never be called Bond To The Future. Major Boothroyd (Q) meets Doc Brown.

    James Bond with a mix of Back to the Future.

    Dear God, NO. I sincerely hope this is a joke.
    DAD and Moonraker were bad enough.
    I was delighted when Casino Royale and Daniel Craig brought Bond back to the real world.
    PLEASE, leave him there. No more sci-fi shlock.
    PLEASE, tell us you're joking. :# :# :#
  • thesecretagentthesecretagent CornwallPosts: 2,151MI6 Agent
    No.
    Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:

    http://apbateman.com
  • jorgemjorgem DTWPosts: 98MI6 Agent
    JADE66 wrote:
    jorgem wrote:
    What do you think about seeing James Bond in the time machine?

    We have already seen his car go underwater, go invisible, played as a remote controlled car, fly, use as a sled, built in missiles, x-rays, ejector seat, anti-pursuit weapons and bulletproof devices. So what's next? Do you want the Q-branch make Bond's Aston-Martin (which is built in time-traveling device) go back in time in order to escape the bad guys? Compare DAD, the car was only temporary invisible, but with a time traveling device, Bond's car would dissappear in the present times. But where in time would he go? 1962? 1969, the day he got married for only a brief time?

    Maybe he should go back to 1969. The film title will never be called Bond To The Future. Major Boothroyd (Q) meets Doc Brown.

    James Bond with a mix of Back to the Future.

    Dear God, NO. I sincerely hope this is a joke.
    DAD and Moonraker were bad enough.
    I was delighted when Casino Royale and Daniel Craig brought Bond back to the real world.
    PLEASE, leave him there. No more sci-fi shlock.
    PLEASE, tell us you're joking. :# :# :#

    I wonder what happens if Bond went back to 1969 to save his wife from getting killed...
  • Mister WhiteMister White The NetherlandsPosts: 814MI6 Agent
    jorgem wrote:

    I wonder what happens if Bond went back to 1969 to save his wife from getting killed...

    Monstrous reapers would be unleashed upon the Earth...:v

    Sorry, that was for the Doctor Who fans amongst us.

    As has been said by others:

    No.

    Not a good idea.
    "Christ, I miss the Cold War."
Sign In or Register to comment.