So, is the For Your Eyes Only teaser taking place in 1969?

Gassy Man

We see Bond in front of Tracy's tombstone, which reads 1969. Later, "Blofeld" is wearing a neck brace, presumably the result of his injury in On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Are we therefore supposed to believe that this sequence, which has nothing to do with the rest of the film, takes place soon after the events of the other film? Of course, Moore's Bond looks exactly the same as he does in the rest of the film, which presumably takes place in 1981.

Also, why is Bond wearing white socks in some moments? Or are those the insides of his trouser legs?

MilleniumForce

But if diamonds are forever takes place in 1971 - how could he survive to do that? The only reason he was in a wheelchair was because 'apparently' DAF is not a part of the official series!?!?

James Suzuki

No. I take it as this. There are two separate Blofeld Timelines.
The first one is the Connery universe. In which Bond finally meets Blofeld in YOLT only for him to escape. He then hunts him down, angry to have lost him, in DAF. OHMSS never happened.
The second is Lazenby and Moore.
Bond first meets Blofeld in OHMSS. And after he kills his wife. Bond changes mood. Becoming world-wearier and with a humourous look on the world. This is where the Moore films come in. Until Bond finally sees Blofeld again in 1981, and disposes of him.

AlphaOmegaSin

MilleniumForce wrote:

But if diamonds are forever takes place in 1971 - how could he survive to do that? The only reason he was in a wheelchair was because 'apparently' DAF is not a part of the official series!?!?

I think John Glenn once said that he believes DAF never took place, or something similar.

Sir Hillary Bray

I prefer to think of it this way:

We never actually see Blofeld killed in the bathosub. Remember, the original script (which was actually shot, I believe) had him surviving the oil rig and escaping to Lake Mead, where Bond finally catches up with him. In any event, I assume he survives DAF. Perhaps he was hurt badly enough that he needed a wheelchair, or maybe he simply aged in the intervening 10 years that it took him to finally get enough resources to go after Bond.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!

AlphaOmegaSin

Or Blofeld may be a Time Lord? :v

MilleniumForce

Sir Hillary Bray wrote:

I prefer to think of it this way:

We never actually see Blofeld killed in the bathosub. Remember, the original script (which was actually shot, I believe) had him surviving the oil rig and escaping to Lake Mead, where Bond finally catches up with him. In any event, I assume he survives DAF. Perhaps he was hurt badly enough that he needed a wheelchair, or maybe he simply aged in the intervening 10 years that it took him to finally get enough resources to go after Bond.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!

I don't think it was shot, wasn't there a problem with the salt mine owners not allowing them to film there? It's quite a disappointing demise in DAF.

AlphaOmegaSin

MilleniumForce wrote:

Sir Hillary Bray wrote:

I prefer to think of it this way:

We never actually see Blofeld killed in the bathosub. Remember, the original script (which was actually shot, I believe) had him surviving the oil rig and escaping to Lake Mead, where Bond finally catches up with him. In any event, I assume he survives DAF. Perhaps he was hurt badly enough that he needed a wheelchair, or maybe he simply aged in the intervening 10 years that it took him to finally get enough resources to go after Bond.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!

I don't think it was shot, wasn't there a problem with the salt mine owners not allowing them to film there? It's quite a disappointing demise in DAF.

The Mine Owner refused Permission to film there

Gassy Man

I noticed that Roger Moore's hair appears just a bit shorter in the teaser than in the rest of the film. It could be the way it was combed, but I still wonder if we're supposed to believe all of that is taking place in 1969 or 1970.

Firemass

AlphaOmegaSin wrote:

MilleniumForce wrote:

But if diamonds are forever takes place in 1971 - how could he survive to do that? The only reason he was in a wheelchair was because 'apparently' DAF is not a part of the official series!?!?

I think John Glenn once said that he believes DAF never took place, or something similar.

Trying to form a plausible timeline out of the Bond series is not logical.

I see FYEO as picking up where OHMSS left off. Not in a literal chronological sense, but more in terms of shifting the tone back to Fleming and appeasing all the OHMSS fans that were writing letters to Cubby.

by the way, what does iSo mean ?

AlphaOmegaSin

I've wondered that as well?

Gassy Man

Ha ha, sorry, a typo. Fixed it.

James Suzuki

Gassy Man wrote:

I noticed that Roger Moore's hair appears just a bit shorter in the teaser than in the rest of the film. It could be the way it was combed, but I still wonder if we're supposed to believe all of that is taking place in 1969 or 1970.

That's a possibilty. It could of been pre-LALD. But firemass has a point Its illogical trying to get a linear storyline. They each their own adventure. (Apaprt from CR and QOS)

Gassy Man

The thing is, the date on the tombstone directly correlates to On Her Majesty's Secret Service. I'd have an easier time believing the teaser takes place right after that film and then the rest of For Your Eyes Only picks up a decade later.

Now, of course, there's the issue of Diamonds are Forever. Where would it fit? We really don't know for certain that Bond is after Blofeld to avenge Tracy. She is never mentioned. And since the film opens ostensibly in Japan, it seems more like it's meant to be a sequel to Your Only Live Twice, as though Bond is after Blofeld for having escaped at the end of that film. So, if the films were not taken chronologically but in terms of the events onscreen, and also ignored the books, they could fit like this:

Your Only Live Twice (Bond meets Blofeld for the first time, but he escapes.)
Diamonds are Forever (Bond goes after Blofeld, nearly defeats him, but he escapes again.)
On Her Majesty's Secret Service (Bond goes after Blofeld "in disguise," but is discovered, and Blofeld escapes a third time.)
For Your Eyes Only (In the teaser sequence, Bond finally defeats Blofeld).

This would require a lot of squinting to avoid the anachronisms of cars, fashion, and so forth. It would also require us to believe that Bond's disguise is so great, Blofeld doesn't recognize him in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, but we're already supposed to believe that from the other films that included Blofeld, starting with From Russia with Love. Given that Blofeld is keenly aware of him there, I don't understand why people only point to the later films as having a problem with their not recognizing each other.

James Suzuki

Gassy Man wrote:

The thing is, the date on the tombstone directly correlates to On Her Majesty's Secret Service. I'd have an easier time believing the teaser takes place right after that film and then the rest of For Your Eyes Only picks up a decade later.

Now, of course, there's the issue of Diamonds are Forever. Where would it fit? We really don't know for certain that Bond is after Blofeld to avenge Tracy. She is never mentioned. And since the film opens ostensibly in Japan, it seems more like it's meant to be a sequel to Your Only Live Twice, as though Bond is after Blofeld for having escaped at the end of that film. So, if the films were not taken chronologically but in terms of the events onscreen, and also ignored the books, they could fit like this:

Your Only Live Twice (Bond meets Blofeld for the first time, but he escapes.)
Diamonds are Forever (Bond goes after Blofeld, nearly defeats him, but he escapes again.)
On Her Majesty's Secret Service (Bond goes after Blofeld "in disguise," but is discovered, and Blofeld escapes a third time.)
For Your Eyes Only (In the teaser sequence, Bond finally defeats Blofeld).

This would require a lot of squinting to avoid the anachronisms of cars, fashion, and so forth. It would also require us to believe that Bond's disguise is so great, Blofeld doesn't recognize him in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, but we're already supposed to believe that from the other films that included Blofeld, starting with From Russia with Love. Given that Blofeld is keenly aware of him there, I don't understand why people only point to the later films as having a problem with their not recognizing each other.

I think the YOLT twice to DAF jump is correct in their thinking. -{
Trying to ignore OHMSS

Gassy Man

I think you're right, haha. But you know, it also makes sense for On Her Majesty's Secret Service to be taking place after Diamonds are Forever. Bond has been chasing Blofeld for two years, and both of them are, in their own way, tired of the game. Blofeld seems to be making his big play to get out of the crime business. It doesn't make a lot of sense for him to go back to it right afterward. If we can simply reimagine the aesthetics of clothing and three different Bonds, haha, it's not too hard to see a continuity if the films are arranged this way.

AlphaOmegaSin

It makes me think about who would play Blofeld if the original Idea for TSWLM went ahead?

Thunderbird 2

Oh this is a can of temporal worms! Because of timeline headaches in Star Trek, Stargate SG1 and Babylon 5, I keep this easy for me. Each Bond actor represents a mini reboot. Except Mr Craig, as CR-06 is a full scale Reboot. Almost a Pair-Of-Boot.

So I see the opening scene of FYEO, as a reflection of events from OHMSS, but from a Sir Roger perspective. This also links to TSWLM, where Anya references Bond is a widower. Ie, the PCS is in 81. Plus Bond wears the exact same 3 piece suit to see Tanner. I think.

Re DAF, I see Sir Sean's Bond as having loved Tracy, but they didn't get married before she died. He was very flippant about wedlock to Kissy, "Think again please, you gave false name to priest!" So I can see his Bond loving Tracy, but not committing to her. So he would still want vengeance for her death. (Cue the "Where's Blofeld?!")

The unfortunate Q lab scene in DAD could scupper this theory, except I just assume Mr Brosnan's Bond has been very busy in a very short space of time!

AlphaOmegaSin

Trying to make Sense of the whole Bond Time line has never been a high Priority with me

MilleniumForce

He doesn't seem to be going for revenge of Tracy in DAF. Someone who cared that much might have mentioned it later. However, with the whole surgery thing originally planned for OHMSS, maybe it goes YOLT, DAF, then bond has surgery, OHMSS, and then he ages a bit and becomes Roger Moore (they do look a little similar). So the start of FYEO takes place between OHMSS and LALD.

AlphaOmegaSin

That does seem the most plausible Theory -{

But what about Dalton and Brosnan?

MilleniumForce

AlphaOmegaSin wrote:

That does seem the most plausible Theory -{

But what about Dalton and Brosnan?

Now you have to be me to get that - I've always thought TLD is a reboot of the franchise. As that is the case, dalton never made a movie after brosnan, so we don't have to worry about continuity.

AlphaOmegaSin

TLD was originally going to be an Origin Story, so yes -{

Thunderbird 2

(Takes two headache pills with water)

Oh Crap! I'd better get this glass back to the SaBS!

Firemass

As for the PTS taking place several years before the rest of the film? Well, that's an interesting thought.

Do you think the "9 year gap" between the Goldeneye PTS and main film was appropriate or heavy handed?

Personally, I'd probably enjoy the film even more without knowing that 9 years had passed. Brosnan looks exactly the same…

Blackleiter

Firemass wrote:

Personally, I'd probably enjoy the film even more without knowing that 9 years had passed. Brosnan looks exactly the same…

That jumped out at me immediately - Bond hadn't aged a day in nine years! Hell, he didn't even change his hairstyle! )

hehadlotsofguts

The chopper that picked up Bond looked too modern for 1969.

LPFilms

Gassy Man wrote:

The thing is, the date on the tombstone directly correlates to On Her Majesty's Secret Service. I'd have an easier time believing the teaser takes place right after that film and then the rest of For Your Eyes Only picks up a decade later.

Now, of course, there's the issue of Diamonds are Forever. Where would it fit? We really don't know for certain that Bond is after Blofeld to avenge Tracy. She is never mentioned. And since the film opens ostensibly in Japan, it seems more like it's meant to be a sequel to Your Only Live Twice, as though Bond is after Blofeld for having escaped at the end of that film. So, if the films were not taken chronologically but in terms of the events onscreen, and also ignored the books, they could fit like this:

Your Only Live Twice (Bond meets Blofeld for the first time, but he escapes.)
Diamonds are Forever (Bond goes after Blofeld, nearly defeats him, but he escapes again.)
On Her Majesty's Secret Service (Bond goes after Blofeld "in disguise," but is discovered, and Blofeld escapes a third time.)
For Your Eyes Only (In the teaser sequence, Bond finally defeats Blofeld).

This would require a lot of squinting to avoid the anachronisms of cars, fashion, and so forth. It would also require us to believe that Bond's disguise is so great, Blofeld doesn't recognize him in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, but we're already supposed to believe that from the other films that included Blofeld, starting with From Russia with Love. Given that Blofeld is keenly aware of him there, I don't understand why people only point to the later films as having a problem with their not recognizing each other.

Your timeline is the most logical I've heard. Blofeld's different. Something to back it up even further:
Donald's Blofeld could owe his look to a failed attempt at the surgery his doubles went through in DAF. We get shots of Blofeld's hair and facial silhouette in FRWL and TB while Dawson was playing him, and we can clearly see that he has some hair and more muscular face. Blofeld has surgery again and gain his classic Dawson look from the earlier two films once DAF comes around. Then he takes on another look in OHMSS to further conceal his identity.

As for Blofeld not recognizing Bond, it can be taken the way it is, as a plothole, or maybe consider that the Blofeld in either YOLT or OHMSS is a clone like his ones in DAF, which is why he is unaware that the Sir Hillary he met is really Bond undercover.

MilleniumForce

As for Blofeld not recognizing Bond, it can be taken the way it is, as a plothole, or maybe consider that the Blofeld in either YOLT or OHMSS is a clone like his ones in DAF, which is why he is unaware that the Sir Hillary he met is really Bond undercover.

Let's just all agree on this - every Blofeld is a clone. Real Blofeld is never revealed.......

Firemass

hehadlotsofguts wrote:

The chopper that picked up Bond looked too modern for 1969.

As Gassy Man pointed out in his other thread, it's nearly the same Bell 206 helicopter that was used in OHMSS.

On a similar train of thought, the Beckton Gasworks plant closed in 1970. So if the PTS was taking place in 1969 the plant would not have been abandoned.

Gassy Man

LPFilms wrote:

Gassy Man wrote:

The thing is, the date on the tombstone directly correlates to On Her Majesty's Secret Service. I'd have an easier time believing the teaser takes place right after that film and then the rest of For Your Eyes Only picks up a decade later.

Now, of course, there's the issue of Diamonds are Forever. Where would it fit? We really don't know for certain that Bond is after Blofeld to avenge Tracy. She is never mentioned. And since the film opens ostensibly in Japan, it seems more like it's meant to be a sequel to Your Only Live Twice, as though Bond is after Blofeld for having escaped at the end of that film. So, if the films were not taken chronologically but in terms of the events onscreen, and also ignored the books, they could fit like this:

Your Only Live Twice (Bond meets Blofeld for the first time, but he escapes.)
Diamonds are Forever (Bond goes after Blofeld, nearly defeats him, but he escapes again.)
On Her Majesty's Secret Service (Bond goes after Blofeld "in disguise," but is discovered, and Blofeld escapes a third time.)
For Your Eyes Only (In the teaser sequence, Bond finally defeats Blofeld).

This would require a lot of squinting to avoid the anachronisms of cars, fashion, and so forth. It would also require us to believe that Bond's disguise is so great, Blofeld doesn't recognize him in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, but we're already supposed to believe that from the other films that included Blofeld, starting with From Russia with Love. Given that Blofeld is keenly aware of him there, I don't understand why people only point to the later films as having a problem with their not recognizing each other.

Your timeline is the most logical I've heard. Blofeld's different. Something to back it up even further:
Donald's Blofeld could owe his look to a failed attempt at the surgery his doubles went through in DAF. We get shots of Blofeld's hair and facial silhouette in FRWL and TB while Dawson was playing him, and we can clearly see that he has some hair and more muscular face. Blofeld has surgery again and gain his classic Dawson look from the earlier two films once DAF comes around. Then he takes on another look in OHMSS to further conceal his identity.

As for Blofeld not recognizing Bond, it can be taken the way it is, as a plothole, or maybe consider that the Blofeld in either YOLT or OHMSS is a clone like his ones in DAF, which is why he is unaware that the Sir Hillary he met is really Bond undercover.

A very interesting idea with the plastic surgery.

If I recall correctly, Blofeld is pretty much on to Bond from the beginning in the novel. He's constantly snooping and trying to make Bond slip up. The film doesn't suggest this as much, but the novel makes it seem like Bond's disguise, no matter how great, is still very, very thin.