[ SECRET POST #6266 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6266 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.

































Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 40 secrets from Secret Submission Post #896.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

They really don’t, though. Just make another movie and pretend the last one didn’t happen. It’s not as if the franchise has ever been particularly hung up on continuity.

[(Anonymous)]

+1

They literally shouldn't even address it. Just make a James Bond movie.

[(Anonymous)]

That isn't true, they've always observed continuity and maintained the conceit that all Bonds have been the same Bond. All Moneypennys the same one, but each M was explicitly a new M with different habits. The Craig Bond movies abandons that conceit in favor of a stupid Internet fanfad to franchises detriment.

[(Anonymous)]

To the extent that they've used that conceit, it's been incredibly marginal to the series and what's going on in any given movie. It is just not an important part of the series. Each movie is basically standalone. Canon and continuity is not an important part of it. Ignoring something from an earlier movie is not going to make a James Bond movie worse. Finding some elaborate way to fit a new James Bond movie into 'canon' absolutely *will* make it worse.

In short:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bn-ZwI_jUfo