-3

Are there any James Bond movies which have a series?

Example: Superman 1, Superman 2, Superman 3...

I mean the same James Bond movie is continued with the same actor and other stars in later released movie series.

If no, what could be the reasons?

8
  • 6
    I'm sorry, but I am quite confused by this question. Clearly the same actor has been used more than once - there have only been 6 actors over 25 movies. Also a number of supporting character have had the same actors ... M, Moneypenny, Felix Leiter. So the question appears to be a very obvious "yes" in terms of the actors. So what do you really mean by "the same James Bond movie is continued"? – iandotkelly Sep 19 '20 at 14:13
  • 1
    Because while Superman 1, 2 and 3 have some characters that continue, they are stand alone movies in their own right, and only have minimal elements that continue between them. – iandotkelly Sep 19 '20 at 14:17
  • 1
    No. Through the movie Octopussy, the films were based James Bond novels by Ian Fleming. There have been no numbered sequels, and no need -- James Bond is all that is required to market the films. – dbugger Sep 19 '20 at 15:10
  • 1
    So you're asking why wasn't there a Goldfinger 2 or a Mooonraker 2 ? – iandotkelly Sep 19 '20 at 15:42
  • 1
    The closest I can think of a storyline continuation from one movie to another is Bonds singleminded manhunt of Blofeld at the start of Diamonds Are Forever, which (although IIRC not explicitly stated) I always associated with Blofeld killing Bonds wife at the end of the previous movie OHMSS. Spoiling the continuity of course, is that Sean Connery was Bond in Diamonds, after Lazenby in OHMSS. – racraman Sep 21 '20 at 10:24
4

The entire Bond series is a set of recurring themes, heroes, assistants and helpers and recurring villains, but it has never been a single plot line; because it was initially based on books which also weren't necessarily sequential in plot, they were in essence simply episodic. I'm sure this has been a part of its continued success. Every time an actor gets tired, they're replaced with a fresh one and off we all go again.

The villain Ernst Blofeld for instance has appeared in some form in nine Bond movies, played by seven actors… but they don't really make any kind of continuous plot.

There has always been some hint of continuity across the movies, but really they can all be viewed as stand-alone. You never have to have watched any other Bond movie to watch another. You may miss some easter eggs, but usually nothing truly significant that you have to know already.
This continuity aspect is well-covered in Is there any continuity between James Bond movies that have different actors portraying the title character?

4
  • 2
    Those whom the gods would destroy they first ask to make sense of the Bond continuum. – jeffronicus Sep 19 '20 at 15:55
  • Thanks Jeff. Do you feel the James Bond movie series could have been created with a story line matching with the same sequence and the main character being played by the same actor? – Prashant Akerkar Sep 19 '20 at 16:18
  • 2
    Anything could have been done… but it wasn't. As for 'the same actor'… Sean Connery is now 90 years old & retired from the business 15 years ago. If you can imagine the poor guy having to jump off trains & helicopters to grapple with the baddies… ermmm… sure. – Tetsujin Sep 19 '20 at 16:21
  • Ohh. That last comment feels a little more poignant today than it did last year:\ RIP Sean. – Tetsujin Nov 5 '20 at 18:00
4

The simple answer is no, not really.

The more interesting answer is... more interesting.

First of, Superman I and II were actually filmed with the intention of being a two part story. Superman III and IV were numbered because the the first two set a precedent - and while there are characters in common with the first two movies, there isn't really all that much continuity. You can certainly watch the third and fourth movies without the other two.

Onto Bond then.

Bond was a character in books before he was in movies. Fleming didn't really write for continuity, and the books were rather short, limiting detail around the Bond character.

The first movie, Dr No, was not the first book. In fact, it took until the twenty-first movie until they did make the first book into a movie, Casino Royale.

For the most part, the first twenty movies are pretty much watchable all own their own, with very little ongoing story development, even though many of the characters return each movie (M, Q, Moneypenny, Blofeld) - although there is some little continuity here and there - the most well known thread being Bond's wife. Overall, though, these movies are fairly independent.

However, since Casino Royale and Daniel Craig taking on Bond, the last few movies have resulted in a developing thread. In Casino Royale, we see a fresh Bond get his 00 licence. Quantum of Solace has him follow a trail laid down at the end of the previous movie. Skyfall alludes to a shadow organisation, and sees in a new M. Spectre reveals the shadow organisation, brings in threads laid down in Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace. Finally, the latest movie, No Time to Die (yet to be released) will apparently tie any loose threads ready for a new actor to come in and take in the role.

8
  • 1
    There was actually an off-canon Casino Royale released in 1967, starring Peter Sellers & David Niven. It's rather weird & doesn't need to be watched as part of the Bond 'main' series. – Tetsujin Sep 20 '20 at 6:57
  • Thank you. As you mentioned "Fleming didn't really write for continuity, and the books were rather short, limiting detail around the Bond character." I mean, had Ian Fleming would have written some novels which could have continuity then there would had been James Bond Series. – Prashant Akerkar Sep 20 '20 at 7:24
  • Prashant - You seem to want to change history to fit your theory. Of course, had Fleming written the books as a continual story then the films might have done too. He didn't, so they aren't. – Tetsujin Sep 20 '20 at 8:36
  • Thanks. Do you feel future James Bond movies may have a production series I,II,III ... chances? – Prashant Akerkar Sep 20 '20 at 14:56
  • 1
    You still seem to be insisting on some change to the established protocol. Why should there be to one of the most successful franchises of all time? New Bond movies don't even have titles as they're being made, only numbers, but those don't need to be in the public perception. When I was working on the last one it was just called "B25" - i.stack.imgur.com/YBwnv.jpg - Bond movies are a huge deal, worldwide. They don't need to be changed into numbered episodes like a bad horror movie franchise. They don't even ever use the name Bond in the release title… that's how big it is. – Tetsujin Sep 20 '20 at 16:12

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .