007 Chronological Viewing Order

[Dallas Kinard]

"cos there are people who write their fiction, have plans for their fiction, have a CANON, damn even the Bible has one."

Not sure what the 66 historical books of the Judeo-Christian Bible have to do with a completely fictional movie series. But that's a debate for a different forum. People can write FICTION, have plans for their FICTION and have a "canon" (whatever that means anymore) and still not give 100% clear cut answers about every facet of said fiction to the fans. When this info isn't provided, we fans speculate and there isn't a dang thing wrong with that.


"it's called LOGIC, it0s teached in school with math."

But math isn't fiction. Math is objective. Fictional stories about not real spy organizations aren't held to the same standards as a Math class lol


"If 2 possibilities are real and opposite to eachothers, one of them MUST be true.""

Yep, in the real world this is absolutely true. Two things can't be true in the same way at once....but we are talking about fiction my friend.


"could u have said it before? Instead of treating it as it is canon?"

I'm using my head to interpret what I watch and then coming to conclusions based on the evidence I gather within the films themselves. I'll be like James Gunn here and say "That's my canon". That word is SO annoying at this point. No freaking wonder creatives avoid it. It brings out the worst in these fandoms.


We could have avoided all this."

You mean avoiding you coming into my thread and blasting my ideas you so vehemently disagree with? You are clearly just here to prove a point and not add anything of value to the timeline.


"people who made it have a clear canon, so you wanna go to them and say "I don't care what you did?"."

What do you mean by "clear canon"? Are you saying there are zero plot holes/continuity issues? Fans like me are just trying to make sense of the world we are presented with. And there's not a thing wrong with that. I'm not saying to anyone who worked on these movies anything at all. Heck, you should be upset every time a movie deviates from the source material because apparently the filmmakers didn't care what the author wrote because they did their own thing. Do you hate ALL movies/shows based on books/comics/graphic novels because of this?


"They made the movies, they know how the story went."

I have eyes, ears and a brain. I can watch a movie and come to my own conclusions based on what is presented to me.


"didn't ignore it, just stated he isn't refearing to that, as HE IS SMILING AND LOOKING AT THE CAMERA, in a real scene why should he smile? And to who since there was no one?"

How do you know who he is or isn't referring to? And what does him smiling and facing towards the "camera" that doesn't really exist in universe have anything to do with it? People talk to themselves in stressful situations all of the time lol Is that really an argument you're making? Bond can't talk to himself!!! Checkmate!! smh



"smt = something; for smt that doesn't exist I mean the brainwashing theory."

I mean, the brainwashing theory DOES exist....lol plenty of people ascribe to it being a possibility. I'm one of them. So I'm living proof that the theory exists.


"counting all the evidence leading to one theory vs. official canon."

So what is the "official canon" then bud? And how did you come to the conclusion?


"oh yeah, there is the comic timeline. the novels timeline and the Reboot timeline (daniel craig). and THAT LINE IS A 4TH WALL BREAK!"

So multiverse then. Cool. And hey, if you want to believe Lazenby is Deadpool, go right ahead buddy. More power to ya. What you cannot do, is tell others how to take the dialogue. That is up to the viewer and I'll die on that frickin hill.


"definition of headcannon for you, buddy:

"Elements and interpretations of a fictional universe accepted by an individual or small group of fans, but not necessarily found within or supported by the official canon. quotations"

According to who? And even if you just got this from Google, I actually agree with it. Let's break it down. I'll add emphasis where needed to make my point.

Elements and interpretations of a fictional universe accepted by an individual or small (or medium, or large) group of fans, but not necessarily found within or supported by the 'official' canon."

"In my own headcanon of Rocky IV, Ivan Drago is a Russian Mafia enforcer instead of a Red Army Captain.""

Is this what you really believe? And if so, what evidence within the film itself led you to come to this conclusion? You could be right, I'm just looking for any and all evidence within the film itself before I decide to go with your idea. That's how my 007 rationale works.


"it's not how i want to call it, languages have dictionaires, and words have a meaning."

Do words change/evolve over time? Are definitions subjective?


"headcanon again."

Sigh, according to you yet again.


"i'm not believing it, it's official canon, i'm not making the stuff up, it's official."

I'm not "making stuff up" either. Heck, the brainwashing thing could be wrong. I'm convinced that James Bond is an alias, because the film OHMSS tells me that. The brainwashing theory is just a way that makes sense in universe to rationalize it. I'll die on this fricking hill.

"not when people or creators of a word makes an established canon."

Define "established canon". Can something "established" ever be amended or change?

"I can't say Daredevil isn't canon to the MCU, cos it's an established canon works by it's creators.... Then why they have one man checking on everything? For sport?"

When talking fiction you can say whatever you want. Plenty of folks reject the Netflix series as being "canon" to the MCU. And guess what, more power to them. It's all fiction. I can disagree, but that's like saying I disagree that blue is the best color. It's all a preference. And what do you mean by "one man checking on everything"? If you mean Kevin F, he gets paid so it's not "for sport" lol

 

[Pro Bot]

When talking fiction you can say whatever you want. Plenty of folks reject the Netflix series as being "canon" to the MCU. And guess what, more power to them. It's all fiction. I can disagree, but that's like saying I disagree that blue is the best color. It's all a preference. And what do you mean by "one man checking on everything"? If you mean Kevin F, he gets paid so it's not "for sport" lol

 

[Dallas Kinard]

View attachment 2900

lol I may disagree with them but again, it's all make believe soooo.

 

[Jamesctl]

The theories are interesting, but it is important to agree on one point. I prefer the theory that it is the same person. Moreover, the reboot is an alternative version of the original, with all the elements (like the M's, etc.) that we see on the paintings.

 

[Dallas Kinard]

The theories are interesting, but it is important to agree on one point. I prefer the theory that it is the same person. Moreover, the reboot is an alternative version of the original, with all the elements (like the M's, etc.) that we see on the paintings.

It's impossible for us to agree on things we have a fundamental disagreement on. Also, I'm not sure it really matters. We are talking fiction after all. Who cares what anyone believes about something fictional?

 

[Megatron]

It's hilarious to me because my entire premise is to "bring order" to this franchise that has continuity issues galore. But no, when it's fiction THERE ARE NO RULES! That's the flipping point dude! If you want to write a story about purple unicorns who like eating Tacos upside down and live on a sliding timeline where the universe is made out of Cheese, GO AHEAD! There are no "rules" because it's literally ALL made completely up! Are you seriously THIS dense?

yes, cos if i do that kind of story, it's my word, and as an author and owner of that word i have the right to consider what is canon or not to that word, as I have the final word on my work.

 

[Megatron]

Does the author use his head to write his canon?

i sent you a definition of headcanon, i'll answer to you there.

 

[Megatron]

You tell me? How do you define "official" vs "fan"?

official is something that is made by the group working on a franchaise, or another group but with full thumbs up from the original creators. (canon)

Fan is smt that the fans make and it is not recognized or approved by the original creators (non-canon)

 

[Megatron]

Not sure what the 66 historical books of the Judeo-Christian Bible have to do with a completely fictional movie series. But that's a debate for a different forum. People can write FICTION, have plans for their FICTION and have a "canon" (whatever that means anymore) and still not give 100% clear cut answers about every facet of said fiction to the fans. When this info isn't provided, we fans speculate and there isn't a dang thing wrong with that.

news flash, The term "Canon" was created with the Bible to describe al the works considered canonical to the Bible, the term then expanded to include every fictional universe.

But math isn't fiction. Math is objective. Fictional stories about not real spy organizations aren't held to the same standards as a Math class lol

but their works are real or the james bond movies doesn't exist?

Yep, in the real world this is absolutely true. Two things can't be true in the same way at once....but we are talking about fiction my friend.

and so? I don't see Bond floating in the air cos gravity doesn't exist in his fictional world.

I'm using my head to interpret what I watch and then coming to conclusions based on the evidence I gather within the films themselves. I'll be like James Gunn here and say "That's my canon". That word is SO annoying at this point. No freaking wonder creatives avoid it. It brings out the worst in these fandoms.

what? Using a term which exist for centuries? No big deal.

You mean avoiding you coming into my thread and blasting my ideas you so vehemently disagree with? You are clearly just here to prove a point and not add anything of value to the timeline.

blasting your ideas? I'm Just saying they're going against official canon, I just told you, add the term "headcanon" to the title so that people doesn't take it as an official recognized. Again you can think what you want, just don't call it official.

What do you mean by "clear canon"? Are you saying there are zero plot holes/continuity issues? Fans like me are just trying to make sense of the world we are presented with. And there's not a thing wrong with that. I'm not saying to anyone who worked on these movies anything at all. Heck, you should be upset every time a movie deviates from the source material because apparently the filmmakers didn't care what the author wrote because they did their own thing. Do you hate ALL movies/shows based on books/comics/graphic novels because of this?

for clear canon i mean (again), all the works made by the people who deteins the rights to a franchaise or other people that had the blessing from the owners of the brand. As for me hating movies based on comics etc... if they change the characters so much, hell, I hate them, like if you changed the main character of that X comic, just make your own original character and storyline, why change the characters of that story who were famous and iconic cos of their original characterization.

I have eyes, ears and a brain. I can watch a movie and come to my own conclusions based on what is presented to me.

again, what's the problem with that? Just don't call it official.

How do you know who he is or isn't referring to? And what does him smiling and facing towards the "camera" that doesn't really exist in universe have anything to do with it? People talk to themselves in stressful situations all of the time lol Is that really an argument you're making? Bond can't talk to himself!!! Checkmate!! smh

you didn't checkmate anyone, cos yeah people talk with themself when stressed, but i don't smile when without anyone in the middle of the night, i'm not coming out of an asylum.

I mean, the brainwashing theory DOES exist....lol plenty of people ascribe to it being a possibility. I'm one of them. So I'm living proof that the theory exists.

the theory exist, but not in the movies.

So what is the "official canon" then bud? And how did you come to the conclusion?

the official canon is that they are the same man (exclusing craig who is an alternate universe); and i din't come out with anything, is what it's considered official by EON.

So multiverse then. Cool. And hey, if you want to believe Lazenby is Deadpool, go right ahead buddy. More power to ya. What you cannot do, is tell others how to take the dialogue. That is up to the viewer and I'll die on that frickin hill.

you're right, but when people go on saying that it's official that they are multiple bond, i have no problem to say you're wrong. No different than (making an example) us wearing hats, and you say we don't have hats, i'll tell you you're wrong.

According to who? And even if you just got this from Google, I actually agree with it. Let's break it down. I'll add emphasis where needed to make my point.

online dictionary of english words, so no google. It's the official definition, not smt I "made up".

Elements and interpretations of a fictional universe accepted by an individual or small (or medium, or large) group of fans, but not necessarily found within or supported by the 'official' canon."

exactly, so you see? What you're making is an headcanon, by definition, and not following EON's official canon.

Is this what you really believe? And if so, what evidence within the film itself led you to come to this conclusion? You could be right, I'm just looking for any and all evidence within the film itself before I decide to go with your idea. That's how my 007 rationale works.

not wanting to tell you how a dictionary is done, but when you search a word, it's followed by examples in a phrase, that is the example the dictionary gave for the word's usage, not smt i did myself.

Do words change/evolve over time? Are definitions subjective?

the language evolve, the definitions doesn't, they expand at max, and DEFINITIONS AREN'T SUBJECTIVE (Ik that cos I study languages in my life).

Sigh, according to you yet again.

bro i seriously gave u the dictionary's definition.... are you going against English now?

Define "established canon". Can something "established" ever be amended or change?

the author has the final word on it, so it revolves on him, so tecnically nope.

P.S. I can't find your comment on Star Wars and canon, but as i said before, Star Wars didn't created the term canon, and also didn't come up in 2014, Star Wars had a canon since 1977, cos yk of Legends of the Expanded Universe, they even had guys paid to check that the continuity between movies, comics, games and book was clear. They even had George Lucas to approve every project they did, cos if there wasn't his approval, they couldn't go ahed with the project. People got angry with Disney Canon, cos they ignored all the deep work that was done in decades to create less inspired and interesting projects, claiming there wasn't source materials, lol. (it's not a case why nowdays they write their fiction inspired by legends as they reference the old EU a lot).

and yes Ik you don't count comics and books and games, but still they're official and were made between 1976 (the adaptation novel of EP IV came out a year before the movie) to 2014, you talk like that between 1977 and 2014 they only released the movies and the clone wars TV series when you talk about star wars.

and again you have to consider the comics or books to enjoy star wars? ABSOLUTELY NOT, but you also have to recognize them, you can't go around saying to people the books and comics doesn't exist, tho you can say they don't exist TO YOU (can you see the subtle difference between 2 phrases? Cos that's my point in all this.)

 

[Dallas Kinard]

yes, cos if i do that kind of story, it's my word, and as an author and owner of that word i have the right to consider what is canon or not to that word, as I have the final word on my work.

Sure you do...but people also have their own "right" (whatever that is, can you enforce it?) to interpret the FICTION however they so choose.

 

[Dallas Kinard]

i sent you a definition of headcanon, i'll answer to you there.

A definition. But what about the definition if there is such a thing?

 

[Dallas Kinard]

official is something that is made by the group working on a franchaise, or another group but with full thumbs up from the original creators. (canon)

Fan is smt that the fans make and it is not recognized or approved by the original creators (non-canon)

According to whom? Aren't a lot of these writers fans themselves? So if a fan writes a piece of fiction, regardless of who they are employed by, aren't they just writing "fan fiction" too? Some Star Wars fans argue anything not written by Lucas is "fan-fiction". Are they wrong?

 

[iceman109]

Alright cmon guys this argument obviously isn't going anywhere new

 

[Pro Bot]

If you're going to argue that there's no such thing as an official Disney canon and Legends canon in Star Wars, I'm gonna have to call you out on that. The franchise holders do get to decide and enforce the canon between different movies, shows and comics.

 

[Megatron]

Sure you do...but people also have their own "right" (whatever that is, can you enforce it?) to interpret the FICTION however they so choose.

if i own my work i can enforce it indeed, i can even cancel projects that deviates from my view.

 

[Dallas Kinard]

"news flash, The term "Canon" was created with the Bible to describe al the works considered canonical to the Bible, the term then expanded to include every fictional universe."

Eh, per Wikipedia:

The term canon derives from the Greek κανών (kanon), meaning "rule", and thence via Latin and Old French into English.[1] The concept in English usage is very broad: in a general sense it refers to being one (adjectival) or a group (noun) of official, authentic or approved rules or laws, particularly ecclesiastical; or group of official, authentic, or approved literary or artistic works, such as the literature of a particular author, of a particular genre, or a particular group of religious scriptural texts;[2] or similarly, one or a body of rules, principles, or standards accepted as axiomatic and universally binding in a religion, or a field of study or art.[3]

It's not mutually exclusive to scripture. But again that's a debate for another thread, certainly not this one.

"but their works are real or the james bond movies doesn't exist?"

Their books and movies are "real" in the sense that they physically exist as books and film reels/discs. But the stories are fiction. Are you really making this argument because if you are, this is getting to pure absurdity at this point. Fiction isn't real!


"and so? I don't see Bond floating in the air cos gravity doesn't exist in his fictional world."

Right, so we have no evidence Bond can fly. He had to use a Jetpack and that's evidence he can't. If someone posits gravity doesn't exist, they just need to provide some evidence for it and then we can interpret the evidence like we do for literally everything else in fiction.


"what? Using a term which exist for centuries? No big deal."

Terms change. Meanings of words change. Get with the times bro.


"blasting your ideas? I'm Just saying they're going against official canon, I just told you, add the term "headcanon" to the title so that people doesn't take it as an official recognized. Again you can think what you want, just don't call it official."

I never did. YOU are saying that I did to make some weird point on here. I think you just like to argue so you can appear "correct" on this forum.

"for clear canon i mean (again), all the works made by the people who deteins the rights to a franchaise or other people that had the blessing from the owners of the brand."

Eh, they are just people too. We are all fans at the end of the day and nobody is above another.

"As for me hating movies based on comics etc... if they change the characters so much, hell, I hate them, like if you changed the main character of that X comic, just make your own original character and storyline, why change the characters of that story who were famous and iconic cos of their original characterization."

Cool. Feel however you want pal. I really enjoy cold weather hikes. They are fun.


"again, what's the problem with that? Just don't call it official."

I never once did call it "official" lol stop putting words in my mouth!


"you didn't checkmate anyone, cos yeah people talk with themself when stressed, but i don't smile when without anyone in the middle of the night, i'm not coming out of an asylum."

Cool story bro. Lazenby Bond disagrees.


"the theory exist, but not in the movies."

None of the "theories" exist in the movies. But there is EVIDENCE that points us to them being possible. Like OHMSS (I will never stop saying it as long as I breath).

"the official canon is that they are the same man (exclusing craig who is an alternate universe); and i din't come out with anything, is what it's considered official by EON."

Source? I want "official" word of EON that Connery - Brosnan is 100% "the same guy" without a shadow of a doubt. I'll wait.

"you're right, but when people go on saying that it's official that they are multiple bond, i have no problem to say you're wrong."

Yea? And? I can just reply with "I think YOU'RE wrong! What now?

"No different than (making an example) us wearing hats, and you say we don't have hats, i'll tell you you're wrong."

You can tell me I'm wrong all day long buddy. It doesn't change a thing.

"online dictionary of english words, so no google. It's the official definition, not smt I "made up"."

Oh so that website means it's "official" huh?

"exactly, so you see? What you're making is an headcanon, by definition, and not following EON's official canon."

But EON's "official" canon is different than Fleming's book canon....so which one is correct?


"not wanting to tell you how a dictionary is done, but when you search a word, it's followed by examples in a phrase, that is the example the dictionary gave for the word's usage, not smt i did myself."

It's amazing to me how this debate has evolved into the definitions of words, the english language etc. when it all started with me saying "hey guys I think Lazenby's line can be taken literally and here's why I came to that conclusion." Internet debates are freaking exhausting.

"the language evolve, the definitions doesn't, they expand at max, and DEFINITIONS AREN'T SUBJECTIVE (Ik that cos I study languages in my life)."

Um, definitions can be subjective because people have different experiences and perspectives. For example, what "success" means to a business person may be different from what it means to an artist. So sometimes they ARE subjective. You would know this if you paid better attention in your studies.


"bro i seriously gave u the dictionary's definition.... are you going against English now?"

Are definitions subjective?

"the author has the final word on it, so it revolves on him, so tecnically nope."
Totally disagree. Ian Fleming is long dead. Does he have the final word on the film canon? Nope.

"P.S. I can't find your comment on Star Wars and canon, but as i said before, Star Wars didn't created the term canon, and also didn't come up in 2014, Star Wars had a canon since 1977, cos yk of Legends of the Expanded Universe, they even had guys paid to check that the continuity between movies, comics, games and book was clear. They even had George Lucas to approve every project they did, cos if there wasn't his approval, they couldn't go ahed with the project. People got angry with Disney Canon, cos they ignored all the deep work that was done in decades to create less inspired and interesting projects, claiming there wasn't source materials, lol. (it's not a case why nowdays they write their fiction inspired by legends as they reference the old EU a lot)."

Thanks for the history lesson, but let's keep it 007 related please.

"and yes Ik you don't count comics and books and games, but still they're official and were made between 1976 (the adaptation novel of EP IV came out a year before the movie) to 2014, you talk like that between 1977 and 2014 they only released the movies and the clone wars TV series when you talk about star wars."

"Head-canon" to me means enjoying whatever I want and excluding what I don't want. It's FICTION so I can do that with zero real life consequences. Have more fun dude. Stop being so serious about make believe worlds.

"and again you have to consider the comics or books to enjoy star wars? ABSOLUTELY NOT,"

I never said you did. Stop with that trash.

"but you also have to recognize them,"

Says who? I don't have to do nuthin.

"you can't go around saying to people the books and comics doesn't exist,"

Yes I can, but that wouldn't be true would it? The books and comics DO exist. But they can be ignored too lol In fact, I don't believe Lucasfilm cares or counts them either. But I could be wrong. No way a single comic prevents a filmmaker from telling the story he wants to.

"tho you can say they don't exist TO YOU (can you see the subtle difference between 2 phrases? Cos that's my point in all this.)""

But they DO exist. I just don't count them/read them or acknowledge them. I ignore them and I think MOST of the people working on this stuff do too! LOL

 

[Megatron]

According to whom? Aren't a lot of these writers fans themselves? So if a fan writes a piece of fiction, regardless of who they are employed by, aren't they just writing "fan fiction" too? Some Star Wars fans argue anything not written by Lucas is "fan-fiction". Are they wrong?

you forgot second part "ANOTHER GROUP WITH A THUMBS UP FROM THE ORIGINAL CREATORS". And yes they're wrong if they think that.

 

[Pro Bot]

Some Star Wars fans argue anything not written by Lucas is "fan-fiction". Are they wrong?

Let's go with that interpretation. Does that change the fact that Disney does have their own universe with their own canon rules? Every piece of media, including fan fiction, has its own canon. It just depends what is valid to it. So, Star Wars I-VI is valid to Disney and Legends canon. It doesn't matter whether someone wants to call them fan fiction or not.

 

[Dallas Kinard]

Alright cmon guys this argument obviously isn't going anywhere new

Its a massive waste of time. I intended (as the author of this thread) for this to be a place to post my personal findings of the 007 film series timeline. It has sadly devolved into a toxic back and forth about "canon", "fan theories" etc. But, if I stop replying, the aggressors will think they've "won" something so I can't back down. My point remains and still stands. If ya'll don't like it, MAKE YOUR OWN 007 timeline - but most importantly HAVE FUN. This is all fiction after all

 

[Dallas Kinard]

If you're going to argue that there's no such thing as an official Disney canon and Legends canon in Star Wars, I'm gonna have to call you out on that. The franchise holders do get to decide and enforce the canon between different movies, shows and comics.

Take it to the Star Wars thread bud. I'm not taking up any more space on this specific 007 thread to talk about other super divisive franchises. PM me if you actually want to take this further. Not doing it here.