As a huge geek, the Skyfall timeline is messing with me (yes it's just a movie, but this makes for an interesting discussion.)
Yes, I know CR was a reboot and not a direct prequel to Dr. No. That being said, Bond always lives in the present, which explains how Brosnan is the same guy as Connery and Moore: adjusted timelines. Brosnan and Dalton kicked No's ass on Crab Key in 1982 instead of '62 and so on and so forth. In this new timeline, Bond became 007 in 2006, leaving the door open for any new adventures.
But here, 007 is established as a burnt out veteran agent, and M's #1 guy, implying the missions of previous films happened in between QOS and SF (updated of course, like the 007 Legends game.) This is backed up
by the gadget-packed DB5. But then we get the old office, male M and Moneypenny at the end, which brings us back full circle.
If the reboot series is unconnected to the previous 20 stories, remember the DB5 in CR was a regular car with the wheel on the lefthand side.
The one here is presented as the tricked out DB5 with the righthand wheel from GOLDFINGER.
I know it's just a movie, but I'd still like to know where you guys would fit in the grand scheme of things.
CR, QoS, DN-DAD (in the present, tweaked to Craig continuity with Dench's M,) SF
vs.
CR, QOS, SF, DN-DAD
Dr. No to Die Another Day. Thats it. That's the end of that series. It's over.
Casino Royale to Skyfall is a new timeline. Has nothing to do with the old one.
That being said, it is still referenced, because it's the same film series. Just a new continuity.
With the older films, they're all stand alone stories with the same characters. Some converge with others, some don't. This is one of those series where every film is it's own thing, aside from a select few.
James Bond was the original reboot. I think when they cast Dalton, they had to throw continuity out the window and fix the timeline. Same thing happened when they cast Craig. But you can take it a step further and view each new Bond as a new continuity.
Only a tiny part of me wished they had recast M in CR to break all connections from the previous film series. But she's so great. Most of me was happy they didn't make that decision as she's a big part in these films. A bigger part than any other M seemed to be in any other series continuity (Brosnan's included).
I'm having a hard time buying into Bond being allowed to drag M into seclusion like that. Ok, lets say it was because she allowed it, which she did, but Bond said the plan was to bring Silva to them and then capture/kill Silva. Ok, his plan worked, Silva came, in a big ass helicopter, where was the calvary to shoot it down and rescue them?
Anyways, this movie wasn't boring, it was freaking awesome, and YES, one of the best Bond movies.
When Bond initially 'kidnaps' M, I believe his attention was to take M somewhere secluded and off-the-grid to take away Silva's advantage, and to also have sufficient weaponry and back up to take Silva down.
HOWEVER, when M agrees to the plan and to being the bait, she says "Alright, but just us, too many people have died because of me" (or words similar to that). So it is M who decides that it should just be her and Bond taking on Silva, it wasn't Bond's decision.
I don't agree with that all, other then M maybe. James Bond isn't a ranked...he's a person, actually named James Bond, just like Blofeld. You were more right the second time, there is little to zero continuity in Bond films.