Talk:James Bond

CMG (2)

I'm starting this topic again because in the 2012 film 'Skyfall' Bond is refered to as a CMG (he is also refered to one in the film trailor). Bond has in pretty much most of the books and films has been refer to as a 'Commander' in the Royal Navy. The Header of this article should read; Commander James Bond, CMG, RNVR, code name 007, is a fictional character.....' otherwise the correct and factual information is not being displayed on this 'encyclopedia'.

Ref 1: Ian Fleming's spy, James Bond, a commander in the Royal Navy Volunteer Reserve (R.N.V.R.) was fictionally decorated with the CMG in 1953. (This is mentioned in the novel From Russia, with Love.) He was later offered the KCMG (which would have elevated him from a Companion in the Order to a Knight Commander in the Order) in The Man with the Golden Gun, but he rejected that offer as he did not wish to become a public figure.

Ref 2:In 1953, according to the Soviet file on him in From Russia, With Love, Bond is made a Companion of the Order of St Michael and St George. Benson, Raymond (1988). The James Bond Bedside Companion. London: Boxtree Ltd. ISBN 978-1-85283-233-9. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help) Nford24 (Want to have a chat?) 15:30, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

All very good, except he's not RNVR in the films, only the books. We've avoided the problem here because this isn't about the character, it's about the industry, so the focus is about the use of the character in various media forms, rather than specifically about the background of the character. James Bond (literary character) looks at the literary character and begins "Royal Navy Commander James Bond, CMG, RNVR, is a fictional character ..." We are hoping to have a film character article go live soon which will begin "Commander James Bond, CMG, RN, is a fictional secret agent ...". the opening to this article will remain as it is. We will then have three correct articles and nothing wrong or misleading in the opening lines. - SchroCat (talk) 18:26, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

It forgets to mention ONE MAJOR movie.

Never Say Never Again (1983) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.240.82.156 (talk) 16:35, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

See the Non-Eon films section, where NSNA has happily been mentioned for some time now. Many thanks - SchroCat (talk) 16:43, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Adding the James Bond fragrance information

Tried to update the info about new fragrance in October 2012 - but hasn't been kept? Rosiehannah (talk) 14:24, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

- Oh no - it must have been going through a process of acceptance or something perhaps? It has now reappeared and has been accepted.

Thank you in advance.

- Now it has gone again? Rosiehannah (talk) 15:22, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

According to the revision notes it was removed by User:Betty Logan on the grounds that it belongs in the cultural impact section, not the adaptions section of the article. Mediatech492 (talk) 15:33, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Slight correction: it was removed for being unsourced. It was in the wrong section too, but the edit summary says that if the informaiton is returned with a source, it should go into the correct section. - SchroCat (talk) 15:36, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay - Thanks for responding - I see now. How do I find what you found? ie - who removed it and for what reason..? Rosiehannah (talk) 16:50, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

adding Fragrance website URL and bottle image

Hello 2 suggestions: 1)could we add the 007 fragrance web site URL 2)could we add the fragrance picture ---You have the reference here:

References

I already suggested this in the past but not sure why it was not validated. Serena demaio (talk) 17:01, 26 February 2013 (UTC)Serena, James Bond Fragrance Brand Manager; 26 Feb 2013

I suggest you read WP:NOTADVERTISING. The website for the fragrance and a picture of it are not relevant to the subject. Betty Logan (talk) 17:29, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Fallacy in article.

The James Bond article lists him as being in the longest running film franchise in history. This is innacurate. As of Skyfall, the number of James Bond films is 23. Godzilla, by comparison, has 28 films to his name (29, assuming Toho has accepted the 1998 film into the canon, which they seem to have done in referencing the movie in Giant Monsters All Out Attack, and then bringing the creature itself into play in Godzilla: Final Wars. 30 if the upcoming film by Legendary will be considered part of the canon.) and is thus the longest running film franchise currently in existence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.240.98.142 (talk) 04:31, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

No fallacy. You forgot to quote the words "continually running", which Bond is and Godzilla isn't. - SchroCat (talk) 07:08, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Define "continually running". Because if the term is intended to mean that there are still movies coming out, then Godzilla does qualify as the new film by Legendary is due out in 2014. Since Toho seems to have taken the 1998 film into its overall canon, there's a good chance they will do so again with this. Now if the article said the second longest, it would be accurate, again due to the upcoming 2014 Godzilla film. Plus, at what point does a series stop being considered 'continually running'? Because there's usually a gap between films even in the bond series. 67.240.98.142 (talk) 17:25, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Since1961 there has a Bond film in production or pre-production, largely by one company (two films accepted). They have therefore been continual. This is not the case with Godzilla, which have had numerous gaps between productions and been by a number if different parties. - SchroCat (talk) 19:13, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Hoagy Carmichael image

The earlier photograph of Hoagy Carmichael was made when he was too young to really conjure James Bond very closely since Carmichael was almost still a boy when it was taken. Note, however, the similarity between this later more rough-hewn image and the drawing of James Bond at the beginning of the article: absolutely identical. Chaneykarlofflugosi (talk) 17:28, 6 April 2013 (UTC)