I agree, that's kinda what I'm saying though. There's no reason that he shouldn't be killed that relate to continuity or "canon." I don't think they should have killed him just because I don't think that's what the character of Bond is for but there's no reason not to kill him other than that.

Craig was the New 52 Bond, but Pierce Brosnan's post-Crisis Bond has been living in the same Universe as him since Convergence.

I do actually agree that they should never have killed him off in the last film though. But only because surviving in spite of everything is the whole point of Bond, not because of any absurd notions of continuity or canon.

I while back, I found a blog listing all the comic issues that appeared in that movie. So, of course, I created a reading list on LoCG. leagueofcomicgeeks.com/profile/mist...

I know what you're wondering, & out of those comics, I own Superman’s Pal, Jimmy Olsen #67 (1963), Superman’s Pal, Jimmy Olsen #75 (1964), and Action Comics #314 (1964).

I sadly do not yet own Superman’s Pal, Jimmy Olsen #65 (1962),Superman #165 (1963),Superman #166 (1964).

This kept happening to me at work so I asked for a cupboard to be reserved in the staff kitchen for non-communal mugs. That cupboard is still completely empty except for my mug. I have no regrets.

Yeah, I reckon Sinestro and the rest could have figured out "chuck it in the Sun" without Hal's help.

I know I bang this drum a lot but whenever a comic book movie boasts "faithfulness to the source material" & "a love letter to the fans" it's always a big, red flag. Just change or leave out what you need to in order to tell the best story possible. We don't deserve love letters, we're all wankers.