|
|
Post by Clouseau on Jun 2, 2006 14:00:33 GMT
i've been mulling over this for the past few days, so i thought i'd go ahead and post something about it... - at the end of TPP63, Clouseau goes to prison “for a few years”, but ASITD was released only 3 months later, and there’s no mention of how he could’ve cleared his name... it could be argued that ASITD was completed before TPP63, and therefore should be considered first, rather than second, in the timeline... but that doesn’t work either, because in ASITD, Clouseau is single and lives with Kato, he’s married to Simone in TPP63, and then he’s single and living with Cato again in subsequent films... if ASITD comes first, why wouldn’t Clouseau keep his butler when he got married? If TPP63 comes first, then ASITD is apparently set at least “a few years” later... and where was Cato during the events of IC?
- in ASITD, Dreyfus goes crazy, and we have to assume he was locked up... in RetOTPP, he's back in office (somehow), but goes crazy and is locked up... now ASITD was in 1964, and RetOTPP was in 1975, but in 1976, at the beginning of TPPSA, when Dreyfus is in the mental institution, they say that he's been there for three years!
my theory? the events of the PP films did not occur in the years or even the order in which they were released... i'm not 100% on how it ought to go, but here's a possibility of the order and the years the films' events might go: TPP63 (1963), IC (1968), ASITD (1970), RetOTPP (1973), then the rest in the order and years they were released... minus TPP06, because i see TPP06 as a reboot, rather than being part of the original series' continuity... i think that takes care of most of the issues... there are still other odd things about the series, but none that really affect the order/spacing of the films, that i can think of... for instance: - in TPP63, Sir Charles hooks up with Simone; then in RetOTPP, his wife’s name is Claudine; but in TotPP and CotPP, his wife’s name is Simone again – perhaps Charles and Simone just had a rocky relationship, but there’s no mention of it, so it just seems odd...
- in TPP63, Sir Charles’ last name is spelled “Lytton”, but in subsequent films (RetOTPP, TotPP, CotPP), it’s spelled “Litton”
- in ASITD, Clouseau’s butler’s name is spelled “Kato”, but in subsequent films (RetOTPP, TPPSA, RevOTPP, TotPP, CotPP), it’s spelled “Cato”
- in SotPP, Dreyfus doesn't recognize Maria Gambrelli, the prime suspect from ASITD... of course, this could be because she looks different (because she's played by a different actress), or because he's been in and out of mental institutions so many times, or something like that, but who knows?
what do you think? |
|
|
|
Post by SportzStoogeOO7 on Jun 18, 2006 3:07:07 GMT
As for the last one, I don't think Dreyfus ever made face-to-face contact with Maria Gambrelli. I don't remember though, I haven't seen ASITD in a while.
Anyway, that's the problem with the PP series. Continuity is thrown out in place of laughs. Its not very thought out, like the Star Wars is.
Plus, the movies were made far between each other, and made in bursts.
There was almost a 10 year gap between IC and Return, a little less than 10 between COTPP and SOTTP.
|
|
|
|
Post by Clouseau on Jul 6, 2006 12:53:42 GMT
my theory? the events of the PP films did not occur in the years or even the order in which they were released... i'm not 100% on how it ought to go, but here's a possibility of the order and the years the films' events might go: TPP63 (1963), IC (1968), ASITD (1970), RetOTPP (1973), then the rest in the order and years they were released... minus TPP06, because i see TPP06 as a reboot, rather than being part of the original series' continuity... in retrospect, i'm not sure that even this theory even works, because TPPSA presents its own problem, with Dreyfus being molecularized at the end... Clouseau was around for the events of that film, yet, Dreyfus magically remolecularizes for future films, including the ones in which Clouseau disappears and his son takes over... also, when Clouseau re-emerges at the end of CotPP, he's got a new face, and he's crossed over to the dark side, so TPPSA can't come after CotPP... i guess for now, my conclusion must be that TPPSA is a stand-alone story, which cannot fit into the chronology of the rest of the series UNLESS it can be speculated that Dr. Fasbender discovered a way (sometime in the 2 years between the end of TPPSA and the beginning of RevOTPP) to reverse the effects of his Doomsday Machine, and as with the question of Sir Charles' wife (mentioned in my opening post), it just wasn't mentioned, so i suppose there's no way of ever knowing!  |
|
|
|
Post by ben on Jul 6, 2006 23:08:47 GMT
Yeah, I always thought the structure or storyline wasn't right.. you guys did a good job detailing that. I suppose after Shot in the Dark their interests for the movie were to keep the comedic value though so I don't think they would have bothered maintaining any sense of continuity in the storyline
|
|
|
|
Post by Mancini on Jul 7, 2006 10:23:16 GMT
In Trail of the Pink Panther, there is a line (I can't remember it) that suggests Clouseau wasn't found guilty. I'll try and find the scene, if you like.
|
|
|
|
Post by Clouseau on Jul 10, 2006 17:58:31 GMT
In Trail of the Pink Panther, there is a line (I can't remember it) that suggests Clouseau wasn't found guilty. I'll try and find the scene, if you like. this is the closest thing i could find... Sir Charles: And believe it or not, for a while, it looked as though Clouseau, himself, was the Phantom. He was actually arrested for having stolen the Pink Panther, and sent to prison. Marie Jouvet: But he was innocent? Sir Charles: Inept, but innocent. Marie Jouvet: Inept? Sir Charles: Wouldn't you say so, darling? Simone: Oh no, not in everything, darling. He was a terrific sleeper. Marie Jouvet: Well that's hard to believe! Simone: Oh, it's true! He almost never made a serious mistake when he was sleeping! |
|
|
|
Post by SportzStoogeOO7 on Jul 11, 2006 3:38:19 GMT
That's true, but ASITD was completed before PP63 release right?
And was shelved, until they realized how much of a hit the character was.
|
|
|
|
Post by Clouseau on Jul 11, 2006 3:57:13 GMT
That's true, but ASITD was completed before PP63 release right? And was shelved, until they realized how much of a hit the character was. right, but that still doesn't account for the continuity issue, as i explained above... and here's another minor issue i came across today... in TPP63, Lugash is run by a King, but in TotPP and CotPP, instead of a King, it has a President, THEN in SotPP, it has a King again! now of course, the government may have changed hands a couple times, but once again, it's just odd that there's never any mention of it... know what i mean?? |
|
|
|
Post by georgelytton on Aug 5, 2006 0:50:07 GMT
my theory?
the events of the PP films did not occur in the years or even the order in which they were released... i'm not 100% on how it ought to go, but here's a possibility of the order and the years the films' events might go: TPP63 (1963), IC (1968), ASITD (1970), RetOTPP (1973), then the rest in the order and years they were released... minus TPP06, because i see TPP06 as a reboot, rather than being part of the original series' continuity... Funny thing, I actually had this idea a few months ago! I pretty much approve. And I would actually add the Lytton element, by saying that Sir Charles in RETURN is in fact, George Lytton using his uncle's name for security reasons. Here's how it goes: After PANTHER, Clouseau is released from jail and is humiliated. He's divorcing from Simone, who marries Sir Charles shortly thereafter. Years later, he is assigned the case of the the robberies in England. While he's in France, in that scene where Clouseau yells at his "superior officer", he could very well be yelling at Dreyfus - in retrospect, this could very well be their first meeting. In SHOT, Dreyfus and Francois are aware of Clouseau, and Dreyfus in specific is worried he may blow the case of Gambrelli off. By then, Clouseau has also made himself famous with his "multiple lookalikes", as seen in INSPECTOR. Dreyfus is not found guilty on the murders of the innocent victims (the cosac and the lot) and the Ballon villa residents, as there are no charges, but he's demoted because of the rumors and because of the word out. Then RETURN. Now, there are two solutions for the rest. One, to consider that the rest happened as made. The other, to consider that all post-Sellers PANTHERs were never made (no TRAIL, CURSE and SON). In this case, put REVENGE before STRIKES AGAIN, and you have with STRIKES AGAIN the end of the PANTHER series. In any case, I really believe that INSPECTOR works best as a sequel to PANTHER and a prequel to SHOT. For the title itself informs its about solely about Clouseau, by SHOT Clouseau is seen lowly in the eyes of his collegues for more than just the Pink Panther case, and Clouseau in INSPECTOR doesn't pronounce wrongly as he did in SHOT and then RETURN and on... (although he does have the voice Sellers used in RETURN and on...) Anyway, I'm all for INSPECTOR after PANTHER and before SHOT! |
|
|
|
Post by brandon on Aug 25, 2006 6:57:27 GMT
BTW, at the end of The pink panther '63, Lytton says, "When the Phantom strikes again, The Inspector will be free as a bird."
I figure Clouseau being back on a case in A Shot in the Dark, meant the Phantom already struck again.
-Brandon "sounds terribly theatrical" Pierce
|
|
|
|
Post by belindapanther on Oct 8, 2006 11:52:20 GMT
Hello. Can someone help me clear up a question about RetOTPP?
When the guide is taking us through the museum in the first shot we're told that the diamond is protected by a weighted alarm (much like the gold head statue at the start of Raiders). Why is it then that when the theif removes the diamond and replaces it with a glove, the alarm doesn't go off? (Indy got it right, he used a sandbag).
Also .. did Lady Litton go into the can after nicking the diamond at the end of the film?
Thanks.
Belinda
|
|
|
|
Post by Clouseau on Oct 8, 2006 13:13:17 GMT
well with the alarm, what the guide said was that the alarm would go off if there was the slightest release in weight, which is different from the scene in Indy, where it's the slightest change in weight, i believe... notice that one of the Phantom's metal claws is pushing down on the diamond's platform while the other claw is taking the diamond and putting the glove into position... as long as that first claw keeps pressure on the platform, it won't set off the alarm... that's the way i understood it, anyway... i'm not sure about your second question... have to pop the DVD in again sometime and have a look... welcome to the site, btw... always glad to have someone new around!  |
|
|
|
Post by thecolonel93 on Nov 16, 2006 20:08:40 GMT
First off, there is a common misconception that A SHOT IN THE DARK was filmed first. This is an error even MGM has made in recent years. A quick glance at back issues of Variety, Hollywood Reporter, and The New York Times reveals The Pink Panther was ready for production in November 1962 when Peter Ustinov pulled out. Sellers was onboard in January 1963 when shooting began. A Shot in the Dark went into production in the Fall of 1963. The Pink Panther was first screened in September 1963 for a sneak preview reported in The Hollywood Reporter. It opened in parts of Europe in December 1963, the UK in January 1964, and the US in April 1964. A Shot in the Dark opened in June 1964. Nothing sat on the shelf and A Shot in the Dark was definitely filmed second.
|
|
|
|
Post by thecolonel93 on Nov 16, 2006 20:12:48 GMT
Sir Charles' surname was spelled Lytton in the original Pink Panther screenplay, press kit, and novelization. The spelling was changed to Litton thereafter. The Inspector's manservant is not as clear cut. The credits to A Shot in the Dark list the spelling as Kato, but the screenplay lists Cato which would be the accepted spelling thereafter. Revenge and Trail/Curse as well as the unfilmed Romance of the Pink Panther give Cato the surname Fong while the screenplay to Son of the Pink Panther lists his name as Fred Cato, a Goonish reference if ever there was one.
|
|
|
|
Post by thecolonel93 on Nov 16, 2006 20:46:32 GMT
As to the real continuity issues, this is my take which I will argue is as close to canon as anyone can get:
As stated in the dialogue in the original Panther, as soon as The Phantom struck again in South America, the Inspector would be cleared and released from prison. He was cleared and returned, humiliated to the Surete (don't forget his actions in Cortina and Rome were during his vacation, he was not acting for the Surete but on his own hunch or heunch). Since Simone left him for Sir Charles, they divorced soon after and he hired Cato to fulfill the household duties as a newly single man accustomed or unwilling to do them himself.
Commissioner Dreyfus suffered a nervous breakdown at the end of A Shot in the Dark (no one knew he had inadvertently murdered people). He returned to the Surete after a leave of absence and occupied the lower position of Chief Inspector starting in Return. Note the contrast between the successful bureaucrat with wife and mistress at the start of A Shot in the Dark with the henpecked, unhappily married Dreyfus of Return and Trail/Curse. Three years do occur between Return and Strikes Again. Since Strikes Again occurs during the Ford Administration, it is likely Return is set in the early 70s.
Incidentally, Dreyfus' wife left him after his breakdown and stay in the asylum after Return, but they reconciled by the time of Trail/Curse once he reestablished his career and reclaimed some grip on his sanity.
Dreyfus was not vaporized at the end of Strikes Again. Hugo Fassbinder's work was in the field of manipulating vortices of electromagnetic aberrations. He did not atomize the UN building, he merely sent it to another dimension (this was evident in the original screenplay, the novelization, and the William Gleason stage play). Since Fassbinder remained in our dimension in the film (but not, incidentally in the script, book, or play), he easily reversed the process and restored the UN building, Dreyfus, and the castle. Dreyfus returned to the asylum before being reinstated as Chief Inspector in Revenge.
The fact that Dreyfus does not recognize Maria in Son is not odd considering it had been at least 30 years since they had seen one another.
Inspector Clouseau (1968) follows the Gambrelli case because that was the case that established Clouseau as a success and led to him being called in to help Scotland Yard. Cato does not appear because there are no scenes in Clouseau's apartment.
Sir Charles and Simone split up shortly after the events of the original film, likely to avoid implicating one another. Sir Charles married Claudine four years before the events of Return (in the late 60s) and gave up a life of crime. The late Colonel Sharki was blamed for stealing the diamond for political reasons as stated in Return. Claudine did not go to prison, but did see her marriage end (she did nearly get her husband killed, after all). He eventually wound up with his true love, Simone. They later married. Simone was eager to ignore Sir Charles' ex-wife and the possible scandal during her interview with Marie Jouvet in Trail when she completes Marie's sentence by simply saying she married the man of her dreams.
|
|
