Baronlando said:

Sequels were made and watched in a very different way back then. Everyone has a raging boner for continuity and tonal consistency now, but it just didn't matter as much to the average, non-starlog reader. That's why it was ok for James Bond to meet Blofeld in one movie and then meet him again in the very next. It just wasn't a big deal.

I think the shift in sequel-making mentality might have begun after Temple of Doom was so deliberately, gleefully, different in tone than Raiders and people got all pissed.

Having watched all the Bonds up to "For Your Eyes Only" in chronological order, there's a tad more continuity hidden in there than you'd think.