Why are the Pink Panther movies inconsistent?

My girlfriend and I rented The Pink Panther Returns a few weeks ago–admittedly, we should have started with the original, but this was the only one on the shelf.

Last night, we watched the original Pink Panther. Not bad, but we couldn’t understand why the plots of the two films were inconsistent. In the original, Sir Charles is vindicated of the accusation of being the Phantom, and Clouseau is implicated and hauled off to prision instead. In Returns, the film starts with Clouseau recognized as the man who beat Sir Charles (a much younger man who, incidentally, has suddenly turned into Christopher Plummer), clearly known to have been the Phantom. Also, Clouseau clearly doesn’t recognize his ex-wife in Returns, unless I have my facts wrong and they’re blatantly two different ladies.

So what’s the catch? Is there a film set in-between that we missed, or did the writers just decide to ignore the original film’s plot?

Crap, lost my post.

There was “A Shot in the Dark”, theone where he goes to a nudist camp but that wont help you. They reworked the premise between the movies. A few times I think.

Here’s a list, see the big gap between 2 & 3.

The Pink Panther - 1964
A Shot in the Dark - 1964
The Return of the Pink Panther - 1975
The Pink Panther Strikes Again - 1976
Revenge of the Pink Panther - 1978
Trail of the Pink Panther - 1982 (this is the one where Sellers died and the reworked the film. Terrible)

There’s also
Inspecter Clouseau - 1968 (without the people who made it the Pink Panther.)
Curse of the Pink Panther - 1983 (or is this the one that I hated so much, rather then Trail? Or both?)
Son of the Pink Panther - 1993 (I think they wanted to make sure the series was really dead. Stake through heart.)

I think that’s all. Stop at Revenge. Heh, kinda like Revenge of the Jedi or Revenge of Khan.

Remember how in the beginning of every Pepe Le Pew cartoon, the pussycat would get a white stripe of paint down her back? And remember how Pepe would see her and mistake her for a female skunk and try to make love to her? And remember how–even though this had obviously happened to them many times before–they always acted as though this was the first time they had ever found themselves in this situation?

The PINK PANTHER movies display the same sort of logical inconsistency because–let’s face it–they are basically live-action cartoons.

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.”

In other words, why exactly does this matter?

My intent isn’t to nitpick. It’s just that we were severely confused between the two movies and wondered if we missed a film that explained the gaps.

Well, geez, it wasn’t the same cat every time.

That would make no sense at all!

[Hijack] I used to have a porno (With a guess appearance by Nina Hartley) called The Pink Panties and the lead character was Inspector Cliteau[/Hijack]

Please return to your normal thread.

E3

~sigh~ I meant a guest appearance, of course.

Try not thinking of the second movie being a sequel of the first.

As stated above: they’re live-action cartoons.