101

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

superado wrote:

I loved Inglourious Basterds... I'm one that he particularly touched with this movie, inappropriately or not.

ajb007/amazed  He didn't touch your feet did he, superado?

"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

Roger Moore 1927-2017

102

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

I just saw "Inglorius Basterds" on disc this weekend and was blown away by how good it was. The expierence has me reconsidering Tarentino as a possible Bond director.

While my imput will never be sought by EON, If DC was to do three films, then Tarentino would be a very compelling choice to direct the last entry. Then we would have the "traditional" film directed by Campbell, the arthouse film by Forster and the .... well Tarentino version.

If Tarentino respects the original material, and want to make a "thriller"- he could be a great choice. After seeing "IB", it's odvious he can do dialog, tension, action and humor. As others have said, Tarentino would have to hold back on the sex and violence, but who knows, maybe he is ready to "grow" as a filmaker and embrace the god of tasteful restraint.

103

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

The bear jew.Thats all there is to say. ajb007/takecover

"Yes,dammit,I said "was".The bitch is dead now."

"It's not difficult to get a double 0 number if your prepared to kill people"

104

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

7289 wrote:

I just saw "Inglorius Basterds" on disc this weekend and was blown away by how good it was. The expierence has me reconsidering Tarentino as a possible Bond director.

While my imput will never be sought by EON, If DC was to do three films, then Tarentino would be a very compelling choice to direct the last entry. Then we would have the "traditional" film directed by Campbell, the arthouse film by Forster and the .... well Tarentino version.

If Tarentino respects the original material, and want to make a "thriller"- he could be a great choice. After seeing "IB", it's odvious he can do dialog, tension, action and humor. As others have said, Tarentino would have to hold back on the sex and violence, but who knows, maybe he is ready to "grow" as a filmaker and embrace the god of tasteful restraint.

I agree and posted something about this recently too - he could film three movies back-to-back in about ten years using Henry Cavill?

Things I hate:
1. People who hate things.
2. Irony.
3. Lists.

105

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

A DC/QT Bond film would be amazing, perhaps definitive.

106

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

I just think the ship has sailed. Tarantino has been snippy about Craig and that stuff just doesn't get forgiven by the Broccoli clan, it's not their style. And at the risk of bringing gender politics into it, I sense that La Broccoli does not approve of Quentin's unPC, macho style without the brakes on, it's too much like a kid left alone with his crayons for her liking. She seems, to my mind, to have a woman's slightly patronising indulgence towards the Bond character that does not sit well with Quentin's 'anything goes' attitude to movies.

It's odd, it's as if Babs is showing how brutal and cool men can be through Craig, but from a woman's point of view, while Quentin can show how capable and cool women can be (Uma in Kill Bill) from a man's point of view, both are laudable in a way but with a patina of sexism on boths ides that doesn't go together.

"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

Roger Moore 1927-2017

107

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

I think Tarrintino would have made a very good Bond movie.  He's a fan of cinema in general and knows what Bond movie is all about through the years.  Had he got a chance to direct one, I think it would have been a more traditional offering of Bond for the most part with his own unique style peppered here and there through the movie.  He would not stray too far away.  It's actually the producers of CR and QOS that had strayed way too far to the point of where Bond became unrecognizable, action flick with Craig and no charm.  But someone should oversee his direction because it can very easily becomes a parody if overdone with charm and humor.

I know one thing for sure, he would bring back the smart and intelligent script to the Bond movie.  It's been lacking for so long.

Last edited by qn (24th Nov 2010 22:41)

108

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

Tarantino would make a Tarantino film. I don't want to see that. I want a Bond film.

109

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

Napoleon Plural wrote:

I just think the ship has sailed. Tarantino has been snippy about Craig and that stuff just doesn't get forgiven by the Broccoli clan, it's not their style. And at the risk of bringing gender politics into it, I sense that La Broccoli does not approve of Quentin's unPC, macho style without the brakes on, it's too much like a kid left alone with his crayons for her liking. She seems, to my mind, to have a woman's slightly patronising indulgence towards the Bond character that does not sit well with Quentin's 'anything goes' attitude to movies.

It's odd, it's as if Babs is showing how brutal and cool men can be through Craig, but from a woman's point of view, while Quentin can show how capable and cool women can be (Uma in Kill Bill) from a man's point of view, both are laudable in a way but with a patina of sexism on boths ides that doesn't go together.

Yeah I get that, and it makes sense to a point: cuz then I remember Robert Forster's character in "Jackie Brown."  Which would seem to inform me, while QT does indeed like to wallow in genre, he understands genre can be different things, just depends on the specific genre he's working in.  Pretty sure he would make a true Bond-type Bond film and really punch up the Bondian things, make somebody like Campbell look the glorified TV director he is.  IMHO.  But agree it'll never happen.

110

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

I am inclined to agree that Tarrantino wouldn't make bad Bond film. Outside of his recognised style, he will obviously appreciates different genres and probably knows more about other director's styles and methods - certainly more than most of us here. I think he would probably want to show he can do it so much, he would do a pretty good job. There's always something very very memorable about every film of his, whether you like them or not, he always leaves an impression. And there has been plenty to dislike in the past three films - who knows, maybe he could just do it...

Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:

http://apbateman.com

111

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

I rather see Brian De Palma direct a Bond film.

112

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

Tarantino would direct a great Bond film. He mentioned a few of his ideas for a Brosnan Bond film before. I can't remember who he was talking to about it. It might be on youtube...

"Better late than never."

113

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

I'd of loved to see Tarrintino's take on a Bond Film, in the 80's I also thought J Carpenter would of been a good choice,But that might just be my love of horror movies. ajb007/lol

“I didn’t lose a friend, I just realised I never had one.”

114

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

Thunderpussy wrote:

I'd of loved to see Tarrintino's take on a Bond Film, in the 80's I also thought J Carpenter would of been a good choice,But that might just be my love of horror movies. ajb007/lol

That's not a far-out thought. I loved Escape From New York and there is no reason not to picture John Carpenter making a fun Bond film.

115

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

I would love to see established directors like Tarantino take on Bond films. Bond films have become too light and stuck in tradition to past films or Fleming novels. Tarantino would definitely bring something fresh to our hero. As the Craig films exist in their own world, I hope future films will also have their own alternate continuity. I rather watch odd stuff like Teen Bond or an aged Bond in NSNA than another sequel. Bond at this point is a character free to many interpretations like Dracula or Sherlock Holmes.

116

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

JamesBondJunior wrote:

I would love to see established directors like Tarantino take on Bond films. Bond films have become too light and stuck in tradition to past films or Fleming novels. Tarantino would definitely bring something fresh to our hero. As the Craig films exist in their own world, I hope future films will also have their own alternate continuity. I rather watch odd stuff like Teen Bond or an aged Bond in NSNA than another sequel. Bond at this point is a character free to many interpretations like Dracula or Sherlock Holmes.

The solution is not to further drive away from the original source material. What they should be doing is finally getting closer to the atmosphere of Fleming's novels and finally put an end to the "rebel" Bond.

117

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

Ricardo C. wrote:
JamesBondJunior wrote:

I would love to see established directors like Tarantino take on Bond films. Bond films have become too light and stuck in tradition to past films or Fleming novels. Tarantino would definitely bring something fresh to our hero. As the Craig films exist in their own world, I hope future films will also have their own alternate continuity. I rather watch odd stuff like Teen Bond or an aged Bond in NSNA than another sequel. Bond at this point is a character free to many interpretations like Dracula or Sherlock Holmes.

The solution is not to further drive away from the original source material. What they should be doing is finally getting closer to the atmosphere of Fleming's novels and finally put an end to the "rebel" Bond.

I have to disagree. The series has lost its unique appeal and innovation. Returning Bond to Fleming's vision was interesting in Casino Royale, but I do not think its a permanent fix. Most fans that I talk to complain that this "new" Bond is too similar to modern action heroes like Rambo and Jason Bourne. Most people will always have the idea that the cinematic James Bond is closest to Roger Moore, Pierce Brosnan or Sean Connery. The general public knows little of the novel characterization. Whether this is good or bad is anyone's opinion, its just a fact.

Personally, I enjoy Fleming's novels. They are excellent source material, but are too dry, long-winded and dated to really satisfy today's audience. This is just speaking from a producer's perspective. Each story has been translated to screen, some better than others. Its time to stop retreading and start building upon Fleming's work.

I don't care what anyone says. The original film series is really what cemented the character as extraordinary. It was Fleming's novels tuned up with invigorating action sequences, wittier dialogue, boosted sexuality and more escapist plots. This is the James Bond that I miss.

An example, the 1931 film version of Frankenstein is only loosely based on Mary Shelley's novel. But it is a masterpiece and all of the more faithful adaptations are unmemorable.

118

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

JamesBondJunior wrote:

I have to disagree. The series has lost its unique appeal and innovation. Returning Bond to Fleming's vision was interesting in Casino Royale, but I do not think its a permanent fix. Most fans that I talk to complain that this "new" Bond is too similar to modern action heroes like Rambo and Jason Bourne. Most people will always have the idea that the cinematic James Bond is closest to Roger Moore, Pierce Brosnan or Sean Connery. The general public knows little of the novel characterization. Whether this is good or bad is anyone's opinion, its just a fact.

The 2006 Casino Royale was very much it's own entity that took very little from the book . All they did was borrow the mission and one or two key elements. Also I never said the series still has had it's touch, it's been long lost since the 1960's. Personally, I wish they stopped making the films years ago.

Personally, I enjoy Fleming's novels. They are excellent source material, but are too dry, long-winded and dated to really satisfy today's audience. This is just speaking from a producer's perspective. Each story has been translated to screen, some better than others. Its time to stop retreading and start building upon Fleming's work.

With a little imagination, you can stick the old source material without bastardizing it. No one at EON has the vision to do so. At the very least, they make these films thrillers again instead of just generic action flicks.

I don't care what anyone says. The original film series is really what cemented the character as extraordinary. It was Fleming's novels tuned up with invigorating action sequences, wittier dialogue, boosted sexuality and more escapist plots. This is the James Bond that I miss.

The movies cemented Bond's legendary status but I find the books superior. Bonds character was stronger than in the movies. I think the only time Bond's character was great in movies was Doctor No.

119

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

Why have you stuck around as a Bond fan? You should simply cut and run if you think the last time Bond was great was in a fifty-year-old movie.

Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:

http://apbateman.com

120

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

In my humble opinion, the spirit and intent of Ian Fleming's novel Casino Royale effectively made the transition to the big screen: a pivotal relationship earlier in Bond's career with tragic underpinnings, a high-stakes card game, mistakes made by Bond in the course of the mission, Bond's capture and very specific torture by the villain, the message behind the villain's demise, Bond's resolve to continue at the end.  That Eon finally returned to the source material is reason to be happy, as far as I'm concerned, rather than fret over the empty portion of the glass.

Personally, after 50 years and endless adaptational liberties with the original source material, I'd much rather celebrate what Fleming has survived (and continues to do so) than bemoan the rest.  I'm reminded of Fleming's own remarks on the Doctor No film after its release (paraphrasing):  "Those who haven't read the book will probaby think it's a good film, but those who have will probably be disappointed."  Truly a typical novelist's perspective, I should think  ajb007/wink

Ninety-eight percent of films adapted from novels are inferior to their source material, IMO, and such a thing is largely unavoidable due to the differences in the media.  My first screenplay, The Disappearance of Wiley Hood (still unproduced, damn the movie gods), was an adaptation of one of my own short stories---and things had to change in order to make it work.  In Eon's case, having committed to making Bond forever a man of the modern era, all we can hope for are peeks into the character's spirit and intent as the world moves ever beyond the era of his birth.

"Blood & Ashes"...AVAILABLE on Amazon.co.uk: Get 'Jaded': Blood & Ashes: The Debut Oscar Jade Thriller
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM

121

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

Loeffelholz wrote:

In my humble opinion, the spirit and intent of Ian Fleming's novel Casino Royale effectively made the transition to the big screen: a pivotal relationship earlier in Bond's career with tragic underpinnings, a high-stakes card game, mistakes made by Bond in the course of the mission, Bond's capture and very specific torture by the villain, the message behind the villain's demise, Bond's resolve to continue at the end.  That Eon finally returned to the source material is reason to be happy, as far as I'm concerned, rather than fret over the empty portion of the glass.

That's what I meant by hardly using the novel. They simplified or changed everything. The tragedy of Vesper was not fully exploited in film. In the novel Vesper, for Bond, became the beacon of black and white in a world that was udderly gray. When she died, he was thrown into a devistating psychological loop that he shoved him right back into Mi6.  The torture sequence was played for laughs in the movie. In Fleming's novel, it was dark. Bond barely talked back to Le Chiffre because he was in so much pain and he slipped in and out of consciousness, he was totally at his mercy. Then were was the Casino itself in the film which served as little more than just a backdrop. In Fleming's novel, you felt the ectasy of gambling, the thrill. Also of course the wretched change of baccarat to poker and Royale-les-Eaux became the barely exploited Montenegro. Nope, Casino Royale 2006 was not paying homage to the book like Doctor No or From Russia With Love; They just turned into a good action film. I like action films but it's not Fleming's work.

Also as a last note, I don't hate all film adaptations that aren't 100% close to the source material. Howards Hawks rarely stuck to the literary source in his films but they were still great like To Have and Have Not; It was a pleasing alternative. Casino Royale was not a pleasing alternative, they gave us neither the book nor something fresh in return. 


thesecretagent wrote:

Why have you stuck around as a Bond fan? You should simply cut and run if you think the last time Bond was great was in a fifty-year-old movie.

I never said the films suck after that but it's just that the character was strongest in that film.

Last edited by Ricardo C. (2nd Dec 2010 23:38)

122

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

Well, I can agree with you, Ricardo, that the films lost their touch of excellence perhaps after OHMSS. And I can totally understand Fleming's disdain for their adaptations, because his sense of storytelling is far removed from the populist styles of the films. But I think that Bond as populist art is superior to Bond as serious pulp espionage. I just feel more appreciation ofr them.

And I'm totally with you on returning Bond to a thriller series over an action series. I think that the most satisfying films in the series actually fit under the category of "Adventure" over "Thriller", "Espionage" or "Action". (Referring to Goldfinger and TSWLM). Those films took great elements of suspense and thriller storytelling while sugarcoating them with fashion-forward stylistic choices. I think the later Moore films and the Brosnan era films tried to hard to make Adventure films and just came up with cartoonish Action films. I do respect Casino Royale for bringing psychology into the series. I'll have to take your word on it being unfaithful as I have never read that one.

Its sad to think Fleming didn't like Dr. No. Its pretty amazing for such a low budget film that totally skips Bond's origins. The casting, the direction and the music are superb. I think they really couldn't have done better in that time period. Taking out the nudity, mild racism and Dr. No's green skin were all great and obvious choices.

123

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

Ricardo C. wrote:

That's what I meant by hardly using the novel. They simplified or changed everything.

In short, they adapted the novel to film  ajb007/wink

Ricardo C. wrote:

The tragedy of Vesper was not fully exploited in film. In the novel Vesper, for Bond, became the beacon of black and white in a world that was udderly gray. When she died, he was thrown into a devistating psychological loop that he shoved him right back into Mi6.

Fair enough.  I would have preferred something closer to the novel.  But the essence remains much the same for me.

Ricardo C. wrote:

The torture sequence was played for laughs in the movie. In Fleming's novel, it was dark. Bond barely talked back to Le Chiffre because he was in so much pain and he slipped in and out of consciousness, he was totally at his mercy.

Yes.  Brilliant in the book...and utterly unfilmable that way, unfortunately, if you're courting the film audience that's been putting cash in the coffers since '62.  I never felt it was 'played for laughs' in the least, using the yardstick laid out by 40+ years if previous Bonds, at any rate.  This remains my favourite scene in the film.  I feel that the moment when Le Chiffre tells Bond, "You really aren't going to tell me...are you?" and Bond laughs and says, "No," well, that's the moment when Craig became James Bond for me: a modern amalgam of classic Fleming that brought the cinematic heritage along for the ride. 

We all understand how disappointed you are with the state of Bond on film, to be sure, and I think it's safe to say that all remaining issues pertaining to your ambiguity with regard to this issue have been resolved  ajb007/smile

"Blood & Ashes"...AVAILABLE on Amazon.co.uk: Get 'Jaded': Blood & Ashes: The Debut Oscar Jade Thriller
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM

124

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

Loeffelholz wrote:

In short, they adapted the novel to film  ajb007/wink

I kind of like the word bastardized. Yes, bastardized. ajb007/tongue

Yes.  Brilliant in the book...and utterly unfilmable that way, unfortunately, if you're courting the film audience that's been putting cash in the coffers since '62.  I never felt it was 'played for laughs' in the least, using the yardstick laid out by 40+ years if previous Bonds, at any rate.  This remains my favourite scene in the film.  I feel that the moment when Le Chiffre tells Bond, "You really aren't going to tell me...are you?" and Bond laughs and says, "No," well, that's the moment when Craig became James Bond for me: a modern amalgam of classic Fleming that brought the cinematic heritage along for the ride.

There are way too many exchanges of one liners to take it very seriously, it was definetly played for laughs. It did not feel like a jarring or devistating experience. Possibly for the first few moments but no more. Unfilmable the way it was ? Hardly. Surely they could have better illustrated Bond feeling udderly defeated, like he knew this was it. In the film it felt like a temporary inconvience for Bond, not much else. And afterwards, the recover was again watered down. Bond's world was not devistated. He was in the hospital for a little and that's it, moving on. Casino Royale was a very simple film that took on a very complex book.

Last edited by Ricardo C. (3rd Dec 2010 04:28)

125

Re: Tarrintino's spin on directing a 007 movie

Ricardo C. wrote:

I kind of like the word bastardized. Yes, bastardized. ajb007/tongue

No. You adore the word; you're addicted  ajb007/lol  Put the word down, and step away from the car  ajb007/lol 
I double-dog dare you.

Ricardo C. wrote:

udderly

You're killing me   ajb007/martini

"Blood & Ashes"...AVAILABLE on Amazon.co.uk: Get 'Jaded': Blood & Ashes: The Debut Oscar Jade Thriller
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM