Casino Royale directed by Quentin Tarantino and starring PB. How would it have turned out?

BAIN123

Commenting on this in the "more Fleming-esque" thread last night made me wonder. QT has made some GREAT movies but has also made some bad ones and has more than a bit of that "fanboy" manner about him.

That said, he has made some extremely distinctive films with very quotable dialogue. Would you have been excited about him adapting Fleming's first story?

Note: I wouldn't trade the CR '06 for anything - its just for fun.

chuck007

it would be, bloody, full of dirty words, and villains shooting each other (mr white and le chifre)

oo7

a waste of celluloid as all his efforts are. if robert rodriguez really believed predators was superior film to predator 2 then prehaps tarantinos verson of Casino Royal with an old pierce brosnan falling for vesper due to naivty would make as much sense as daniel craig fighting jaw and drax. oh wait...
Oh wait i bet he would have imagined himself back to 1951 from 2005 like chris reeve in that film with jane seymour. somewhere in time.

DoubleOhhSeven

I would've been a steaming pile of trash. Luckily the Skyfall teaser has just been released so let's all watch that again shall we. :D

SaintMark

It would have been a bucket of steaming horsedung directed by the one director who is heavily overrated.

QT will never be as good as he himself thinks he is. O:-)

doubleoego

To be fair I think it would have been very creative and interesting to say the least but it's nothing worth dwelling on. CR as it is is a fantastic film.

SirHenryLeeChaChing

SaintMark said:
It would have been a bucket of horsedung directed by the one director who is heavily overrated.

QT will never be as good as he himself thinks he is. O:-)

=D> Could not have put it any better except to say "steaming horsedung".

Univex

SirHenryLeeChaChing said:

SaintMark said:
It would have been a bucket of horsedung directed by the one director who is heavily overrated.

QT will never be as good as he himself thinks he is. O:-)

=D> Could not have put it any better except to say "steaming horsedung".

Quite agree with the above. "bucket of steaming horsedung" it is.

SirHenryLeeChaChing

Yes, much stinkier and visually more effective ;)

Univex

SirHenryLeeChaChing said:
Yes, much stinkier and visually more effective ;)

"manure" would fit there as well. Oh well, Tarantino is way overated.

SaintMark

SirHenryLeeChaChing said:

SaintMark said:
It would have been a bucket of steaming horsedung directed by the one director who is heavily overrated.

QT will never be as good as he himself thinks he is. O:-)

=D> Could not have put it any better except to say "steaming horsedung".

I took your critism and corrected my oversight

SirHenryLeeChaChing

What criticism? Just a suggestion fellow Bond brother. One of your most awesome posts ever!

I am in a shockingly extremely happy mood, smiling icons all over the place!

fanbond123

Tarantino is a huge Bond fan so that would be a big plus. Having loads of f words in the film would be a shame. Bond films don't need constant swearing or ultra violence.

SirHenryLeeChaChing

Bond movies have too much class, EON would very likely never allow that language to be used. The epithet "bloody" might appear more than normal if Tarantino had his way, but the F bomb, never.

"A little violence never hurt anybody"- Benjamin "Lefty Guns" Ruggiero ;))

Violence is always a part of Bond movies. I don't mind the "ultra violence" of LTK for example, because it fits the story.

Kerim

Die Another Day would have looked like Citizen Kane in comparison.

it would have been good...

BAIN123

Quentin Tarantino vs Lee Tamahori.

One made Pulp Fiction, the other did not ;)

Also, who's to say it would be packed with f-bombs just because QT directed it? I'm sure the guy could adapt if he wanted to.

Recently Martin Scorsese (whose films are often loaded with violence and f-bombs) made his first ever kids film.

thelivingroyale

Tarantino is a great director, and Brosnan by 2006 had become a better actor and imo was a great Bond. I would've definetly enjoyed it.

actonsteve

We dodged a bullet letting QT anywhere near a Bond film. Him wanting Piercey shows what lapse of judgement the man had. The fifty something Piercey doing a story about Bond learning the ropes and getting his 00 status.

We didnt just dodge the bullet. We dodged a machine gun spray of them. "Gorgola:The Gorilla Bride" would have been a better film.

BAIN123

actonsteve said:
We dodged a bullet letting QT anywhere near a Bond film. Him wanting Piercey shows what lapse of judgement the man had. The fifty something Piercey doing a story about Bond learning the ropes and getting his 00 status.

We didnt just dodge the bullet. We dodged a machine gun spray of them. "Gorgola:The Gorilla Bride" would have been a better film.

Who said it would have been about Bond learning the ropes?

The original novel wasn't an origin story like the film was. When we first read about Bond he's a fully formed 00 agent.

I suppose it would have been re-written somehow. Pierce, an older 00 agent who thinks he's seen it all is suddenly caught off guard by Vesper.

Age doesn't always make you wiser.

actonsteve

BAIN123 said:

actonsteve said:
We dodged a bullet letting QT anywhere near a Bond film. Him wanting Piercey shows what lapse of judgement the man had. The fifty something Piercey doing a story about Bond learning the ropes and getting his 00 status.

We didnt just dodge the bullet. We dodged a machine gun spray of them. "Gorgola:The Gorilla Bride" would have been a better film.

Who said it would have been about Bond learning the ropes?

The original novel wasn't an origin story like the film was. When we first read about Bond he's a fully formed 00 agent.

I suppose it would have been re-written somehow. Pierce, an older 00 agent who thinks he's seen it all is suddenly caught off guard by Vesper.

Age doesn't always make you wiser.

Thats true. Its Tarantino after all. Bond would have been a seventies [edited] with flares and Afro and a propensity for jumping slo mo in the air while calling everybody "bitches" and wielding a samarai sword.

Edited by moderator

BAIN123

actonsteve said:

BAIN123 said:

actonsteve said:
We dodged a bullet letting QT anywhere near a Bond film. Him wanting Piercey shows what lapse of judgement the man had. The fifty something Piercey doing a story about Bond learning the ropes and getting his 00 status.

We didnt just dodge the bullet. We dodged a machine gun spray of them. "Gorgola:The Gorilla Bride" would have been a better film.

Who said it would have been about Bond learning the ropes?

The original novel wasn't an origin story like the film was. When we first read about Bond he's a fully formed 00 agent.

I suppose it would have been re-written somehow. Pierce, an older 00 agent who thinks he's seen it all is suddenly caught off guard by Vesper.

Age doesn't always make you wiser.

Thats true. Its Tarantino after all. Bond would have been a seventies with flares and Afro and a propensity for jumping slo mo in the air while calling everybody "bitches" and wielding a samarai sword.

Samuel L. Jackson would need to make a cameo in there somewhere :p

Him, Harvey Keitel or (gasp!) Tarantino himself.

thelivingroyale

actonsteve said:

BAIN123 said:

actonsteve said:
We dodged a bullet letting QT anywhere near a Bond film. Him wanting Piercey shows what lapse of judgement the man had. The fifty something Piercey doing a story about Bond learning the ropes and getting his 00 status.

We didnt just dodge the bullet. We dodged a machine gun spray of them. "Gorgola:The Gorilla Bride" would have been a better film.

Who said it would have been about Bond learning the ropes?

The original novel wasn't an origin story like the film was. When we first read about Bond he's a fully formed 00 agent.

I suppose it would have been re-written somehow. Pierce, an older 00 agent who thinks he's seen it all is suddenly caught off guard by Vesper.

Age doesn't always make you wiser.

Thats true. Its Tarantino after all. Bond would have been a seventies with flares and Afro and a propensity for jumping slo mo in the air while calling everybody "bitches" and wielding a samarai sword.

Tarantino is a good director who can adapt and I think he read the book and wanted it set in the 50s.

bondsum

BAIN123 said:
Quentin Tarantino vs Lee Tamahori.

One made Pulp Fiction, the other did not ;)

Depends whether you view Pulp Fiction as a sacred cow or just a rather slow, disjointed and self-satisfied Grindhouse movie with A-list stars.

You seem to wish that QT had made CR, Bain. I'm sure the movie in your head plays out far better than anything Tarantino could ever have managed, and maybe it's best that you hold on to that unfulfilled thought as a real Tarantino Bond movie would only have led to a major disappointment.

I also shudder to think what the soundtrack might have sounded like. Probably sampled music from 60's cop shows and Connie Francis numbers.

BAIN123

bondsum said:

BAIN123 said:
Quentin Tarantino vs Lee Tamahori.

One made Pulp Fiction, the other did not ;)

Depends whether you view Pulp Fiction as a sacred cow or just a rather slow, disjointed and self-satisfied Grindhouse movie with A-list stars.

You seem to wish that QT had made CR, Bain. I'm sure the movie in your head plays out far better than anything Tarantino could ever have managed, and maybe it's best that you hold on to that unfulfilled thought as a real Tarantino Bond movie would only have led to a major disappointment.

I also shudder to think what the soundtrack might have sounded like. Probably sampled music from 60's cop shows and Connie Francis numbers.

I don't. I already said I wouldn't give up the CR film we have for anything. Its one of my favourite Bond films BUT its just interesting to wonder how an alternative CR would have turned out.

I'm a fan of PF. I like the quotable if nerdy dialogue (I'm a nerd so I enjoy it all the more), the classy soundtrack and the "jigsaw" story. Slow? Nah, Ive watched it many times and never once got bored.

While more controversial I've always enjoyed Inglorious Basterds. Its not as focused but has some great moments. The opening scene, which everyone knows by now, shows what a great film-maker QT CAN be.

I'd have thought the existing PTS of CR would be something up Quentin's alley. Its dark (both visually and content-wise), violent but funny aswell.

bondsum

I was hugely disappointed with Inglorious Basterds, especially when I recall QT talking about Where Eagles Dare and the Dirty Dozen being huge war favourites of his. He even went so far as to say that Eagles was the Terminator of its day. I fully expected these movies to have had an influence on him and the making of IB with lots of action set pieces and a return to the Boy's Own adventures. But what we got was a way too slow period movie on French/German cinema in the 40's and next to zero action, just lots of deliberation and an outlandish plot. I find QT talks a good movie but doesn't deliver on one. That's how I see him nowadays.

And I bet his "new" spaghetti western homage is a complete pile of fecal matter when it comes out too.

DaltonCraig007

someone didn't have enough hugs this morning....... :P

thelivingroyale

bondsum said:
And I bet his "new" spaghetti western homage is a complete pile of fecal matter when it comes out too.

It's called Django Unchained. And it's my most anticipated film of the year, me and lots of others are really excited for it, and there's a great cast who seem really excited. I'll be really suprised if it's crap.

BAIN123

bondsum said:
I was hugely disappointed with Inglorious Basterds, especially when I recall QT talking about Where Eagles Dare and the Dirty Dozen being huge war favourites of his. He even went so far as to say that Eagles was the Terminator of its day. I fully expected these movies to have had an influence on him and the making of IB with lots of action set pieces and a return to the Boy's Own adventures. But what we got was a way too slow period movie on French/German cinema in the 40's and next to zero action, just lots of deliberation and an outlandish plot. I find QT talks a good movie but doesn't deliver on one. That's how I see him nowadays.

And I bet his "new" spaghetti western homage is a complete pile of fecal matter when it comes out too.

My mum funnily enough - not normally a fan of his - really enjoyed IB. She hadn't seen PF or RD. I think one of the problems with IB is thats its episodic and doesn't really fit together as well as something like PF did. The ending is rather convoluted too.

Still, its got some great scenes.

jolearon

Would be EPIC for sure.

wildboonjive

Tarantino is a fantastic director, one of the best of his generation, and Inglorious Basterds is a superb film. Those who feel let down by it for being "too slow" are missing the point entirely. As skilled as Tarantino is at directing action, his greatest strength is actually in building tension within a scene, and he does that through careful plotting and clever dialogue. IB was one of his best examples of that. In fact, I don't think he has ever made a bad movie, though some are surely better than others. But he is a gifted filmmaker on many levels and can apply those skills across several genres.

That said, his version of Casino Royale would have surely been very different than what we ended up with, or any other Bond movie for that matter. But it would have been interesting nonetheless. My only point of hesitation is the fact that he wanted to make it with Brosnan, and that's a bit shocking for me because I don't consider Brosnan to be a particularly good actor, and Tarantino has always surrounded himself with top talent, and most significantly, gotten great performances out of said talent. However, it's likely that he would have made Pierce give a career performance, and that would have aided his vision surely. But he could have had much more to work with had he made it with someone like Craig, or others perhaps. Either way, it would have been an interesting vision, but I don't regret for a minute that it never happened.

Categories

In this Discussion

Announcements