›

How would Cubby Broccoli have done Casino Royale differently

Ottofuse8Ottofuse8
edited March 2015 in Bond Movies Posts: 832
Cubby had wanted to do Casino Royale from the beginning, how would he have done it differently than babs did?
«1

Comments

  • jerome007jerome007
    edited March 2015 Posts: 158
    Nothing against Cubby but I think it would have been standard Bond-by-numbers fare and not as radical a change as we got.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    Roger Moore would have been paid 80 million to keep playing oo7
  • Tuck91Tuck91
    Posts: 1,680
    Im fine with DC doing it but it would have been interesting to see Connery or Brosnan do it.
  • JCRendleJCRendle
    Posts: 1,552
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Im fine with DC doing it but it would have been interesting to see Connery or Brosnan do it.
    I think the only "pre-Craig" Bond who could have done Casino Royale would have been Connery, and only if it were pre-Dr. No.

    Only because Fleming conceived Casino Royale as one of Bond's earlier missions.

    I still think From Russia With Love should have been before Dr. No...
  • dinovelvetdinovelvet
    Posts: 709
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    Roger Moore would have been paid 80 million to keep playing oo7

    JW Pepper would have been one of the gamblers at the table
  • JCRendleJCRendle
    Posts: 1,552
    dinovelvet wrote: »
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    Roger Moore would have been paid 80 million to keep playing oo7

    JW Pepper would have been one of the gamblers at the table
    :-&
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Im fine with DC doing it but it would have been interesting to see Connery or Brosnan do it.

    Connery yes. Brosnan doing CR woulnt have fared so well, with all kind regards to him.

  • Ottofuse8Ottofuse8
    Posts: 832
    I agree that it's best with babara doing it, and I love Casino Royale. I do think that Brosnan or Connery could have done it though, probably because aside from Craig they had the most character development. Actually what do people think about Lazenby doing it (I know some might find this appalling).
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    Lazenby? No.
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Any Bond movie would benefit from the inclusion of J W Pepper.

    He is dearly missed.

    The argument about who would do better Babs or Cubby is a bit of a no-brainer as he trusted his daughter and stepson to continue the franchise instead of selling it to the highest bidder and so ensuring financial well-being for his family. He chose to entrust his family and in that I find prove that he darned well knew what he was doing.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    Well, it really depends on when it would have been made.

    Early Connery era would make the most sense. I doubt we would have had the torture scene though. I think Lazenby would have been adequate but I wouldn't trade it for OHMSS, that's for sure. Also, you can't follow OHMSS up with CR and have the Bond girl die at the end two films in a row.

    Moore could have done it, yes, but it probably would have been markedly different from the novel and I don't think I like that trade off. Perhaps it would have worked perfectly for Dalton's first as TLD was kind of a soft reboot anyway. I'm not sure how much they would have changed.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I have a feeling that we were better off with Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson running this one. It's hard to see the patriarch resisting the urge to throw in a little kitsch.

    True and Cubby was always against going back to a 're-boot'/ origin film. Wilson put this (an origin story) to him in 86 and it was rejected.
  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    edited March 2015 Posts: 3,327
    Cubby made a lot of mistakes during his time, particularly during Moore's tenure, as much as he is put on a pedestal for what he did with the franchise.

    The one thing he did do right though, was hiring Dalton and attempting to go back to basics with Fleming, trying to adapt criminally unused Fleming scenes from the novels that he discarded during the Moore years.

    Had CR been made in the 60's with Connery, it would probably have been very good, FRWL/OHMSS style, although probably wouldn't have featured the torture scene in quite the same way as we got it in 2006.

    Had CR been made in the 70's with Moore, it would have been a disaster, with just about every scene discarded from the novel, with the exception of character names only.

    Had CR been made in the late 80's with Dalton, it would probably have been excellent, maybe even better than what we had with Craig.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    I agree with all these commemts bar one. I think that Craig's CR was excellent because I I prefer him in the role to Dalton.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,998
    Had it been directed by Terrance Young, it would probably have been quite good.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    pachazo wrote: »
    Well, it really depends on when it would have been made.

    Early Connery era would make the most sense. I doubt we would have had the torture scene though. I think Lazenby would have been adequate but I wouldn't trade it for OHMSS, that's for sure. Also, you can't follow OHMSS up with CR and have the Bond girl die at the end two films in a row.

    Moore could have done it, yes, but it probably would have been markedly different from the novel and I don't think I like that trade off. Perhaps it would have worked perfectly for Dalton's first as TLD was kind of a soft reboot anyway. I'm not sure how much they would have changed.

    This is the post I agree the most with.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,125
    I know there is another thread on this topic somewhere.
  • JamesSpectreJamesSpectre
    edited March 2015 Posts: 164
    ThomasCrown76 wrote: »
    Roger Moore would have been paid 80 million to keep playing oo7

    Roger Moore in Casino Royale would've been disguised as the cards dealer.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    A 34 year old Roger Moore in a 1962 version of CR, directed by Terence Young would have been a very different Bond from what he was in the 70s and 80s. Preferably with Joseph Wiseman as Le Chiffre.
  • DRush76DRush76
    Posts: 533
    Im fine with DC doing it but it would have been interesting to see Connery or Brosnan do it.


    Why?
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Had it been directed by Terrance Young, it would probably have been quite good.

    Yes yes yes.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,998
    One sees an interesting difference between the Terrance Young films and what followed.
    I liked Goldfinger immensely, because it was big, bold, and colorful. But the realism we saw in the first two films begins slipping away in GF, until the series finally reaches a point of absurdity on so many levels. The producer(s) must take responsibility for the direction the series went. My enthusiasm for Broccoli began to diminish when it was clear the series was far more focused on stunts, big set pieces, and outlandish stories.

    Young might have been a better producer. CR is up there among my favorite Bond films, but I find the Miami airport sequence tedious. For some reason, it always seems to pull me out of the film before getting back on track.


  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    CrabKey wrote: »
    One sees an interesting difference between the Terrance Young films and what followed.
    I liked Goldfinger immensely, because it was big, bold, and colorful. But the realism we saw in the first two films begins slipping away in GF, until the series finally reaches a point of absurdity on so many levels. The producer(s) must take responsibility for the direction the series went. My enthusiasm for Broccoli began to diminish when it was clear the series was far more focused on stunts, big set pieces, and outlandish stories.

    One could say this trajectory is commonplace with each era. I know people will defend the DC era as going against the grain, but for all the character work it does seem like the arc is similar. Doing it better, doesn't excuse it from doing 'the same'. Introducing more and more of what is expected, rather than stripping it away. I get the impression this will always happen.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    CrabKey wrote: »
    One sees an interesting difference between the Terrance Young films and what followed.
    I liked Goldfinger immensely, because it was big, bold, and colorful. But the realism we saw in the first two films begins slipping away in GF, until the series finally reaches a point of absurdity on so many levels. The producer(s) must take responsibility for the direction the series went. My enthusiasm for Broccoli began to diminish when it was clear the series was far more focused on stunts, big set pieces, and outlandish stories.

    Young might have been a better producer. CR is up there among my favorite Bond films, but I find the Miami airport sequence tedious. For some reason, it always seems to pull me out of the film before getting back on track.


    CR is the perfect example of a near perfect modern 007 film though. For the most part the casino/ Vesper elements remain fairly faithful to the Fleming story. However, we also get stunning action set pieces such as the free running scene and more exotic locations and Bond girls such as the Bahama scenes.
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre
    Posts: 1,548
    So glad Brosnan didn't do this with Tarantino
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    suavejmf wrote: »
    CR is the perfect example of a near perfect modern 007 film though.

    Indeed. It hasn't been surpassed in the intervening decade.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    I don't think it will either. For me the best Bond film since the 60's.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    suavejmf wrote: »
    I don't think it will either. For me the best Bond film since the 60's.

    I think you're probably right, the trajectory they're on suggests it won't be beaten.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    I'm not expecting a DAD/MR style Craig entry anytime soon though! :)>-
  • RC7RC7
    edited April 2015 Posts: 10,512
    suavejmf wrote: »
    I'm not expecting a DAD/MR style Craig entry anytime soon though! :)>-

    Definitely not, but I think they choked to some extent after QoS and they'll be adding more of the familiar with SP. I reckon if they stripped all the nods and attempts at old-school humour out of SF it would be a much better film. Even the Brosnan films didn't stoop to including the GF DB5.
Sign In or Register to comment.