› ›

Would you rather find Sylvia Trench playing golf in your flat OR Tatiana waiting in your hotel room?

1…1819212324…147

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited August 2023 Posts: 40,954
    Pfft, I would've paid a large amount of money for a CR adaptation with Brosnan starring and Tarantino directing. No question.

    If I'm picking between the two talents of today, I'd go with Tarantino. Spielberg's would probably feel more Bondian but Tarantino's take would be so damn unique and different and colorful, I'd have to see what he could come up with.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,378
    I should have specified. Spielberg was rumored in the mid to late 70's. Not sure if it was indeed any truth to it. Tarantino was rumored in the early 2000's with Brosnan and CR.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,449
    Spielberg, at any given time.
  • Agent_Zero_OneAgent_Zero_One Ireland
    Posts: 554
    I'd be more interested in how Tarantino would do it. It'd certainly be unconventional, and I did really enjoy the spy section of Inglorious Basterds.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,193
    Hands down, Raider’s era Spielberg .
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited August 2023 Posts: 6,264
    There are some things they could do in a "Bond begins" new timeline--Bond meets Moneypenny, Bond meets the Bernard Lee M (played by Jonny Lee Miller?). There could be younger cameos of characters we might meet later on, like someone said, a Trevelyan.
    peter wrote: »
    Spielberg from the late 70s/80s? Or Spielberg now?

    If it was the young Beard, I’d take him over Tarantino (his action beats would be unbeatable)…. If it’s present day The Beard, I’d take Tarantino (whether it be the young, or present Tarantino. He’d be much more interesting than present day Spielberg. I may not like the end result of the Tarantino film, but I know I wouldn’t be bored, and I know he’d make daring choices that no one else would have the balls to consider)….

    We're on the same page. A younger Spielberg would be something to see. I mean, OP was basically an homage to Spielberg. But Spielberg is way, way past his prime--when was his last really good film...I'm thinking Catch Me If You Can?

    If we had to choose a director in 2023, I'd pick Tarantino over Spielberg, hands down. It wouldn't be boring, that's for sure.
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    Posts: 1,970
    I would of said Spielberg back in the late 70s, early 80s. Now? Tarantino by far. IMO Tarantino has never made a bad movie.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,512
    You can bet a Tarantino CR would see Bond sucking on Vesper's toes not fingers.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,134
    Spielberg for me.
  • brinkeguthriebrinkeguthrie Piz Gloria
    Posts: 1,400
    Spielberg is one of history's great directors. If they can get him, they should. This is not a hard choice.
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,122
    Spielberg over Tarantino.
  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    Posts: 3,327
    talos7 wrote: »
    Hands down, Raider’s era Spielberg .

    Absolutely! There is no better action adventure film.

    Tarantino would put too much of his own stamp on a Bond movie, which I don't think would be for the better. He is too ingrained in American trashy pop culture to really get the upper class English essence of Bond, whereas Spielberg wouldn't have that problem.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,142
    I'd be genuinely interested in both. A Spielberg Bond film immediately after MR? Hell, yeah. But a Tarantino Bond film? Sure, that too. Both would probably take the series in a very peculiar, possibly completely "off" direction, but come on, there's a perverse side to us all that is at least curious to see how it'd play out. ;-)
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited August 2023 Posts: 3,787
    It depends on their take:

    At least I've heard the Bond version of Tarantino:
    He wanted Brosnan to star in 60's version of Casino Royale, in black and white, it would come after the events of OHMSS, he'd also pitched Uma Thurman as Vesper and Samuel Jackson as Le Chiffre.

    So there's already the concept from Tarantino.

    On the other hand, I've never heard anything from Spielberg regarding his Bond film pitch, so I'm not sure what would his version of Bond film would've looked like, it's hard to tell, it's seemed like he didn't have the same enthusiasm as Tarantino in making a Bond film , and Tarantino, I think is also a Bond fan like Nolan, he had some interviews regarding Bond, heck, he'd even talked recently about Moonraker, so, I think, Tarantino is also a fan of the Franchise, he voiced out his interest about the James Bond films, so at least I can see him understanding the character and the material, he at least knows Bond, he does have a knowledge about Bond.

    Here's Tarantino talking about Moonraker with Roger Avery:

    https://www.independent.co.uk/independentpremium/culture/moonraker-bond-films-best-worst-b2147539.html

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/1649539/Quentin-Tarantino-Frank-Sinatra-James-Bond-theme-song-Moonraker-Shirley-Bassey/amp

    I'm not sure about Spielberg, granted he'd made some fantastic films, but when it comes to Bond, I'm not sure at what he could've done with it, at least in Tarantino, there's James Bond in his heart, something that Spielberg maybe didn't have, I liked Moonraker, and I also felt that Octopussy was somehow had that Spielberg style in it due to the fantastical elements of it, but again, I'm not sure at what he could've done with Bond, I'm not even sure if the guy had knowledge about the Bond Franchise.

    Actually, I liked the Bond directors to have at least an understanding of the character, to have at least a little knowledge about the character, because if they don't have any knowledge or understanding about Bond, they wouldn't likely to execute Bond well, or we're going to end up with a Bond film that's very un-Bond like, and I think Spielberg does fall into this category, he may be a great director, but I think he didn't have that much of an understanding regarding James Bond.

    And Tarantino laid that concept of what would his Bond film would've looked like
    meanwhile, never heard anything from Spielberg, he'd just stated that he was once considered to do a Bond film, but what Bond film is that? (Remember, he's even considered to direct NSNA), so with Tarantino, there's already a hint of what his Bond film might've looked like, Spielberg on the other hand is something I wasn't sure of.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,378
    I was always under the impression that Steven enjoyed Bond and was quite knowledgeable about the series as a whole. Quentin is such a cinebuff I can see him knowing more about the nuts and bolts.

    Over my years on the boards I have heard of 2 novels that many would like to see a more faithful adaption brought to the big screen. So lets have a literary would you rather with cinematic outcomes!

    Would you rather a faithful adaption of Moonraker for the Big Screen OR a faithful adaption of You Only Live Twice?

    You must choose just one!
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited August 2023 Posts: 3,787
    Neither for me.

    YOLT could only work as a sequel to OHMSS (and since OHMSS was already adapted, there's no way this book could've work again), and considering there's not that much plot in it, I don't see this working, and looking to the modern culture, I don't think it would've aged well, there's some racism in the book about the Japanese people.

    And NTTD did adapt some parts of it, including Safin, his lair, Bond's phrase (Die Blofeld Die), and the pregnancy.

    So, I don't need to see it.

    MR, on the other hand, was also semi-adapted many times in different forms, in GE and DAD, the ending of the book was echoed somewhat in QoS, I even see some elements borrowed from the book in SF.

    Alec Trevelyan, Gustav Graves, and Raoul Silva all felt like a modern reworking of the literary Hugo Drax.

    Would it work today? Yes, the plot maybe timeless about a Nuclear Missile Launch (but again, both GE and DAD already did it), I want something new and fresh this time.

    If there's a novel that's worth adapting now, it's TSWLM, as a PTS of introducing the new Bond.

    Neither, really, I want something new, unique and different.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,508
    I love Moonraker, it may be my favourite novel (with FRWL and OHMSS and yes, for all its faults, TMWTGG)…; it could easily be updated and quite close to the book. It would be the perfect introduction for a new actor (maybe in the film adaptation, M grounds Bond in London for some type of misbehaviour, and in the course of this grounding, M brings him on the caper at Blades….). A tight budget thriller with a ticking time bomb (literally).

    One would have to find new motives for Drax, but this could be an excellent, tight, contained thriller.

    Yes please….
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,954
    MR. Give me a completely faithfully accurate adaptation of that novel and I would be giddy as hell.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 4,061
    MR. Both novels have had elements of them adapted throughout a number of recent Bond films though. Still, with a good bit of tinkering MR could be adapted.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,449
    Got to go with MR, even though both could be fantastic. With MR though, it has pure standalone appeal, and I especially want to see a proper Drax and Gala.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,958
    Adapting any Bond novel faithfully would work for me.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,378
    I've been surprised that we haven't had a character called Gala Brand in any of the movies. As much as I love Lonsdale as Drax it would be good to see a different take on the character.

    I'm with you @FoxRox lets get a MR adaptation green lit with Barbara!
  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    Posts: 3,327
    They had their chance to adapt YOLT with NTTD, and they blew it, big time!

    So for that reason it has to be MR.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,787
    jetsetwilly wrote: »
    They had their chance to adapt YOLT with NTTD, and they blew it, big time!

    So for that reason it has to be MR.

    And they had their chance to adapt MR with DAD, and they blew it big time too 😅
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,512
    MR if I had to choose, but I am not a fan of reusing one-off specifics from other films, like 'Moonraker', 'Drax' etc. appearing again in a new film. Ideally it would be faithful in story/plot but change those names already used in the 1979 film. We don't need two MR films. Make a faithful adaptation for TV - a period piece, that would be great. Or a game. Basically, converting the novels to another medium than film is what I would prefer.
  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    Posts: 3,327
    QBranch wrote: »
    MR if I had to choose, but I am not a fan of reusing one-off specifics from other films, like 'Moonraker', 'Drax' etc. appearing again in a new film. Ideally it would be faithful in story/plot but change those names already used in the 1979 film. We don't need two MR films. Make a faithful adaptation for TV - a period piece, that would be great. Or a game. Basically, converting the novels to another medium than film is what I would prefer.

    What's more likely is certain scenes from the book may still get adapted, like the card game with M at Blades to expose a cheat, etc. This is crying out to be adapted.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,512
    jetsetwilly wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    MR if I had to choose, but I am not a fan of reusing one-off specifics from other films, like 'Moonraker', 'Drax' etc. appearing again in a new film. Ideally it would be faithful in story/plot but change those names already used in the 1979 film. We don't need two MR films. Make a faithful adaptation for TV - a period piece, that would be great. Or a game. Basically, converting the novels to another medium than film is what I would prefer.

    What's more likely is certain scenes from the book may still get adapted, like the card game with M at Blades to expose a cheat, etc. This is crying out to be adapted.
    Yes, the game at Blades would be great, complete with reflections in the cigarette case. Other things I'd welcome, such as the villain's physical appearance perhaps, Gala Brand, cliffs of Dover, locations all set in Britain.
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    Posts: 1,970
    YOLT by far. Its my favorite of the novels and is an amazing revenge story. Its a real shame EON ruined it in 1967.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,287
    YOLT is too weird and I'm not sure it's very cinematic; MR is the one I'd go for. The issue as mentioned above is that it's already been mined fairly effectively so may seem a bit derivative. Even that Stormbreaker book/film knocked it off.
  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    Posts: 3,327
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    YOLT by far. Its my favorite of the novels and is an amazing revenge story. Its a real shame EON ruined it in 1967.

    And they ruined it in 2021 too.... ;)
Sign In or Register to comment.