It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
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.
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.
"manure" would fit there as well. Oh well, Tarantino is way overated.
I took your critism and corrected my oversight
I am in a shockingly extremely happy mood, smiling icons all over the place!
"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.
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.
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
Samuel L. Jackson would need to make a cameo in there somewhere :p
Him, Harvey Keitel or (gasp!) Tarantino himself.
Tarantino is a good director who can adapt and I think he read the book and wanted it set in the 50s.
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.
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.
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.
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.