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
this film does not and never did exist so why document a non event jamespage?
There are plenty of 60s and 70s knockoff Bonds he could remake.
Most of his recent films have been over-hyped due to the fact he started with two brilliant movies. Kill Bill 1 was ok, but OTT and over-long, KB2 seemed to lose the plot, and IB seemed to have much of the action left on the cutting room floor, another film that's not as good as some would have you believe.
I'll probably go see DU, but please keep this man away from Bond.
They didn't have the rights to CR. So let's imagine that they start talking about how much they want to make CR. What would happen then? The price that they would pay to buy the rights would skyrocket. So no matter how much that they want it - which I would imagine is a lot - they underplay CR and make it sound unimportant to them.
Let's say that you want to buy a very specific car, say, a 1962 Mustang and I'm the only person who has one for sale in your city. Not only that, but for years I've had the only one. You want to buy it from me - are you going to tell me how desperately you want it? Of course not, because then I can jack the price up. You tell me, well, sure it's a classic, but the car is old, it doesn't have the features that new cars have, it will break down, etc.
So I find it hard to believe that they were working on a reboot and were NOT thinking of CR. It was probably a matter of price. Of course, if they let it be known that they'd like to do CR and then they DON'T get the rights then how bad would that look? It was well-played on their part, I think.
Campbell doesn't want to come back :( WHYYYYYYYYY
With a 1962 Mustang you probably are :D
On a serious note, I do agree that it's a good move money-wise. When I went and bought my car I also told the bloke that the bumper was dented and it had a few paint chips. It was still in a great shape, but had I told him that the price would have been raised.
For tarantino to say that it's because of him that Casino Royale was made is like saying I'm should be credited for Skyfall because I once made a story about bond having a DB5 as his personal car.
It makes me want to crawl over broken glass to thank Eon that this never happened and the rights went to the right people. We certainly dodged a bullet on that one.
Because up until now, the public didn't know that Tarantino actually bid against EON for the rights to make the film. That is quite significant in the Bond history books.
We don't 'not' cover news because we don't like the guy. Tune in to cable news if that's your style.
As much as we need Batman threads. :D
As for Tarantino, his claim that it would have been a Tarantino movie and not a Broccoli movie says all. No sense in thinking about that story anymore.
It does look like he went to the Broccolis and said he and QT wanted to do CR sometime after May 2004. He was sacked in October 2004. Be interesting to see his teaming up with QT had on the Broccolis.
Sorry, but:
1. Considering in the 2006 Bond wants to kill her, with the 'allow me' line, and..
2. a similar storyline in TWINE was played out where he killed Elektra,
I really don't think it would have made that much a stink :)
He didn't want to kill her. He just wanted answers. All because he said it, doesn't mean he meant it.
And regarding QT, he has no place near Bond movies. Final verdict.
Ditto with Brosnan. As much as I enjoy him in the films his "7 books" remark is rather embarrassing.
As I've said before I'm curious to see how a "Tarantino Bond film" would have looked but I wouldn't trade the CR we have for anything.
In early 1997, Thunderball producer Kevin McClory and Sony/Columbia Pictures teamed up to begin work on Warhead 2000, a James Bond film based loosely on a treatment McClory worked on with Ian Fleming in the late 1950s. Sony/Columbia was looking for a franchise movie series and McClory was the stepping stone they needed in perhaps the most outrageous lawsuit in the annals of Hollywood history.
In short, McClory/Sony/Columbia sued MGM/UA and Eon Productions on the grounds that McClory’s story elements from Thunderball had been exploited in every James Bond film since 1962's Dr. No. A claim that could yield McClory and Sony millions, if not billions, and the control of the cinematic rights to James Bond.
The suit was considered ‘dirty pool’ in Hollywood. The thought of undermining the series away from the Broccoli family, who has made it successful for over 35 years, was pathetic in the minds of fans all over the world. By late 1999, Sony/Columbia still had no competing Bond film. Faced with a negative ruling from a Los Angeles judge, Sony decided to drop the suit and settle out of court which in turn gave MGM the distribution rights of Casino Royale.
Source: Dr. Shatterhand's Botanical Garden - "It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad Royale: How the First OO7 Novel Got Away - Until Now" http://shatterhand007.com/MadRoyale/ItsAMadMadRoyale.html
IMHO I think the Broccoli family was seriously looking to get the rights to CR for many years. Michael Wilson mentions, "United Artist bought out Charlie Feldman’s rights and Columbia owns the rights in common, so they’re in a Mexican standoff." Wilson continued, "I think it's an interesting (Fleming) story - whether it's in our style, the right way to go with Bond, I don't know? It's a very heavy story in a way. To fall in love with a woman who is a double agent and be completely misled after all Bond has been through with her is tough. Then have her commit suicide and have Bond feel good about it - that's kind of a heavy film." (Bondage magazine #17 - 1989)
Barbara Broccoli mentions, "It was always an ambition of theirs (Cubby and Harry Saltzman) to be able to make this story but, sadly, they were never able to. So, when it finally became available to us, we leapt at the chance."
MGM had the book rights and the distribution rights to CR by 2000 and most likely after all the legal dust had cleared from that frivolous lawsuit Die Another Day was already in pre-production. CR was just sitting waiting for a decision as to how to go about it. So how in the hell did QT get into a bidding war with this novel? My own guess is that he was hoping to be offered the director's reigns for a Bond film. Whatever the real truth is, I'm glad he was shown the door by Eon since I feel he would have messed up the novel with an aging Brosnan.
The Broccoli family does listen to its fans and they knew we wanted a faithful adaptation. Brosnan was too old for that book and a difficult decision was made to start new. Long live Daniel Craig.
With all due respect, Brosnan was indeed too old looking to be Bond after 2002. They made that mistake once by keeping Sir Roger one more movie longer than necessary and I'll never agree with Cubby on that or even longer, as he originally wanted Sir Roger to also do TLD. I give Sir Roger credit for pulling the plug on that notion. We all know that despite a hit title song, AVTAK clearly exposes the need for a new and younger actor to be Bond. Giving Brosnan CR over Craig, or a 5th movie at all would have been a poor decision that Michael and Barbara were smart enough not to make, kudos to them for that.
I shudder to think what a rival CR collaboration with Brosnan and Tarantino directing would have been like. What I do know is that I would not have paid to see it, like NSNA it would have been an inferior effort to what we got. Tarantino had no idea what the book ending was, and if he did he thought he had a better idea. Wrong. Vesper's suicide was right to do based on the source material. Now whether you support Fleming's out of touch idea with what modern moviegoers want to see (Bond simply finding her dead with a suicide note) as right or not is a matter of opinion. To me, that would have been much less dramatically effective than Bond's efforts to save her and her actually saying goodbye in person. Another time in the distant past, it may have worked but not nowadays.
McGlory was a petty and greedy f**k and definitely played dirty pool. He did all he could and beyond to damage EON. I don't usually speak ill of the dead, but I'd dance a jig on McGlory's grave if I am ever in the neighborhood and bored enough to actually visit it. Good riddance to that poor excuse for a human being.
I liked the Zorro film he (Campbell), made.
Anyway, I'd like a Tarantino Bond film with Brosnan, but I like the CR we had.
He's my favourite director, and I would like him to film a Bond flick in the future (although after all this it probably would never happen). And I do sort of feel bad for him, since it does seem like he wanted to make CR and then they made it and it was a smash hit.
Some directors don't realise they are wrong for a project until someone points it out to them. Did he really think he could muscle in on Bond? Did he really think if he obtained the rights the Broccolis would roll over and want to work with him?
I think he did. A star director thinks he can get what he wants. The Broccolis have always ploughed their own furrow.
I am ever so glad you have pointed this out @Doctor_Shatterhand. I too, wonder how Tarantino wanted to bid for the rights, if by 2004, they were already safe in EON's keep.