Thurman to Be a Bond Girl? Hollywood movie-maker Quentin Tarantino is set to cast his muse Uma Thurman as a Bond girl if he lands the next 007 director role. The Kill Bill director is desperate to helm the 21st James Bond film - a remake of Ian Fleming's original story Casino Royale - and is keen to keep Irish heart-throb Pierce Brosnan on for one more spy outing. A source told British tabloid Daily Star, "Quentin wants Pierce as his Bond and Uma as a Bond girl. The thing is that Uma doesn't like the idea of being just another girl for Bond, so she's said she'll only ever do it if she gets to kick 007's a*s." http://imdb.com/news/wenn/#1
Probably right. They are pretty protective of the franchise. But it would be a nice change of pace. I like the idea of a Bond movie having some nice snappy dialog. Have the dialog drive the move and the action in appropriate moments. However these days looking at the last few films (of which I very much enjoyed) they seem to be leaning on big budget action. As far as I am concerned the major key to a good bond movie is having great villians to foil Bond.
The girl in Casino Royale never kicks anyone's a$$, as I recall, let alone Bond's. Not that the Fleming novels have been all that intrinsic to the movie scripts in any more than a nominal sense; setting, character names, etc.
I think this is a misconception and I hear it a lot. Many people say they like Bond because of the Evil villain, the cool gadgets, they witty dialogue... but in truth, that's what really has made the movies stupid. They're cool, and add personality to the film, but in order to preven the film from being stupid, they should all be toned down and should only exist to complement a good story/plot. The Broccolis better do something different: Goldeneye was very good Tomorrow Never Dies was ... okay The World is Not Enough was .... kinda bad Die Another Day was absolutely aweful. Worst of all Bond films. (yes, worse than TSWLM, NSNA, Thunderball, and even worse than Moonraker) The series has really gone down the crapper. Brosnan has been an excellent Bond, but his contract is up and he has the luxury of turning down a film if the script and director aren't good enough. Things I'd like to see in a bond film: No more heroines. I'm sick of seeing bond fight WITH women, or getting saved by women. He's a womanizer, and any woman he encounters should only be there as a sex kitten or plaything. They should not be tough, powerful, or smart. They should not fight agents or save Bond (aka Jinx, Wai Lin, christmas Jones). Is that sexist? Yes. But that's what has always made us love Bond. No more 'saving the world' The best Bond films haven't been about saving the world from destruction. They've been mostly about espionage stuff: retrieving decoders, combatting organized crime, drug cartels, that sort of thing. Less cliches Gadgets, clever one-liners, Fanatastic evil palaces/weapons, these should exist only to complement the characters and story. But they've taken center stage and it's gotten stupid. I'm not opposed having them, but they should be toned down dramatically. Once all that crap is gone and a good story is revealed, people will love Bond again. -- droxford (a huge Bond fan)
QT and Bond.......honestly, that would be the coolest thing ever. How could he NOT get the job? That movie is an instant mega hit. It would make millions and millions and millions.
I hear ya Pole. I'm under the impression that Tarantino can literally do whatever he wants in Hollywood. Everybody wants a piece of that guy's money.
I'm unsure of QT and Bond as stylistically compatible. Of course, I would LOVE if ANY director's versions were more compatible to the original novels, which generally were on a much smaller scale, and more along the lines of a tradtional detective novel with action as opposed to an action story.
Why do you think that? Becuase the guy has had one hit movie and a couple of decent performers since then? Die Another Day alone outgrossed both halves of Kill Bill (thus far). Heck, Die Another Day outgrossed Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown combined. QT can do what he wants at Miramax, but there's no evidence to support the idea that anyone else is just dying to work with him, especially on something that's stylistically out of his wheelhouse. And since the Broccolis have nothing but Bond, they're very protective. They would not want the Bond that QT would likely deliver. And with Sony buying MGM, it's questionable whether they'd want to work with QT, either. And it seems like the Bond franchise is doing just fine without hiring someone who hasn't shown the Bond sensibilities to direct (and not to mention that Columbia is skittish about hiring directors who aren't in the Director's Guild. And QT isn't in the Director's Guild and has shown no interest in joining).
That's not really a fair assessment. Pulp Fiction was in the top ten highest grosses for 1994. Die Another Day didn't even make the top ten eight years later when it was released. Bond movies are always preceded by an out and out media blitz. I don't watch a whole lot of TV, but I can't remember EVER seeing a commercial for either of the Kill Bill's. I'm sure they're out there......but I've never seen one. You combine the larger than cult, cult like following that QT has with an all out Bond type media blitz, and I believe you end up with the top grossing movie of any year that doesn't have another Titanic or Lord of the Rings movie.
Nomar would like to add he thinks this is the worst possible thing to happen to modern filmmaking since Kill Bill.
What did the directors of the previous 4 films do before Bond? The Goldeneye guy came from TV if I'm not mistaken. Tomorrow Never Dies was directed by the same guy who did Stop or my Mom Will Shoot, Air America, and Turner and Hooch. I guess they were awesome flicks to you mrpaige. The Director of the last one did Along Came a Spider and the Edge, movies I liked but weren't exactly box office gold. Though ACAS was profitable. You don't think QT is in the same league as these guys? I think you could direct a Bond film and it would still be a hit.
She looked pretty good when I saw (maybe) her first movie back in the 80's (when she was a fresh young-un)...Baron Von Muscousen...or something peculiar to that effect...I was young and in love!... But, now I agree totally with your comments...
I'd pay double the price of a movie ticket to see a QT Bond flick. Keep Pierce because he's the **** and a distant relative. The series has gotten stale and I'd say since Goldeneye so they just keep dropping the ball. Get good talent behind the camera and writing and whatnot and let's get this amazing movie made!
Are you kidding me?!? TND and TWINE were awesome. They are 2 of the highest grossing Bond flicks ever. TWINE had one of the best plot twists I can think of in recent memory, and had excellent characters/development. The Spy Who Loved Me??? Thunderball?? Dude you are crazy. Those are 2 of the best bond films ever made. I agree with Moonraker, but you might want to add The Man With the Golden Gun, Licence To Kill (aka Bond Vice), and A View To a Kill - those were some of the worst in the series. Any Connery Bond flick was gold because Connery IS Bond in my opinion. You need to go back and watch the series again. Ive watched it about 20 times over now. RE: Tarantino. I think it would be interesting to have him direct, but I find it doubtful that team Broccoli would want it. Too much of the unknown. People WANT the same formula when they see a Bond flick. Its not original, but the key ingredients are what keep fans coming back year after year after year. Messing with that is messing with tradition.
