"Quantum of Solace" and other unused Fleming titles - are they viable film titles?
#1
Posted 21 July 2003 - 10:23 PM
"Quantum of Solace"
"Risico"
"The Hildebrand Rarity"
"The Property of a Lady"
"007 in New York"
Which, if any, do you think would be the most viable title for a Bond film made today?
"Quantum of Solace" - Well, if MGM worried that people would be too dumb to understand "Licence Revoked", heaven knows what they'd make of this one. It would be unpronounceable to many, as well as meaningless (talking of unpronounceable, I wonder how much pressure the young actor Ioan Gruffudd, often spoken of as a potential Bond in the future, came under to change his name).
No such problem with "Risico" - Snappy and not remotely difficult to spell or speak, all they'd need is a villain with the surname Risico and they'd be away. OTOH, it's just not an exciting, sexy title, IMO.
"The Hildebrand Rarity" - Too dated. Sounds like a British B-movie of the 1940s or 50s.
"The Property of a Lady" - According to some sources, this was going to be the title of the planned third Dalton film. Probably the best of the bunch, but to me it doesn't really sound like a Bond film; instead, I picture a Merchant Ivory period drama (A ROOM WITH A VIEW, THE REMAINS OF THE DAY, etc.).
"007 in New York" - I really think this could work. Of course, it presupposes a Bond film set at least mainly in NYC, but that certainly doesn't sound a bad idea to me. It would be a memorable and unique title for a Bond film (none, of course, has ever had "007" or "James Bond" in the title), and to me it has an air of mystery, exoticism (well, unless you live in New York, of course:D) and a secret mission - perfect. At any rate, I don't think it would be any weaker as a film title than TOMORROW NEVER DIES or DIE ANOTHER DAY.
Opinions?
#2
Posted 21 July 2003 - 10:39 PM
"Risico" comes from For Your Eyes Only
"The Hildebrand Rarity" a character from this novel was Milton Crest and he was was portrayed in LTK.
"The Property of a Lady" was mentioned already in Octopussy
"007 in New York" No way
I like Icebreaker and John Gardner's other titles
#3
Posted 21 July 2003 - 10:47 PM
Originally posted by Tarl_Cabot
"The Property of a Lady" was mentioned already in Octopussy
I don't see that that matters. After all, THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH was mentioned first in ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE.
Tarl_Cabot, if you had to choose one of those five Fleming titles, which would you go for?
Gardner had some great titles, but there wouldn't be the prestige factor in using a Gardner title that there would be in using a Fleming title.
#4
Posted 21 July 2003 - 10:51 PM
#5
Posted 21 July 2003 - 11:41 PM
#6
Posted 21 July 2003 - 11:58 PM
#7
Posted 22 July 2003 - 12:01 AM
#8
Posted 22 July 2003 - 12:08 AM
Originally posted by Dr.Carl Mortner
I don't see why not. However, I fear today's audiences woulld be mystified by titles that actually make sense, as opposed to the likes of Tomorrow Never Dies or The World Is Not Enough. I realize the latter is a Fleming reference, albeit an uncharacteristically dunderheaded one. Why, exactly, is the world NOT enough?
Foolish sentiment.
About the titles, I really don't care. Bond titles usually sound dumb when they're traslated to Portuguese.
#9
Posted 22 July 2003 - 04:18 AM
Originally posted by Dr.Carl Mortner
I don't see why not. However, I fear today's audiences woulld be mystified by titles that actually make sense, as opposed to the likes of Tomorrow Never Dies or The World Is Not Enough. I realize the latter is a Fleming reference, albeit an uncharacteristically dunderheaded one. Why, exactly, is the world NOT enough?
Well, for all sorts of reasons. Isn't this sentiment usually attributed to the kind of megalomanical evildoers that Bond runs into? Pesky bastards.
As for me, I think "Quantum of Solace" would be a great title. It's suitably inscrutable, and all it means is "a bit of compassion." What's so hard to understand?
#10
Posted 22 July 2003 - 02:29 PM
Originally posted by Wade
Well, for all sorts of reasons. Isn't this sentiment usually attributed to the kind of megalomanical evildoers that Bond runs into? Pesky bastards.
As for me, I think "Quantum of Solace" would be a great title. It's suitably inscrutable, and all it means is "a bit of compassion." What's so hard to understand?
Well you have to remember Wade that when the title for LTK was originally "License Revoked" Eon had to change the title because it was discovered that the majority of US citizens did not know what "Revoked" meant.
As Barry Norman said on the BBC in "Film '89" "They do still speak English over there (in the USA) don't they, or has Spanish finally taken over as the native language?"
#11
Posted 22 July 2003 - 05:09 PM
Originally posted by Wade
As for me, I think "Quantum of Solace" would be a great title. It's suitably inscrutable, and all it means is "a bit of compassion." What's so hard to understand?
Originally posted by DLibrasnow
Well you have to remember Wade that when the title for LTK was originally "License Revoked" Eon had to change the title because it was discovered that the majority of US citizens did not know what "Revoked" meant.
I agree with DLibrasnow, Wade. I really can't picture MGM/Eon being willing to release a would-be blockbuster James Bond film costing tens of millions of dollars under the title QUANTUM OF SOLACE. It's not a bad title, just not commercial. Not remotely.
The same goes, I feel, for "The Hildebrand Rarity". Indeed, I wonder whether THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS would be considered too complicated and box office-unfriendly to be approved as a Bond film title these days. (Do Americans use the term "the living daylights", as in: "I'm gonna beat the living daylights out of you!"?)
So I reckon that, of the five unused Fleming titles, only three would be viable as future film titles: "Risico", "The Property of a Lady" and "007 in New York".
The idea of 007 IN NEW YORK as a film title is really growing on me. They could incorporate elements of Fleming's (very) short story into the screenplay in the same way as the script of THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS took inspiration from the source material.
Bond is sent to New York to warn a woman who used to work for MI6 that she is dating a spy from a hostile country (he is Russian in the story; the nationality could be changed to reflect today's concerns). He arranges to meet her at the Reptile House at the Central Park Zoo. But there is no Reptile House at the Central Park Zoo! (It is implied in Fleming's story that 007 eventually catches up with the woman thanks to a chance encounter at midnight by the skating rink at Rockefeller Center.) Did MI6 screw up? Did Bond? Has 007 walked into a trap? P&W, put your thinking caps on!
The story also mentions that Bond has a lover in New York named Solange, and mention is made of Felix Leiter. Enough raw material, I think, to craft a tale of espionage and adventure set largely in New York (although, obviously, the idea of a villain planning to wipe out that city would be a wee bit insensitive).
#12
Posted 22 July 2003 - 05:16 PM
Quantum of Solace is a great title and it means "The amount of comfort". I would use it, yes.
#13
Posted 22 July 2003 - 05:28 PM
Originally posted by Tarl_Cabot
Ok Loomis I would use 'Casino Royale' and adapt that story for Bond 21. They own the rights now so why not?
I know that a lot of fans would love to see that happen. Personally, I wouldn't. Apart from anything else, I think it might cause confusion with the 1967 spoof. I'm not 100% against the idea, though. The following thread has a fairly lively discussion on the question of whether "Casino Royale" ought to be used: http://forums.comman...=&threadid=8578.
Originally posted by Tarl_Cabot
Quantum of Solace is a great title and it means "The amount of comfort". I would use it, yes.
But do you think MGM/Eon would consider it commercially viable as a title? I don't. Many millions of people in the United States, United Kingdom and other countries across the English-speaking world wouldn't be able to pronounce or spell it correctly! Don't get me wrong, I like it, and I'd certainly love to see it used, but if The Powers That Be weren't prepared to go ahead with LICENCE REVOKED, I can't picture them approving QUANTUM OF SOLACE, which is roughly 10 times more "difficult" as a title.
#14
Posted 22 July 2003 - 06:12 PM
And actually we do know and use the word ‘revoked’. MGM‘s concern with the title License Revoked (it had the ’s’ in License in the US at the time) was that it would be taken as a movie about driver’s licences since the most common use of the word ‘revoked’ in the US is when someone gets there driver’s licence revoked. MGM even later stated that they thought Americans would have thought that a film titled License Revoked would have been like Corey Haim’s film License To Drive.
#15
Posted 22 July 2003 - 06:21 PM
Fact is, it doesn't matter what a Bond movie is titled. The next time you see a Bond movie in a multiplex cinema, listen to what people request when they want to see the Bond movie of the time. They don't say "Give me two tickets for Die Another Day." They usually just say "Two for Bond" or "Two For 007." People know what they're getting, and that's what they ask for.
#16
Posted 22 July 2003 - 06:24 PM
#17
Posted 22 July 2003 - 06:39 PM
Originally posted by Dr.Carl Mortner
Fact is, it doesn't matter what a Bond movie is titled. The next time you see a Bond movie in a multiplex cinema, listen to what people request when they want to see the Bond movie of the time. They don't say "Give me two tickets for Die Another Day." They usually just say "Two for Bond" or "Two For 007." People know what they're getting, and that's what they ask for.
Wow, I must say that I'm surprised that there seem to be so many fans of QUANTUM OF SOLACE as a title. I still can't picture it getting past MGM top brass, though.
Dr. Carl Mortner, I disagree that it doesn't matter what a Bond movie is titled. It's crucial to come up with something commercial. Finding the right title for DIE ANOTHER DAY may have been more difficult than writing the script (I'm only half-joking). Check out this list of rumoured titles for BOND 20* (taken from http://forums.comman...&threadid=10379):
-Beyond the Ice
-Beneath the Ice
-Beneath the Sea
-Final Assignment
-Black Sun
-Colonel Sun
-Icebreaker
-Colonel Moon
-Double Cross (XX)
-Cold Eternity
-Terminus
-Wizard of Ice
-Icedesert
All pretty straightfoward, no? Generic thriller titles, by and large. No difficult words like "quantum" or "solace" for Joe Blow to struggle with. I reckon The Powers That Be would always try to come up with titles like, I don't know, THE KILLING GROUND, LICENCE TO DIE, TOMORROW IS NOT ENOUGH and so on, instead of something complicated like QUANTUM OF SOLACE.
I mean, you wouldn't expect them to use ORBIS NON SUFFICIT as a film title, would you? I'd say that QUANTUM OF SOLACE is in the same league.
*Thanks, Tanger.
#18
Posted 22 July 2003 - 06:44 PM
#19
Posted 22 July 2003 - 06:47 PM
Originally posted by Double-Oh-Zero
I agree with Dr. Mortner. It could be the most inventive, fantastic and creative title, but the general audience doesn't really care.
I'm sure MGM/Eon would care if audiences found the title of the new Bond flick incomprehensible, unpronounceable and difficult to spell. And if finding a decent title is so unimportant, why didn't they simply plump for THE NEW JAMES BOND FILM or BOND 20, instead of DIE ANOTHER DAY? Or - *shudder* - THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH II?
#20
Posted 22 July 2003 - 06:53 PM
Unless they ignored that bit of it and called (I dunno, say) a boat or something relevant to the plot like yet another space death laser "Quantum of Solace".
Come to think of it, I can see it more likely as some sort of passing nod in a future film - say a boat/ship called "Quantum of Solace" - rather than an actual film title. It might be Fleming but does that really mean it has to a) be used and revered and c) used because it is revered?
If they use it, I fear - albeit I'd be happy to be surprised to the contrary - that the reaction will be a collective "uh?" - wherever one may be.
#21
Posted 22 July 2003 - 07:50 PM
Because how would it sound if whenever fans went to discuss a Bond film the next films would be "The James Bond Film That Came After The One that Came After The One that Surpassed Die Another Day"? Yes, the title is important, but the point I'm trying to make is that it doesn't matter if people can say or spell it, because no one except the fans discusses the Bond films every day unless you really follow the films. "That new Bond movie" or "007" is usually the title given to the release of any Bond film by the general audience, regardless of it's name. And if people can't spell or pronounce it, well, that's what posters, commercials and trailers are for. If people can't understand it, why did Eon hire George Lazenby? I'm sure people couldn't figure out his name (and many, I'm sure, still can't).Originally posted by Loomis
I'm sure MGM/Eon would care if audiences found the title of the new Bond flick incomprehensible, unpronounceable and difficult to spell. And if finding a decent title is so unimportant, why didn't they simply plump for THE NEW JAMES BOND FILM or BOND 20, instead of DIE ANOTHER DAY? Or - *shudder* - THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH II?
#22
Posted 22 July 2003 - 07:55 PM
On the other, hit movies have come out of titles like The Bourne Identity, The Sum of All Fears and Patriot Games. Quantum of Solace sounds classy, but people are lazy and don't want to think for themselves. Most could end up thinking it is something that would be playing in an art house.
#23
Posted 22 July 2003 - 08:21 PM
And whilst we know that QoS is a Fleming title, perhaps it's not immediately recognisable to the public (this is an assumption) as the Bond novel titles.
Possibly - I don't know. Maybe they'd need to do a pretty substantial marketing push on it. After all, they did use From a View to a Kill - sort of.
Still - I rather suspect that if one were to approach a person on the street (and they didn't run off in sheer terror) and ask "Who wrote Quantum of Solace" or even "Which famous character appears in Quantum of Solace", you'd get a variety of answers
I'm not saying it's impossible, just that I doubt MGM's current marketing theories will support the title
#24
Posted 22 July 2003 - 08:21 PM
the title certainly has an 'in-your-face' ring to it. with the correct font, it could make a fascinating title super-imposed on a larger-than-life eon 007 logo.
it could sell....not as effective/evocative/flemingesque as:
SHATTERHAND (a three-sylable, one word title a' la goldfinger/thunderball/moonraker/goldeneye) but none the less, not a bad bond/fleming title.
more interesting a title than, say, dr no...the spy who loved me...view to a kill...the living daylights....
the title could be a reference to a RARE, very deadly virus developed/discovered by a, *AHEM*, professor/doctor HILDEBRAND, a nazi who escaped to the seychelles islands in the mid 40s and whos formula has been developed en mass by an heir....a derranged leader of a aryan cult with secret holdings in global german bio-tecnology and pharmacutical concerns.
Ha....how do u guys like that!!!!:cool:
(Btw, Germany does have a disproportionately large share of the world's prescription drug research/manufacturing firms)
#25
Posted 22 July 2003 - 08:51 PM
#26
Posted 22 July 2003 - 09:16 PM
#27
Posted 22 July 2003 - 09:23 PM
Originally posted by Jim
It might be Fleming but does that really mean it has to a) be used and revered and c) used because it is revered?
No, but you gotta admit - well, you don't, but I wish you would;) - that the use of a Fleming title (for the first time since 1987, fact fans) would lend a certain cachet. Perhaps, though, they'll save any unused Fleming title they're thinking about using for the 50th anniversary film in 2012 (if there is one), just so that they can say: "Hey! Look! We're using a Fleming title for the 50th anniversary film! Pretty cool, huh?"
Originally posted by Turn
Quantum of Solace sounds classy, but people are lazy and don't want to think for themselves. Most could end up thinking it is something that would be playing in an art house.
Exactly.
Originally posted by ray t
the title could be a reference to a RARE, very deadly virus developed/discovered by a, *AHEM*, professor/doctor HILDERBRAND, a nazi who escaped to the seychelles islands in the mid 40s and whos formula has been developed en mass by an heir....a derranged leader of a aryan cult with secret holdings in global german bio-tecnology and pharmacutical concerns.
Ha....how do u guys like that!!!!:cool:
Ha! Bring it on, ray t!:cool:
Originally posted by DLibrasnow
Quantum of Solace sounds like a Merchant Ivory picture....
Quite. As does "The Property of a Lady".
#28
Posted 22 July 2003 - 09:40 PM
Originally posted by Loomis
Ha! Bring it on, ray t!:cool:
you know it, baby!!!
Andt...perhapz JIM kan interpritt my broad ideaz inzo a treatment, ja? my schpelling und grammrr 'av a lott to bee dezired...ja?
how about eet, herr JIM?
sorry, got carried avaay, there..........
Hell...its about time we had a German baddie again...the German audience/fans themselves dont mind one of their own being a derranged loonie (auric goldfinger, helga brandt, irma bundt, stromberg, hugo drax-from the novel, kriegler, zorin's creator, stamper, dr kaufmann)
JUST IMAGINE...Dame Judy Dench's voice at the very begining of the first teaser trailer:
"In 1941, a ruthless nazi scientist, a herr doctor Markus HILDEBRAND developed a RARE, deadly virus during expeiments at one of the third reich's secret death camps.....capable of wiping out millions without affecting plant or animal life...blah blah blah....."
#29
Posted 22 July 2003 - 10:05 PM
Originally posted by Jim
After all, they did use From a View to a Kill - sort of.
Totally unrelated, but I actually have Peter Lamont's business card from that period where the film was still called From a View to a Kill and as such, mentioned on said card.
Still - I rather suspect that if one were to approach a person on the street (and they didn't run off in sheer terror) and ask "Who wrote Quantum of Solace" or even "Which famous character appears in Quantum of Solace", you'd get a variety of answers
I'm not saying it's impossible, just that I doubt MGM's current marketing theories will support the title
It would never get past their Focus Group, and admission to focus groups are, by definition, to include the lowest common denominator. Therefore, participants will have to convince the bouncers that they don't understand more than one variant of the word Revoked.
I believe this may have been suggested in a thread in distant times past so I cannot claim to be the originator of this, but the only way to use Fleming from now on will be chapter titles - and there are a few good ones to choose from. The Undertaker's Wind, anyone?
#30
Posted 22 July 2003 - 10:15 PM
Originally posted by Simon
The Undertaker's Wind, anyone?
not to take the 'wind' out of your sails, simon, but it, umm, has the connotations of , old boy!!!
it simply wouldnt do...