Casino Royale The "Lost" Stage Play
The curious tale of the 'Casino Royale' that wasn't
'Casino Royale' the "lost" stage play
#1
Posted 01 August 2005 - 11:39 PM
#2
Posted 02 August 2005 - 12:02 AM
The concept reminds me of the Ian Fleming one man show "The Man With The Golden Pen" staged in the UK a few years back was surprisingly effective. CBn did a report on that.
ACE
Edited by ACE, 02 August 2005 - 12:04 AM.
#4
Posted 02 August 2005 - 12:10 AM
Report
http://commanderbond...ies/532-1.shtml
Photos
http://commanderbond...ies/534-1.shtml
ACE
#5
Posted 02 August 2005 - 12:11 AM
I would have definately paid to see such a play.
And any more info on "The man with the golden pen"?
#6
Posted 02 August 2005 - 12:16 AM
Oh. LOL!Yeah, some bozo wrote something about it time back, in pre-history.
Report
http://commanderbond...ies/532-1.shtml
Photos
http://commanderbond...ies/534-1.shtml
ACE
Hey, that 2001, how can you expect me to remember that far back? Heck, that was way back when Brosnan was still Bond.
#7
Posted 02 August 2005 - 12:19 AM
Oh. LOL!Yeah, some bozo wrote something about it time back, in pre-history.
Report
http://commanderbond...ies/532-1.shtml
Photos
http://commanderbond...ies/534-1.shtml
ACE
Hey, that 2001, how can you expect me to remember that far back? Heck, that was way back when Brosnan was still Bond.
4 years ago. Or, as Billy Joel once said, "Two careers in pop music!"
ACE
#8
Posted 02 August 2005 - 03:55 AM
#9
Posted 02 August 2005 - 07:36 AM
Very interesting zen, and thank you.
Cheers,
Ian
#10
Posted 02 August 2005 - 07:37 AM
#11
Posted 02 August 2005 - 09:30 AM
Or am I thinking Dalton?
#12
Posted 02 August 2005 - 05:46 PM
#13
Posted 02 August 2005 - 06:01 PM
Edited by Gri007, 02 August 2005 - 07:32 PM.
#14
Posted 02 August 2005 - 06:41 PM
#15
Posted 02 August 2005 - 07:20 PM
#16
Posted 02 August 2005 - 08:25 PM
And it's very easy to brush off the theatrical agent who dismissed it as being 'elderly', but perhaps she actually knew what she was talking about.
#17
Posted 02 August 2005 - 08:51 PM
And it's very easy to brush off the theatrical agent who dismissed it as being 'elderly', but perhaps she actually knew what she was talking about.
Indeed.
The general public loves Bond films and will always spend money to see them in cinemas. Not sure that the general public would respond so well to a Bond play - and a (presumably) fairly talky and action- and spectacle-free play at that. Would Benson's CASINO ROYALE have been able to provide what Joe Public got from the Eon films?
Of course, you could argue that audiences for plays are smaller than for films, that theatregoers are more willing to be "challenged", and so on; but, yeah, I'd agree that this was probably only ever going to appeal to Bond diehards. Which isn't to say that Benson's play is rubbish, of course. I haven't read it - for all I know it's excellent. But I can understand the view that it may not be box office dynamite.
For Bond to succeed on the stage, it'd probably have to be a lavish, tacky, tongue-in-cheek extravaganza with eye-popping scenery, catchy musical numbers, dancing girls, acrobats, etc. - something a lot closer to the 1967 CASINO ROYALE than to Fleming's "Casino Royale".
#18
Posted 02 August 2005 - 10:09 PM
And Loomis, you may be right about a theatre audience being willing to be challenged, but Royale isn't a challenging story by any stretch. It's a straightforward, fairly simple thiller and nothing more.
The only place I'd want a straight Fleming adaptation would be on Radio 4 or on CD. Why won't they let them do it?
#19
Posted 02 August 2005 - 10:17 PM
And Loomis, you may be right about a theatre audience being willing to be challenged, but Royale isn't a challenging story by any stretch. It's a straightforward, fairly simple thiller and nothing more.
Sure. What I meant was, challenging in terms of presenting a vision of Bond (some miserable spies in a casino set) at odds with that of the lavish, fun-for-all-the-family Eon spectacles (the image flashed to mind of a bunch of highbrow London theatregoers saying they wouldn't be caught dead watching OCTOPUSSY while lining up for a "Casino Royale" play and telling themselves they were about to see the "authentic", "thinking person's" Bond, which the masses wouldn't appreciate). Agreed that CR isn't a challenging piece of work.
#20
Posted 03 August 2005 - 10:16 AM
#21
Posted 03 August 2005 - 11:33 AM
#22
Posted 03 August 2005 - 07:04 PM
#23
Posted 04 August 2005 - 10:12 AM
You can't say it won't work if you don't try it.
I'm sure it would have worked, it's just that a straight adaptation wouldn't have been the most daringly electric bit of theatre ever. And since it'll disappoint film-loving Bond fans and won't excite normal theatre goers, I can't see it actually attracting an audience.
#24
Posted 18 August 2005 - 03:37 AM
I was under the impression that the film rights to Casino Royale (lets start post 1967) was owned by Columbia Pictures. Was this just the film rights? Is that different than the "performing rights"?
Benson goes on to say "Since that time, EON bought the rights to Casino Royale" - Yeah, they got it from Columbia Pictures in 1999 in a settlement (MGM rather). Right? Or if they're different did EON/Danjaq go back to IFP and purchase the "performing rights" too?
I'm just kind of confused on this.
#25
Posted 18 August 2005 - 04:17 AM
#26
Posted 25 September 2006 - 12:10 AM
a shame we can't catch a glimpse of benson the playwright.
#27
Posted 10 May 2008 - 07:07 AM
This would be a dream.
#28
Posted 23 May 2008 - 08:55 AM
What would it hurt to publish it if the production rights are still firmly in EON's hands? No harm, I would think.
#29
Posted 23 May 2008 - 08:55 AM
What would it hurt to publish it if the production rights are still firmly in EON's hands? No harm, I would think.
#30
Posted 23 May 2008 - 10:26 AM
EON is the service company that makes the films of the rights the above own.
However, I believe Ian Fleming Publications Limited (IFP - and variants thereto) own publication rights to anything to do with the literary Bond.
I do not know for sure who owns theatrical rights to Bond. I guess IFP does (Danjaq et al have the film and TV character rights to Bond and first refusal on subsequent novels).
My guess is that IFP seem to be anxious to promote:
1 Sebastian Faulks' Devil May Care (and any subsequent "adult" Bond novels)
2 Charlie Higson's Young Bond (which may go to a second series)
3 the original Ian Fleming novels
4 Samantha Weinberg's Moneypenny Diaries
I have a feeling that the stage play is owned by IFP and it will not see the light of day in the immediate future.