62 replies to this topic

[Qwerty]

Now on the CBn main page...

Quentin Tarantino considers spy series to rival James Bond

Director wants to adapt Len Deighton spy trilogy

[Sark2.0]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA,wait, wait, let me regain my composure.... HAHA... sorry, under control now. No, really, best of luck with that venture Quinten.

[Tybre]

I don't know whether to turn into Heath Ledger or David Tennant over this one.

[MicroGlobeOne]

Tarantino's been discussing this for some time now. The problem is, I just can't imagine that he's at all interested in producing a straight adaptation of Deighton's novels, and I believe that he's admitted as much in previous interviews. If he does work on the Game, Set, Match trilogy, there's a good chance that the original plot will be the first thing thrown out.

[jaguar007]

What will be really interesting is when he casts Uma Thurman as Bernard Sampson.

[Tybre]

What will be really interesting is when he casts Uma Thurman as Bernard Sampson.

Bernadette Samson?

[OmarB]

This guy's a nutjob. Plus if you've read Jackie Brown you know this guy can't adapt for crap.

[Craig Arthur]

Tarantino is the perfect choice to direct Game, Set and Match, just as Daniel Craig was perfect for Bond (and yet everybody grumbled).

OK, so he is not British. But that does not mean that he could film a British spy drama. He would of course use a British cast.

People wrote Tarantino off as an action director and yet he sure demonstrated his abilities with Kill Bill and Death-Proof. Game, Set and Match, on the other hand are not a big stretch from "Jackie Brown", closer in style to his early films than Kill Bill or Inglorious Basterds.

Deighton, despite being British, wrote in a similar vein to Elmore Leonard and Raymond Chandler. A.L. Alvarez called Berlin Game "sharp, witty and sour, like Raymond Chandler adapted to British gloom." Who better suited to such a style than QT. A film version of the Samson trilogy would require a lot of dialogue and he is one of the few directors who can make a dialogue based drama electric, start-to-finish. Also, his use of wide shots of actors against empty backdrops perfectly captures Deighton's prose style and atmosphere.

[Trident]

I've heard this story already a few months ago, but hoped it was just the usual tabloid rubbish. Berlin Game, Mexico Set and London Match are by and far the least attractive work of Deighton to adapt to film. The plot is extremely lengthy, complicated and complex, absolutely nothing easily captured on screen. Apart from that, it makes hardly any sense without the second trilogy, Line, Hook and Sinker, as this is the part that gives the whole tale a different meaning and actually reveals the real story. So Tarantino (or any other director) would really have to tackle six books, with tons of dialogue, backstory, detail but next to no real action. Much as I hate to admit it, the Bernard Samson series is really not even very gripping and far from Deighton's best works.

And, judging from Tarantino's aspirations, I have doubts he ever really read more then the titles of these books, or he most likely wouldn't suggest such an outlandish idea in the first place. He clearly doesn't realize how ludicrous his notion really is, to try and rival Bond with Samson, of all agents. He might as well have suggested Winnie, the Pooh.

[Syndicate]

I don't think spy stuff are right for Quentin Tarantino, seeing what movies he has made in the past. Weather it the super spy ones like Mission Impossible, or the close to real world type like Russia House, The Siege and Clear And Present Danger. I have never read any of Len Deighton's novel, so I don't know if it super spy type or close to the real world type.

If it close to real world type, the there are better directors who should be making the movies not Tarantino. Here goes some that can do the job, Fred Schepisi, Jonathan Demme, David Fincher, Oliver Stone, Steven Soderbergh, Gavin O'Connor, Christian Duguay and Wolfgang Petersen. Now if it is a super spy type there are other directors that can do the job, and some of them are Tony Scott, John McTiernan, James Foley, Peter Howitt, Brett Ratner, D.J. Caruso and Harold Becker.

It also just like type movie like The Game, Transformers, Hannibal, Flightplan, The Trasporter, Casino, Seven, War Of The Roses, Knowing, Copland and Outbrake don't fit him, or look like his kind of movies. Just think what if he has made any of those movies, what would it be like. Would do good at the box office, how would the story be like who would he cast in the movie. People say he is action director, I don't see him as one, yes his movies has a some action in it. But it not like The Last Boy Scout, Face/Off, Hard Target, Die Hard With A Vengence, Lethal Weapon series, Force Vengence and Punisher War Zone. Quentin Tarantino is only good at making what is Quentin Tarantino movies, I don't think outside of that, or he would have made some of the movies I named here.

By the way did it say that it is a fictional spy agency, when the SIS(Secret Intelligence Service). That is of the British spy agency today and MI6 is it WWII time name, that some people use to still call it today.

Edited by Syndicate, 15 August 2009 - 04:32 PM.

[Safari Suit]

Might be interesting, but he wont get round to it, just like he hasn't got round to most of his 264 projects from the last twenty years.

[Craig Arthur]

I've heard this story already a few months ago, but hoped it was just the usual tabloid rubbish. Berlin Game, Mexico Set and London Match are by and far the least attractive work of Deighton to adapt to film. The plot is extremely lengthy, complicated and complex, absolutely nothing easily captured on screen. Apart from that, it makes hardly any sense without the second trilogy, Line, Hook and Sinker, as this is the part that gives the whole tale a different meaning and actually reveals the real story. So Tarantino (or any other director) would really have to tackle six books, with tons of dialogue, backstory, detail but next to no real action. Much as I hate to admit it, the Bernard Samson series is really not even very gripping and far from Deighton's best works.

And, judging from Tarantino's aspirations, I have doubts he ever really read more then the titles of these books, or he most likely wouldn't suggest such an outlandish idea in the first place. He clearly doesn't realize how ludicrous his notion really is, to try and rival Bond with Samson, of all agents. He might as well have suggested Winnie, the Pooh.

The tabloid rubbish part is that QT is trying to film Game, Set and Match as a rival to the Bond films. That's rot. He never said that he wanted Samson to rival; that is just the journalist speaking and this person clearly knows nothing about Deighton's Samson books.

But it is not tabloid rumour that QT wants to film these books. It comes from the horse's mouth:
http://www.slashfilm...-match-trilogy/

I disagree when you say that "Berlin Game, Mexico Set and London Match are by and far the least attractive work of Deighton to adapt to film. The plot is extremely lengthy, complicated and complex, absolutely nothing easily captured on screen . . . the Bernard Samson series is really not even very gripping and far from Deighton's best works." I think the first six Samson books are Deighton's masterpiece and are equal to if not better than any other spy series in fiction. To say they are the least attractive work of Deighton to adapt to film is rubbish. They have already been adapted brilliantly for TV and would work great on the big screen. Sure it's not going to be a great action movie but a mature drama for grown-ups, as the novels themselves are.

Yes, the second trilogy - Hook, Line and Sinker - do reveal the reality behind Fiona's defection but that does not mean that the first three books could not be filmed as they are. That would be like saying the books could not be published or sold to anybody not planning to read to the end (and there are 10 books in the Samson series after all. Does that mean that QT is expected to make 10 movies? That would be like saying EON should not have made any Bond movies unless they intended to film all 12 Bond novels in sequence without altering any of the content.) QT stated in the Slash interview that he had previously only read Berlin Game but at the time of the interview he was reading the other books. And it was only once he started to read the other books that he thought of filming them. Just as he states on the "My Name Is Modesty" DVD that he would not include a book jacket in a movie without having read the book and hence had read "Berlin Game" when he included it in "Jackie Brown", I am sure he would not film "Game, Set and Match" without first reading all 10 books in the series.

There are possible problems with making the film - boiling three books down to three hours, as QT admits in the Slash interview. But there are surely similar problems with filming John Le Carre's Smiley books and yet a big screen remake of "Tinker Tailor" is going ahead next year, with the same screenwriter as Bond 23. So why not film Game, Set and Match?

I don't consider the idea outlandish at all. It is a film project I would like to see happen. I will happily go see it on the big screen, buy the DVD and watch it again and again - as I would watch the TV miniseries again if I could, if they would only release it on DVD - as I reread the Samson books every few years and as I watch QT's other movies . If people are not Deighton fans or not QT fans there are plenty of other books and movies to occupy their attention. But to rubbish this conjectured project just because you don't like the idea of don't like the Bernard Samson books does not make any sense to me.

[Jim]

Splendid idea. Very talented man.

[DominicGreene]

Why didn't they just let him direct a Bond film? Are they ignoring him?

[Safari Suit]

It must be because they're a bunch of meanies. What other reason could there be?

[Loomis]

Who cares whether Tarantino has mentioned this before and failed to deliver on it? His projects are usually long in gestation. He was discussing KILL BILL years before it was made, and has been talking about INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS for about a decade.

As Jim says, splendid idea, very talented man. The idea of a Tarantino spy franchise makes me cream myself, frankly.

[karligula]

Quentin Tarantino is a good director when making Quentin Tarantino style movies. But if he is ever allowed to direct a Bond movie I shall burn all my Bond DVDs and Blu Rays and go live on a desert island and eat coconuts.

[Trident]

I've heard this story already a few months ago, but hoped it was just the usual tabloid rubbish. Berlin Game, Mexico Set and London Match are by and far the least attractive work of Deighton to adapt to film. The plot is extremely lengthy, complicated and complex, absolutely nothing easily captured on screen. Apart from that, it makes hardly any sense without the second trilogy, Line, Hook and Sinker, as this is the part that gives the whole tale a different meaning and actually reveals the real story. So Tarantino (or any other director) would really have to tackle six books, with tons of dialogue, backstory, detail but next to no real action. Much as I hate to admit it, the Bernard Samson series is really not even very gripping and far from Deighton's best works.

And, judging from Tarantino's aspirations, I have doubts he ever really read more then the titles of these books, or he most likely wouldn't suggest such an outlandish idea in the first place. He clearly doesn't realize how ludicrous his notion really is, to try and rival Bond with Samson, of all agents. He might as well have suggested Winnie, the Pooh.

The tabloid rubbish part is that QT is trying to film Game, Set and Match as a rival to the Bond films. That's rot. He never said that he wanted Samson to rival; that is just the journalist speaking and this person clearly knows nothing about Deighton's Samson books.

But it is not tabloid rumour that QT wants to film these books. It comes from the horse's mouth:
http://www.slashfilm...-match-trilogy/

I disagree when you say that "Berlin Game, Mexico Set and London Match are by and far the least attractive work of Deighton to adapt to film. The plot is extremely lengthy, complicated and complex, absolutely nothing easily captured on screen . . . the Bernard Samson series is really not even very gripping and far from Deighton's best works." I think the first six Samson books are Deighton's masterpiece and are equal to if not better than any other spy series in fiction. To say they are the least attractive work of Deighton to adapt to film is rubbish. They have already been adapted brilliantly for TV and would work great on the big screen. Sure it's not going to be a great action movie but a mature drama for grown-ups, as the novels themselves are.

Yes, the second trilogy - Hook, Line and Sinker - do reveal the reality behind Fiona's defection but that does not mean that the first three books could not be filmed as they are. That would be like saying the books could not be published or sold to anybody not planning to read to the end (and there are 10 books in the Samson series after all. Does that mean that QT is expected to make 10 movies? That would be like saying EON should not have made any Bond movies unless they intended to film all 12 Bond novels in sequence without altering any of the content.) QT stated in the Slash interview that he had previously only read Berlin Game but at the time of the interview he was reading the other books. And it was only once he started to read the other books that he thought of filming them. Just as he states on the "My Name Is Modesty" DVD that he would not include a book jacket in a movie without having read the book and hence had read "Berlin Game" when he included it in "Jackie Brown", I am sure he would not film "Game, Set and Match" without first reading all 10 books in the series.

There are possible problems with making the film - boiling three books down to three hours, as QT admits in the Slash interview. But there are surely similar problems with filming John Le Carre's Smiley books and yet a big screen remake of "Tinker Tailor" is going ahead next year, with the same screenwriter as Bond 23. So why not film Game, Set and Match?

I don't consider the idea outlandish at all. It is a film project I would like to see happen. I will happily go see it on the big screen, buy the DVD and watch it again and again - as I would watch the TV miniseries again if I could, if they would only release it on DVD - as I reread the Samson books every few years and as I watch QT's other movies . If people are not Deighton fans or not QT fans there are plenty of other books and movies to occupy their attention. But to rubbish this conjectured project just because you don't like the idea of don't like the Bernard Samson books does not make any sense to me.

Which part did you like best? Which scenes, do you think, cried 'Film me, Tarantino!!!' when you first read them?

My personal favourite was always Dicky Cruyer forgetting the classified stuff in the Xerox machine and I bet QT will make it a hell of a scene on screen...

[DamnCoffee]

Oh for christ sakes.
People have tried for years to rival James Bond, and apart from the Bourne movies, nothing has came close.

[Double-0-7]

I hope QT doesn't ruin my second favorite British spy franchise!

[Trident]

Here's an excerpt from the Dark Horizons story on the same matter from early 2008:

...He also has some ambitious plans for the book series - "I would see if I could boil it down to the fat of the characters, and ignore all this Maquis double agent stuff."...

I think this really shows Tarantino's understanding of the plot and its characters and I'm looking forward to see the final product.

[Blofeld's Cat]

Ian Holm
IS
Bernard Samson

I'm quite happy to keep on re-watching the TV mini-series of that trilogy without it ever getting remade.

[Diabolik]

Oh, Gawd no!!! If it's like his other work, he'll just lift scenes from classic spy films and string them all together.

[Doctor Shatterhand]

Dear Quentin,

Drop the Len Deighton idea and go with a series that is tailored-made for your style. His name:


MATT HELM

[Aris007]

Is there a crackbrain in this planet who will finance this absolute rubbish? I have to admitt though that his PR is really talented, don't you think?

[Tybre]

Oh for christ sakes.
People have tried for years to rival James Bond, and apart from the Bourne movies, nothing has came close.

Spoiler

Harry Potter

[Turn]

I'd be interested in this because:
1. I am always curious about most everything Tarantino does
2. I'm curious to see what he'd do with the spy genre
3. More competition may up Eon's game in competing with this
4. Should the end result fail, maybe he'll shut up about not getting his chance to do Casino Royale. Probably not.

[Trident]

Dear Quentin,

Drop the Len Deighton idea and go with a series that is tailored-made for your style. His name:


MATT HELM

Seconded! Strongly seconded! Helm would be just QT's cup of tea, exactly the stuff he's best in using for his films, ultra-hard-boiled cold war pulp with lots of girls, guns and violence. Codename Eric is long overdue to see his adventures properly adapted for the big screen and QT wouldn't be a bad choice for the task. He could play all his strengths here, whereas with Samson I have difficulties seeing what Tarantino would bring to the party.

[Safari Suit]

Oh for christ sakes.
People have tried for years to rival James Bond, and apart from the Bourne movies, nothing has came close.

Spoiler

Harry Potter

Spoiler

Not actually about spies, I believe

[Syndicate]

Why didn't they just let him direct a Bond film? Are they ignoring him?

Because others in Hollywood only think he can only make what is called Quentin Tarantino style movies, not outside of that. If it was not that way, he might of been able to make movies like The Transporter, Crash, Troy, Transformers, Blood Diamond, Seven, Casino, Wanted, The Dark Knight, Hellboy, Star Trek, A Few Good Men, Weeding Crashers and Lucky You. I don't think they want him to put in what is the Quentin Tarantino style in the movies.

Edited by Syndicate, 15 August 2009 - 04:56 PM.