It's no news that Quentin Tarantino famously wanted to jump into the James Bond franchise and make "Casino Royale." But in a recent in-depth interview with New York magazine, the "Hateful Eight" director briefly reflected on what he wanted to do with the 007 franchise.
"After 'Pulp Fiction,' I tried to get the rights to Casino Royale away from the Broccolis, but that didn’t happen," Tarantino recalled to the magazine in a footnote from the interview. "That wouldn’t have been just throwing my hat in the franchise ring; that would have been subversion on a massive level, if I could have subverted Bond."
The filmmaker first revealed his plans to approach the studio about adapting the Ian Fleming novel in 2004 during his time as president of the Cannes jury. But how was the "Django Unchained" filmmaker initially planning to massively subvert 007? Tarantino wanted to make "Casino Royale" a period piece, set in either the 1950s or '60s, filmed in black and white, and he wanted it to star Pierce Brosnan, his favorite Bond.
Last year, the actor recalled the time Tarantino approached him in a hotel bar about the film. Apparently, Tarantino told Brosnan he was "the best" and "only James Bond" over multiple apple martinis. Brosnan was on board, but the studio wasn't. Back in 2009, the filmmaker said the studio went on record claiming the project was "unfilmable." They eventually realized otherwise, which Tarantino credits himself for, and "GoldenEye" director Martin Campbell became involved.
Now we're still left daydreaming about what kind of Brosnan-esque subversion could have been. If Tarantino ever got to make a Bond film today, we at least know it would be nothing like "True Detective," which the filmmaker told New York he found "really boring." (He skipped Season 2 though, luckily.)
For the full interview, head to Vulture.
Also on HuffPost:
For a constant stream of entertainment news and discussion, follow HuffPost Entertainment on Viber.