Trio of Tinsel Treats

Happy finds in Twinkle Town...

Three movies about Snow White are coming to screens, each with its own "take."  I'd wondered about how the dwarves would be "done."  Would they go the route of shrinking actors as seen in recent epic fantasy movies or would they use actual talented little people?  Well, for one of the films in which the dwarves are now Shaolin monks, the answer seems obvious.  We now have an answer for the other two, though.  The untitled back-to-and-beyond-the-roots-of The Brothers Grimm version will feature a cast of great actors (including the marvelous Danny Woodburn) who just happen to be smaller than most folk.  Snow White and the Huntsman, focusing more on their relationship, has cast guys who are going to need computer magic to be a dwarf.  Granted a lot more than this issue will factor into what makes or breaks the movies, but it will be fun to see how they fare given their choices of actors.

Guillermo del Toro wants to direct Maleficent.  Yes, please!  It's not entirely likely that he will be able to do so, but I ever so wish for it to happen!  Sounds like he's the man for the job:  And let me tell you how much of a fan I am. I have a collection of over two or three dozen Maleficent figures, some of them four or five feet tall. I own about 10 pieces of conceptual art from Sleeping Beauty that include the dragon and a lot more pieces that are just from Sleeping Beauty. It's one of my three favorite Disney films. [Quoted from this article.]  Hmmm.  Director Guillermo del Toro and writer Linda Woolverton.  Double yes, please!!

Danny Elfman is re-teaming with Sam Raimi for OZ: The Great & Powerful.  Hosah!  That could be divine.  I'm uber-fond of Elfman's score for Alice.  I bet he'll devise something great and powerful indeed!

Awaiting...

Holly Will They or Won't They?

Some more rumblings in Hollywood to cheer or jeer.

First, the jeer. A little while back, I mentioned the remake of Fright Night. A summary: It's a bad idea... unless you use the twist they had decided upon. Well, twist again. Chris Sarandon will not be involved with the movie. If the reason for doing the remake requires his presence to work, then, yes, the spark of fun in it has gone. At least for me. It's now to be set in Las Vegas with 'Charlie Brewster' going to a 'Criss Angel' type figure to help. I suppose it could be good. But I'm just not psyched anymore without the "metaphysical" approach.

On the cheer side, a director has been set for OZ - The Great and Powerful. That's the movie starring Robert Downey Jr. as the man from Omaha who would be a Wizard - i.e. a prequel to The Wonderful Wizard of OZ. See this post for more info. Sam Raimi has found a place in this balloon. He's a great choice. I enjoyed the hell out of the first Spider-Man movie (yes, I did have some issues, but they're minor) and although I didn't care for the story in the least for the rest of Spidey, Raimi did a great job staging imagery on screen. He's just the grounded fantasy we need for a movie like OZ. Up, up and away.

A Rose By Any Other?

I’ve been struck with one of those ideas which is either vaguely brilliant or alarmingly dreadful. The kind that both wants to be seen and also never come to light. At least I think so. Before I tell you what it is, please note that I do not intend to tackle any such project. I’m just as much on the fence about it as I suspect you will be.

Let me begin with a terse rant about the Hollywood remakes. Yes, they exist. And yes, they always have existed. Lately they seem to be dominant. Love them or hate them (generally I hate them) they are here to stay. Some have been good, most bad. But I’m not going to pontificate on those. Point being they do exist, for better or for worse. If you want to hear me rant more on this subject, you can find it here.

Sometimes, however, a good reason or outcome is included with the re-do of films. I’ll give you two examples. Oddly (or not so oddly), they both deal with horror movies. Not surprising, I suppose, taking into consideration that horror movies, especially, are getting remade. (Now that’s an entirely different subject of exploration: why are we bent on remaking horror?)

Clive Barker had been approached to remake Hellraiser. For those of you who do not know, the Hellraiser series, as it pertains to Barker, is more than initially appears. I’m not trying to convince you it’s good nor that you should like it. I’m just relating that a great deal of thought and inventive mythology went into its creation. (As well as the comics it spawned.) When approached, Barker declined. Told that the remake would be done with or without him, Barker responded (paraphrasing): “Okay then, I guess I could stand to revisit my work and see what I can come up with now…” I love that…an author “invited” to rework their own work.

Sam Raimi, before Spider-Man, had a big hit with the Evil Dead series. This series has its own inherent oddities of creation, but perhaps I’ll discuss those another time. When the prospect of an Evil Dead remake came up, Raimi gave his blessing! I love the reason why. He wants to be able to watch his story through the eyes of another director and creative team. Curious how else it might be done, he allowed it gracefully. Very cool. I have to say I had not been charmed to remaking Evil Dead. Until I read Raimi’s reaction.

Now I’d like to turn your attention to the comic book world. I’m the peripheral sort of comic book guy. I like them a lot and a know quite a bit about a great much of it. In other words, enough to get by. But one of the things that anyone can see is: character design evolves. It may be obvious that it would…but that doesn’t make it any less important. New artists draw the character differently. Or perhaps new elements are introduced. All in all, fresh styles and visions come about. There may be exact guidelines touching upon it, but it’s a new perception all the same.

It also applies to characters from other than the comics. It might seem that they are static at first thought, but even icons Bugs Bunny and Mickey Mouse have undergone changes throughout time and artists.

Another area that has benefited from re-imagining is video games. From "re-inventing" 2-D to 3-D to upgrades in character desgins and the like, there is no denying that the world of video gaming has had many guises under the same umbrella.

Let us not forget the stage. Re-staging is a common term and practice, one that is even desired.

The music industry is no stranger to the idea either. Songs are "covered" all the time. To both sweet and sour results. And it's not just the "mainstream" music. We are always delighted to hear a different orchestra's rendition and/or a noted conductor's take on classical pieces.

Wondering what my point is? What is this "big, crazy-enough-to-work but please don’t try it" idea? Remakes of Novels. An author who writes the same story of another author into his or her own style. All of the same story elements, characters (and names) would exist and the sequence would be the same…but written anew, with different language and words to tell the story. For instance, what if Stephen King “rewrote” Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland? Re-read Peter and Wendy written afresh by Richard Bach (Jonathan Livingston Seagull, Illusions).

I bet you can think of a great many “What Ifs?” along this vein. I’m trying not to…

(I’m sure someone will tell me that it’s already been done. If that is the case, then it’s mea culpa for not hearing about it. But it's just as well I not know.)