Luhrmann movie a go!

[karen]

Looks like Baz Luhrmann is going to go ahead with his Alexander movie -- the one starring Leonardo di Caprio and Nicole Kidman.De Laurentis says " it will be the Alexander that everyone has been waiting for."From Screendaily.com, via Megalexandros:
http://www.livejournal.com/community/me ... ros/Warmly,
Karen

[canto]

Oh that is so wonderful Karen. This posting caught my eyes. Something to look forward to.Thanks so much for sharing.lightofdawn

[Ambrosia]

Oh, My! That is great news folks. I hope this movie is better then Olvier Stones. That film was terrible,Alexander must be redeemed, lets hope this film does him justice. Thanks for sharing

[heinrich]

I'm afraid I do not share in this optimism. Luhrmann's project always seemed to be the lesser of the two Hollywood movies. (What happened to the Greek and Iranian projects?) One of my objections is that Luhrmann uses the Manfredi books - what can we expect? From the director of Moulin Rouge, a final scene with people in folkloristic dresses singing "we are the world, we are the people" can not be excluded.Anyhow, have a nice weekend, my friends.HM

[marcus]

I have to admit that I, too, am sceptical that this will produce the "movie everyone was expecting". I don't imagine Luhrmann will include song and dance numbers, but any proposed use of Manfredi doesn't fill me with much hope.Although I don't imagine a Moulin Rouge type film, I do wonder whether he can pull off the right type of film - I'm a great admirer of Luhrmann, but with Moulin Rouge, Strictly Ballroom and Romeo and Juliet to go by, I wonder whether he can handle something of a much more epic scope.On the other hand, he could do a much more 'intimate' film, depending on what aspects of Alexander he chooses to focus on ... that would exclude using Manfredi, which already makes me heave a sigh of relief ...All the bestMarcus

[Nax]

Yeah, anything that starts out with the ego (I'M making the movie EVERYONE is expecting) already smells of disaster.

[kate]

Hi Everyone,I think it is great that someone else is willing to try doing another Alexander movie after all the bad press Stone's film received. I dare say Stone's film will make its money back on DVds ets, but it seems unlikely that it will be a huge money-spinner, which presumably makes an Alexander film a bit of a turn-off for Hollywood. Whether or not, Luhrman can produce a really good film is another matter - please o please don't let him use the Manfredi books for inspiration!Cheers,Kate

[jan]

Anyway to get in contact with Luhrman that would at least give us an opportunity to influence his decision? Do you know? As for me, I would like it if every producer would do a film on Alexander, good, bad, or indifferent. I don't think that there can be enough versions to really do anything but satisfy a desire to see what amounts to a rohrschach test on all the writers.

[karen]

I'm hesitant to be too optimistic, I must admit. I'm not worried about Dino De Laurentis's ego -- he's the producer, not director or writer. And I think he's just trying to offset the taint on the topic that Stone's movie has left -- producers are salespeople.I've never read the Manfredi books, but I've heard nothing but bad about them. I hope the heck there's no Leptine. But it seems to me that writing a script better than Stone's should be really easy. As I recall, it's Ted Tally doing it -- the guy who wrote the screenplay for The Silence of the Lambs.I read somewhere that Baz Luhrmann intended to make the movie extremely visually lush... so we can look forward to that!Regards,
Karen

[birdlover]

I am skepical about this film, too. I really liked Stone's version (despite it's flaws and problems). But even though many here would go see another film on ATG, I am not so sure the moviegoing public would be in the mood to see another film about the same subject. These films are going to be pretty close together (3 years, give or take), as well (whether that means anything remains to be seen). If "The Aviator" wins Best Picture (which it is predicted to), I don't know if I would want to run out and see another film on Howard Hughes in 2007 (I know ATG, is much different and much more fascinating, but the average audience usually wouldn't take that into consideration. But it depends on the story, I guess). Enough said on that.




It will be interesting to see what kind if script gets written here, as well. I think Stone had all of the ingredients for a great film, he just couldn't put all those elements together to make a cohesive story. I can't say the script was the main culprit (I know no one has said that, here). It was the way he handled it and the way he edited the film that made a big difference. Some of the editing was just dreadful. I almost wish the film ran the full four hours, then we wouldn't have had to put up with the choppy edits that we all endured. I wish Stone had gotten hinself a good editor for this film. That was one of it's biggest downfalls.




But, it's all water under the bridge, now.



Just my 2 1/2 cents.




Dara

[alejandro]

Hi Karen,It's funny you mention the old-new project, because today I was thinking about who should be a good Alexander (Leonardo Di Caprio is not within my top choices and Colin Farrell was very disappointing: too concerned about transmitting emotion through his face, he sometimes seemed to be part of a soap-opera! Exception: when in Gaugamela he is requested by Philotas to give up his pursuit of Darius and help the left wing).I had just seen an ad of Sam Raimi's new movie, and remembered he directed Spider-man and, hey! What about James Franco? (the guy who plays Harry Osmond, William Defoe's son). He looks like a young Tom Cruise (who would be my first choice, if he were 15-20 years younger , and I think he would be a good choice. Drawbacks: probably too tall and, most importantly, I don't know how good he is as an actor (he's not impressive in Spider-man, and I haven't seen him anywhere else.What do you think?Best,Alejandro

[kenny]

Marcus HailWith regards to the Manifred books,,, Im in the minority as I like the books and to be quite honest such a story maybe would be better to tortray on screen,,, Maybe trying to be historical and in lineb it gets too difficult and congested.Manifred is typical hollywood, Based on fact, Which has always worked weel and can still stick to the basics of the story.Braveheart on of the most memorable movies of recent years, Was very very loosely based on fact,, and at the same time gave the audience a good feeling about Wallace and the movie was fluent and fantastic.I am ready for all the dismisives aboy Decaprio,, I dont particullay like the guy,, Titanic made me feel ill,,, Stop shouting for young Brad Pitts or Tom Cruises.THe only real actors with the qualites are dead or gone by there sell by date.Kirk Douglas,was the guy totally,,, Pacino but how many would have cussed Pacino with died hair.So Dicaprio is destined for the roll.Kenny

[birdlover]

James Franco is a good choice, actually. He was very good in a film called "City By the Sea". He also won a Golden Globe for his portrayal of James Dean in a biography about his life. He will also be seen soon in the film "Tristan & Isolde", where he plays Tristan.
So, I think he would be good. I also could see Christian Bale (the new Batman) as Hephaistion. He is another good actor as well. He was in "Reign of Fire" and "Little Women". Beside "Batman Begins", he will be seen in the film "The New World" with Colin Farrell, at the end of the year (no I am not a big film nut, I read this on imdb.com). I still liked Colin. I didn't think he was all that bad. Unfortunately the actors were more a victim of script choices and editing. I am sure that did not help much.
Cheers,
Dara

[Ariadne]

Are you sure ?
I heard talking about a man in antiquity....

[Nax]

Yeah, I'm sure when it comes to directors of films. A healthy ego is one thing but some of these guys need to tone it down in order to see their SUBJECT rather than themselves.Kind of like how Mel Gibson tries to re-write history in order to play himself in a heroic role in each film..Too many times, what we get is the director instead of a good script. That man in antiquity was talking about himself, not someone else. He was true to HIS story, he didn't try to tell anyone elses.