Author Topic: Drunken Angel  (Read 2518 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MacGuffin

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 22985
  • Respect: +638
Drunken Angel
« on: February 10, 2005, 12:37:33 AM »
0
'Aviator' trio eye 'Angel' for Warners
Source: Hollywood Reporter

"The Aviator" team of Martin Scorsese, Leonardo DiCaprio and screenwriter John Logan are in early negotiations to develop a remake of Akira Kurosawa's 1948 classic "Drunken Angel" for Warner Bros. Pictures.

DiCaprio is attached to star in the picture, which would be produced by Barbara DeFina with Scorsese and DiCaprio through the latter's Appian Way production shingle, which is based at Initial Entertainment Group. Logan would pen the project, which is being discussed as a potential directing vehicle for Scorsese.
 
Kurosawa's film, which was set in postwar Japan, centered on a young criminal who is being treated for tuberculosis by an alcoholic doctor.

Warners shares domestic distribution on "The Aviator" with Miramax Films. Both companies were involved in producing that film along with IEG and Forward Pass.

Scorsese and DiCaprio next collaborate on "The Departed," which is about to begin filming. A remake of the Hong Kong feature "Infernal Affairs," the adaptation is about a rivalry between the Boston police force and an Irish-American gang and is being produced by Warners, Vertigo and Plan B Entertainment.

Beyond that, Scorsese will next direct a big-screen adaptation of Japanese author Shusaku Endo's book "Silence," which is being produced by Gianni Nunnari's Hollywood Gang outfit.
“Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art.” - Andy Warhol


Skeleton FilmWorks

kotte

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2051
  • camera assistant. camera operator. carnivore.
  • Respect: +9
Drunken Angel
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2005, 01:36:26 AM »
0
What's up with these remakes and adaptations?
Where's his personal vision?

Myxo

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1768
  • Respect: +28
Drunken Angel
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2005, 01:59:14 AM »
0
Quote from: kotte
What's up with these remakes and adaptations?
Where's his personal vision?


No kidding. :(

eward

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2815
  • Respect: +11
Drunken Angel
« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2005, 09:31:06 AM »
0
this is rather unexciting news.

Alexandro

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742
  • Respect: +470
Drunken Angel
« Reply #4 on: February 10, 2005, 03:09:29 PM »
0
totally agree...i mean i don't mind book adaptations but a remake of a kurosawa film...oh man, oh man...

Gold Trumpet

  • The Master of Three Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5768
  • Respect: +151
Drunken Angel
« Reply #5 on: February 10, 2005, 04:26:41 PM »
0
Quote from: Alexandro
totally agree...i mean i don't mind book adaptations but a remake of a kurosawa film...oh man, oh man...


Are you saying its easier to adapt a book than it is a Kurosawa film? I only know of one adaptation that was better than the book it was based off.  Everytime I read a novel after having seen its cinematic adaptation, I'm always amazed how small and simple the film feels afterward. For the most part, novel adaptations really should be eradicated from film. Two different mediums with completely different ranges of emotion and information. They just don't work. The only benefit I've come across in this phenomonen is that in forewards for novels that have been adapted into classic films, the writer sometimes will give their own take on the film adaptation. What they say usually goes against accepted thought and with the novel in their mind, they can come to some of the best criticisms I've really ever heard. They are better able to put a film in its respective place not just against other films, but all other forms of art. A few film critics do this, but most don't even know where to begin when considering this prospect.

On topic, I don't think this is a big mistake at all. Drunken Angel is hardly a perfect film and not only can be improved, but can be interpreted in a number of ways. I can easily imagine Scorses doing a straight forward adaptation or a wild reimagination. There's just too many possibilities before deciding this one's fate yet.

I think there should be more groans about The Departed. Though Scorsese is finally working Nicholson and promises a return to low budget filmmaking, I expect a very traditional film anyways.

edit: John Logan's involvement is probably a legimitate reason to groan. Maybe Hollywood Scorsese is here to stay.

Myxo

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1768
  • Respect: +28
Drunken Angel
« Reply #6 on: February 10, 2005, 08:00:01 PM »
0
I always ask when an adaptation of a book or previous film is being made..

"Why and will it be at least as good as the original?"

Shawshank Redemption is a helluva lot cooler on screen, as is Last of the Mohicans and a shitload of other movies that were adapted from ho-hum novels. Fight Club? I love the book, but god damn, that movie is a great adaptation. Godfather 1, 2? I'd say those are fairly faithful great adaptations.

Interview with a Vampire is an example of a failed adaptation in my eyes.

I believe that books are adapted and made into films far more successfully than working within the same medium, as it would be remaking a film.

Alexandro

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742
  • Respect: +470
Drunken Angel
« Reply #7 on: February 11, 2005, 12:29:33 PM »
0
I think the fact that are two different mediums is the key to me. Book adaptations are ok with me cause the filmmaker can interpret the piece any way he wants without any real background on film. I know mostly the books are better but that's besides the point. Kubrick changed everything on his adaptations and he didn't care at all about the author's vision, just his, and he made incredible movies.

If you remake a film, there is an inmediacy element to it that makes it harder to separate your vision, from the original film, not to talk about everyone comparing the movies. I haven't seen Drunken Angel, and I have no doubt Scorsese will imprint his own view on it, as he always does. I mean, if his view is imprinted all over The Aviator, a film in which he had no creative input before they showed him the scrypt, he will certainly do it with a Kurosawa movie and it will certainly be interesting. But I just don't feel it's such a good idea.

The Departed is a remake too, and it sounds to me like a very commercial kind of adult thriller late summer thing. That description reminds me of Cape Fear, which kind of excites me. Cape Fear is underrated for me. It's commercial and fun, but Scorsese's unique vision turn it into something else. I know critics didn't liked it, but I love when popcorn movies have the style of a master behind them.

John Logan does worries me, though.

kotte

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2051
  • camera assistant. camera operator. carnivore.
  • Respect: +9
Drunken Angel
« Reply #8 on: February 11, 2005, 01:12:00 PM »
0
Someone said this of adapting books, I think it was Tarantino,

When you commit to making the adaptation you read the book once before writing the script and you never pick it up again...except maybe for double-checking names...

Gold Trumpet

  • The Master of Three Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5768
  • Respect: +151
Drunken Angel
« Reply #9 on: February 11, 2005, 01:38:52 PM »
0
Quote from: Alexandro
I think the fact that are two different mediums is the key to me. Book adaptations are ok with me cause the filmmaker can interpret the piece any way he wants without any real background on film. I know mostly the books are better but that's besides the point. Kubrick changed everything on his adaptations and he didn't care at all about the author's vision, just his, and he made incredible movies.


A few things worry me about book adaptations: 1.) When a book adaptation does happen, I always get the feeling the filmmakers are in search of a story they could not write. Kubrick said he never was a writer and thats he searched out a novel to adapt and an author to help him do so. 2.) From that, we get the biggest cliche of cinema: the reliance of a film to tell a straight forward story. Most of these stories seem hardly cinematic and instead seem like imitations of the novel. I think this has been the overriding thing to hold down the evolution of film with the years. Kubrick does this and even though he makes good stories into films with elements of a touch of the cinematic, he never seem to have gone further into the cinematic after 2001. (Barry Lyndon I'll lable as the arguble) He seemed to have found his touch of pen and until his death continued to make films at that level. Though cinematic, they were just as reliant on the stronghold of being adapted from a novel. 2001 seems the least reliant because the novel was written in adaptation of the film. (Yes, I'll ty to stop arguing Kubrick in this forum)

 
Quote from: Alexandro
If you remake a film, there is an inmediacy element to it that makes it harder to separate your vision, from the original film, not to talk about everyone comparing the movies. I haven't seen Drunken Angel, and I have no doubt Scorsese will imprint his own view on it, as he always does. I mean, if his view is imprinted all over The Aviator, a film in which he had no creative input before they showed him the scrypt, he will certainly do it with a Kurosawa movie and it will certainly be interesting. But I just don't feel it's such a good idea.


You're right. Film remakes usually hardly change anything from the original and try to just replicate what was only good about instead.  It's just for me film remakes seem the less impossible job to do.

Quote from: Alexandro
The Departed is a remake too, and it sounds to me like a very commercial kind of adult thriller late summer thing. That description reminds me of Cape Fear, which kind of excites me. Cape Fear is underrated for me. It's commercial and fun, but Scorsese's unique vision turn it into something else. I know critics didn't liked it, but I love when popcorn movies have the style of a master behind them.


i'm hopeful for The Departed too and I also see a similiar film being made. Scorsese is talented enough to do almost any film, but I have a feeling he's never really going to back to the integrity of his days in the 70s. That also doesn't bother me because I can't see him going back anyways. He talks so much film, references so many other films in his own that I kinda feel he is the perfect Hollywood director anyways. He's always wanted to be in this position so why not let him continue it. The Aviator for me is his best accomplishment of pure Hollywood conventions and overall a very accomplished film for something that is just trying to be entertaining.

Alexandro

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742
  • Respect: +470
Drunken Angel
« Reply #10 on: February 13, 2005, 02:09:23 AM »
0
GT, I agree with you on the adaptation thing, but, you know, I didn't know we were talking about freeing cinema from telling a linear story. In that case, you're completely right cause a book will never let you do that, or most books at least.

On the other hand, telling a linear story is not bad at all if it's done like Kubrick, Scorsese and all those other great filmmakers have done it before.

Flannery

  • The Call to Adventure
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Respect: 0
Drunken Angel
« Reply #11 on: February 16, 2005, 01:57:29 PM »
0
You know Raging Bull was book first.  So was GoodFellas, The Last Temptaton and The Age of Innocence, so I think you guys are blowing this out of proportion.
I am not thrilled about this Drunken Angel new either, but I think the choice word in this announcement is "developing."  At one point, Scorsese was developing a Dean Martin biopic, a western, a remake of the Magnificent Ambersons' original script and a remake of another Kurosawa film, High and Low.  Not to mention Schindler's List before Spielberg.
I don't think The Departed is going to be one of Scorsese' best, but it should at least be decent.  The real news here is that he is going to do the Silence after it.  Based off of Shusaku Endo's book, it is about the persecution of Portuguese priests in 16th century Japan.  Like Gangs of New York, it is really about the clash of two cultures.  Scorsese has mentioned it in a couple of interviews as a personal project.  He and Jay Cocks have been developing it since 1990.

Gold Trumpet

  • The Master of Three Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5768
  • Respect: +151
Drunken Angel
« Reply #12 on: February 16, 2005, 03:40:44 PM »
0
Quote from: Flannery
You know Raging Bull was book first.  So was GoodFellas, The Last Temptaton and The Age of Innocence, so I think you guys are blowing this out of proportion.
I am not thrilled about this Drunken Angel new either, but I think the choice word in this announcement is "developing."  At one point, Scorsese was developing a Dean Martin biopic, a western, a remake of the Magnificent Ambersons' original script and a remake of another Kurosawa film, High and Low.  Not to mention Schindler's List before Spielberg.
I don't think The Departed is going to be one of Scorsese' best, but it should at least be decent.  The real news here is that he is going to do the Silence after it.  Based off of Shusaku Endo's book, it is about the persecution of Portuguese priests in 16th century Japan.  Like Gangs of New York, it is really about the clash of two cultures.  Scorsese has mentioned it in a couple of interviews as a personal project.  He and Jay Cocks have been developing it since 1990.


Excellent fucking point. Thought I'm not the biggest fan of Scorsese, I wonder if I brought up a general argument in the wrong forum.

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy