Sleuth (Kenneth Branagh, 2007)
- Jeff
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:49 pm
- Location: Denver, CO
Sleuth (Kenneth Branagh, 2007)
The remake is currently in post-production, so it may actually make it out later this year. Jude Law is playing Michael Caine's role from the 1972 film, and Caine himself is playing the Olivier role. Kenneth Branagh directed, and Harold Pinter adapted Anthony Shaffer's play.
Here is the first still.
Here is the first still.
Last edited by Jeff on Wed May 16, 2007 10:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Belmondo
- Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:19 am
- Location: Cape Cod
Was there some problem with the original? Of course not; but let's remake it anyway and thereby provide more evidence that no one in the business has had an original idea for the last thirty five years. Jude Law did not make me forget Michael Caine as ALFIE and Caine won't make me forget Olivier. Yeah, I know; we are making another classic available for a new generation of younger blah, blah, blah. But, I still want an answer - was there some problem with the original?
- Jeff
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:49 pm
- Location: Denver, CO
I think you could count on one hand the number of movies that were remade because there was a "problem" with the original. As a general rule, movies are made to make money, not to solve problems. Obviously, that's not the case with many of the movies discussed on this forum, but as a general rule for studio product (which the Sleuth remake is), I think it applies.Belmondo wrote:Was there some problem with the original?
In the case of Sleuth, the impetus of the film was Jude Law's fondness for Shaffer's play and for its previous cinematic interpretation. Law is producing the film, and recruited Caine, Branagh, and Pinter. Perhaps it isn't even fair for me to call it a remake since it is really a new interpretation of the play.
I certainly share your concern that Hollywood seems to be especially reliant on sequels, remakes, and television derivatives to make a buck these days, but I don't really see the harm in a new version of Sleuth. I've seen several plays multiple times with different casts and directors, and often find different things to appreciate each time. I have some hope that the same will hold true for Sleuth.
- Jeff
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:49 pm
- Location: Denver, CO
Sony has finally set a release date, and it will indeed make it out this year: October 12, 2007.
-
- Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 12:15 pm
- Location: Philadelphia
-
- Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:30 pm
- Contact:
-
- Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:30 pm
- Contact:
I beg to differ. Olivier is as overrated as Law is underrated. I recall Caine's graciousness to Law on winning his Oscar for Cider House Rules -- beating Law for The Talented Mr. Ripley. Clearly he saw someone operating in his range and temperament -- albeit with a middle-class accent as opposed to Caine's pure Cockney.
I would advise Law-deriders to check out his truly expert performance in I Heart Huckabees.
I would advise Law-deriders to check out his truly expert performance in I Heart Huckabees.
- nyasa
- Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:05 am
- Location: UK
Agreed. This week's Larry's 100th anniversary, and the evaluations of his legacy have been decidedly mixed.David Ehrenstein wrote:I beg to differ. Olivier is as overrated as Law is underrated.
A few years ago, Britain's Channel 4 had a series called J'Accuse in which the reputations of the likes of Mother Teresa, Linda McCartney and Larry Olivier were trashed. The Olivier episode was devasting. With choice snippets of some of his most affected performances* he was hung by his own petard.
*The consensus this week seems to be that he was a great performer rather than a great actor.
-
- Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:30 pm
- Contact:
He was a Movie Star -- a big old-fashioned romantic leading man. Absolutely nothing wrong with that. But when claims are made puffing him up into someone supposedly refresenting the embodiment of the actor's art, it's hard to keep from giggling."The consensus this week seems to be that he was a great performer rather than a great actor."
Let me put it another way : He was no Dirk Bogarde.
- Highway 61
- Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:40 pm
- nyasa
- Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:05 am
- Location: UK
This side of the Atlantic he still tends to be thought of chiefly as a man of the stage - one of the original lovies, along with Gielgud, Richardson et al - who directed and starred in a trio of great movies. His position as a Hollywood leading man does tend to get lost amid all the dross he was involved with in his later years.David Ehrenstein wrote:He was a Movie Star -- a big old-fashioned romantic leading man.
The received explanation that he accepted any old crap during the 70s because he 'thought he was dying' in no way excuses his accent in The Jazz Singer.
-
- Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:30 pm
- Contact:
- MichaelB
- Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
- Location: Worthing
- Contact:
Richard Fleischer - the replacement director who was under no illusions about the quality of the film he was completing - actually asked Olivier what he thought he was doing making this crap. Olivier said that The Jazz Singer paid far better than London theatre work, and he needed the money for school fees.nyasa wrote:The received explanation that he accepted any old crap during the 70s because he 'thought he was dying' in no way excuses his accent in The Jazz Singer.
(Paraphrased from memory - the original anecdote is in Fleischer's autobiography)
- Kirkinson
- Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 5:34 am
- Location: Portland, OR
I had an acting teacher who studied Shakespearean acting at Oxford for several years and absolutely despised Olivier. He went as far as blaming him for all the negative stereotypes that the public autmoatically associates with Shakespeare, and said that nowadays when people stage Shakespeare's plays they're more often than not just aping Olivier instead of actually thinking about the text and what it means.
In any case, I do think Olivier's calculated grandiosity worked perfectly in Sleuth, and one of the things that excites me about this remake is seeing how differently Caine interprets the role. Jude Law, on the other hand, seems more naturally charming than Caine, who in his original role had to make some effort to come off smoother. In any case, the Caine/Law dynamic will be much different than Olivier/Caine, and that difference alone makes this one of a scant few remakes that have ever interested me.
In any case, I do think Olivier's calculated grandiosity worked perfectly in Sleuth, and one of the things that excites me about this remake is seeing how differently Caine interprets the role. Jude Law, on the other hand, seems more naturally charming than Caine, who in his original role had to make some effort to come off smoother. In any case, the Caine/Law dynamic will be much different than Olivier/Caine, and that difference alone makes this one of a scant few remakes that have ever interested me.
- The Fanciful Norwegian
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:24 pm
- Location: Teegeeack
He also told someone on the set of Inchon (Rex Reed, I think) that he took crap parts because he was an old man, he'd paid his dues, and the only thing he could pass on to his descendants at that point was the money he got taking whatever lucrative jobs came his way, quality be damned. There's a certain logic there, to be sure, but it's pretty depressing.MichaelB wrote:Richard Fleischer - the replacement director who was under no illusions about the quality of the film he was completing - actually asked Olivier what he thought he was doing making this crap. Olivier said that The Jazz Singer paid far better than London theatre work, and he needed the money for school fees.
(Paraphrased from memory - the original anecdote is in Fleischer's autobiography)
- justeleblanc
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:05 pm
- Location: Connecticut
David, are you kidding me? I love Schaeffer quite a bit and I think his original play and screenplay were far from "trying to be Pinter."David Ehrenstein wrote:Obviously Kenneth Bragnagh isn't Joseph L. Mankiewicz, but Harold Pinter is Harold Pinter -- which is more than can be said for original writer, Anthony Schaeffer, who with this baroque two-hander is trying his best to be Harold Pinter -- in a more "popular entertainment" mode.
-
- Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:30 pm
- Contact:
That's what others said at the time of the play's premiere. Not me. The play (and the Mankiewicz film) being a "two-hander" the overall dynamic is quite susceptible to being converted to a Pinter set-to.David, are you kidding me? I love Schaeffer quite a bit and I think his original play and screenplay were far from "trying to be Pinter."
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
- Jeff
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:49 pm
- Location: Denver, CO