'Gypsy' remake will not be directed by Matthew Warchus but by Babs herself?- Page 4

[FishermanBob]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 1:36pm

So lovebwy, be clear please. Enough subtlety and beating around the bush. Are you for this or against this moving forward?

And we already know an actor can't play someone much younger. This board had a tremendous amount of discussion as to how Denzel Washington had no business playing a much younger character in Raisin. And of course those folks were right. The reviews absolutely blasted Washington and said he was a complete failure... or did they think he was exceptional in the role? I can never quite remember how that turned out.

Updated On: 8/9/14 at 01:36 PM

[lovebwy]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 1:50pm

STAGE and FILM are entirely different media, darling.

[lovebwy]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 1:53pm

To allow Barbra Streisand to do Gypsy is a BETRAYAL of the memory of Art Laurents!

"Sondheim said, ’What is the point of it?’ And I said, ’They have this terrible version with Rosalind Russell wearing those black and white shoes.’ And then Sondheim told me something that he got from the British — and it’s wonderful. He said, ’You want a record because the theater is ephemeral. But that’s wrong. The theater’s greatest essence is that it is ephemeral. You don’t need a record. The fact that it’s ephemeral means you can have different productions, different Roses on into infinity.’

"So I don’t want it now. I don’t want a definitive record. I want it to stay alive.

"I think [Streisand] is disappointed. She wanted very much to do it. That would have been a good exit for her career. Tom Hopper [sic] wanted to direct it. I think he’s wonderful."
Laurents said NO!

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 2:15pm

Can we PLEASE refer to the man as Arthur at the very least?

Also, I think it's a red herring to claim the movie should go forward either because Laurents WOULD have supported it, or because he wouldn't. Like any writer of a work who is no longer with us, his only claim to us now is the libretto he wrote in 1959, which anyway will become a different animal in the hands of the movie's new screenwriter regardless.

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 2:59pm

lovebwy neglects to mention that shortly thereafter, Laurents inked a deal with Universal on the project. Turned out Warner Brothers, the original studio, was not interested in the creative control Arthur wanted, but Universal didn't mind. Like many times in his life, it was a ploy to get what he wanted.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 3:46pm

Who cares about Barbra's age, all I care about is the bullet we dodged by not having Tom Hooper direct this. The world so doesn't need a Tom Hooper-directed GYPSY. Streisand's issue is of course her ego. Really, I'd rather have a Streisand-directed GYPSY with her as Rose than no GYPSY at all, but then again I'm a sucker for the story and those songs, and I dislike the other two movies so much, this one can't be worse.......right?
I think the ensemble here will be key. Surround Streisand with actors she'll actually have chemistry with and they'll create something special.

[BobbyBubbi]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 3:57pm

Start at 7:46

[smallvillefan16]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 3:59pm

this is never gonna happen.

[SweetLips]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 4:17pm

Everyone has the right to have an opinion-on any subject-but if you think the people involved in this project[if at all there is one] are going to read, much less take any notice of the thoughts on here then you live in la la land..Vent away but I'll pay my $4.50[pensioner price] to see it-if I live long enough !

[lovebwy]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 4:27pm

NO NO NO! Arthur Laurent's FINAL decisions before he DIED was not DENY the rights to Gypsy. He didn't want it with Barbra. END OF STORY!

This is a disaster of an idea and will be a monumental TRAIN WRECK and I can't wait for it to come out to horrible reviews and worse box office so I can come back to THIS VERY THREAD with a big fat "I TOLD YA SO"!

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 4:33pm

NO NO NO! Arthur Laurent's FINAL decisions before he DIED was not DENY the rights to Gypsy. He didn't want it with Barbra. END OF STORY!

I love the Freudian slip here, because, again, it was not "END OF STORY." Warner Brothers held the option, Arthur wanted creative control that WB thought he shouldn't have, he went public saying "you know what, let's not do a movie," Barbra and Joel Silver came back with the deal he wanted from Universal, and he did sign off on it. Check any of the first articles about Gypsy happening again just before and right after his death. It's the truth.

Updated On: 8/9/14 at 04:33 PM

[lovebwy]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 4:37pm

No. Art Laurents was DEAD and it is his estate that is allowing this disaster to continue. Can you provide a news article where he gives his approval that's dated after mine? He said he didn't want her to do it when he was 93 and he DIED at 93.

He died happy thinking Streisand would never get her long finger nailed mitts on it.

What a shame.

[lovebwy]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 4:46pm

PS Laurents made his very wise comments on March 14,2011. He died on May 5, 2011. He did not change in mind in those few months. Streisand swooped down like a vulture after he died and is going against his expressed wishes.

Streisand's Gypsy Film Scrapped
14 March 2011 9:11 AM, PDT | WENN | See recent WENN news »

Barbra Streisand has been left "disappointed" after movie bosses decided not to proceed with plans for her big screen adaptation of Broadway musical Gypsy.

The singer/actress recently confirmed she had signed up to star in the latest Hollywood re-imagining of the famous show, which has previously been transformed into films starring both Rosalind Russell and Bette Midler.

Director Arthur Laurents has now revealed the musical's co-creator Stephen Sondheim was against the idea of another film adaptation, so they scrapped the Streisand project.

He tells the Hartford Courant, "He (Sondheim) said, 'What is the point of it?' And I said, 'They have this terrible version with Rosalind Russell wearing those black and white shoes.' And then Sondheim told me something that he got from the British - and it's wonderful. He said, 'You want a record because the theatre is ephemeral. But that's wrong. The theatre's greatest essence is that it is ephemeral. You don't need a record... '

"So I don't want it now. I don't want a definitive record. I want it to stay alive. I think (Streisand) is disappointed. She wanted very much to do it. That would have been a good exit for her career. Tom Hooper wanted to direct it. I think he's wonderful." »

[SweetLips]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 4:50pm

lovebwy is your life so empty and needs validation so you can go around like a loon pumping the air shouting 'I told you so' ?? Geeze man, as the young ones now say--Get a life--this will happen [or not] no matter how many words you waste on here. You really do need to get a hobby.

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 4:52pm

As per http://barbra-archives.com/films/gypsy.html:

2009 (according to Arthur's posthumous memoir The Rest of the Story) -- Barbra calls Arthur and plays footsie about doing Rose in Gypsy. She asks if he thinks she could play Rose. He says no. She asks if he thinks she's too old, and he says, "No, but you'd play for sympathy." He goes on to say: "She said she knew Rose because her mother was Rose. She went into details. Her mother made Rose look like Mother Teresa. That Barbra survived was a testament to her determination [...] The three-hour conversation left me with affection for Barbra and convinced she could play Rose if she cut her fingernails and didn't direct."

January 2011 -- News leaks that Warner Brothers and producer Joel Silver are developing Gypsy for Barbra. She will play Rose and produce. Laurents tells the press that "now things are serious and a movie is truly in the works," and publicly suggests Tom Hanks as a casting suggestion for Herbie. Known not to be a fan of the '62 film starring Rosalind Russell, he says, "I would be very pleased if we had a different film version for the historical record." When questioned whether Streisand is too old for the role, he tells the New York Times, "First of all, they can do magic in Hollywood. Second, does it really matter?" It emerges that Tom Hooper is interested in directing (but eventually chooses Les Mis as his movie musical debut).

Two months later -- The project is off. Laurents says that after speaking with Sondheim about the project, he's changed his mind. He tells the press, "[Sondheim] told me something that he got from the British -- and it's wonderful. He said, 'You want a record because the theater is ephemeral. But that's wrong. The theater's greatest essence is that it is ephemeral. You don't need a record. The fact that it's ephemeral means you can have different productions, different Roses on into infinity.' So I don't want it now. I don't want a definitive record. I want it to stay alive."

A week or so later -- Reports leak that Universal is interested in the film.

May 2011 -- In an article following Arthur's death, producer Joel Silver tells the New York Times that Arthur ultimately signed off on the Gypsy film in a deal that gave him substantial creative control and called for the film to be "substantially similar" to the stage version. Quoting Silver, "I last spoke to Arthur in April, brought him up to speed on everything, and then I think I surprised him a little by asking him to make the movie with me. I felt that he understood Gypsy better than anyone, and that he understood Barbra, since he cast her in her first big musical, I Can Get It for You Wholesale. And he said yes. We were talking about him coming out to L.A. in May." (Link to article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/26/theater/before-death-laurentss-was-working-on-new-gypsy-film.html.)

Reading between the lines, my assumption (and it's a reasonably calculated one) is that WB didn't want to give Arthur that extent of creative control, either because they judged him to be old to wield that much control or because they never give the source writer that much power on a film, so he did his usual song-and-dance until they came up with a deal that appealed to him.

Think about everything you've ever heard about Arthur here, from PJ and others. Does this really strike you as them waiting for the old man to die before they could move? Hell no! It is absolutely in character for Arthur to do this! And given, according to the NY Times article linked above, that his agent confirmed this chain of events and the signed deal before Arthur's death, I can only conclude that you're wrong.

(I suppose a five-year-old would add "na na na na na" here.)

Updated On: 8/9/14 at 04:52 PM

[lovebwy]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 5:03pm

Hm, yes well knowing Joel Silver I can picture him in the hospital room guiding a barely coherent Arthur's pen hand to sign the contract.

But fine, I stand corrected. I still think this will be a bigger disaster than the Hindenberg and the Titanic combined. This will make the Great Chicago Fire of 1871 look like a goddamed PICNIC!

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 5:16pm

What, if anything, do you know about Joel Silver? Because clearly you don't know **** about Arthur's death. He died at home after his pneumonia rapidly got out of control (as it would with anyone in their nineties), not in any hospital. (See cited Playbill article, which notably also adds that Arthur had just finished negotiations on the film of Gypsy.)

Arthur Laurents, Legendary Librettist, Playwright, Screenwriter and Director, Dies at 93

Updated On: 8/9/14 at 05:16 PM

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 5:19pm

Readers of the thread may note that I am by no means saying the film will be good, but lovebwy is clearly talking out of their ass in extreme emotional reaction to news they dislike.

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 5:39pm

And now I'm not talking out of my ass, because Arthur's second volume of his autobiography confirms my theory (quoted from Google Books):

The project ran into an insurmountable obstacle: Warner Brothers refused to give me and Steve Sondheim the approvals we wanted -- namely, that our estates have approval after we were gone.

He goes on to offer a variation on the "ephemeral" quote, but then says:

A new film version doesn't matter per se. What does matter is that if there is to be one, it be one we can all be proud of.

Sounds to me like it was never off the table unless he didn't get creative control -- exactly as I suspected. And it sounds like he was about to get it, as further down the page, after discussing Joel Silver and his background, he says:

...he asked me to be a producer of the new film of Gypsy -- not an executive producer, an active functioning producer. He says I am the only one Barbra will listen to.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 5:51pm

Art Laurents was DEAD and it is his estate that is allowing this disaster to continue.

If you dare call him "Art" one more time, Arthur's ghost is going to come up from where he's currently residing and rip you a new one so big there isn't a dildo in the world that can fill it.

The man's name was ARTHUR not ART and you know absolutely nothing about the workings of his mind and the goals of his estate.

Stop arguing with people who do.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 5:56pm

I can picture him in the hospital room guiding a barely coherent Arthur's pen hand to sign the contract.

Arthur Laurents died at home.




EDIT: I see now that was already pointed out to you by g.d.e.l.g.i

Updated On: 8/9/14 at 05:56 PM

[lovebwy]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 6:51pm

The Joel Silver comment was a joke, folks. It was playing on his rep as a vicious shark.

If Arthur Laurent's ghost comes after me, I just hope it's over with it's obsession with Jeremy Jordan.

[Claudia Draper]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 7:39pm

As a Super Fan, I have to join in... It's happening. filming starts in Jan. It WILL be out by Xmas 2015- 18 months. I think once the cast is annouced, it will generate more positive reaction. Louise will not be Gaga Jennifer Lawrence or Natalie Portman . I think everyone will be pleasantly surprised. That is all.

[lovebwy]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 7:58pm

I quote Miss Barbara Stanwyck from the classic television series Dynasty 2: The Colbys of California:

"God help us...All"

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 8:03pm

My guess is that maybe they are going to do the sad ending like in the 1974 and 2008 Broadway revivals where Louise laughs sarcastically at Rose's dream and the craziness within taking over. The original film and TV version had the happy ending and they might do something different for a change. However, this is totally up to Barbra since she is in the director's chair as well.