NBC is considering a live broadcast of the play A Few Good Men, according to Variety. The deal is still in its early stages, with no cast, director, or airdate in sight, but Aaron Sorkin would reportedly "do another pass" on the script to get it in TV shape. (What creative alternate curse-words will he come up with? The possibilities are endless.) The could-be staging would be produced by Craig Zadan and Neil Meron, the same pair behind the live Sound of Music and the upcoming Peter Pan, which means we have some really interesting casting choices to look forward to. What is the Carrie Underwood–as-Maria equivalent for casting Colonel Jessup?
I can think of about 50 plays I'd rather see than this. What is the attraction for this play?
If anyone ever tells you that you put too much Parmesan cheese on your pasta, stop talking to them. You don't need that kind of negativity in your life.
If they're combing the late 80s plays turned into early 90s movies catalog, I'd rather they do Steel Magnolias or the long overlooked Other People's Money.
Can you just imagine the cast of Other People's Money? Jon Hamm as Larry Garfinkle Cate Blanchett as Kate Dustin Hoffman as Jorgy Holland Taylor as Bea
If anyone ever tells you that you put too much Parmesan cheese on your pasta, stop talking to them. You don't need that kind of negativity in your life.
True, I can name a dozen better plays I'd rather see, but this title has name recognition with the successful movie. They can also use Sorkin's name to sell it to audiences.
You mean that successful movie that didn't win any Oscars? The only reason people remember it is for the tagline "You can't handle the truth."
If anyone ever tells you that you put too much Parmesan cheese on your pasta, stop talking to them. You don't need that kind of negativity in your life.
May I ask if posters think the tag "live" really attracts many extra viewers? Perhaps it's because I'm on the West Coast and we often (see SNL) get the live version on videotape anyway, but a TV show being live is only interesting if a disaster happens. Otherwise, the "live" part is just an idea.
There's already a classic film of GOOD MEN. Unless Sorkin has a radically new take on the story (which he may) or the casting is strikingly interesting (a tall order when replacing Jack Nicholson), I don't see the point of doing it "live".
Yes, the "Live!" aspect does add appeal and interest. There's a bit of anything can happen/go wrong in the air. I'm not saying Joe and Betty Sixpack in my hometown in southwest Virginia will be aflutter "that guy who played Ross is doing a tv thing by that guy who wrote that West Wing show" but it will appeal to key demographics.
Again, I'd much rather them do another play, but...it is what it is. If this is successful maybe they would/will do more. It's already encouraging that NBC is doing Peter Pan, The Music Man, and A Few Good Men all based on the success of The Sound of Music. We may just have to suffer through Adam Levine in the Tom Cruise role.
My hope is these live productions will encourage people to get out and go to the theater and a straight play seems like an obvious next step since they need a hand attracting audiences more so than musicals.
A Fee Good Men is a solid choice for a first try for the reasons already stated but I think something like Arsenic and Old Lace with some combination of Betty White, Cloris Leachman, Carol Burnett, or Georgia Engle as the Brewster sisters would draw a crowd. I see the film on tv all the time and those roles are perfect for any of those comediennes from the golden age of tv sitcom/variety shows. I also think comedy plays better live than drama, at least televised.
I, for one, am praying that they cast JK Simmons as Colonel Jessup
"I could totally get on board with that. Whiplash proves he's able!! I think that Darren Criss could totally take on Tom Cruise role of Lt. Daniel Kaffee.