Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Another remake: Affleck's "Witness for the Prosecution"


jakeem
 Share

Recommended Posts

The two-time Oscar winner Ben Affleck is hoping to direct and star in a new version of "Witness for the Proscution," based on a story by Agatha Christie first published in 1925. It was adapted as a play in 1953.

 

A 1957 screen version, co-written and directed by Billy Wilder, starred Charles Laughton, Tyrone Power (in his last complete film role), Marlene Dietrich and  Elsa Lanchester. The film earned seven Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (Laughton) and Best Supporting Actress (Lanchester).

 

ben-affleck-image1.jpg

 

Affleck shared the 1997 Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay for "Good Will Hunting" with his friend and co-star Matt Damon. He won a 2012 Oscar as a co-producer (with George Clooney and Grant Heslov) of "Argo" which was named Best Picture, Affleck also directed that film. 

 

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ben-affleck-direct-star-witness-920929

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the film should be turned into a Broadway musical.

 

Well, maybe AT LEAST "turned into" a new "poll result" posted within a particular ongoing thread around here, anyway!

 

(...can't wait to see how you'd work "Tor" into it...bet it'd be good, in any case)

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two-time Oscar winner Ben Affleck is hoping to direct and star in a new version of "Witness for the Proscution," based on a story by Agatha Christie first published in 1925. It was adapted as a play in 1953.

 

A 1957 screen version, co-written and directed by Billy Wilder, starred Charles Laughton, Tyrone Power (in his last complete film role), Marlene Dietrich and  Elsa Lanchester. The film earned seven Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (Laughton) and Best Supporting Actress (Lanchester).

 

ben-affleck-image1.jpg

 

Affleck shared the 1997 Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay for "Good Will Hunting" with his friend and co-star Matt Damon. He won a 2012 Oscar as a co-producer (with George Clooney and Grant Heslov) of "Argo" which was named Best Picture, Affleck also directed that film. 

 

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ben-affleck-direct-star-witness-920929

Affleck in the Charles Laughton role? Affleck has always reminded me of Laughton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as he doesn't do the same case.

 

I already know how that one went.

 

The twist at the end is the first thing that came to mind about why remaking a film like 'witness' could be problematic.    When talking media heads discuss or write about a film that is a remake they often discuss the plot.   While they wouldn't give away the entire thing as a spoiler,  they provides hints.  This could cause people to do some 'research' (e.g. asking someone who has seen the original). 

 

Once one knows the twist,  there isn't much of a reason to see another version of this story.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As blong as he doesn't do the same case.

 

I already know how that one went.

 

They could always do it in the style of "Clue" (1985), which was distributed as three versions -- all with different endings. By the way, there's been talk of remaking it, too.

 

Clue-2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The twist at the end is the first thing that came to mind about why remaking a film like 'witness' could be problematic.    When talking media heads discuss or write about a film that is a remake they often discuss the plot.   While they wouldn't give away the entire thing as a spoiler,  they provides hints.  This could cause people to do some 'research' (e.g. asking someone who has seen the original). 

 

Once one knows the twist,  there isn't much of a reason to see another version of this story.   

 

Right.
 
All that should be retained is the title and the courtroom setting.
 
Everything else should be different. Otherwise it'll be like watching a baseball game over again. Why bother?
 
I'm sure he'll be smart enough to come up with a new story.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The twist at the end is the first thing that came to mind about why remaking a film like 'witness' could be problematic.    When talking media heads discuss or write about a film that is a remake they often discuss the plot.   While they wouldn't give away the entire thing as a spoiler,  they provides hints.  This could cause people to do some 'research' (e.g. asking someone who has seen the original). 

 

Once one knows the twist,  there isn't much of a reason to see another version of this story.   

 

I'm inclined to agree.  I didn't see the recent remake of Beyond a Reasonable Doubt, but the reviews certainly didn't suggest that they overcame the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like that's all Hollywood is good for these days (remakes)...

 

I reckon there are no writers out there penning decent tomes. I hate remakes. Are there no writers out there with new stuff?? It's like the Richard Mathesons and his like have completely disappeared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I reckon there are no writers out there penning decent tomes. I hate remakes. Are there no writers out there with new stuff?? It's like the Richard Mathesons and his like have completely disappeared.

 

I keep looking, but can't find,  if someone has complied any actual data of American movies released by each decade and how many are based on pre-existing plays or books (ones released say 5 years before the film was released,  e.g. Shakespeare),   'new' plays or books,  screenplays written just for a movie (therefore really 'fresh'),   remakes,  serials,  etc.... 

 

The decades of the 40s and 50s had a lot more remakes than some people realize.   Anyhow data would help us know how many movies are so called retreads verses really 'new' material,  verses really 'old' material (made into a movie before or not).

 

The 30s did have a lot of 'written just for the film' screenplays but these were mostly 'B' list programmers where the plot is well worn but they make a few minor changes and called it 'new'.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep looking, but can't find,  if someone has complied any actual data of American movies released by each decade and how many are based on pre-existing plays or books (ones released say 5 years before the film was released,  e.g. Shakespeare),   'new' plays or books,  screenplays written just for a movie (therefore really 'fresh'),   remakes,  serials,  etc.... 

 

The decades of the 40s and 50s had a lot more remakes than some people realize.   Anyhow data would help us know how many movies are so called retreads verses really 'new' material,  verses really 'old' material (made into a movie before or not).

 

The 30s did have a lot of 'written just for the film' screenplays but these were mostly 'B' list programmers where the plot is well worn but they make a few minor changes and called it 'new'.

 

Yes, but to remake Gilligan's Island??? I understand Hollywood wants to make money, but really....

I'm curious to know if there are any decent writers out there. There must be.

Co-workers are enamored at the zombie shows, god knows why. There's a book club at work and I love to read, but the crap that people are reading is just that... Crap! The people who are getting published these days stink! I took an online college course in English grammar and editing and I will regret it the rest of my life because I can pick out errors in any book I read. My favorite author is Stephen King and he does have a few punctuation errors in his books. Everybody has. But some of this crap that people are reading nowadays...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but to remake Gilligan's Island??? I understand Hollywood wants to make money, but really....

I'm curious to know if there are any decent writers out there. There must be.

Co-workers are enamored at the zombie shows, god knows why. There's a book club at work and I love to read, but the crap that people are reading is just that... Crap! The people who are getting published these days stink! I took an online college course in English grammar and editing and I will regret it the rest of my life because I can pick out errors in any book I read. My favorite author is Stephen King and he does have a few punctuation errors in his books. Everybody has. But some of this crap that people are reading nowadays...

 

Sorry but this post, which I tend to agree with,  would be a reason why Hollywood should make more and more remakes; fresh source material is crap.

 

The zombie shows and the zombie movies are original works.  The new books in that book club are original works.  So it isn't that there is a lack of new original source material being used in the film industry but you just don't like the content of these original works.  

 

I don't like most of it either which is why 90% of the film I see are studio era movies.

 

I guess we have to pick our poison;  a remake of a solid well written but 'old' play or book  or a movie from fresh source material that is likely to be crap.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but to remake Gilligan's Island??? I understand Hollywood wants to make money, but really....

I'm curious to know if there are any decent writers out there. There must be.

Co-workers are enamored at the zombie shows, god knows why. There's a book club at work and I love to read, but the crap that people are reading is just that... Crap! The people who are getting published these days stink! I took an online college course in English grammar and editing and I will regret it the rest of my life because I can pick out errors in any book I read. My favorite author is Stephen King and he does have a few punctuation errors in his books. Everybody has. But some of this crap that people are reading nowadays...

 

I believe there is a specific quality to the shows of the 60s which would most likely prevent them from getting reboots. The 60s, in terms of sitcoms, was the decade for wholesome family shows and cheesy sitcoms. Could you really imagine seeing Gilligan's Island or Dennis The Menace getting a reboot in todays world? I didn't think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe there is a specific quality to the shows of the 60s which would most likely prevent them from getting reboots. The 60s, in terms of sitcoms, was the decade for wholesome family shows and cheesy sitcoms. Could you really imagine seeing Gilligan's Island or Dennis The Menace getting a reboot in todays world? I didn't think so.

 

If Gilligan's Island was remade into a T.V. show or movie,  a lot of the focus would be on the Professor and Ginger and Maryann. 

 

I can clearly imagine the various story lines in this area.    

 

In addition sometimes a T.V. show was wholesome when the source material wasn't as much;  e.g. Perry Mason  - he committed a lot of crimes in the books and it was implied he and Della had something going on.    A new version of Mason would be more faithful to what the author intended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...