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

a mildred pierce remake - WHY?????????????????????????


Recommended Posts

But when I was young, black and white movies as the norm was already a thing of the past.All new films that came out were in colour. How come, used as I was to colour films. I wasn't "put off" by black and white? Quite the opposite, the fact that they were so different, full of shadows, they looked so different from what I was used to, is what fascinated me.

At the risk of sounding like a typical "older" person, why should young people today be any less open to watching classic movies in black and white than I was in the 70s and 80s?

Link to post
Share on other sites

>misswonderly wrote:

>At the risk of sounding like a typical "older" person, why should young people today be any less open to watching classic movies in black and white than I was in the 70s and 80s?

 

. . . Because: they have been exposed to a very different sort of atmosphere concerning the whole issue of technology and the changes that one becomes accustom to. It's like telling somebody today, a young person, to use a rotary phone, instead of a standard push-button! . . . Give somebody today an old Black & White TV and they'd look at you like you're drunk or out of your head! . . . Take away somebody's "Blackberry" or they leave it behind and they'll go crazy! It's all about the mentality that is in a very different sort of frame or perspective to how they see the world around them. Of course, there are a few exceptions to the rule, where I've run into young people who can accept and respect various aspects of the past; be it movies or anything else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that often strikes me is that when I was going to the Brattle in Boston to see The Maltese Falcon or maybe Mildred Pierce, that old movie was not thirty years old. Now it is almost 70 years old. When I was young, a 70 year old movie would have been older than Melies. Humphrey Bogart was an actor I knew from his later movies; I'd enjoyed Spencer Tracy in Inherit the Wind and Mad Mad World and even Bad Day at Black Rock, so it was less of a reach to see Boystown or Captains Courageous. Those links don't exist, really, for kids today.

And think of the overwhelming amounts of "classic" movies. As I say, in college I looked back on 35 years of talkies, whereas today that past is 80 years of stuff. There've been a lot of 'classics' since my days at the Brattle -- where to start? Finally, I've had sixty plus years to develop my backlog of classic movies to love; this younger group is just beginning. Thank heavens for TCM for providing access to some good old films that younger people can savor -- when they find that moment.

Meanwhile, why let remakes bother you at all? They may be good or bad, but they never displace an earlier film, good or bad -- unless we're thinking of that old story where Gaslight kept Angel Street off of American screens... Let them fight each other after they've been made; give 'em a chance to be wonderful!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just heard or read about the remaking of Mildred Pierce. Does not anyone in Hollywood have an original bone in their body? Also the fact that the director is not using the City of Angels, or Glendale to be specific, as the backdrop to this new version is disrespectful to say the least. As much as I like Kate Winslet, this is just a really stupid idea! I hope it sucks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you hear the name Mildred Pierce, and you happen to know your classic cinema, you probably go right to one woman: she of the big eyebrows and shoulder pads...better known as Joan Crawford. Crawford won her one and only Oscar for her role in Michael Curtiz's crime classic, and now another Oscar winning actress has signed for a remake of the noir tale, but this time it's for the small screen. Variety is reporting that Kate Winslet has joined forces with director Todd Haynes to star in a remake of Pierce as a cable miniseries.

 

 

Mildred Pierce was the story of a woman determined take on the restaurant world and make a better life for her daughters, only to have her eldest turn on her, and after much slapping and running up and down the stairs, Mildred finally *resorts to murder. The original film was based on James Cain's novel, and Haynes will be writing his script from the original source material rather than the 1945 film. Which I would assume is because not only would a miniseries require a little more material than a feature film, but also because of the changes that were made to Cain's story to keep the film in line with the production code at the time

 

 

According to sources, HBO is expected to snap up the property, but nothing has been put to paper. But I have to tell you that as much as I am no fan of pointless remakes, there is something about the combination of Winslet, who is exceptional at play unsympathetic mothers and wives with Haynes, who has a way with recreating the look of classic films, that makes me think there just might be hope for this project yet.

 

 

 

Aug 16, 2009

Cinematical.com

Link to post
Share on other sites

the young people of today are very shollow, self-centered and dumb, and i know a large number of them, it is just so sad, crawford was a gem and a diamond in the raw all at once...i love her and no one should touch her oscar winning role!

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it, this remake had been in the planning stages for several years. Over the period of time it?s taken to finally get things going, at least a dozen or so actresses were considered, long before Kate Winslet managed to accept the role. The script as written by the project?s director Todd Haynes, promises to be as close the original novel as possible; Haynes is said to have pulled no punches, creating an atmosphere that will be very straightforward and without any restrictions to the adult themes that cram the novel! Of course, this is to be expected and while some fans out there might not like this new idea of rejuvenating ?Mildred Pierce,? Haynes has been careful in changing the format by way of a televised series and not a major motion picture. In hindsight, this shouldn?t really be considered a remake, but a different and closer interpretation of the Cain novel.

 

I?ve said it once and I?ll say it again: The Big and Most Important Question to date is ?What will actress Ann Blyth have to say?? Actress Evan Rachel Wood, who is playing the role of ?Veda,? originally made famous by Blyth, hasn?t had much going for her career as of yet. Perhaps this new version will be as important to Wood as it once was to Blyth; after all, the role made Blyth a star and brought her an ?Oscar? nomination! So far, Blyth hasn?t been able to be reached for any comment. Most likely, she won?t have much to say, if anything, about this new version of Mildred Pierce.? Still, there are enough fans out there that will want her to say something or perhaps just give an opinion on the matter. The first and probably most obvious question is whether or not she will watch the new version when it makes its way to HBO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=johnbabe wrote:}{quote}

> the young people of today are very shollow, self-centered and dumb, and i know a large number of them, it is just so sad, crawford was a gem and a diamond in the raw all at once...i love her and *no one should touch her oscar winning role!*

 

Well, no one can touch her performance. I don't think roles win Oscars. What a strange lot of fearful protectiveness. No one takes this attitude in theater. A great performance, a great production, it's something to aim at, to try to better, to reinterpret. And in theater the original is always lost, lost every night, but in film, there is no loss! The original remains, available to all. The new one might or might not be great, or good, or fine. The earlier film remains stable.

 

I don't get the outrage. And I reject the "shallow, self-centered, and dumb" generalization.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only consolation in these pointless, if not sacriligious (to me anyway) remakes, is that something like the recent "The Women" is already fading from memory, whereas the original will live on forever. The 1982 version of "The Postman Always Rings Twice", is not considered the definitive version of that story, even with two Oscar winning actors in the leads, and all the more recent sex and violence included, as per the book (can anyone really find that sex on the kitchen table scene sexy?), it still doesn't compare with the 1946 version.

 

I too grew up watching tv, and movies on tv, in the 70s and 80s. Maybe the fact that we didn't have a color tv for the longest time may account for my affinity for older movies, but when I was really little, these older movies was about all there was to see on the few commercial channels there were (compared to the hundreds now on cable). Reruns of tv shows were also in black and white (again that's all we had) and I used to puzzle about the credits saying "Gilligan's Island -In Color", etc. since that was a big selling point when first broadcast in the mid-60s. In observing my nephews and nieces, the only shows in black and white are I Love Lucy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This new adaptation of "Mildred Pierce" might be worth a look- first Kate Winslet is a very good actress ( and I'm sure it will be a bit different from Crawford's classic performance) writer- director Todd Haynes knows how to make films in the classic tradition just take a look at his magnificent Oscar nominated " Far From Heaven". I have not read the novel but I'm sure there are some aspects of the story which the censors had changed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remakes can be good and what may people forget is that remakes have taken place since movies started! Now I have to assume that most people that complain about remakes are really complaining about NON classic movies. e.g. movies made after 1960 or so. OK, I get that since the vast majority of movies I love are classic movies, but people do need to rememeber a movie like The Maltese Falcon is a remake.

 

So what is a modern movie maker to do, only make movies from modern (new) original sources? I don't see why. Also, if a remake will get younger movie fans to check out a classic movie than this remake had value to the history of movies.

 

Kate is very good so she just might be able to make the movie interesting. The goal isn't to be Crawford but for actors and directors to put their own stamp on classic source material.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, I know lots of young adolescents and young adults. I'm with them every day, in many settings. I know plenty of shallow people, many silly people, but I find they can't be classified, by age, or religion, race, or job category. Not even by their fondness for old movies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> The 1982 version of "The Postman Always Rings Twice", is not considered the definitive version of that story, even with two Oscar winning actors in the leads, and all the more recent sex and violence included, as per the book (can anyone really find that sex on the kitchen table scene sexy?), it still doesn't compare with the 1946 version.

 

The 1946 version, of course, was a remake of [*Ossessione*|http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0035160/] three years earlier, which gets back to my point previously in the thread of how some remakes are either considered better then the original, or else considered the original outright, with the real original having been forgotten.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=MovieProfessor wrote:}{quote}

> One way or another, I don't see the younger crowds finding any interest in a film that's about 65 years old.

 

I?ve heard that they are going to put a lot of nudity and cursing in this new film, and also several car chases, and several explosions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

>Fred wrote:

> Ive heard that they are going to put a lot of nudity and cursing in this new film, and also several car chases, and several explosions.

 

And the game! Don't forget about the Video Game that has to go along to be marketed too!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to see someone making the point about remakes I have also been making, especially 'else considered the original outright, with the real original having been forgotten'. Many times I have to remind someone the 'original' movie they love so much more than a remake is also a remake!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...