§ While some are doubtless rejoicing over HUMAN TARGET getting the pick up from FOX, another comics-related pilot didn’t make it all the way, as io9 reports that No Heroics wasn’t picked up. Originally a satirical Britcom created by Drew Pearce, the show featured third-string superheroes with problems and the bar they frequented. Pearce has a postmortem:
I don’t actually think anything went wrong as such. I will say that it’s probably not the best year to do a massive, cool, edgy, expensive single-camera genre-based network-comedy without huge starpower on a major American network. Kind of obvious, but true.
Sad. Meanwhile, desperate networks scramble for any way to get more advertising for their dying shows, even tying in ads with the content. As Laura Hudson shows No Heroics would have been tailor-made for product placement, at least where in-jokes are concerned.
§ Geoff Boucher breaks the incredible news that the original crew is back for GHOSTBUSTERS 3, as Dan Aykroyd, aka Raymond Stanz, says holdout Bill Murray is on board.
Aykroyd said Sigourney Weaver is on board now, as are the original squad of ectoplasmic specialists — Aykroyd, Bill Murray, Harold Ramis and Ernie Hudson. Murray’s presence was the pivot point in making a third film happen. He holds a one-fifth controlling interest in the property rights and has been seen as the most reluctant to return to the paranormal comedy. Aykroyd said that is true but that it’s more nuanced than the public portrayal of the situation.
“I don’t put not making the third movie on Billy. We can’t do that. I’ve been very busy. Harold’s been busy, Ivan’s been busy. And a third script really didn’t coalesce properly. And Billy, you can’t blame an artist for not wanting to do the same thing again. He did two of them, for God’s sake. Although I’m the biggest cheerleader as the originator of the concept but I’ve never begrudged Billy not doing a third movie. I never said he held it up or that he refused. Hey, listen, he’s an artist. You can’t force somebody into it. I’m sorry he never read my third draft because I thought it was pretty good but, look, now we’re at a point that there’s a story that he can accept and that’s going to work, and I think we’re going to be in production fairly soon. We could be in production by winter.”
We’re as psyched by this news as anyone — GHOSTBUSTERS 1 was one of our most favoritest movies of our youth and showcased NYC in a vibrant ’80s mode that was accurate but not campy. HOWEVER….given that the entire cast (save Weaver) has, um, expanded tremendously (and understandably) with time, fitting into those jumpsuits is going to be quite a challenge, and may conjure visions of Hurley as a Dharma. Also, how many variations on the “I’m getting too old for this shit?” line will we have to hear?
§ Hayden Christiansen will play Mandrake the Magician in a new movie, and Djimon Hounsou will help him out, while Mimi Leder directs. Mandrake originated in a comic strip by Lee Falk.
§ We’re totally not sure how we feel about this Sherlock Holmes-action hero trailer. Isn’t this a character who liked to sit in his room, get high, and solve crimes just by thinking about them — ‘ratiocination’? It’s nice to see Guy Ritchie trying to be cerebral, but perhaps this film should star Jason Statham and Gerard Butler.
Guys do not all let themselves go, or fall apart, in their forties and fifties. I’ve had the same waist size for 17 years.
SRS
I dunno.
I recall eagerly awaiting Ghostbusters 2 because it had similar pedigree (same cast, writers and director as the first movie). The results were less than spectacular.
Also… this movie had better have Rick Moranis and Annie Potts!
There’s been at least one indication that Moranis will be in the film:
Is it me or does the actor Mark Strong in the new Sherlock Holmes movie a dead ringer for a younger Stanely Tucci?
That ain’t Sherlock Holmes.
“Isn’t this a character who liked to sit in his room, get high, and solve crimes just by thinking about them”
Holmes was into house breaking, covering up murders and other crimes, boxing, threatening to murder people, bending pokers with his barehands etc.
People’s view of the character seems more coloured by the old films that the books.
“Also, how many variations on the “I’m getting too old for this shit?” line will we have to hear?”
It’s like a prerequisite for any retiring character or for any reunion movie. Bugs the crap outta me I tells ya. And it’s the only reason I had an iota of interest in Indy and the Crystal Skull. I still must find out if it was used.
“The world as you know it will end,” how many times has that over-used cliche been put into movies? What happened to actual creativity in writing?
While this is… apparently not Holmes as we know him, I would argue that Sherlock was not the Holmes who stayed in his room thinking all the time. That would be Mycroft.
Sherlock, aside from being able to bend a fireplace poker with his bare hands, tended to run around the moors with Watson, pistol in hand, break into the apartments of blackmailers, impersonate dock workers and lie in wait for murderers in between analyzing people’s shoes and accents and so on.
And the use of “pops”, as in young guy saying “Here, Pops, let me handle that”. NObody really says “pops” except in movies.
As someone pointed out on another blog, the Holmes film looks/sounds a lot like the novel “The List of 7” by Mark Frost.
http://www.amazon.com/List-Seven-Mark-Frost/dp/0380720191/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242846200&sr=1-1
Actually, I spent some time last year with Ernie Hudson, and the man looks good. So does Murray. Ramis may need an IMAX screen, though….
I’m pretty excited about Sherlock Holmes, speaking as a long-time fan. If you really get into the canon, you find that he’s actually a very quirky man of action – a thinker yes, but a fighter as well.
He relishes getting out into the streets, going under-cover in the most squalid places, and generally mixing it up. Of course he IS often involved in more cerebral mysteries, but there’s more usually some danger or chase at the heart of them. Also, he’s got some very annoying traits, which only Watson can really put up with. There’s the drugs, of course, but also he’s vain, rude, anti-social, and secretive to a fault. (In one story he actually could have saved the life of one character if only he’d voiced his concerns, but he didn’t want any chance of being wrong so he waited until he’d figure everything out!)
In short, it seems the movie is taking some of the lesser-known traits and pumping them up somewhat. Just the fact that Watson is being played as a normally intelligent Doctor (as in the stories) rather than a bumbling fool is a great sign! So I’m really looking forward to it.
It also appears that the FABLES pilot didn’t get picked up, at least for Fall 2009.
Never considered Sherlock as an action hero. So I’ll keep an open mind. I liked the prequel (of a sort) Young Sherlock Holmes.