web counter
 

To a New World of Gods and Monsters

By TK | Posted Under Trade News | Comments (26)

brideoffrankenstein.jpg

Universal Studios has caught the remake/reboot bug, and they’re running with it. First there was news of their in-production remake of The Wolf Man, starring Benicio Del Toro, directed by Joe Johnston (The Rocketeer, Jurassic Park III), who replaced One Hour Photo’s Mark Romanek.

Now, they’re going back to the classic monster movies of the 30s, with a remake of 1935’s Bride of Frankenstein, about Frankenstein’s monster persuading the good doctor to create a woman to share his miserable, hounded life. The ending of the film is actually a favorite of mine — we’ll see if they keep it. As of right now, Ropes of Silicon is reporting that Neil Burger is in talks to direct.

Burger’s a solid choice, who achieved decent success with 2006’s The Illusionist. It’s a remake that I’m not in a tizzy over, since it’s a 70+ year old movie that could be done well, assuming they don’t focus on effects, and instead concentrate on the dynamic of a lonely creature who desperately just wants someone to love him, instead of chasing him with torches and pitchforks.

Of course, Universal Pictures makes me nervous as hell — the last time they went to the classic monster well, we ended up with one of the worst genre films ever made, the disastrously awful Van Helsing, which basically skullfucked every classic monster in cinematic and literary history. I suppose as long as they make sure Stephen Sommers doesn’t even enter the same time zone. Although, Kate Beckinsale would make an excellent Bride, considering she’s basically a talking doll anyway. Hey-O!

God, Van Helsing sucked.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance

← Love Happens Trailer | Ryan Reynolds' Entertainment Weekly Cover →









Comments

DOnt even joke about beckinsale, that talentless frog lipped harpy will not....desecrate the good name of the bride!!!

I'm seeing...In one direction, Christina Ricci...In another...Helena Bonham Carter(Burton?)
In yet a third, making it into something so awesome I would literally give birth to Kittens if it happened...Angelica Houston

Posted by: Nadine at June 18, 2009 10:06 AM

I was thinking more along the lines of Lindsay Lohan or Skank Cancer for this role.

Oh, I know. Amy Winehouse! They'll save a fucking fortune on makeup!

Posted by: UncleJR at June 18, 2009 10:10 AM

Actually, I'm kinda hoping for Amy Adams on this one. Please God, let it be Amy Adams...Or Anna Friel. One of them would make me happy.

Posted by: Jeremy Feist at June 18, 2009 10:15 AM

Eleanor Ringel, former jackass critic for the Atlanta Journal/Constitution, in her review of Branagh's "Frankenstein", scoffed that he even added in the "Bride" plot. That's when I knew I wasn't unnecessarily critical of her, she really was an idiot.

DOnt even joke about beckinsale, that talentless frog lipped harpy will not....desecrate the good name of the bride!!!

Elsa Lanchester is my homegirl. http://www.jaynagyphoto.com/BrideBox.jpg
There is no reason I'd ever want someone to mess with her.


Posted by: Jay at June 18, 2009 10:20 AM

JAY!!! Wheeere!? I want!!

Posted by: Nadine at June 18, 2009 10:23 AM

It was just randomly on this one guy's table of wares at a toy show I went to about ten years ago. Cost me fifty bucks and I've never regretted it. I don't even know what you call those things, the caricature statues. I associate them with tobacconists.

Posted by: Jay at June 18, 2009 10:40 AM

Emily Blunt would be cool as The Bride but I'm betting they will got with master thespian Megan Fox.

Posted by: TylerDFC at June 18, 2009 10:41 AM

It is my mission, Jay, to find my own .

Posted by: Nadine at June 18, 2009 10:42 AM

Jay, did you not hear how Ringel kept herself in print for so long? On Celestine Sibley's death bed, she bequeathed to Ringel the infamous Cox Sisters Goat Orgy file, complete with photos and first-party accounts of the event.

It wasn't just you, buddy. The AJC has a storied history of keeping no-talent gas bags on the payroll. Now you know why.

Posted by: Wednesday at June 18, 2009 11:32 AM

Le sigh. I have loved Elsa Lanchester since The Inspector General (see it, love it, tell me I'm awesome) and Kate Beckinsale since Cold Comfort Farm and her non-shitty version of Emma for the Beeb. But this is not the combo I wanted, seriously.

I do love the idea of Emily Blunt though.

Posted by: Anne (in Reno) at June 18, 2009 11:52 AM

Eh, I liked it better when Jennifer Beals and Sting did it. Made me laugh when she roared at the kitten.

Posted by: Sharon at June 18, 2009 12:03 PM

Oh Jesus, Celestine. She would at least have the self-awareness to occasionally quote herself in her anecdotes with "...'I whined" when she'd talk to her relatives, but she was still whining about one thing or the other in every single column, only without being funny, so it was just "Granny Bitchy" every week. Tiresome.

Posted by: Jay at June 18, 2009 12:29 PM

"OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH sweet mystery of life! At last I've found you!"

After "YF" no one should be able to watch this with a straight face.

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at June 18, 2009 1:06 PM

See, this is the type of remake that needs to be done. A very, very old movie that few people remember, but had a great story and could benefit from a well-done modern treatment. Far better than redoing something that came out no more than 20 years ago.

Posted by: figgy at June 18, 2009 1:30 PM

I love the part in that movie with the mad scientist Frankenstein uses to help him. All the tiny people in the jars... it's so amazing what they could do with special effects back then.

This could go either way. It doesn't really matter who plays the Bride, since she shows up in the last 5 minutes and then is killed, along with like, everyone else. Unless they remake The Bride but really, there's no need.

Posted by: Ariel at June 18, 2009 2:17 PM

A very, very old movie that few people remember

ExCUSE me?

Posted by: Jay at June 18, 2009 2:51 PM

I don't think that's an incorrect statement. It's a 75 year old movie, and it's true, very few peoople have probably seen it.

Just because it's near and dear to YOUR heart (or any of us, really), doesn't make it popular with modern moviegoers.

Posted by: Skewicide Blonde at June 18, 2009 3:02 PM

And of course, by "peoople", I meant... oh, fuck it.

Posted by: Skewicide Blonde at June 18, 2009 3:03 PM

This is not an obscure movie. It is not true that "very few people have probably seen it".

Posted by: Jay at June 18, 2009 3:06 PM

Perhaps it's not obscure, but I'm willing to bet that if you walked outside right now, and asked the first 20 people you encounter if they've seen it, probably at least 18 will say no. That's all I'm saying. And I'll bet that stat holds with a larger sample size as well.

Stop being stubborn about it.

Posted by: Skewicide Blonde at June 18, 2009 3:10 PM

Stop being stubborn about it.

You mean "aware". Now, read what you wrote and look up "obscure".

Posted by: Jay at June 18, 2009 3:26 PM

Wow, you really are a condescending bastard. I already conceded that it's not obscure. Why don't YOU read what I wrote.

Posted by: Skewicide Blonde at June 18, 2009 3:28 PM

Only cause you were condescending first, Poopyhead Pot! Pbbbbbbtttt!!

Posted by: Jay at June 18, 2009 3:41 PM

Oh yeah? Well, I'm rubber and you're glue... let's make out.

Posted by: Skewicide Blonde at June 18, 2009 3:43 PM

Sorry, honey, I'm spoken for. But thanks!

Posted by: Jay at June 18, 2009 3:44 PM

No, really, I can get a dry spell goin like nobody's business.

Posted by: Jay at June 18, 2009 3:52 PM