free counter with statistics Fahrenheit 451 Movie | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

451.2.jpg
Hey, Can A Motherf***er Burn Some Books?

We Don't Need No Water / Claude Weaver III

Trade News | July 1, 2009 | Comments (29)

For a guy known for some pretty good book-to-movie adaptations (The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, The Mist), director Frank Darabont seems oddly desperate to roast a crapload of them.

Well, to be fair, he only wants to burn them for his adaptation of Fahrenheit 451, the classic Ray Bradbury novel about a Fireman (a sanctioned book burner) who begins to question his purpose and the society he lives in. It seems that, similar to other cursed book adaptations like Don Quixote, the path to the screen has been a long and painful one. Originally intended as Mel Gibson’s follow-up to Braveheart, Darabont took over and never let go. Now after a decade of work, if you think he is giving up anytime soon, you got another think coming. Says Darabont:

“Fahrenheit is the thing I’m trying to get up next, which is casting-dependent, so it’s one of those. I’m out to somebody at the moment, fingers crossed, because, boy, do I want to make that movie. I’m not giving up. I’ll die in the traces before I don’t make that movie … It’s not one of those movies that are vastly expensive by any contemporary standard, but money is still money, and it’s of a price that requires somebody that will justify that investment. This is definitely going to be more than The Mist, so those other considerations do come into play.”

The last time the project was heard from, Tom Hanks was signed on to play protagonist Guy Montag, but he left some time ago. Nobody knows who the new pick is, though.

Darabont is especially desperate to complete the project while the 88-year-old Bradbury is still alive.

I promised myself that it would at least go into production while Ray Bradbury were still with us. It’s not like I think he’s going to leave tomorrow, but he’s not getting any younger. So I have an emotional commitment to wanting to get the wheels well and truly in motion while he’s still here to enjoy that.

Considering all the folks dropping like flies nowadays, his panic is well-founded. The director is also hard at work adapting another of Bradbury’s stories, The Illustrated Man, for the screen.


← Inglourious Basterds French Trailer | Couples Retreat Trailer →



Comments

if you think he is giving up anytime soon, you got another think coming.

I hope this wasn't a typo, because I really like the idea of think instead of thing. It makes me happy for some reason.

Posted by: Marra at July 1, 2009 10:09 AM

Marra I was always under the impression that that was the correct way of saying it...

Darabont is especially desperate to complete the project before the 88-year-old Bradbury is still alive.
But here I think Claude meant either WHILE Bradbury is still alive or BEFORE he died, and not before he's still alive!

Posted by: Linda at July 1, 2009 10:12 AM

This book is more relevant than ever. Bradbury essentially described our modern world: perpetual war, no reading, reality tv. That is our society. Period.

Posted by: adam at July 1, 2009 10:20 AM

That's it. No more late-night posting. When I get sleepy, all spelling and grammar rules go out the damn window.

Posted by: Vermillion at July 1, 2009 10:24 AM

And my robot dog keeps pissing on the floor.

Posted by: Braski at July 1, 2009 10:25 AM

Bradbury is still alive? Why did I think he was dead?

As much as I love Tom Hanks, I'm having trouble picturing him as the main character. It's probably a good thing, then, that he left the project.

Posted by: MelBivDevoe at July 1, 2009 10:27 AM

The correct phrase is "another think coming." The Grammar Nazi has spoken.

I didn't come here to comment on that, though. I'm racking my brains trying to guess who Darabont is talking about when he says "casting dependent" and "somebody that will justify that investment."

Who the fuck can it be? Christian Bale? (The shine is starting to wear off Mr. Bale for me, after what I've read of his single-handedly sabotaging the script for Terminator Salvation. He may redeem himself if he's good in Public Enemy.) I can easily see Bale in this role...Or is it someone older?

Who does Darabont want for the lead?

Posted by: Jerce at July 1, 2009 10:30 AM

I am ashamed to say I've never read the book, though I know the story.

Posted by: Snath at July 1, 2009 10:31 AM

Darabont pussied up the ending of The Mist. I haven't forgiven him yet.

Posted by: malikvlc at July 1, 2009 10:37 AM

Snath, you might want to give it a try. Unlike many 'classics' which are more revolutionary for the ideas explored than the quality of the prose, Fahrenheit 451 has some really beautiful moments. The woman with the match is a particular favorite.

Who the fuck can it be? Christian Bale?

He did this. It was Equilibrium and it was 1/3 of a good movie.

Posted by: twig at July 1, 2009 10:38 AM

Don't be 'shamed, Snath. There are far too many "classics" for anyone to have read them all. I haven't read the book in decades, but I still know twig is right, because it's Bradbury.

Unlike most other "classic" books, I'd love to see this one as a movie*--especially a movie directed by Darabont. That's why I'm half-wild to find out about the casting!


(*Yeah, I know there's a version from the 60s. It sucks ass.)

Posted by: Jerce at July 1, 2009 10:44 AM

Adam is so right about relevance. The people watch giant TV screens and they have ear pieces that allow them to interact with the characters in the soap operas they are fed 24/7 to keep them complacent and uninquiring. It was a really scary book but now it's life.

Posted by: PaddyDog at July 1, 2009 10:51 AM

I thought Far. 451 and The Illustrated Man were already made into movies. More reboots.

Posted by: BWeaves at July 1, 2009 10:52 AM

There already is a movie about the book, it was made in the UK and was released in 1966. Not a bad movie actually, but I'm sure it can be updated quite well.

Posted by: Mark at July 1, 2009 10:53 AM

Um um um um..... I'm a little scared. Too many movies focus on the PLOT of the books and not the internal conflict, and with Montag, there's a lot of internal conflict. Could be good.... could be really bad.

Posted by: Ariel at July 1, 2009 11:47 AM

Oh, Snath, do read it. It's really very good, and don't be scared by the "classic" demarcation. It's very readable, as is all of Bradbury's stuff, and not the least but boring.

It's been years since I read it, I guess it's time for another go! Yay summer reading.

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at July 1, 2009 12:05 PM

Oh, and on-topic, I never saw The Mist, because I ... heard some things, and refused, but Shawshank and Green Mile were both very well done.

*fingers crossed*

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at July 1, 2009 12:10 PM

I also really liked Fahrenheit 451, despite having to read it for school. If it has a good adaptation director (I've never seen any of his movies), then it could be surprisingly great.

MelBivDevoe, that was my first thought too. Tom Hanks would be a horrible fit for Montag. Let the motherfucker burn!

Posted by: SaBrina at July 1, 2009 12:53 PM

I agree with Darabont--it's going to be very, very tricky casting this, because if one role doesn't get the right actor, the whole thing could flounder.

And yeah, Tom Hanks isn't right for the lead. It needs a blue-collar Everyman, not a white-collar one.

Posted by: Minty at July 1, 2009 2:50 PM

I should clarify--I'm glad Darabont claims to want to be so careful with the casting of this. It seems like so many directors/producers just try to get the biggest star they can, without really considering whether or not that star is right for the part.

Posted by: Minty at July 1, 2009 2:53 PM

Fahrenheit 451 is an incredible book. I'm a little nervous that it might not be as good in movie form just because it's a book about books and their importance. A movie about the importance of books might not pack the same punch. For those of you who've seen the original movie adaptation; how was it? And, did it really capture the tone of the work?

Posted by: ruby at July 1, 2009 4:50 PM

For those of you who've seen the original movie adaptation; how was it? And, did it really capture the tone of the work?
Pretty good. The whole subplot about the impending war was removed, and Montag's wife isn't nearly as shrewish as she is in the book. It's worth a rental.

Posted by: muchsarcasm at July 1, 2009 5:36 PM

so...am I the only one who didn't actually like the book? Maybe I've seen too many rip-off movies and read too many dystopian novels (I mean, really, as far as I'm concerned Orwell did it first and better), but it seemed completely unoriginal to me and I found certain aspects (we're all just gonna memorize shit now?) to be awkward and not all that well thought-out.

Posted by: s. pisaster at July 1, 2009 5:37 PM

I'm gonna regret that comment, aren't I?

Posted by: s. pisaster at July 1, 2009 5:38 PM

I'm gonna regret that comment, aren't I?
Nah. Not every book is for everybody; and besides, you've got some good points about the setting of the book.

My opinion is, despite his being labeled a "science fiction writer," Bradbury was never very good at the science stuff. But he's really good at the people stuff, which is why I like him. Also, his prose is beautiful.

The only good movie adaptation of Bradbury that I know of is Something Wicked This Way Comes. But I trust Darabont. I expect this film to be good.

I am DYING to find out who his "casting dependent" choice of lead is!

Posted by: Jerce at July 1, 2009 7:41 PM

Does anyone else picture, say, a worn down Daniel Craig or maybe doing another feature with Thomas Jane for Darabont?

When Daniel Craig is still and contemplative, it's riveting.

Or maybe Heath Ledger. . . oh, snap. CGI?

Posted by: adam at July 2, 2009 5:53 AM

(I mean, really, as far as I'm concerned Orwell did it first and better)
 Although Orwell probably tops my list of wonderfully dystopian books as well, Fahrenheit 451 is still a great read. Orwell's work deals less explicitly with the focus that Bradbury chooses.

Posted by: ruby at July 2, 2009 11:11 AM

S. Pisaster -

Just a clarification, Orwell may have done it best, but he wasn't first by any means. Both Aldous Huxley's Brave New World and Yevgeny Zamyatin's We were released before 1984, and both were admitted influences on the work. In fact, I'm 98% a series of letters between Huxley and Orwell was published in which Orwell basically said he ripped off Brave New World and Huxley said " 'sokay, your book's pretty great." That may or may not be true, but I remember reading something about it.

Also, Heath Ledger would've been perfect for this, but whoever mentioned Daniel Craig...that would also work well, I think.

Posted by: kyle at July 2, 2009 8:28 PM

That would be me.

Posted by: adam at July 3, 2009 1:06 AM