Friday, June 17, 2011

EDITORIAL: HOLLYWOOD AND REWRITES 


(Source: Lucas Films)



"The Adventures of the Star Killer?"  One of the most beloved movies ever in Hollywood history.  The adventure, the excitement, two sequels, cartoons, lunchboxes, action figures...you know the movie, you loved it think about it. "In a Galaxy far far away..."  It's a classic.  Does "Star Wars" sound familiar?

Yes, that is the original name of  "Star Wars: A New Hope".  "Luke Skywalker" was originally known as "Luke Starkiller".  "Star Wars" went through at least 4 rewrites before it became the movie that we know it to be today.  So what's the big deal about the SWATH rewrite?  This Snow White "battle" is being stretched beyond reality.  It has now reached the level of the 'Twilight Zone'.

Script rewrites are totally common in Hollywood.  As a matter of fact, scenes can be rewritten right on set by scripting or by improvisation as the cameras are rolling. (Kristen Stewart provides an example of this during the tree climbing scene in the DVD commentary of "Twilight") 

So what brought on this editorial?  I was reading the gossip guru Ted Casablanca's 'The Awful Truth' and I am still trying to understand what his point is but let's take a look at it shall we?



Snow White and the Huntsman is "going back to the drawing board", so Ted says. I love to know who his source is for that conclusion.  He states that he has read the script (version unknown) and based upon his description, he was less than impressed.  That is his opinion and we'll roll with it.

Is he saying that the script is bad so that is why it needs a rewrite?  Or, that the producers want more sexual intensity between Chris Hemsworth and Kristen Stewart? (unsourced speculation) Which is it? One or the other or both?

How about none of the above.  Here's a thought:  All of these actors involved, one who has an Oscar actually read this bad script and signed up? Ok, whatever you say Ted. Whatever you say.

Could it be that the script is just being tweaked to tighten up character aspects?  This is a logical conclusion that can be drawn. The script was written without knowing who was going to be cast.  Charlize Theron was the only known actor to be attached to the project for some time until the remaining lead characters were cast.  The Huntsman had a couple of names attached to the character (Viggo Mortensen and Hugh Jackman). 

Now that the main characters are known and pre-production meetings have taken place, it is not uncommon for producers to want to update the script based upon the chemistry shown and ideas bantered around in order to take advantage of their talent.  So, what's wrong with that?  Why does this have to have such negative connotations?  I forgot, this has to play into the "Battle of the Snow Whites".


The easy thing to write in order to be titillating is that Hemsworth can bring more sexuality to the role with, as Ted states, add  "gratuitously shirtless scenes".  That's debatable because I think Viggo's pretty hot myself not to mention Hugh. 

In otherwords, Hemsworth will be a better "sexual fit" for Stewart's age than Mortenson in order to build "sexual tension" between the two characters. Oh boy, here we go with the cookie cutter aspect of Hollywood.  Would it be too much to ask if the Huntsman was just, well, a Huntsman?   Ted even tried to tie-in Twilight but I'm not wasting time going there.  


Any fan of SWATH may have read "a version" of the script at one time or another.  The Internet has a plethora of information *giggles*. One thing the script indicates is that the Huntsman has the potential to be quite a physical role.  

Now don't get me wrong, with the younger Hemsworth, producers can play up more "sexual tension" but to add more challenging action sequences could be a use for the younger Hemsworth as well.  Also, do we really believe that an Oscar nominated screenplay writer was hired to add more "sexual tension"?  Paying Oscar nominated dollars to add more "sexual tension".  Really?  I believe Ted is reaching just a bit.  

Maybe we can dump all the "deep-in-the-forest flirtation" nonsense and just look at this script rewriting with some reasonableness.


More character development I believe is what is being done to the script because we now know who is playing each character.  Build it to their strengths.  Develop the relationships. Maybe more interactions between Stewart and Hemsworth, Hemsworth and Theron, Claflin and Stewart etc... 
 
But must we be so simplistic and juvenile as to write that this script is "going back to the drawing board" just to add some "deep-in-the-forest flirtation"?  You do not need an Oscar nominated screenplay writer for that because there are plenty of excellent script writers in Hollywood who have the capability of inserting "deep-in-the-forest flirtation" (Ted's words).  *sighs*  


No, I believe it's about the characters. Simply stated, character development.  It makes total sense and it is the smart thing to do.  

A script is a living breathing thing.  With the main actors now in place, the script can be tightened up by adding more nuances to the plot and more character development and with that, make the story even better. 

It's definitely not the nail in the coffin or makes this version less palatable than the Relativity version.  It's a rewrite. No panic necessary. It happens. It's Hollywood. 

By the way, that Luke Starkiller seemed to work out ok. Didn't he?
Dancerone   

A little note: The LA Times rebutted Ted's claim that Robert Pattinson was rejected for a role he was never really up for. Ted was a bit off today.

UPDATE: Ted updated and corrected his post about Robert. Read it here.

2 comments:

  1. This site is awesome it's so beautiful and professional I love it... Thank you! Oh and thank you for putting TC in his place with education, knowledge, class and actual facts!

    ReplyDelete

You May Also Like:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...