No, Srsly. The Farrell Brothers are producing a “Stooges” movie. Supposedly the stars will be:
Benicio del Toro as Moe (“Why, I oughtta!”)
Jim Carrey as Curly (Whoopwhoopwhoop!!)
Sean Penn as Larry (“I don’t have an interesting catchphrase”.)
What do you think? I think it’s not going to work. Even with a good script and good actors (and I think those could work) most people still associate the Stooges with- well- The Stooges. They’re pop icons that way.
Then again, I’ll take this over what passes for most “comedy movies” these days. :thud:
Yeah, a rather sad and depressing one, at that. My dad used to work for a guy who was a big Stooges fan, and regularly corresponded with Moe Howard (I actually got to see some of the letters.) They were pretty nice guys, but man, they had a lot of tough luck.
Back OT: I have my doubts about the movie. Unless they can pull it off just right, it’ll flop worse than a boneless fish.
Most likely somebody ended up with the rights to the characters (those are constantly being haggled around behind the scenes in Hollywood) and decided to make a movie, common sense be damned. How do you think Pirates of the Caribbean got made? It was based on a Disney ride for God’s sake! It didn’t even have any specific characters!! (Ok, that one DID work, but it was pretty well made -and it had [STRIKE]Sinistral[/STRIKE] Johnny Depp too- and even then, it just happened to strike the fans’ fancy, better movies went belly up in the same time.)
Why do they have to make horrible abominations of movies of EVERYTHING?! Everything gets a movie or a remake. Its…its retarded. There has to be original material.
Did the Dukes of Hazzard need a movie? no, no it did not.
Did the Honeymooners need one? no. leave it to beaver had one in the 90s didnt it?
Seriously, leave this shit alone. It was popular when it was popular for a reason. If you want to watch the Stooges, fucking watch them.
What’s next? An Andy Griffith show movie?
A lot of things don’t need films. Every show does not need a film. Video games do not all need films. (Shouldn’t Super Mario Bros. the movie prove that? I know its off topic, but still).
I’d like to go see a movie that wasn’t based on something else. geez.
I concur, if you meant only the following with the word “something:” video games, other movies, TV shows, biographies, pop. Almost all movies out there based off of books, comics, and short stories, I don’t mind seeing, even if I’ve read said materials.
Why do they have to make horrible abominations of movies of EVERYTHING?! Everything gets a movie or a remake. Its…its retarded. There has to be original material.
The answer is simple: MONEY. Making new stuff is always a risk, because it might be a hit- or it might not. You can’t blame people for sticking to old stuff that they know DID once sell, as name recognition is a factor on many people’s choices to buy or watch. Also, as I mentioned above, acquiring the rights to make movies and other spinoffs cost money -we’re talking MILLIONS here- and the studios who spent it are definitely going to want to see SOMETHING done with them. The smarter ones will do market research, find what works and what doesn’t, and hire someone who knows the stuff to make the film; the one who aren’t too smart will hire the first hack they can and say, “here, make a movie out of this!” The results often speak for themselves…
I’ve seen some movies based on books or stage performances that I loved(Hello Rocky Horror!) but, not everything needs a movie, is basically what I’m trying to say.
And it seems like EVERYTHING is getting a movie.
Wasn’t there a Hulk movie like, two years after a different Hulk movie?
