GALLERY: Who Should Star in 'Barbarella?'
Filed under: Sci-Fi & Fantasy, Casting, Universal, Fandom, Remakes and Sequels
So it seems the majority of you agree with Robert Rodriguez in wanting Rose McGowan to star in the Barbarella remake, even though Universal isn't willing to risk $100 million on her name. And I don't blame them. Why Rodriguez needs $100 million to shoot the remake of a campy sci-fi flick is beyond me, but furthermore -- even if Universal got their wish, and Rodriguez ditched McGowan -- are there any females in Hollywood who can carry a film with a $100 million pricetag? This is nothing against women at all (heck, I love all women just as much as the next guy), but I'm really struggling to come up with the last film to gross over $100 million with a female in the lead role (not counting romcoms since credit is also due to the male lead). While you think about that, here's how the last few McGowan films have done: 1. Grindhouse (part of an ensemble -- $25 million gross). 2. The Black Dahlia (part of an ensemble -- $22 million gross). 3. Vacuums (couldn't find anything -- was this even released?). 4. Monkeybone (part of an ensemble -- $5 million gross). Don't force me to continue ... it gets even worse.
Based on those stats, it appears as if Rodriguez would have to shoot Barbarella, with McGowan in the lead role, for roughly $15 million in order to make money. Universal is willing to do it for $60 million. Rodriguez wants somewhere between $82 and $100 million. And for that kind of money, Universal wants someone else in the lead role. So, in your opinion, are there any female actresses out there capable of carrying a film with that high a budget? Because we're always game for the multiple choice answers, Cinematical put together a gallery full of women who we think would be good in the role of Barbarella. Are any of them better than Rose? You decide.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-18-2007 @ 3:21PM
seraphflux said...
Alyssa Milano and Marisa Tomei and her twin sister? :)
My point on the matter stays the same. The project is risky and out there to begin with, no matter who stars in it.
If Universal decided to throw $100 mil its way (Rodriguez said $82 mil) anyway, and God bless producers who make such crazy and ballsy decisions in an age of "play it safe" like this one, it seems absurd to me that they get cold feet when they hear thr name of the actress the director wants for the part. Especially since said actress fits the bill, character-wise, in more ways than one.
Reply
10-18-2007 @ 3:24PM
Cincinnati Mike said...
I'm not Mr Box Office, so help me out... How long has it been since a female lead made that kind of bank... Tomb Raider? Panic Room? Coming a week after Warner's supposedly said "no more female leads", it just seems like a bad time to be asking $100 mil for ANY female, let alone the chick with a gun for a leg--no matter how hot she is!
Reply
10-18-2007 @ 3:28PM
Erik Davis said...
Panic Room, if I recall, made around 94 or 95 million. Tomb Raider did crack the 100 million mark, though it had Jolie and a massive built-in fanbase. The sequel, however, didn't even come close to 100 mil.
Reply
10-18-2007 @ 3:41PM
Matt. B said...
As much as I love Marisa Tomei and think she is gorgeous... there is no way in hell she could get this gig. Come on, she has to be closing in on 40? The only way this project will ever get off the ground is if the budget is lowered. I don't know about the script, but if it is true to the original it's doomed. If they take out the campyness and just make it a sci-fi adventure with a lead female (ala Aliens)this might work. Not sure who could carry the lead role though? Scarlett Johanssen maybe?
Reply
10-18-2007 @ 3:52PM
Neil said...
Have any of the creators discussed the intention here?
Every single commentator I've heard on the subject refers simply to the Roger Vadim adaptation. Is it intended to be simple adaptation of that or is a re-interpretation of the original comic book.
If the former, well, who cares? If the latter, how about these pictures -http://www.hollywoodcomics.com/forestbarbgallery.html
Reply
10-18-2007 @ 4:13PM
Ron Moses said...
$100 million? Whatever happened to the Robert Rodriguez we used to know and love, the one who could bring in a $30m movie for under a third of that? The man who argued about the dangers of "the money hose"? Now he's looking for $100m to make a meaningless money-grab tentpole? Oh RR, what has become of you...?
Reply
10-18-2007 @ 4:27PM
Jon said...
I know very little about the original Barbarella, but this just seems crazy. I can't see a move with Rose Mcgowan being a HUGE mainstream hit, and who cares about Barbarella anyway...is there some huge cult following with this movie that I haven't heard about?
Reply
10-18-2007 @ 5:28PM
Blair M said...
I'd stay stick with rose mcgowan. She's one of the few respectable actresses who can (or is willing to on film) really exude sex the way someone playing barbarella has to. Really the only way the movie would be a success is nostalgia for the original anyways. Remaking a mediocre b softcore 70's film was a risk in the first place, and adding star power won't make it more respectable.
Reply
10-18-2007 @ 9:51PM
Ray said...
$100 Million? This is the guy who made a movie for 7 grand! Granted, things have changed, but since when does Robert Rodriguez need $100 million to make ANY movie? Frankly, I think this project is doomed. If it even gets made, it's going to be a real money loser.
Reply
10-18-2007 @ 11:42PM
Neil said...
As I posted on my blog - http://bleeding-tree.blogspot.com/2007/10/rodriguez-rose-and-barbarella.html - is this movie even a remake at all? No one calls Tim Burton's Batman a remake of the 1966 Batman. I think it would only be a remake if it tells the same story. Has it been established if it will or not?
Reply
10-19-2007 @ 2:16AM
Ponyboy said...
If Lindsay Lohan gets this part, I am going to kill myself.
Reply
10-19-2007 @ 4:00AM
treze said...
You know who ?
Doria Baird.
She's not a superstar of course, but just cast her in that part and the film will make millions.
Reply
10-19-2007 @ 12:26PM
liya said...
To be honest, I don't think there is anyone better than Rose McGowan for this movie. I can't believe you're serious about your suggested leads. Rose McGowan can't sell a movie, but Pam Anderson can?
Reply
10-19-2007 @ 2:09PM
ML said...
No.
Reply
10-20-2007 @ 10:03PM
nina606 said...
Rose McGowan is perfect for the role, there is just no good reason to remake this film (much less a reason why it was made in the first place). If Universal wants to chance it, don't spend more than 20 mil.
I won't even comment on that BS about RomComs only making money because credit is "also due to the male lead." (that must have been the secret to Julia Roberts' success - having the same male lead in all her films)
Reply