JohnBoorman Tagged Articles at Cinematical

It would seem the Lady in the Lake has found another group of knights to wield Excalibur -- or at least John Boorman's version of it. Variety reports that Warner Bros and Bryan Singer have finally won the rights to Boorman's Excalibur, and are set to remake the 1981 film. Singer is on board to produce, but may decide to don his directing armor, and lead the charge himself.

I find this to be rather perplexing. Boorman's film was based on the "definitive" medieval Arthur tale, Morte d'Arthur and was simply adapted by the director and Rospo Boorman. It departs from the original in a few trippy and sexy ways, but it stays relatively close to the original text. It's been a long time since I've seen it, and it always has a horrible fever dream quality for me, so I may be remembering poorly. Frankly, I just remember Gabriel Byrne not bothering to take off his chainmail before sexing it up with Igraine, and that Lancelot wore nothing under his armor.

So why not just, you know, write a new adaptation of Morte d'Arthur? An insistance on obtaining Boorman's film rights suggests nothing more than a shot by shot remake which is silly. There's plenty of sex, violence, and fantasy to be wrung out of the original Arthur legends. The whole myth has been begging for someone to tackle it, and bring a Pre-Raphaelite version (only R rated!) to life instead of another dull "Here's the true story behind the Arthur legend" film. I'd criticize more harshly, but frankly I'm just perplexed by anyone who opts to remake rather than return to the source material.

Well, I'm obviously all over this. The more I've thought about John Boorman's plans for a non-musical, CGI-animated Wizard of Oz -- The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, to be more precise -- the more intriguing it has seemed. After all, it's a pretty damn good story, right? The 1939 musical is fine and all, but there's room in the world for a rendition of this story that does not involve anyone singing "Over the Rainbow" -- one that we can take a bit more seriously. Maybe one that's a little bit scary.

In that respect, this update from Ain't It Cool News is heartening. Apparently, according to their tipster, Boorman really does have a vision that's serious and that sticks to the novel -- down to the little-known fact that Tin Man is diminutive in stature. They also have some fantastic-looking concept art, with a scarecrow that looks like a scarecrow and a witch's castle that's just a wonderful, timeless image.

So now this is making a bit more sense to me: The Wizard of Oz as straightforward, classic fairy tale. I've put a couple of the images below the fold here, but you're going to have to visit Ain't It Cool News for the rest.

This was an is-it-April Fool's-Day moment for me this afternoon. First of all, I thought -- foolishly, I realize -- that we were safe from another straight-up adaptation of The Wizard of Oz. (I was open to the possibility of parodies, modernizations, rock musicals, etc.) This is a story that much of the industrialized world literally knows by heart. Can you really tell it these days to anyone but the littlest kids without some sort of wink or angle?

So needless to say I wasn't expecting the announcement that we'd be getting a full-on computer-animated Wizard of Oz in the summer of 2010. And I certainly wasn't expecting the man responsible to be John Boorman, who hasn't made a Hollywood film since the 80s. But, uh... It's coming, pitched not as a remake of the famous film, but as another adaptation of the original novel by L. Frank Baum. It won't be a musical, which might be tough to imagine for people raised on the 1939 movie, but which isn't too surprising: a musical remake would probably be painting itself into a corner.

Boorman, for the uninitiated, is the legendary director of Deliverance and Excalibur. More recently, The Tailor of Panama was excellent. He's never made an animated film, and I think he must have some sort of specific vision for this one. Otherwise it's a very strange late career move.

Despite the often inflated sticker prices, I'm a huge fan of the "DVD box set." My very special "no touching" DVD shelf contains the Alien Quadrilogy, the Star Wars Trilogy, the Godfather Trilogy, Indiana Jones, Matrix, etc., etc. There's just something about getting the whole darn series in one slick box that makes for a happy movie geek. And with November's mega-cool Superman set on the horizon, it looks like a may need to invest in a new shelf.

But here comes word on an upcoming box set that, frankly, I can live without. Streeting October 10th is WB's Exorcist Movie Collection, and here's what's included:

• The original cut of William Friedkin's The Exorcist, a true classic in every sense of the word
• The extended "Version You've Never Seen" (which is a lie because I have seen it)
• John Boorman's frankly horrible Exorcist 2: The Heretic
• William Peter Blatty's The Exorcist 3, which has its fair share of supporters (one of whom is not me)
• Renny Harlin's Exorcist: The Beginning, which kinda stinks
• Paul Schrader's Dominion: A Prequel to the Exorcist, which (no kidding) might be the worst movie title I've ever seen

DavisDVD informs us of the impending release, but there's very little info on the actual platters -- most likely because this is not a newly-produced box set, but instead a slipcase filled with the exact same product you'll find at your local DVD shoppe. But hey, it looks like this set will cost only about 30-some bucks, so if you've got a taste for the Satanic sequels, I suppose it's a pretty good deal.

• Sir Richard Attenborough, John Boorman and Nic Roeg are all scrambling to get new films into production in Ireland before the end of the month. On March 31, the tax-friendly UK-Ireland and Canada-Ireland coproduction agreements under which their films are being made is scheduled to expire, and a renewal of the deals isn't assured. Hey, even fake royalty like to save a buck when they can.

• Pedro Almodovar's highly anticipated Volver was screened for critics in Madrid this weekend, and has also been submitted for competition at Cannes. While the responses in at the screening were immediate - if someone called my film "a gift", I'd be pretty stoked - the director won't hear from Cannes until next month. The film, which tells the story of two sisters whose mother returns as a ghost to solve the problems among the three of them, is described as being lighter in tone that Almodovar's recent work, as well as a return to his earlier focus on female characters. And, boys, in case you're unsure about seeing a foreign chick flick, Penelope Cruz is "spellbinding as Volver's undeniable protagonist, oozing a mid-century glamour and sex appeal modeled on the young Sophia Loren." Yowzers.

• The lineup for the Sofia meetings portion of the ongoing Sofia International Film Festival has been set, and includes 10 projects (half of them by women) from countries as diverse as Germany, France, and Kazakhstan. The meetings will take place this weekend, and are two days during which the 10 "filmmakers...have an opportunity to pitch to more than 50 international producers and film funds." All of the directors involved this year are seeking funding for their second features.
  

John Boorman (whose page at the IMDB includes the helpful information that he's sometimes credited at "himself"), who single-handedly destroyed the idea of a quiet wilderness getaway for whole generation of American men when he unleashed Deliverance upon the world in 1972, hasn't spent much cinematical time in the US since then. Instead, most of his work has been based in Ireland and the UK, locations to which he'll be returning when A Tiger's Tale begins shooting in Dublin next month.

The movie, which Boorman also wrote, sounds freaking awesome. It's about an Irishman who, after a "chance encounter," is "pursued by a murderous replica of himself." WHOA. It's like Borges wrote a movie, or something - what an incredibly cool concept (this is where you tell it's been done brilliantly six times already, and provide titles in the comments so I can go see for myself). Also encouraging is the news that the outrageously talented Brendan Gleeson is set to star. Though kids these days tend to know Gleeson only from Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, he's a longtime Boorman collaborator whose performance in the title role of The General is great enough to make you never want to see another movie again. There is, however, some bad news: Kim Cattrall is in it. In, like, a major role. Actually, I'm dealing with this information by pretending that I never had it. A Tiger's Tale is going to rock, dammit.

[via Dark Horizons]