1078 replies to this topic

[doublenoughtspy]

If you wonder why a new Saint is taking so long it's to prevent like this happening: http://www.deadline....es-no-spinster/

There have been numerous approaches to take the Saint well away from the established character...

Are you objecting to the fact that the character's age will be different than the "classic" Marple or that she will played by an American?

We've got a fairly successful Young Bond franchise going on in print, and reboots are all the rage, showing younger versions, or origin stories of classic characters - Batman Begins, Star Trek, etc. Why can't we see an early version of Miss Marple?

And considering we've got Brits playing Superman, Batman, Spiderman, etc. - nationality changes don't seem to bother casting people at all.

I'm not saying I totally agree with it - but it boils down to a franchise's fanbase age. It's the main reason James Bond Jr. was greenlit - they were concerned that the fanbase was skewing so much older - they needed something to draw younger fans in.

Now I doubt that the Christie estate is thinking, wow, once the Jennifer Garner movie takes off, we'll have a slew of new fans and the classic books will fly off the shelves, but hey, if the check clears...

[Royal Dalton]

We've got a fairly successful Young Bond franchise going on in print, and reboots are all the rage, showing younger versions, or origin stories of classic characters - Batman Begins, Star Trek, etc. Why can't we see an early version of Miss Marple?

I doubt it will even be Young Marple, as such. More likely, Garner will be playing the original Marple's American great niece, or some such nonsense. In other words: Miss Marple in name only.

[Ian Dickerson]

Are you objecting to the fact that the character's age will be different than the "classic" Marple or that she will played by an American?

We've got a fairly successful Young Bond franchise going on in print, and reboots are all the rage, showing younger versions, or origin stories of classic characters - Batman Begins, Star Trek, etc. Why can't we see an early version of Miss Marple?

And considering we've got Brits playing Superman, Batman, Spiderman, etc. - nationality changes don't seem to bother casting people at all.

I'm not saying I totally agree with it - but it boils down to a franchise's fanbase age. It's the main reason James Bond Jr. was greenlit - they were concerned that the fanbase was skewing so much older - they needed something to draw younger fans in.

It's not the nationality and I think it's only in part the age thing but what I really find objectionable is the creative laziness surrounding the idea. They've bought the brand but not the character (something I'm all too familiar with given my involvement with the Saint).

For me Miss Marple is an elderly lady detective with all the drama and conflict that presents. Take away the elderly aspect of it and you lose a major characteristic and the way she interacts with other characters. You're just left with a thirtysomething female detective and there's a bundle of those characters, extremely well done, available in crime fiction books today. I'm sure they'd have been a lot cheaper to option as well. I'd love to see a proper updating of Miss Marple, not the trapped-in-a-time-warp stuff ITV have been doing, but an elderly female detective let loose in the modern world. Just think of all the fun and stories you could tell with that.

Don't get me wrong, I loved Moffat's Sherlock--well, except the middle episode--and will undoubtedly watch whatever happens with Marple, as Mark Frost is certainly someone who knows what he's doing. But I'd like to see someone buy the brand *and* the character, or just create something fresh and--whisper this--take a risk.

Ian

Edited by Ian Dickerson, 29 March 2011 - 06:55 PM.

[Simon]

But I'd like to see someone buy the brand *and* the character, or just create something fresh and--whisper this--take a risk.

Agreed, 100%

[0077]

No one asked the important question:

Why Disney?

[Ian Dickerson]

No one asked the important question:

Why Disney?

Ha! Good question that I can't answer.

Maybe they're the only people with too much money and not enough brain cells...?

Ian

[marktmurphy]

Are you objecting to the fact that the character's age will be different than the "classic" Marple or that she will played by an American?

We've got a fairly successful Young Bond franchise going on in print, and reboots are all the rage, showing younger versions, or origin stories of classic characters - Batman Begins, Star Trek, etc. Why can't we see an early version of Miss Marple?

Name a defining characteristic of Miss Marple. What makes her Marple? Batman wears a bat mask and fights colourful villains, Kirk captains a spaceship called Enterprise, Bond is a lone grim spy battling supervillains in a stylised world, Sherlock solves crimes using heightened powers of detection. Now think; what makes Miss Marple unique? Is it just her name?

I see Richard Briers as playing a new, rebooted Captain Kirk; this time he's a 77 year old Englishman who Captains a small bridge team who call themselves 'Enterprise'.

[Royal Dalton]

I see Richard Briers as playing a new, rebooted Captain Kirk; this time he's a 77 year old Englishman who Captains a small bridge team who call themselves 'Enterprise'.

I'd watch it.

[David Schofield]

Are you objecting to the fact that the character's age will be different than the "classic" Marple or that she will played by an American?

We've got a fairly successful Young Bond franchise going on in print, and reboots are all the rage, showing younger versions, or origin stories of classic characters - Batman Begins, Star Trek, etc. Why can't we see an early version of Miss Marple?

Name a defining characteristic of Miss Marple. What makes her Marple? Batman wears a bat mask and fights colourful villains, Kirk captains a spaceship called Enterprise, Bond is a lone grim spy battling supervillains in a stylised world, Sherlock solves crimes using heightened powers of detection. Now think; what makes Miss Marple unique? Is it just her name?

Er, because she's a 60/70 year old spinster with an amazing talent for detective work, from a picture perfect English village, who uses her relative anonymity to insinuate herself in situations where she is able to solve crime?

Not too many of them about. Whereas there are loads of blokes who fly space ships, tackle fancily dressed villains while wearing costume face masks. Hell, there are loads of spies who are lone, resourceful and a little grim who live in stylised elegance.

Come on. I am not a huge Christis fan but give the OLD girl a break.

[marktmurphy]

Are you objecting to the fact that the character's age will be different than the "classic" Marple or that she will played by an American?

We've got a fairly successful Young Bond franchise going on in print, and reboots are all the rage, showing younger versions, or origin stories of classic characters - Batman Begins, Star Trek, etc. Why can't we see an early version of Miss Marple?

Name a defining characteristic of Miss Marple. What makes her Marple? Batman wears a bat mask and fights colourful villains, Kirk captains a spaceship called Enterprise, Bond is a lone grim spy battling supervillains in a stylised world, Sherlock solves crimes using heightened powers of detection. Now think; what makes Miss Marple unique? Is it just her name?

Er, because she's a 60/70 year old spinster with an amazing talent for detective work, from a picture perfect English village, who uses her relative anonymity to insinuate herself in situations where she is able to solve crime?

Not too many of them about. Whereas there are loads of blokes who fly space ships, tackle fancily dressed villains while wearing costume face masks. Hell, there are loads of spies who are lone, resourceful and a little grim who live in stylised elegance.

Come on. I am not a huge Christis fan but give the OLD girl a break.

I think you missed my point: those are exactly the features that make her unique and she's great. I'm saying that if you remove them then she's just another detective. Jennifer Garner playing someone with 'relative anonymity'? I can't quite see that!

[Simon]

This from the below link.

Roger Moore to be in New Orleans for the filming of The Saint TV Show

Roger Moore's official website has this very interesting tidbit on his Q and A page for March 2011:

I am told The Saint will film in July in New Orleans. I’m booked there from mid-July. More news as I get it.

That's about as much as we've heard in quite a while -- the new producers of the forthcoming TV show of The Saint have been extremely quiet, and while we've heard some un-verified rumors about the stars, locations, and scripts; this quote from Sir Roger himself is about as official as it gets for now! More news as we get it.

http://blog.saint.org/

[TheREAL008]

N.E.A.T.

[scaramunga]

This from the below link.

Roger Moore to be in New Orleans for the filming of The Saint TV Show

Roger Moore's official website has this very interesting tidbit on his Q and A page for March 2011:

I am told The Saint will film in July in New Orleans. I’m booked there from mid-July. More news as I get it.

That's about as much as we've heard in quite a while -- the new producers of the forthcoming TV show of The Saint have been extremely quiet, and while we've heard some un-verified rumors about the stars, locations, and scripts; this quote from Sir Roger himself is about as official as it gets for now! More news as we get it.

http://blog.saint.org/

Awesome! Thanks for the update!!!

[jaguar007]

Sorry to be a pessimist, but I'm not going to hold my breath until the camera actually rolls.

[Ian Dickerson]

I've just received the foreword to my book The Saint on TV. It's written by James Purefoy. Infer from this what you will...you'll probably be correct.

[jaguar007]

Looks like since The Philanthropist did so well in the ratings, Scott is out and Purefoy's back in.

[Ian Dickerson]

Looks like since The Philanthropist did so well in the ratings, Scott is out and Purefoy's back in.

Ha! Yeah...no it was entirely driven by actor availability and a strong desire to do it on the part of Mr Purefoy.

[jaguar007]

Looks like since The Philanthropist did so well in the ratings, Scott is out and Purefoy's back in.

Ha! Yeah...no it was entirely driven by actor availability and a strong desire to do it on the part of Mr Purefoy.

I should have used an Emoticon for my sarcastic regarding th ratings. As far as Mr. Purefoy's strong desire for the role, where was that desire when he walked away from the role a year ago to do the Philanthropist?

Actually after seeing his brief appearance in Camelot, I'm actually kind of looking forward to seeing what he might do with The Saint.

[Brisco]

Looks like since The Philanthropist did so well in the ratings, Scott is out and Purefoy's back in.

Ha! Yeah...no it was entirely driven by actor availability and a strong desire to do it on the part of Mr Purefoy.

This is fantastic, fantastic news! I always hoped that things would work out so that Purefoy could return. He really is the best man for the job right now. So is there a network involved, or is the movie being shot independently to be shopped around later as a backdoor pilot?

[Ian Dickerson]

This is fantastic, fantastic news! I always hoped that things would work out so that Purefoy could return. He really is the best man for the job right now. So is there a network involved, or is the movie being shot independently to be shopped around later as a backdoor pilot?

There are many networks involved but no UK or USA ones. Yet.

The feedback from everyone has been encouraging but there is a distinct lack of commitment from both countries at the moment. I honestly think this is partly budgetary (one UK network said they had no development money but could buy it as an acquisition if we came back with the finished product) and partly because of the recent history of the character; TV executives seem to be like elephants and don't forget turkies like the Kilmer film, and the long drawn out Saga behind this current incarnation hasn't helped either...

Ian

[Capsule in Space]

The Saint was such a great series. I wish a UK network would make them again and distribute it to the U.S.

I've got some of the early Moore episodes on DVD. Did they ever release the entire series?

Edited by Capsule in Space, 16 April 2011 - 04:09 PM.

[David Schofield]

TV executives seem to be like elephants and don't forget turkies like the Kilmer film, and the long drawn out Saga behind this current incarnation hasn't helped either...

Ian

Was the Kilmer movie a turkey???

I know it didn't get Saint purests erect - probably in the same way as casting litlle blonde Dan dismayed Fleming devotees - but didn't Kilmer's film make someone, Paramount (?), a shed-load????

[jaguar007]

Was the Kilmer movie a turkey???

I know it didn't get Saint purests erect - probably in the same way as casting litlle blonde Dan dismayed Fleming devotees - but didn't Kilmer's film make someone, Paramount (?), a shed-load????

It only grossed $118,063,304 worldwide ($61,363,304 US) with an estimated budget of $68million. Soo no, it did not gross Paramount a shed-load.

[David Schofield]

Was the Kilmer movie a turkey???

I know it didn't get Saint purests erect - probably in the same way as casting litlle blonde Dan dismayed Fleming devotees - but didn't Kilmer's film make someone, Paramount (?), a shed-load????

It only grossed $118,063,304 worldwide ($61,363,304 US) with an estimated budget of $68million. Soo no, it did not gross Paramount a shed-load.

Do those figures make it a turkey, then?

I'd suggesr a difference of nearly $50,000,000 would indicate a tidy profit, no?

[Ian Dickerson]

Was the Kilmer movie a turkey???

I know it didn't get Saint purests erect - probably in the same way as casting litlle blonde Dan dismayed Fleming devotees - but didn't Kilmer's film make someone, Paramount (?), a shed-load????

Perception is everything.

What Paramount wanted when they originally bought The Saint was a franchise to rival Bond. What they got was a movie that, okay, made a decent profit, but in every other aspect failed to live up to everyone's expectations.

There is even the well told anecdote about the time that Kilmer met Roger shortly after the film was released and admiited that they "totally ed up The Saint".

[TheREAL008]

I think had the film a better script and relating it to either the television show or even some of the novels; the movie would have been way better.

Edited by TheREAL008, 16 April 2011 - 04:55 PM.

[David Schofield]

Was the Kilmer movie a turkey???

I know it didn't get Saint purests erect - probably in the same way as casting litlle blonde Dan dismayed Fleming devotees - but didn't Kilmer's film make someone, Paramount (?), a shed-load????

Perception is everything.

What Paramount wanted when they originally bought The Saint was a franchise to rival Bond. What they got was a movie that, okay, made a decent profit, but in every other aspect failed to live up to everyone's expectations.

There is even the well told anecdote about the time that Kilmer met Roger shortly after the film was released and admiited that they "totally ed up The Saint".

With only a little more confidence Paramount could have got a sequel out of Kilmer's Saint, surely?

No franchise has yet rivalled Bond. And in 1996, personally I thought Kilmer's reinvention/reboot of the Saint gave us a character with more energy that Brozza's traditional take on a 60s Bond concept.

That said, I have recently enjoyed the Clarke and Dutton takes on Templar; both are more relevant now than they were in the late 80s and probably the Kilmer take.

Certainly, all have more credibility now than selling a new TV show on how Rog used to do it nearly 50 years ago...

[jaguar007]

Do those figures make it a turkey, then?

I'd suggesr a difference of nearly $50,000,000 would indicate a tidy profit, no?

Not when you factor in marketing costs which easily could have been another 30-50million

Honestly I'm not all hate on the Kilmer movie, it is true to it's origin, no. Is is a somewhat decent action/suspense movie, yes.

[Ian Dickerson]

Certainly, all have more credibility now than selling a new TV show on how Rog used to do it nearly 50 years ago...

Not sure where this is coming from...certainly I and the producers are going to great lengths to stress that this isn't going to be a remake of a 50 year old TV show - though sadly we seem to be losing the fight in some of the early coverage. If anything, and much as I hate the term it seems somewhat appropriate here, it's a re-imagining of the original character. Certainly the pilot script has mor in common with Charteris' Saint than dear old Roger's show ever did.

Ian

[David Schofield]

Certainly, all have more credibility now than selling a new TV show on how Rog used to do it nearly 50 years ago...

Not sure where this is coming from...certainly I and the producers are going to great lengths to stress that this isn't going to be a remake of a 50 year old TV show - though sadly we seem to be losing the fight in some of the early coverage. If anything, and much as I hate the term it seems somewhat appropriate here, it's a re-imagining of the original character. Certainly the pilot script has mor in common with Charteris' Saint than dear old Roger's show ever did.

Ian

Nothing malicious here, Ian. Merely speculating that selling a 2011 version of Rog's Saint is/should be virtually impossible, and that the twists on the original of Clarke, Dutton and Kilmer are no more far reaching on the orginal than a 2011 version might need to be to remain viable as a product to potential investors.