I’ve always seen the dark underbelly of Fantasy Island. Mostly because I liked the made-for-TV movie Haunts of the Very Rich and I always thought it was the true pilot movie for FI.
In it, a group of people travel to an island paradise, where every whim is catered, but thing slowly deteriorate, and the guests begin to believe they are dead, and in Hell.:eek:
Do you really have to ask about the shame of a man who billed himself as MARKY MARK AND THE FUNKY BUNCH?:eek::D:D
I love the guys acting. Ted and The Other Guys etc…funny stuff.
The problem for an actor is that once you begin accepting the bad roles that pay the rent, you become associated with that type of role. And that means you won’t be getting offered a lot of great roles.
So you have to make a decision; do you want great roles or do you want money? Because if you start heading towards one, the other one will start getting farther away.
He’s a horrible human being though.
I mean, what was the last “great” movie role that Patrick Stewart had that wasn’t X-Men or Star Trek related?
Given his age, Stewart is at a point that this isn’t much of a concern. He may as well take on roles that are lucrative in the relatively short period of his career that remains. And this may be campy or cheesy, but if it means that he gets to work with people who he likes and can sleep at home in his own bed every night instead of at a hotel on location somewhere that may be a driving factor.
Indeed he is. And while anyone might have some youthful indiscretions or said and done things they are not proud of, failing to show repentance or apologize to the victims of his violence doesn’t show that he’s changed all that much, especially given his reputation as a narcissistic asshole on set.
Stranger
Moby Dick? A Christmas Carol?
Both from the last century.
Same could’ve been said about Wonder Woman before the movie.
I think because we’re in the age of Atomic Blonde, etc. is why we’re going to see this. And is probably a good indication of how they’re going to approach it.
Plus there’s the director being a woman and female activist (she really doesn’t care if you call it “feminist” or not.) And then the Angel actors seem to be more of that type, too.
I think it’s pretty clear they’re going for a less misogynistic and more female empowerment take on the concept.
Not a movie per se, but he played both Claudius and King Hamlet in the Royal Shakespeare Company’s 2009 production for the BBC starring David Tennent in the title role. Next to Hamlet, Claudius is the most complicated character in play (and certainly the one who, if not cleverest, believes himself to be so); he’s a murderer and a falsely pious manipulator who is part conspirator and part numbskull, and Stewart plays him masterfully. It remains my favorite film adaptation of Hamlet (sorry, Branagh, but your film was overproduced and lacking in the dark humor that underpins the story) in large measure because of Tennent’s performance, but Stewart’s Claudius makes a credible opponent to Tennent’s maniacal portrayal pretending-to-madness-cum-true-insanity.
Stranger
The last really great thing Stewart did was P. Stew’s Cowboy Classics.
They’re Charlie’s Angels! If they’re not in bikinis once per episode, then what’s the point? You want the characters to be different? Then make a different show. I’d probably even watch it.
The show was a product of its time. It was cheesecake detectives. It also relied on the fact that, in the 70s, women weren’t taken seriously. That fact allowed them freedom to work, as the baddies would always underestimate them.
No one underestimates Fiona Glenanne or Joan Watson (speaking of Charlie’s Angels…) or Kate Beckett unless they’re stupid. The world has moved on.
The original “empowered women” movie:
And it even has The Shat! :cool:What a great idea. Make shows that aren’t Charlie’s Angels remakes. I wonder if any of the studio execs will ever have the guts to try that. They’ll probably have the Just Asking Questions demographic all locked up.
speaking of Michael Caine, he said he does not plan to retire. As long as they keep offering him roles he will keep acting, when the calls stop coming in then he is OK with that and won’t act any more.
Well, alrighty, then.
Keep making remakes. They seem to not be losing money at it, so I guess it’s good business.
Maybe the networks can remake every show from one old season. That’s never been tried. Bionic Woman, Baretta, Gemini Man, Barnaby Jones, Chico and the man. Sanford and Son. Holmes and Yo-yo is ripe for a remake. That’d be awesome. Forget piecemeal nostalgia - go big!
Don’t know what to do about the variety shows, though. Who can we get to play Sonny and Cher, or Carol Burnett, or Donny and Marie? Tony Orlando? I don’t think the Starland Vocal Band is doing anything.
Maybe he does his serious acting on stage and movies are just for fun.
(Saw him in Waiting for Godot and No Man’s Land - He and Ian McKellan were fantastic.)
They did a Bionic Woman remake 10 years ago. Never heard of Gemini Man. Googling shows it aired for one month. Not sure that gives it the nostalgic bootstraps these remakes are intended to exploit.
His take on Macbeth in 2010 for Great Performances was, IMHO, brilliant. (I liked your selection as well.)
Charlie’s Angels, in its own weird way, could be said to have laid some of the groundwork for the empowered women shows and movies that followed. Now that the genre is hot, it would seem unfair for a trailblazer like CA not to reap some of the rewards.
Ben Kingsley was in some really bad movies over the years, but he could also show up in something like Iron Man 3 and be totally awesome.
There’s an attitude I’ve heard expressed by English actors that you’re lucky if you get to do that for a living, and you never turn down a chance to get paid for it.