You mean Harvey is a** Furry**?
Now THAT would be an updating.
“Harvey” has never been one of my favorite plays or movies. Even so, I concede that 1) Jimmy Stewart has never been more charming or likable than he was as Elwood P. Dowd, and 2) Every high school drama club in America puts on “Harvey” regularly, so lots of people have fond memories of the show.
So, it’s fine by me if people like the show and get a few laughs out of it. And yet… the show annoys me FAR more than a light-hearted 1940s screwball comedy should.
Because “Harvey” is really the ancestor of “KPAX” and other plays/movies with a much more insidious, repulsive message: that the insane are delightful, warm people who have oh-so-much to teach us stiff, stuck-up, prudish sane people about life!
Elwood P. Dowd is an amiable, harmless kook, but he’s NOT a freaking role model!
I don’t understand the desire to remake a well regarded film (there’s little upside and a lot of downside), but I don’t generally get too upset by remakes. Either they’ll bring something new to it and it won’t suck or it will and I won’t watch it (or will forget I did).
Same way I view play revivals. Though Spielberg should go old school Hollywood and remake some of his own movies like Hitchcock with The Man Who Knew Too Much or Leo McCarey with Love Affair/An Affair to Remember.
He basically tried that with Indiana Jones, and it didn’t work out so well.
All of his best work was early. I really don’t see how he could improve on Jaws or E.T. or Close Encounters.
Maybe Duel could work. It was a small movie with a simple concept.
And Lincoln gets postponed yet again for this?!? The original was cute but completely inconsequential, and the play has such limited potential for modern resonance that a hardcore reimagining is hard to conceive of.
Grrrr. :mad:
Except Elwood P. Dowd was not insane, unless you count being overly-friendly as insane.
What happened to his plans to film Tintin?
Sure, and “Kris Kringle” wasn’t insane in “Miracle on 34th Street.”
But you know what? If I run into a smiling old geezer who thinks he’s really Santa Claus, I’m not puting my kid on his lap.
That and hallucinating 6 foot talking rabbits.
I don’t know. Didn’t Harvey open the gate to the hospital in the final scene? Could an hallucination do that?
Elwood is not imagining Harvey. Dr. Chumley not only sees Harvey, but has a conversation with him and asks him to stay. There are other bits of evidence that indicates he exists (for instance, when Jess White reads the dictionary definition of “pookah”).
In any case, this is a bad idea. Many reasons have been mentioned, but there are many more:
- Harvey must remain invisible. Viewers’ imaginations is all that’s needed. I know that’s hard since few people have imaginations these days, but Harvey being invisible is a good way of helping them develop one.
- No one could top Josephine Hull. Kathy Bates, while a fine actress, is not in her class.
- The story updates badly. Elwood would be considered an alcoholic (though, in the film, he only has one drink, even though he genially offers to drink with others).
I can understand why Spielberg would be interested, since the message of the play and film is one close to his heart (and a good one):
But I think he could say the same thing using a new story instead of raping an old one.
You guys talking about Harvey being rendered in CGI are joking, right? The whole point is that we never see Harvey. If Spielberg renders him visible then the whole thing is in the toilet as far as I’m concerned.
Elwood was insane not because he saw a 6 foot tall talking rabbit, but because he considered seeing a 6 foot tall talking rabbit perfectly normal. If I had seen Harvey, I would have assumed I was crazy, which would have proved that I wasn’t.
Bit of a Catch-22, actually.
Yep. Insider sources say that the CGI will be used to re-create Jimmy Stewart as Elwood. Harvey will be changed from a rabbit to a mouse and Will Ferrell will play Harvey using an old Chuck E Cheese costume.
They’re also going to give Harvey a girlfriend and add a lot more wacky hijinks.
Why not just keep it a rabbit and use Bruce Willis? I mean he already has the costume…
Well, except in that painting.
Personally, I thought the whole point of the story was pissed away when it was established that Harvey, though invisible, was in fact real and could open doors and change dictionaries and whatnot.
I thought it worked better when it was never firmly established if Elmer was nuts or not. The whole “He wasn’t crazy after all, just gifted!” trope annoys me.
Well, as long as there’s wacky hijinks. Everyone loves wacky hijinks.
Be vewy vewy quiet—I’m hunting wabbits.