A quick little search on the Internet Movie Data Base reveals that Terry Gilliam is getting ready to write/direct a movie version of Terry Pratchet and Niel Gaimen’s Good Omens. Now, I haven’t read the book just yet, I just recently got my own copy last weekend, but from what I hear it’s great. And having read a good amount of Pratchet’s stuff, I must say, I’m excited as hell.
It’s scheduled so far for a 2003 release.
I’ll believe it when I see a significant change in that IMDB page. (it’s been essentially the same for 2-3 years).
I’ll believe it when I see a cast list.
I love that book to pieces, but I’ve pretty much given up on waiting for this.
Last I heard, neither Gilliam nor Gaiman was confident it would be made. This was about six weeks ago.
I usually go toComing Attractions which is a very good site to bookmark for these things.
According to them, Good Omens is in script stage and there has been no news since Novenber 2001.
Don’t hold your breath for a 2003 release.
I’ve heard the same thing, and seen the same lack of development. It’s a shame, though, 'cause it’s one of my favorite books.
Dammit, Denis had better return it soon- I haven’t been able to read it for a year, now. Maybe I’ll just go buy a new one…
Apparently, the hold-up is getting some financing from Hollywood, otherwise the script, cast and crew would all be in place. Check out Dreams, a Terry Gilliam Fansite for the most recent update I could find (22 Mar 02). Keep your fingers crossed, folks.
Crap, I wrote a really long response and the hamsters ate it.
Long story short:
Hollywood has thousands and thousands and thousands of movie projects in various stages development at any given moment. Conservatively, I’d estimate it as around 200,000. No, I’m not kidding. My longer message detailed my methodology; I don’t feel like retyping it.
Anyway, of that number, maybe 300 get a decent North American cinema release, and another 1000 go to video or cable.
Plus, Good Omens has three obstacles to overcome:
The book, while well-known and well-regarded in its niche, is not a bestseller on the scale of Grisham or the Ya-Ya Sisters. Hence, no large built-in audience the studio can rely on to fill seats.
None of Gaiman’s previous work has reached the screen, so he’s also an unknown quantity. Death: The High Cost of Living and Sandman have been stuck in development for years; to give you an idea of how poorly Hollywood understands him, one pinhead executive wanted to make Sandman more like Batman and have him fight a chrome-suited bad guy at the end. Anyway, the perception is that Gaiman, as a source writer, is uncommercial.
And Gilliam has a reputation for being difficult. I think it’s unwarranted; the problems on Baron Munchhausen weren’t his fault, and the spectacular demise of The Man Who Killed Don Quixote was out of his control. Still, he was a royal pain in the ass on Brazil.
Anyway, the odds are low that this will ever get made. Don’t hold your breath.
If you read “The Battle of Brazil,” I think you’d understand why he was such an ass.
Not just read it, I own it in first-edition hardcover.
However artistically justified he might have been (and I firmly believe he was), legally he was still in the wrong. Hence, he was a pain in the ass.