Roald Dahl’s The Witches (Robert Zemeckis)

[Arch Stanton]

Keep that hack Zemeckis away from it!

[The Sovereign]

Originally Posted by Cremildo

Based on the 1973 novel, the film follows a seven-year-old boy who has a run in with real-life witches. Warner Bros. had previously adapted the book in 1990 with Anjelica Huston playing one of the title characters, but sources close to the project say Zemeckis’ version will be more rooted in the original source material, while the Huston pic was a loose adaptation."

Originally Posted by Cremildo

Robert Zemeckis Confirms Previous Reports 'The Witches' Is Set In The American South During The 1960s

[shinobipopcorn]

Uh, yeah. If the family hated the original movie because the ending was changed, they're going to hate changing the whole blinking setting of the book.

[dgoswald]

I suppose a quaint seaside hotel in breezy Bournemouth doesn't quite have the Gothic appeal of the American South. So many lulz. Sigh.

[Monterey Jack]

Originally Posted by AmrlKJaneway

My favourite director, my favourite childhood book. It's a dream come true!

That might change once you see Welcome To Marwen.

[bigbadwoppet]

The ONLY GOOD THING to come out of this is that the original would finally be released on BD (it's the same studio). I'd have liked the original book ending on the Roeg movie but Zemeckis is one of the worst hacks they could have got attached to direct, not to mention they're adapting it to a US setting.

I'm surprised they're giving Zemeckis two pennies to rub together after Marwen. Disgraceful.

[AFFanAttic]

I feel mostly so indifferent about this except that I agree it's encouraging that it might finally mean a release for the Nicholas Roeg film. I want to go back in time a few years when WB was releasing lots of digibooks because I really love the idea of that movie having a digibook release.

[nofear6061]

Well, shit. According to that article, it seems like they're changing over 50% of the story. I mean, not even naming him Luke? C'mon... They may as well just call it a prequel or something like that. Faithful adaptation my ass.

[RFK]

Nicolas Roeg's film is wonderful. All we really need is for warners to release a bluray of Roeg's film which includes both endings.

Del Toro might have pulled off something interesting but Zemeckis hasn't made a decent film since Used Cars.

[Cremildo]

Originally Posted by RFK

Zemeckis hasn't made a decent film since Used Cars.

[aiman04]

A hack? last good film was Used Cars?

One bad film and he's now a hack. Really mature to judge his whole career based on one film. Anyone saying he's a hack, have you not make one bad thing in your life?

[Spirit Zero]

'Back in November, I had reported at OmegaUnderground some exclusive plot details about Robert Zemeckis’ upcoming remake of Roald Dahl’s The Witches for Warner Bros. Those details included specific stuff like the young male lead being played by an African-American actor along with the setting taking place in Alabama during 1969.

Omega Underground has a new plot detail to share about Robert Zemeckis’ remake of The Witches which will be taking place in Alabama instead of the United Kingdom. The era of the film will be taking place during the year 1969.

Previously, we reported that the male lead (unlikely to be named Luke) and his grandmother would be played by African-American actors. Also, his pet mouse Daisy will be a girl that had been previously turned into a mouse by a Witch. Burno will also complete the trio who once the boys are turned into mice will team-up with Daisy to take down the Witches’ plot to turn all the children of the world into mice.

Well, French film outlet Allocine has been able to speak with the director about his upcoming adaptation and he confirmed these details reported over the fall to them during their one-on-one interview. Although, Robert is being a little vaguer than we were.

“Yeah, we’re gonna set in the Goth South in the 1960s. That’s an exciting way to put a sociological spin on this traditional witch story.” '

https://hnentertainment.co/robert-ze...ing-the-1960s/





Seriously??

What gets rammed through the pc meat grinder next? Raymond Briggs?

What has this angle got to do with Dahl's very wicked little British/Norwegian fairytale??

[Michael24]

I've never read the book but from what I've heard about it, I was always under the impression that the 1990 film remained more or less faithful, except for the change in ending. Does the film deviate even more from the book beyond that?

[Spirit Zero]

Originally Posted by Michael24

I've never read the book but from what I've heard about it, I was always under the impression that the 1990 film remained more or less faithful, except for the change in ending. Does the film deviate even more from the book beyond that?

The book is essentially a dark wicked little fairytale and as British as they come (as was Dahl).

The old 90's film was virtually spot on. It was pretty scary stuff for kids with plenty of dark humour and wizard makeup and effects from Jim Henson.



Anjelica Houston was also spot on, absolutely perfect casting (as she was for Morticia Addams).



Very much an underrated Return to Oz type feature if you ask me.


This remake seems to be going down a certain dark political route with its setting and that is not what this story is about.

[Michael24]

Cool. I'll have to get the book sometime. I always loved the film as a kid. When I saw it again about five years ago, it had been a long time since I'd last seen it, and I was kind of like "Damn, this is a little darker and scarier than I remembered it being," but still loved it. At the very least, I hope this remake paves the way for the original to finally get released on Blu-ray.

[shinobipopcorn]

I don't get it. Roald Dahl hated the original movie version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory so much that they weren't allowed to adapt the sequel. Who is authorizing all these alterations to his works?

[Cremildo]

Viola Davis Wanted For Grandmother Role

[shinobipopcorn]

She'd be great, I just don't understand why they can't set the movie in England with a black cast. America doesn't have a monopoly on black people.

[Stevie81]

This is a ****ing disaster! I mean seriously!!

Just make a film about Witches in the deep south. Fine. Invent a new story story from scratch

Don't make a film about *THE* WITCHES, the Roald Dahl book set in Norway and the UK. How can he say that it will remain loyal to the source material when the source material dictates a Norwegian and British setting and a male child for the lead?

Like most other stupid remakes, I will totally ignore it!

The 1990 film is practically perfect, almost unique really in that it has to be the scariest live action 'kids' film ever made. The entire sequence in the meeting room is absolutely horrifying.

They edit a few things from the book and I think that they give the kid an American background so they could cast an American kid in the lead, I'm not sure his mother was American in the book, I could be wrong about that as I haven't read it in years.

The ending change is one thing, I talked about that in an earlier post, but Luke also shouts 'Don't forget Bruno' Well, Roald Dahl didn't forget him as it's suggested in the book that Bruno was drowned.

Also, only the Helga stuck in the painting story was depicted in the film, I think there were five other tales about altercations with Witches.

Also, it's suggested in the film that all Witches and not just the grand High witch wear 'human facemasks', and also Purple eyes was film only.

[dgoswald]

Originally Posted by shinobipopcorn

She'd be great, I just don't understand why they can't set the movie in England with a black cast. America doesn't have a monopoly on black people.

The U.S.' historical relationship with its black population is prime material for subtextual drama. There are somewhat comparable situations in Europe, but nothing on the scale and general accessibility of what happened and happens in the States.