Scarface (reboot)

[Trekkie313]

Originally Posted by Gamma_Winstead

It's got Diego Luna as the lead. I'm down just for that.

I felt he was sleepwalking through his role in Rogue One.

[MJD64]

Originally Posted by Predatorix38417

If they include Push it to the Limit, who should cover?

The Paul Engemann original or just forget it; and that goes double for Debbie Harry's Rush Rush!

[Talleyrand]

The Coen Brothers are not the people to write a remake of Scarface.

I don't think there's any need, or even want, for a remake, but if it's going to happen, it's going to happen, I guess. However, the arched eyebrows of the Coens will mix with Scarface like oil and water.

[Arch Stanton]

Not against this, especially given it seems like a fundamental reworking and they're absurdly brilliant writers.

Edit: oh, they aren't actually directing it? Nope nope

[qb2333]

Originally Posted by jim1174

sorry but the original was the classic

Yeah, the original is actually bundled in a DVD on the remake steelbook and one can see Pacino studied and copied some of the original actor's portrayal (not the accent). Both were great and so are the Coen brothers so I will be looking forward to this remake. Each version is a different ethnicity updated (from Italian Capone mob to Cuban refugee in the early 80s and not an updated Mexican immigrant version). Sounds pretty good to me on its face. Let's all wait and see what it turns into before poopooing the entire project

[Poya]

Originally Posted by qb2333

Yeah, the original is actually bundled in a DVD on the remake steelbook and one can see Pacino studied and copied some of the original actor's portrayal (not the accent). Both were great and so are the Coen brothers so I will be looking forward to this remake. Each version is a different ethnicity updated (from Italian Capone mob to Cuban refugee in the early 80s and not an updated Mexican immigrant version). Sounds pretty good to me on its face. Let's all wait and see what it turns into before poopooing the entire project

As much as I love the Pacino film, it's equal to the original, I don't understand why they made him Cuban. I get it was Sidney Lumet's idea when he was going to direct it originally but that was because he wanted to make it a politically charged film but when he left, there wasn't much of that in the final film and his Cuban heritage is maybe sort of important to the story in the beginning but not so much afterwards. It's just becomes unfortunate whitewashing. Still love Pacino's performance but he couldn't really nail the accent.

[Gamma_Winstead]

Originally Posted by Trekkie313

I felt he was sleepwalking through his role in Rogue One.

Ok.

[qb2333]

Originally Posted by Poya

... Still love Pacino's performance but he couldn't really nail the accent.

Yes on that we can agree on. It's a paradox in that way: great role; horrible accent. lol

[evoxturbo]

I'm so down for this remake so we can get a better transfer of Scarface (1983) on Blu-ray when the new one is released theatrically. Universal would be stupid not to upgrade the transfer while doing another remake. It could use some work.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by jim1174

I just hope they make it like the original.

You mean the original 1932 version with Paul Muni, which was very loosely based on Al Capone?

But I assume you're talking about the 1983 version. But why should it be like that? That film was really over the top and it used the historic event of Castro emptying his jails as the back story for the film. But that wouldn't be relatable today and we already have that version anyway. And I think in the minds of most people, that film is almost considered to be a joke today. Pacino's character has certainly been heavily satirized.

The Coen Brothers are much more sophisticated and would probably take a much more quirky and subtle approach. Frankly, I don't see why we need a new version at all, but if the Coen Brothers can do something really interesting with it, so be it.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by MJD64

What never fails to amuse me is that so many people now see Tony Montana as some kind of hero, which was never Pacino or De Palma's intention.

Hey, same for Darth Vader and the crueler he is, the more people like it.

[Jett Rink]

After Hail, Caesar! I am going to assume their next project will be equally or more shitty than their previous project. I predict this will flop.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by qb2333

Yes on that we can agree on. It's a paradox in that way: great role; horrible accent. lol

Pacino's character was not an educated man and as such, would not speak either very good Cuban Spanish nor very good English. Think of someone from the Bronx or Brooklyn with a heavy New York accent who slurs their R's, etc., and now picture them learning a new language. In addition, Montana's id is based around outrageous behavior and exaggeration and that relates to the way that he speaks...like someone who always speaks in Jive. So I think his accent actually worked quite well for that film. If he were playing a Cuban doctor or artist or politician, not so much. Everything about that film was over the top and if Pacino's accent was over the top as well, that would be consistent with the rest of the film.

[Talleyrand]

Originally Posted by MJD64

What never fails to amuse me is that so many people now see Tony Montana as some kind of hero, which was never Pacino or De Palma's intention.

Well, Truffaut can answer that. Any "anti-whatever" (he specifically discussed anti-war) film will fail to be so, because it makes the thing look cool. I mean, look at this:



And yes, Tony dies at the end, but in the most romanticized, "badass," "cool" way possible.

[Talleyrand]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

But why should [the Scarface remake] be like [the 1983 version]? That film was really over the top and it used the historic event of Castro emptying his jails as the back story for the film. But that wouldn't be relatable today and we already have that version anyway. And I think in the minds of most people, that film is almost considered to be a joke today. Pacino's character has certainly been heavily satirized.

Yes, this is an argument against remaking the film at all.

If people want to consider on the the greatest films ever made a "joke," that's their loss. But they really should just move on with their lives and watch Miller's Crossing instead, rather than f**king around with something they don't even like or understand.

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

The Coen Brothers are much more sophisticated and would probably take a much more quirky and subtle approach. Frankly, I don't see why we need a new version at all, but if the Coen Brothers can do something really interesting with it, so be it.

There is nothing worse than a "quirky and subtle approach" to Scarface. The story is not meant to be quirky or subtle, that's why Brian De Palma directed the film and not the Coens.

They have their place; that place is far removed from having anything to do Scarface.

[Arawn]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

And I think in the minds of most people, that film is almost considered to be a joke today.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Talleyrand

There is nothing worse than a "quirky and subtle approach" to Scarface. The story is not meant to be quirky or subtle,...

What exactly is 'the story' of Scarface and what about it precludes either quirkiness or subtlety?

Tony (Comonte, Montoya, Tomayto, Tomahto) is a pretty standard tragic hero who's story has been told many different ways by many different people in many different places for at least 2,500 years.

'The story' of Scarface doesn't begin and end with Brian de Palma and Al Pacino.

[Gremal]

Originally Posted by Talleyrand

Yes, this is an argument against remaking the film at all.

If people want to consider on the the greatest films ever made a "joke," that's their loss. But they really should just move on with their lives and watch Miller's Crossing instead, rather than f**king around with something they don't even like or understand.

There is nothing worse than a "quirky and subtle approach" to Scarface. The story is not meant to be quirky or subtle, that's why Brian De Palma directed the film and not the Coens.

They have their place; that place is far removed from having anything to do Scarface.

Was the Tony Montana character not quirky himself? All that talk of eating octopus and being 40 with hair on your breasts? You think that's mature writing?

I just don't get these criticisms of the Coens. Miller's Crossing didn't work for me, but that was more than 20 years ago. Since then, they've matured and learned how to create characters that build into a plot like a fine-tuned machine.

If you can name better screenwriters than the Coens I'd love to hear it.

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by Gremal

If you can name better screenwriters than the Coens I'd love to hear it.

Everybody.

[jetthead]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Everybody.

Everybody?