I'm surprised the remake dweebs haven't been clamoring for this one to be redone. If they did, I would defy anyone to top Crispin Glover as Bartleby.
This would have to be one of the most difficult adaptations ever from print to screen. The 1970 version didn't succeed very well, imo; not so with this one.
I hope they've all got the sense to leave it be.
Why the hell would anyone remake a movie that was remade 7 years ago?
share[deleted]
Those movies were all foreign language. You people can't be serious.
share[deleted]
He's wondering why anybody would remake a movie made by foreigners, isn't that right, Sean. Hmm... how you say, RACIST. DAMN YOU.
shareThere's a guy who named Roy Lee who together with Doug Davison, founded the company Vertigo Entertainment - an intermediary that sells the remake rights for Asian films, on behalf of the rights-holders, to American studios.
Roy Lee is listed as an Executive producer on 'The Grudge' 'The Ring' and 'The Departed.'
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0498175/
It's a business/marketing decision. Racism has nothing to do with it. The studio found a script that they want to translate to American audiences.
How many major-studio releases feature an entire cast of foreign actors and subtitles throughout the entire film?? None.
American audiences want actors they are familiar with.
It seems like such a serious short story, I'm surprised PBS or a cable channel hasn't tried to turn it back into a period piece with an all English cast.
Oh no, not English, it's supposed to be Wall St. Maybe with really good stage actors? :D