Comments on: Barbarella Remake in Limbo

By: Aaron

Aaron — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 23:54:27 +0000

Well, until this is sorted out, I’ll just watch CQ again.

By: Karina Longworth

Karina Longworth — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:20:24 +0000

yeah, totally. this guy makes movies in his garage. You’d think, if Rose is hanging around the house anyway, they could put together a test reel pretty easily to soothe the studio’s minds.

By: Jette

Jette — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:14:11 +0000

What baffles me about this is the price tag. Rodriguez has always been able to make movies fairly inexpensively, and in a way that makes them look more big-budget than they really are. Why would he turn down $60 million and insist on $82 million? The article says it’s because the movie takes place in outer space, but it still seems odd.

By: Marco Acevedo

Marco Acevedo — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 05:36:59 +0000

This is all gut feeling but, here goes.
Unless Rodriguez comes up with something really astounding or at least visually original, on the level of Sin City, I don’t think Barbarella is going to do big box office. Its source material is too obscure, and Roberto (and McGowan?) has been tainted by the Grindhouse flop. If the overexposed Kidman makes the movie, it might register a Bewitched-sized blip in the mediasphere and vanish. DVD buyers will stay away. With a relative unknown with some geek cred like McGowan, at least the DVD will have a fighting chance. This all pains me because I really enjoy Rodriguez’ work (and enthusiasm), and I love the original Barbarella.

By: Karina Longworth

Karina Longworth — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 18:41:43 +0000

$20 million doesn’t mean much on a summer weekend. Stepford Wives opened in 5th place, Bewitched opened in 2nd. Neither came close to making back its production budget domestically. I know you love her, but you know those were huge disappointments. I’ll give you The Interpreter, I guess. So Nicole Kidman hasn’t been able to open a movie since mid 2005.

By: Ryan Stewart

Ryan Stewart — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 18:35:19 +0000

Wait … Nicole Kidman can’t open a movie? Stepford Wives, Bewitched and Interpreter all had 20m+ opening weekends, sold exclusively on her face being plastered all over the ads. That’s the very definition of opening a movie.

By: Marco Acevedo

Marco Acevedo — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 18:22:12 +0000

Halle is making me dizzy already, what with the jumping back-and-forth from legit to genre roles. Alba seems too… virginal (I can’t see her in the Excessive Machine sequence). Nicole would seem the best choice of the three “bankables” in that she could probably pull off that combination of sultriness and pre-Lib wonder that Jane projected so perfectly in the original. Except, wait, isn’t she now officially box office poison according to Jeff Robinov? I’m so confused. When is Roberto making that Santo movie?