Universal Studios drops out of GYPSY

And this surprises you??? Streisand is 74 (SEVENTY FOUR) in less than
six months. As legendary as she is, Streisand is no longer box office
(The Focker Films were truly carried by its main, young stars) and "The
Guilt Trip" - a nice film - was a flop. Streisand has foolishly
abandoned her film career since the mid-90s and is now paying the price
in the 21st century. This is hardly news. Except, of course, to you.

BTW, the Jobs film has been greeted with sensational reviews, with tons
of applause directed at the star of this movie. THIS is why I'm seeing
the picture Saturday night with a date, not because of how much money
it's made. But then you are all about commerce, not art. Aren't you?

Wow - who peed in your Corn Flakes this morning? 

I said nothing about my being surprised by this, I said nothing about my opinion on 'art vs. commerce' - I just shared a new update (for anyone who's interested) on the film, as I have been all along since the project was announced. That's all - nothing more, nothing less. No reason for you to get whipped up.

I prefer fantasy over reality TV - like Fox News. - B.Streisand

In an interview yesterday, Travolta says the project is still on and Barbra - as producer - is handling everything at the moment. He's pretty sure it will be Barbra, Travolta himself (as Herbie) and GaGa as Gypsy Rose Lee. Travolta also said it was he who brought the late summer dinner-party together since Streisand wanted to meet Lady GaGa since she was considering her for the movie.

I prefer fantasy over reality TV - like Fox News. - B.Streisand

Aside from Streisand being way too old at this point, Tom Hanks (once
rumored for Herbie) would be the far better choice, as he can out-act
Travolta by eons. Sure, Travolta's starred in several musical blockbusters,
but he can't sing and he's a minor talent overall.

I would love it if this was something that would work (not just
financially "successful", although I question the likelihood of even
that). But the truth is, this has ego and disaster written all over it.

Streisand is almost SEVENTY-FOUR!! But, then again, on TV interviews
and CD covers, she's now managing to look 39 - in a highly artificial
sort of way.

Bar none, this has to be one of the most laughable vanity projects of all time. From a commercial perspective, why would any producer (other than BJS) or studio even touch it? Audiences were already provided with an opportunity to see this for FREE in 1993 (the Bette Midler TV version), and it generated lukewarm ratings.

Why would the public suddenly feel compelled to pay to see the same story again? Just because way-past-their prime Streisand & Travolta are the leads? They are both known for their egos . .however, can they possibly be that delusional?

This project has "Lucy Mame" written all over it. On second thought, at least "Mame" had a strong supporting cast in Robert Preston, Bea Arthur, and Jane Connell . .and Lucy was younger!

Ball was a much bigger mistake. First of all, Lucy's speaking voice
(let's not even touch her "singing" voice) was deeper than Lurch from
"The Addams Family" by 1973. Second of all, the production was way
overblown, mainly to conceal that non-dancer Ball had also barely
recovered from a serious broken leg. And, sadly, Ball had totally
lost touch with any kind of acting scope by this point. Instead of
investing herself in the character of Mame, she simply was "Lucy." Bea
Arthur detested Ball's casting (her friend Angela Lansbury should've
won the role) and only conceded to reprising Vera Charles because
husband Gene Saks was directing and he begged her to do it. Shortly
before her death, Arthur bitterly called Ball "a clown." This was
highly disrespectful (Arthur was an egomaniac herself), but the truth
is this is how Ball wound up. Ball was once a comic genius, and I
consider her characterization of Lucy Ricardo to be one of the most
complex and brilliant (only Gleason and Carroll O'Connor rival her),
but she truly lost her talent. Although she remained beautiful, slim
and even elegant, virtually all of her post-I Love Lucy work is
mediocre and uninspired.

What's sadder about Streisand is that AT ONE TIME she would've been
sensational as Gypsy! Only the great Judy Garland would've
compared. But while the poorly-cast Rosalind Russell was shooting
the original weak film, Judy was making the awful "I Could Go on
Singing" instead! It's almost like a curse.

Gypsy is indeed one of the top five greatest scores ever composed.
Music like this doesn't exist today. Yet a great filming of this
show has yet to happen fifty-plus years after its stage debut.

As for Lady Gaga, I think she is an amazing talent and her casting
would be inspired. But Streisand is just too old.

Agree Streisand at 73 is too old for the role, but has that ever stopped an actor/actress from being cast before?

Olivia Newton-John was 30 when she played teen-age 'Sandy' in "Grease"; Diana Ross was 34 when she played a teenage Dorothy in 'The Wiz' (though they changed the character to being a teacher with 'child-like innocence'); Madonna was too old to play 'Evita', and of course Streisand was too old to play a 20-something year old woman in 'Yentl'.

It happens - and sometimes the film is a mega-success ("Grease") and sometimes it's not ("The Wiz"). I don't think age is the most important factor in the film's over-all reception at the box office.

I prefer fantasy over reality TV - like Fox News. - B.Streisand

Your points are valid. However, the issue is that, unlike Newton John
and Ross, Streisand is AN OLD LADY! Isn't Lady Gaga around 30? I
pointed out that she could pass as teenage June, which is no different
an argument than Newton John as teenage Sandy (and as successful as
Grease was, Travolta and Newton John are truly unconvincing as TEENS).

It's all a crapshoot, but the odds against Gypsy are far greater
than Grease and The Wiz, which were far more marketable to
theatre goers in the late '70s. (The Wiz is a pretty crummy film,
although it may have been a hit - I can't recall).

Streisand was wise to raise the age of Yentl to 28 and, to her credit
and good genes, she is convincing, especially since women of that era
looked much older than they do today).