I just finally saw TFOEC a little while ago after having read the book years ago and heard so many people on this board and elsewhere raving about it.
Well, all the hype was deserved. It was an incredible movie.
It got me thinking that this would be a great candidate for a remake. It just seems with all these great gritty crime films set in Boston doing so well (MYSTIC RIVER, DEPARTED, GONE BABY GONE), Eddie Croyle has a lot of the same ingredients.
So what do people think? Good for an updated remake or too good in its original form and shouldn't be remade?
I can see Johnny Depp in the Jordan role (he's a Jordan kind of actor - nice to look at, can be all different kinds of sinister, and he's interested in good roles with meat on the bones), but I'm having trouble with Mitchum = I don't see anybody around today that can play that crumpled, worn out, beaten down but still finagling and horny as hell character. They just don't let actors age anymore.
Liam Neeson can only do a Liam Neeson kind of role (not all that nuanced) and could never pull off Eddie. I would like to have seen Robin Williams take a stab at it - he was an actor of more depth than he got credit for, and he could have pulled off that crumpled look and attitude very well.
"....Maybe a remake will help develop an interest in the original."
That has happened. When the 'Halloween' remake came out, people were renting/buying more copies of the original because it reminded them of when 'Halloween' was something good.
I get what you're saying - but I can't think of any remakes that've been any good. And they're always compared to the original, and not usually in very good terms.
I don't see any need for special effects, and the cast was perfect.
But I'll admit to not knowing what the hell "well-rounded cast" actually means.
Surely you jest. Perhaps you've not given it enough thought.
Try these solid remakes on for size:
John Carpenter's The Thing Cape Fear The Departed - remake of Internal Affairs Oceans Eleven The Fly The Magnificent Seven - remake of The Seven Samurai
....For the most part, the films you listed were either action, western or sci-fi. "Eddie Coyle", being more character driven, is not really a film that could be improved by the advances you mentioned.
....Actually, the only issue I have with "Eddie Coyle" is the soundtrack, and only in parts ( something about the guitar work, I think ).
....And I agree with Nikon11, I can't think of a more deep and well rounded cast. Maybe you have some suggestions?
I love that this film is a bit of a hidden treasure. I found out about it when it was on Roger Ebert's top ten list of 1973 and decided to track down a bootleg on Ebay. I think the film is better left alone. Besides, why remake an already near-perfect movie? Why not take a crappy movie and remake it into a good one? Like Leonard Part 6, remade with Ice Cube. I'm just saying.
Walk. Don't Drive. Save money, your heart, and the environment.
I listed 6 very good to great remakes off the top of my head, and you dismissed these for "the most part" as "either action, western, or sci-fi".
The makers of "Cape Fear", "Oceans Eleven", and "The Departed" (3 of the 6, or 50% of the films I listed) would beg to differ with your characterization - none of them are action, wester, or scifi.
In fact "Cape Fear" and "The Departed" in particular underscore my point. Both were mystery/thrillers, based on a number of complex and interesting characters that drove the plot, with great performances in the original - the original "Cape Fear" notably starring Robert Mitchum.
And "Oceans Eleven" was hardly an action movie, but rather a comedic heist movie with a number of great characters.
All three remakes were fine films and with fine performances (Robert DeNiro in "Cape Fear" anyone?).
I guess the reality is that this debate happens anytime you discuss a remake of a great film. I'm sure there were plenty of cries from fans loyal to the original against remaking "Cape Fear" or "The Departed", etc.
....I never meant to dismiss those films. Some of my favorite movies are action, western and sci-fi. My point was that all the "advances" in technology, cinematography, film quality, sound, and special effects really can't add that much to great performances.
....Actually, your suggestion that the remake could feature a deeper, more well rounded cast strikes me as a little dismissive.
....As to the depth of the cast, Helena Carroll, who played Eddie's wife Sheila, was probably better known for her stage work ( including the original "Separate Tables" and "Oliver", and revivals of "Design for Living" and Private Lives" ). Maybe her finest film role was as Aunt Kate in Huston's "The Dead".
Cape Fear - Saw it a long time ago, and thought that DeNiro overplayed it, and I don't care about it.
The Departed - remake of Internal Affairs - Doesn't really count as a remake, because the original is foreign, so there's a reason for it. It's not just re-doing a movie for the sake of re-doing it.
Oceans Eleven - I can't even remember if I saw it - so I couldn't have been that impressed.
The Fly - Saw it and don't remember it, and don't care.
The Magnificent Seven - remake of The Seven Samurai - Didn't see it.
As an aside, if you have the time, you should do yourself a favor and watch (or rewatch) some of these films. You will not be disappointed. They are all very strong films in their respective genres.
And as for DeNiro overacting in the "Cape Fear" remake, he was nominated for an Academy Award for that role.
But as you note, it is just your "opinion" so to each his own.
And I can't imagine anyone else coming close to Mitchum talking about his busted knuckles, Alex Rocco describing his girlfriend's pants, or Peter Boyle taking Eddie for a ride.
So, yeah, if it were remade, with today's big-name stars, it would probably be a big-budget, flashy, over the top production. Sure, it would spark some interest in this original version, and probably even in the book. But it's not something that I'd look forward to seeing done.
Did you read the book? I did before I saw the film, and the characters were almost exactly how I imagined them. That almost never happens. So, to me, it's near perfect the way it is.
paul rothchild wrote: -To introduce the story, character, and world to a whole new generation of film goers. To, through advances in technology, cinematography, film quality, sound, and special effects, tell the story on a grander, more contemporary level. To feature a deeper, more well rounded cast. There are plenty of reasons to remake a great but little seen film like "The Friends of Eddie Croyle".
Eh...The best introduction for anyone would be to watch the actual movie. Which is called The Friends of Eddie Coyle, and it came out in 1973. NOT...i repeat...NOT making a slick boring candycoatet waste of celluloid to make bucks off another classic movie. Why not try making something new? Something original! This "new generation" you're talking about (which includes myself, I guess, I'm 33))doesn't need a crappy remake to appreciate anything. I just hate the word, the whole notion of the word "remake". It's all over the imdb boards, like it's a natural and positive thing. And to elaborate on your further points.. technology, cinematography, quality, sound and so on: The film is how it is, and it's damn good. What the hell are they going to do? It's not low quality in ANY of the respects you mention. And one last point, if anyone even dares to even touch the Dave Grusin soundtrack...well, then I'm going to freak out for real...
By making Jackie Brown, Tarantino has shown that he knows how to make a character driven film like TFoEC.... in case of remake, he should be the director !
Robert Mitchum, Peter Boyle and Alex Rocco have a message for you;
go f_u_ck yourself. What, it'd be better with Zac Efron and Jon Voight?
Tell the story on a grander more contemporary level?
Moron, the movie is set in 1973, should we make EVERY movie to 'contemporize' them? A grander level? There's nothing 'grand' about Eddie Coyle, it's a small, mean film about small, mean people. It's beautiful in its pathetic quality, intimate in its doom.
Please god NO REMAKES! Can anyone give me an example of a re-make that was as good as the original?
King Kong re-make dud Planet of the Apes dud Willy Wonka - dud Pyscho-dud even Get Smart dud
as for Rothchild's list
The Thing- not an improvement Cape Fear - good for a while but the cast isn't as good and the ending is awful. So what if De Niro got an Academy Award nomination- Shakespeare in Love WON an academy award for best picture. Magnificent Seven isn't a re-make it's the American version of a Japanese film different setting, characters, dialogue so on..
etc etc. no remakes . or okay maybe they could remake the Godfather (insert sarcastic sneer)
That's a really tough question, Paul. Usually it's not clear, until after the "remake" is remade, and by then it is too late to "unmake" it.
I find that movie goers, and movie enthusiasts (like those on imdb) tend to be sort of close minded when it comes to remakes of their favorite films. For example, I was recently surprised at the incredibly NEGATIVE response to the idea of remaking DIRTY DANCING.
Some movies have been remade so many times that it seems like each generation has their own version. For example, BEN-HUR or MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY or MOBY DICK. The various versions all seem okay.
One example of a movie that has been remade a number of times, but in my opinion has never come close to the original in quality or impact, is MIRACLE ON 34th STREET. In particular, Natalie Wood is so outstanding in the original that it seems unfair, perhaps even cruel, to ask any young actress to try to do a version of Susan Walker that is even the slightest bit as good as Natalie's.
So the question is: would a remake of THE FRIENDS OF EDDIE COYLE be comparable to the original? Because I like this movie so much, and am such a fan of Robert Mitchum, I feel that Mitchum "owns" this part, so any remake would be looked upon as an inferior imitation.
But I must honestly admit, you never know for sure until you try.