The Party Remake Gets a Director
A couple of years ago, in the wake of the success of Borat, there was an interesting rumour that popped up about the possibility of Sacha Baron Cohen starring in a remake of Blake Edwards’s The Party. Since then we’ve heard nothing more about the project, making it probably just another wacky rumour dreamed up by a gossip columnist looking for attention. This week, however, The Party has once again resurfaced, this time with writer/director Jonathan Kesselman attempting to set it up as an indepedent production.
According to The Hollywood Reporter, MGM and Dreamworks failed to follow through on the project, leaving Kesselman to finance it on his own for $20 million. Kesselman previously wrote and directed The Hebrew Hammer, a Jewish-themed blaxploitation spoof that I have not seen, but heard good things about. Still, I have my doubts about whether or not this is a movie that can work today without completely changing around the whole premise. Obviously the casting of the lead role (played by Peter Sellers in the original) is key, and if Sacha Baron Cohen is not involved, I can’t really think of anyone else who could pull it off. Apparently Kesselman is planning to include “cameos by a number of high-profile Hollywood personalities”, which sounds like a bad direction to go in my opinion. What do you think, is a remake of The Party necessary? Is it even feasible?
Comments (4)
the first few minutes of the Hebrew Hammer are AMAZING, and then it turns immediately to absolute shit.
Two words: Andy Dick
stay away from the Hebrew Hammer…
Adam Carolla’s “The Hammer” however – decent flick.
Posted by Goon on March 24th, 2009Bearing in mind that the original movie had virtually no shooting script, and was largely improvised on the strength of Sellers’ slapstick meanderings, it strikes me that any remake would be tantamount to listening to a second-rate saxophonist trying to duplicate a Stan Getz improvisation.
The Cambridge Online Dictionary defines improvise as “to invent or make something, such as a speech or a device, at the time when it is needed without already having planned it.” Any remake would, by definition, be a planned event. You cannot plan to recreate an improvisation. And the answer is contained in the definition: it is NOT needed.
It sounds to me as though the intended plan to have a cameo-fest is just an excuse for these celebs to have a real-life party of their own at the expense of the producers. Anyone old enough to remember “Fedora”? It was no comedy, but jammed full of Hollywood greats, and a big fat forgotten bomb.
What often baffles me is, if a quintessential part of movie-going is the suspension of disbelief, a giving over to the story being told on the screen, why do the great movies of the past need to be remade with the latest “talents” that have been spoon fed to a younger audience? Movies are works of art that should not be made equivalent to Entertainment Tonight.
Posted by Sellers Fifth on April 2nd, 2009The 2 things to survive the wedding speech dilemma are 1.) Writing a superb speech, and 2.) Delivering it without any flaws.
Posted by Alyssa on June 2nd, 2009This movie could not be made without the comic restraint needed to make it work. Otherwise, it just turns into a bunch of dick and fart jokes and we’ve seen a lot of that die at the box office. Blake Edward’s version holds you in suspense successfully — as you think at any moment this imbecile will be kicked out of the party and he seems to somehow redeem himself nicely at each turn. How they intend to get a small elephant into a pool full of hippies and make it seem “current” is beyond explanation
Posted by val on September 12th, 2009Leave a Reply