Producer Bryan Singer Tied To Re-Make Of "Excalibur"

Posted by No_Name_ (17403 posts) - - Show Bio

 

 

When word gets out that film maker Bryan Singer is getting involved in a project; chances are that there will be good things to come. Singer who has worked as a producer on films like "Valkyrie" and "Superman Returns," has set his gaze on a re-make of the classic 80's film "Excalibur" according to a report by Variety. The story will involve the timeless classics attributed to the Excalibur story; everything from the Knights of the Round Table, the magical magician Merlin, and the epic search for the Holy Grail in order to save King Arthur's life.

The film had originally been directed by Jason Doorman back in 1981 and starred Nigel Terry as Arthur alongside Helen Mirren as Morgana and Liam Neeson as Sir Gawain. The re-make of the classic film will be produced by Singer alongside Julie Yorn (Bride Wars, Max Payne).  The producer is still presently looking for the film's screenwriter. Additionally, Singer has been linked to the upcoming X-Men: First Class movie which has obtained a first script draft by O.C. creator Jason Schwatrtz.

What do you think of a re-make of the classic film, Excalibur? Do you think they could make it as good as the first film? Are you tired of all the movie re-makes?
#1 Posted by JadedFool (20 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm tired of all the re-makes.  I understand remaking films with more money to make a superior version, but seriously, where's the originality?  I guess this one's okay though, seeing as it's a classic tale that could be updated for new generations.
#2 Posted by csimon (2110 posts) - - Show Bio

you know some movies just don't need to me remade or touched, some are perfect the way they are and others just are not worth remaking. 
 
What's next a remake of   one flew over the cuckoo's nest??????

#3 Posted by Captain Cascader (1284 posts) - - Show Bio

Ugh. Excalibur is such an awesome epic film and as a King Arthur story does not need to be reamade as an "Excalibur" film. They could have called it any number of things and still just stuck to the main story without directly referencing Boorman's work. Call it Le Morte de Arthur or something.
 
I'm sorry, but it's impossible to remake this film unless they decide to not use modern camera equipment and remake the soft focus style of that movie. Excalibur was not so much about storytelling as it was about mood and look. The acting in it was horrible, but it was that dreamlike quality of the look of the movie that made it what it was. That and the bulky, hyper realistic heavy armor the guys wore.
 
The cherry blossom scene played to Orf's Carmina Burana is one of my all time favorite moments in cinema. The poster for the movie is one of 4 in my house.

Staff
#4 Posted by _brandon (66 posts) - - Show Bio

IIRC I believe it was directed by John Boorman, who did Deliverance as well. 
 
Also that movie had Patrick Stewart (already bald) as Leo De Grance....great cast and story, but the effects must look kinda old. 
 
The movie, if updated, could be amazing. Watching it 30 years later...I'm just not sure the special effects hold up, but it would be hard to have better acting. 
 
Tough call. 
#5 Posted by goldenkey (2927 posts) - - Show Bio
@JadedFool said:
"I'm tired of all the re-makes.  I understand remaking films with more money to make a superior version, but seriously, where's the originality?  I guess this one's okay though, seeing as it's a classic tale that could be updated for new generations. "

What's to be updated?  The movie doesn't really require that much special effects.  Merlin doesn't do any kind of magic that requires him to shoot any kind of energy projections like a Potter film.  This is a very difficult movie to remake considering the original is 3 plus hours long.  I agree with the lack of originality, but this is classic myth basicly tied to religion.  I don't see a remake coming off better in any way.  The acting was a little hokey with the dialouge but that's how they supposedly talked back then.  The plot was great, and I think the muical scores won an Oscar.  Did the movie itself win?  It's like remaking Braveheart.  Just no point.  Clive Owens and Richard Gere already ruined it.
#6 Posted by Captain Cascader (1284 posts) - - Show Bio
@_brandon: It also had Liam Neasons first acting role. 
Staff
#7 Posted by Alphaproto (350 posts) - - Show Bio

That was a good movie and it shouldn't be touched. Why can't he just make his own version of the legend instead of his own version of a film about the legend?
#8 Posted by _brandon (66 posts) - - Show Bio

I seem to recall an interview with Boorman (it might be the DVD's Commentary) where he said he wanted the acting to be on par with a dramatic stage performance, like something out of Othello.  
 
I guess watching now it might seem lame. I gotta watch it again.
#9 Posted by Bruce Vain (1869 posts) - - Show Bio

First that's an epic poster. 
 
Second whatever happened with him doing Logan's Run?
#10 Posted by Green ankh (998 posts) - - Show Bio

Singer will totally destroy what is a great very underseen film.
#11 Edited by frogistheman the buisnessman (24 posts) - - Show Bio

if he sucked at making superman hes gonna suck at making this movie
hes a bad director .........
except when he did the x-men.

#12 Posted by LastSon1027 (516 posts) - - Show Bio
@Babs said:
"  
    When word gets out that film maker Bryan Singer is getting involved in a project; chances are that there will be good things to come.   
 
GOOD THINGS!?!?!? Are you out of your ever loving mind? Did you see the same Superman movie I saw? 
#13 Posted by Fake Shemp (24 posts) - - Show Bio

If this distracts him from making the Battlestar Galactica movie, then I'm all for it!

#14 Posted by Phorqe (2109 posts) - - Show Bio

Ah man, this got my hopes up. I thought it was going to be a Marvel Excalibur movie.
I wish Singer would get back into lower budget independent films for a while. Hollywood seems to be eating at his soul.

#15 Posted by Quintus_Knightfall (84624 posts) - - Show Bio
@Captain Cascader said:
"Ugh. Excalibur is such an awesome epic film and as a King Arthur story does not need to be reamade as an "Excalibur" film. They could have called it any number of things and still just stuck to the main story without directly referencing Boorman's work. Call it Le Morte de Arthur or something. I'm sorry, but it's impossible to remake this film unless they decide to not use modern camera equipment and remake the soft focus style of that movie. Excalibur was not so much about storytelling as it was about mood and look. The acting in it was horrible, but it was that dreamlike quality of the look of the movie that made it what it was. That and the bulky, hyper realistic heavy armor the guys wore. The cherry blossom scene played to Orf's Carmina Burana is one of my all time favorite moments in cinema. The poster for the movie is one of 4 in my house. "
This post is on point. Although I cant lie, I'm actually looking forward to a remake of the classic. Even though I know it wont compare, I'm a huge fan of the Arthur mythology. So much so in fact, that I watch "Merlin," even though its probably the worst t.v. show I've ever seen.
Moderator
#16 Posted by ulrich200 (95 posts) - - Show Bio

They should better remake some people to write for them!

#17 Posted by Decept-O (7275 posts) - - Show Bio

The legend of King Arthur and Excalibur is constantly being told in one form or another, cinematic or otherwise.  The original Excalibur movie however is indeed quite unique with beautiful cinematography as Capt. Cascader pointed out and like him, rank it as one of my all time faves.   
 
I don't know how differently Singer would do the movie, but sad to say I'd probably give it a look only because I am very fond of the whole King Arthur mythos in general.  If Guinevere is hot and appears nekkid, well sign me up, sparky. 

#18 Posted by jefprice (878 posts) - - Show Bio

Watch King Arthur with Clive Owen. That'll make you no longer care about whats coming next. I'm a big fan of this lore, and I have a hard time thinking someone is going to make a better film.

#19 Posted by Pheeke (198 posts) - - Show Bio

i'm tired of these remake's, they are almost never as good as the old ones. 
why can't they just make another decent movie about that sword and king Arthur without it being a remake, i mean the story has been told a million times can't they just stay off the old movies and just make new things! 
i have excalibur on dvd and i wasn't that impressed with it (matter of opinion and taste) i also have merlin (1998) with sam neill and helena bonham carter, i think that one is much better, i love that one, anyone else loved that one better too? i hope they won't remake it ;) 

 
 
#20 Posted by Aronmorales (9434 posts) - - Show Bio

EXCALIBUR!!!

#21 Posted by Media_Master (2189 posts) - - Show Bio

Bryan sounds like a director, more often then not, can make a good movie

#22 Posted by tremerefury (3 posts) - - Show Bio

Singer is an AMAZING director. Superman Returns was a good movie, if you consider the fact that it was a sequel to the old Reeves films and not a reboot. It's too bad he's not making a sequel, because his plans sounded epic, now that he was done re-introducing the charecters. Honestly though, he should've just rebooted Superman instead of contuing the old series. And for the people who don't like Singer because of Superman Returns go watch the Usual Suspects and Apt Pupil, as well as the first two X Men, and shut up.
#23 Posted by karrob (4278 posts) - - Show Bio

Im not a big Bryan Singer fan...*kanye shrug*

This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.