Catherine Zeta-Jones in new film of Gypsy?

[sicetergo]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 8:35am

"The rumor is out and hot that the Weinstein Co. is close on the heels of director Rob Marshall for a movie version [of Gypsy]" and it would appear that they have everyone's favourite Welsh girl in their sights as Rose - according to Liz Smith.

Weinsteins see Catherine Zeta-Jones in new 'Gypsy' film

[ljay889]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:01am

o m g.

This excites me, I don't know why. but wow it does.

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:10am

I'll believe it when I see it.

This is too much in the "gossip" phase right now... thank you, Miss Liz Smith.

[AngusN]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:29am

As Rose? She's a little young to be playing Rose. Plus, she is not strong enough character actress to portray the emotional complexities the role demands. She got away with it in Chicago because it Velma isn't a particularly demanding role, you just need to be a diva, which is is notorious for anyway.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:32am

Catherine Zeta Jones notoriously shaves off several years from her age - she's actually in the ballpark of 40, which isn't really too young to play the role.

I could see it - she's already said she wants to play the role.

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:40am

Catherine's a much better actress than you give her credit for.

Velma's not a demanding role? Hmm....

But I'll give you this... she's too young, at 35 to play the later scenes with Louise as the full-blown Gypsy Rose Lee. They would have to "age" her for that.

Just remember Elizabeth Taylor was 34 when she played Martha in Virginia Woolf on screen.

It's much easier to age "up" on screen than it is to age "down" convincingly.

I'm still trying to figure out if... or even WHY... they're making it.

Oh, yeah... Money.

Why is it that the average producer believes there have only been three musicals written in the history of our country?

Gypsy, Guys & Dolls, and... wait, I KNOW there's a third...

[alterego]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:43am

What would be interesting would be a movie of Gypsy Rose Lee's life, not the musical GYPSY, but the original book it was based on.

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:44am

I agree, alterego!

[alterego]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:46am

Great minds!

[AngusN]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:48am

She's actually only 36, which I believe is way too young for the role. The essence of the show is the fact that she is a faded has-been and is living her life through her kids, at their expense. One of the main criticisms of Bernadette Peters' performance was that she was too young (or at least looked too young and she was 54/5 at the time).
Plus, as I mentioned previously the role needs an inordinate amount of vocal power and with excessive emotional range and depth, and I have never seen Catherine produce these skills. Neither do I think that she is capable of producing them.
Bette Midler has the vocal power and the acting experience and look at the mess she made of it.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:48am

Well, Best12, it is arguable that there has yet to be a definitive film version of GYPSY.

The Roz Russell version, though not the fiasco that say the movie version of MAME is, suffers from lots of problems, and the Bette Midler TV movie looks worse and worse on repeated viewings - it just lacks magic, and Midler who I at first loved in the role seems less and less right for it.

So, if the Weinsteins want to produce another go at a movie of GYPSY - I'm all for it. The musical has always had the potential to be extraordinary on film, it just hasn't gotten there yet.

And even if CZJ were only 35 (she is not as I say above) there is no reason to believe Rose would be in her sixties; its much more plausable to me that she would have had children young and that, as much as any other reason, would have been why she couldn't have been a star herself.

Does anyone know how old the real Rose was?

Updated On: 6/13/06 at 09:48 AM

[alterego]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:50am

Is she only 36? In 1988 she was playing Peggy Sawyer in FORTY SECOND STREET in London which would mean she was 18. Possible but seems unlikely somehow.

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:52am

So, if at first you don't succeed, try, try again... and again... and again?

I guess so.

Hey, I'll go see it, if it actualy gets made.

EDIT: alterego--They say she was 16 when she played Peggy. Funny how her age keeps shifting around.

"That old gasoline tank? She's SIXTY if she's a minute." --- The Women

Updated On: 6/13/06 at 09:52 AM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:52am

She is supposedly actually 41 - though she and her husband are very sue-happy so don't quote me on it

And best12, why not? How many films have been made of HAMLET, or ROMEO AND JULIET? I'm sure Marshall would put his own stamp on it and could do things on a level that never could have been afforded a television remakes... Updated On: 6/13/06 at 09:52 AM

[AngusN]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:54am

LOL. That's a good one MichaelB.

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:54am

If Bernadette Peters was so damn good in the role, why isn't she doing the film? I'd much rather see a new musical version of Gypsy Rose Lee's novel "The G-String Murders" (originally filmed as "Lady of Burlesque" with Barbara Stanwyck and Michael O'Shea.)

[alterego]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:58am

I'll go with 41. I know someone who worked with her in that show (42ND ST), in conversation her name came up once and this friend was asked what she had been like, there was a long pause and my friend said ' put it this way, she's got everything she set out to get'. Interpret that anyway you wish.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:59am

Bernadette Peters is not a movie star. And I think 42nd STREET played in London in 1985, not 1988...
Updated On: 6/13/06 at 09:59 AM

[AngusN]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 10:02am

Nor wishes to be.

[alterego]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 10:12am

It opened in 1985 and was still playing in 1988. She wasn't the first Peggy.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 10:17am

Claire Leech was the original Peggy in London, but Zeta Jones did the performance that year on the Olivier Awards; so she must have been the first replacement. And given that Leech was an American, she probably only opened the show and stayed with it a few months.

At any rate, CZJ wasn't 16 in 1986, 87, or 88...

[philcrosby]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 10:17am

I think Jones could make a damn good Rose. A stretch perhaps, but she has proved to be a capable actress. And I think she has the hard streak necessary to make Rose believabe.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 10:18am

Okay, don't throw tomatoes at me for this, but can Natalie Portman sing? I was thinking her for Louise.

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 10:21am

They need to keep the kids young, to help her come off as "Mommy." Natalie could work.

And I agree that Zeta-Jones has the "fierceness" to play the part.

Just put a little talcum powder in her hair, slap on some graying sideburns, and there you have it!

"Old Rose"

Just like Titanic.

Updated On: 6/13/06 at 10:21 AM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 10:23am

Why would she have to be old? So if she had Louise at 17 (plausible) she'd be 37 or so at the end of the story?