Pretty Woman vs $3000

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 8/3/08 at 6:47pm

So I caught a few minutes of Pretty Woman on tv this afternoon and remember how I thought it was such a sweet movie when it came out and now it just seems kind of ridiculous and kind of gross, what with Julia playing a hooker with the goldest of hearts. Was Richard Gere her first john?

Anyhow, it got me to thinking about how it was originally a much darker movie called $3000 and I rather quickly find a copy of that script online. It's fascinating to see what could have been. This would have made a much better movie, with someone other than Julia Roberts playing the lead.

Updated On: 8/4/08 at 06:47 PM

[Mistress Overdone]

Posted: 8/3/08 at 8:04pm

PRS, I had heard that the original script called for her to end up injured or dead in a gutter, or something along those lines... is that true?

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 8/3/08 at 9:37pm

I fixed the link.

She doesn't end up injured or dead, but she's pretty much destroyed.

[Mistress Overdone]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 11:24am

Wow. That is... really depressing.

I'm guessing it didn't test terribly well with audiences?

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 11:53am

It was never made. I think a lot of people thought the movie was reshot or reedited to lighten it, but by the time Pretty Woman was made, $3000 was pretty much eradicated.

Some major differences -

Vivian is a crack addict in $3000.
She's been hooking since she was 16.
She took Kit in, not the other way around.
Edward is pretty douchey.

Someone really should make this movie based on its original script. The message that Pretty Woman sends is pretty horrifying when you get right down to it.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 11:58am

I thought WHORE was the original script for PRETTY WOMAN before they decided to go a different route.

[Mistress Overdone]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 11:59am

Oh, I agree about the horrifying message in Pretty Woman - "if he sleeps with you, he'll fall in luuuuuuv with you, and being a hooker is TOTALLY glamorous." Then again, the idea that it's okay to degrade people who are poorer than you is not a great one either.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:00pm

The one with Theresa Russell? No. That's a really bad movie, too!

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:03pm

Then again, the idea that it's okay to degrade people who are poorer than you is not a great one either.

I don't think it's saying that, but it does paint a more realistic picture than Julia marrying her first trick.

[southernboy]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:04pm

This seems so perfectly in keeping with Hollywood that it doesn't surprise me.
It's certainly not at all the same kind of switch, but they most recently did this with "Wanted." I don't understand movie studios who would buy one script/book/idea/whatever and make a completely different movie from it.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:08pm

Oh, I agree that it's not surprising. I was just fascinated by how vastly the different the two scripts turned out to be. It's sort of like someone taking "Leaving Las Vegas" and turning it into a comedy.

[tazber]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:09pm

The reason is $$$$$$$$$$$$$

[southernboy]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:11pm

yeah, but that's what I'm saying. It's like that little meme that movies are completely made via focus groups and making sure every film has specific elements is absolutely true. You just know the original script was read, a piece was edited/cut/slashed here and there and, before you know, rom-com starring America's Sweetheart!
I have been involved in a really cute musical which was an adaptation of a film itself. They changed it a lot to make it work onstage and it did. Along comes Broadway producer who hems and haws, asks for 600,000 changes (including playing down its core gayness, which the musical was about) and then dumped it anyway. The sad part is that it wouldn't have been the same show by the time he was done with it, anyway, so you have to wonder why he was drawn to the material enough to sign a contract on it anyway.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:11pm

Oh, okay. For some reason, I thought PRETTY WOMAN and WHORE were tied together.

Updated On: 8/4/08 at 12:11 PM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:13pm

heh, phylly. the theme song then could have been viva las vegas with the words changed to leaving las vegas instead of that star effin' whore's nasty whine.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:17pm

I have been involved in a really cute musical which was an adaptation of a film itself. They changed it a lot to make it work onstage and it did. Along comes Broadway producer who hems and haws, asks for 600,000 changes (including playing down its core gayness, which the musical was about) and then dumped it anyway. The sad part is that it wouldn't have been the same show by the time he was done with it, anyway, so you have to wonder why he was drawn to the material enough to sign a contract on it anyway.

I wonder the same thing every time I see a movie musical whose book is completey rewritten.

[southernboy]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:30pm

Touche (minus the accent since I always forget how to do that).

[shameless]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:36pm

Here's the thing, ya bunch of sad sacks, most of us don't go to the movies to be depressed.

I thought Leaving Las Vegas was a extremely well made film with fantastic performances, but I could barely sit through it the first time and I have not watched it again since. On the other hand, I think I've seen Pretty Woman over 50 times.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:39pm

And a little part of you wants to put on a short skirt and find a john to take you away from all of this, doesn't it? I know I do!

[shameless]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:44pm

Absolutely!

But, I usually end up stuck with the Jason Alexanders.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:48pm

PRETTY WOMAN is pretty much a remake of MY FAIR LADY. One sells flowers, one sells herself. They're both picked up by wealthy, older men, who in turn teach them to dress/behave more ladylike. Higgins brings Eliza to the Ascot Races, Edward takes Vivian to the polo grounds. Eventually both Eliza and Vivian leave their respective benefactors, only to be pursued by them. Even the titles are very similar -- MY FAIR LADY, PRETTY WOMAN.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that PRETTY WOMAN is not to be taken seriously. It's a latter-day fairy tale. Though I agree it's interesting to wonder what might have been.

[D2]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:51pm

And what is MY FAIR LADY based on, Stagey?

[SonofMammaMiaSam]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 12:57pm

oo, oo; oo, oo ... I know!!!!

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 1:01pm

Me too!

[Jon]

Posted: 8/4/08 at 1:48pm

It's been said that the Cinderella/Pygmailon/rags to riches plotline is one of the most borrowed from/copied stories in all of fiction.

Other popular ones are:

The "Beauty and the Beast" plot (Hunchback of Notre Dame/Phantom of the Opera, etc.)

The "Odyssey" plot (Oh Brother Where Art Thou, Cold Mountain, Finding Nemo, or any plot involving the quest to get home to one's loved ones, despite numerous obstacles).

The "Fish Out of Water" plot (E.T., Back to the Future)

The "Odd Couple" plot (Rain Man, Twins)

Some stories are combos: Wizard of Oz is about a fish out of Water on an oddyssey. "Planes, Trains & Automobiles" is an odd couple on an odyssey.