"Tales of the City" Movies - why did they stop?

[ChgoTheatreGuy]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 6:45pm

As a longtime admirer of Armistead Maupin's classic book series, "Tales of the City", I have always been aggravated and annoyed at the fact that they only filmed the first three books and then stopped. According to Wikipedia, they were to begin production on the fourth book, "Babycakes", Mr. Maupin had written a screenplay, but production was halted. With the release of the last book, "The Days of Anna Madirgal", I was wondering what the interest would be in seeing the other books filmed, should they remake the first three books, or start with "Babycakes" and make the rest of them. In my mind, Olympia Dukakis will always be Anna Madrigal to me...

[bobs3]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 9:05pm

Why did they stop?

Money. They got too expensive too make and they couldn't get the financing.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 9:53pm

[Gothampc]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 10:15pm

For me, there are two issues.

First, I don't think the later material is as good as the early material. In the 1970s, there is free love and good times and a sense of freedom. As the stories progress, we are introduced to AIDS and death and drug awareness and unhappiness and the characters change. I enjoyed the original chapters, but once they introduce Mother Mucca and the cannibal priest and Mary Ann loses her optimism and innocence and even though whole Jonestown storyline, it's all too much.

Second, I don't think anyone can top the original cast. Even to me, the second cast was less than perfect. Chloe Webb will always be Mona. Marcus D'Amico will always be Mouse.

Updated On: 3/16/14 at 10:15 PM

[ChgoTheatreGuy]

Posted: 3/20/14 at 1:28pm

I think that part of the attraction of the books was that everything did happen against actual events in history. I agree that the original cast would be very hard to replace or replicate. I think that with the massive strides that Gays have made lately with Gay marriage, that this series is iconic and should get the respect that it wholly deserves.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 3/20/14 at 1:46pm

The first series IS finally back in print in North America (just as the second one I believe has fallen out of print...) Still needs remastering badly, but they did for the first time finally release the uncut version (the nudity was there, but previous editions had two lines of dialogue dubbed over and missed some ofthe iconic songs like Love to Love You Baby in the disco scene.)

I love the series. I actually grew to like the second "Mouse" who I think fits the book a bit better, but never warmed to the second Mona or, really, to the second Brian (but as a Canadian it's hard to replace Paul Gross :P ). I still think the second miniseries is largely great--though filming in Montreal and on more sets is obvious. The third one cut the show down to four episodes I believe (it's shown as one full 3 hour movie on DVD) and Armistad changed a lot--including making an excuse for Mother Mucca to return and,it's the most disappointing adaptation (of one of the more outrageous books) but I still enjoy it. And hey, at least we didn't get the original pitched idea in the early 80s by HBO where they apparently largely wanted to downplay the gay characters, and wanted to make Dr John a serial killer--which is interesting since the original serialized version of the first series had a gay serial killer--I believe the Tooth Fairy--a plot that Maupin deleted when he re-wrote it for book form.

There's been talk, particularly from Olympia Dukakis about doing some sort of movie or series now, probably based on elements from the more recent books.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 3/20/14 at 1:52pm

I never really thought D'Amico was a particularly good actor, but he just IS Mouse for me. And no one could touch Webb's Mona.

I got the re-released DVD a few months ago and haven't had the time to do a full marathon day with a nice bowl. I need to carve out time for that.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 3/20/14 at 1:59pm

It's too bad Webb apparently wanted a significant amount more money (I know the reasons for Marcus not doing it are "vague" and Paul Gross was tied up with his tv show--) but I agree with your take. I guess I warmed up to the second Mouse by the end, and he seems to fit the later, much more confident version of the character in a way that I'm not sure the original could have (though the actor did play Louis in the original London Angels in America so who knows.)

I've just gone through some bits of the new DVD but I need to find the time to completely re-watch as well--it's been a very long time.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 3/20/14 at 2:06pm

I thought Webb wouldn't come back because of the whole D'Amico kerfuffle. I'm not really sure how I feel about the whole thing. I understand the creators not wanting to promote an actor who is in the closet and actively telling the world that he's hetero. Maybe something like that mattered more 20 years ago. Maybe they were just mad he lied. I don't know.

[doodlenyc]

Posted: 3/20/14 at 2:53pm

what was the kerfuffle?

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 3/20/14 at 2:59pm

I'm probably going to mangle this, but apparently Maupin and his partner (who I believe was also a producer) were adamant that there would be no closeted actors cast in gay roles. Straight actors and out gay actors, yes...but not closeted gay actors who had beards, etc. I believe D'Amico presented himself as straight, but during filming was enjoying the many pleasures to be found at the bathhouses around town. During one of the last night's of filming, there was a screaming match and tears and recriminations. So...D'Amico was not asked back, and, if I recall correctly, Webb felt he was treated unfairly and wouldn't return.

I'm trying to remember which book I read this account in...it was some book about gay Hollywood.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 3/20/14 at 3:03pm

It's difficult to tell with Chloe Webb. She and Olympia Dukakis were the two high profile names associated with the project. Dukakis had won an Oscar for Moonstruck but I think Chloe Webb attracted the twenty-something crowd because of her work in Sid & Nancy, and also because she was recognizable from China Beach.

IMO, she nailed the part of Mona. She even made some of the stupid dialogue and awkward moments sound real. It's difficult for me to even think of another actress who could play Mona. While Dukakis was decent in her role, there are other actresses who would have done just as well.

I think one problem may have been that this was tv and there were problems associated with that. PBS picked up the first series, but there were problems with the second series being broadcast. If it had been a theatrical release, I think Chloe Webb could have demanded a much larger cut of the project.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 3/20/14 at 3:23pm

Eric, I liked the second Mouse better, too.

[doodlenyc]

Posted: 3/20/14 at 3:31pm

The second Mouse was definitely cuter.

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 3/20/14 at 3:41pm

According to Maupin:

"Paul Gross was committed to his own TV series, "Due South." Chloe Webb had expressed enthusiasm about playing Mona again, but she backed out when the show's producers declined her request to be paid more than the rest of the cast. (The show was operating under a "favored nations agreement" that required leading cast members to be paid equally.) While everyone felt Chloe was important to "Tales," she was not more important than Laura Linney, Thomas Gibson, Billy Campbell or Barbara Garrick. Despite the rumors, it is not true that Marcus D'Amico wasn't invited back because of issues surrounding his sexuality. The production team met with Marcus and he expressed "ambivalence" about returning to the role of Mouse. The director felt it was important to find someone who would enthusiastically embrace the role."

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 3/20/14 at 3:43pm

And PBS dropped out of co-producing the second season after threats to have their funding cut.

Per the LA Times: "The six-hour miniseries drew lavish praise from critics and the highest ratings PBS has received for drama in more than a decade. But it also brought the wrath of some conservative religious activists and politicians who objected to the program's portrayal of sybaritic San Franciscans, gay and straight, circa 1976."

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 3/20/14 at 5:43pm

I was 12 when it aired on PBS--I remember flipping the channels just as Mouse was dancing in his underwear and I was hooked (luckily my parents worked nights :P ). But after that I paid attention to it in the media and I remember even reading here about some PBS' airing the censored versions and several not airing it at all.

I believe the producer (Alan Poule? Who went on to Exec Produce Six Feet Under and a lot of cable stuff) said on one of the documentaries on the More disc that that scared PBS off, who had committed to more. It was a co-production between them (through American Playhouse I believe--RIP American Playhouse) and the UK CH4 since the books have a massive following in the UK (witness how the most recent one got a ton of mainstream UK media attention and very little in North America.)

I believe Poule then brought it to Showtime's attention, and they had a smaller budget which is why they only filmed for a few days in SF for the later two, but mostly in Montreal on soundstages and locations (it's funny seeing places I recognize.) The biggest loss though IMHO was the director--I like the sequels (as I said I like each one a bit less than the previous) but they miss that style (aside from some other issues.) Alastair Reid was chosen to direct the original partly because CH4 insisted on a British director and because everyone loved his Traffik miniseries so much (the basis for the inferior movie) and felt he could handle so many characters.

He made the film look so much like it was actually filmed in the 1970s--the sequels, don't. Maupin might deserve a bit of blame too. He scripted, I believe, the later two which are fine. Richard Kramer, however, did the first one--he's most famous for his tv work with Herskovitz/Zwick on thirtysomething and later My So-Called Life and Once and Again and was in charge of the gay story on thirtysomething which is probably why they chose him (he also later wrote an episode of the American Queer as Folk but has said on his website he hated it...) An underated TV writer--I should read his new novel sometime.

One more thing about the PBS controversy--I don't think they would buckle or worry about the pressure of showing gay characters now, at all. Things have changed--and I think back then was around the time of some controversy about public funding for a Mapplethorpe exhibit (?)--at any rate conservatives were very aware of the "filth" their tax money was helping with.

HOWEVER, I do wonder if PBS in our current climate would risk the brief nudity (the show didn't go full frontal until the Showtime sequels...) I mean in the 90s even network shows like the aforementioned Once and Again had brief nudity (Billy Campbell sure shows his ass a lot, not that I can complain.)

It does feel like there's more to the D'Amico situation given all the gossip. That said, it was the early 90s, he was trying to build his career, and within two years or so he was most famous for playing a gay man in the major London premier of Angels in America, and for playing gay on TV...

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 3/20/14 at 5:46pm

(I was trying to find the recent LA Times article Richard Kramer wrote about hwat he loved, and liked less about Looking, which talks briefly about his time writing Tales, but couldn't find it--however apparently HBO is adapting his novel into a series... http://www.deadline.com/2013/10/hbo-developing-modern-family-comedy-produced-by-oprah-winfreys-harpo/ )

[Roscoe]

Posted: 3/21/14 at 9:29am

I liked the first TALES OF THE CITY series well enough, even if it did overreach a bit with all the references to VERTIGO all over the place. Entirely well done on every level, good TV.

The second series suffered a good deal from the new casting and some less than interesting plotting. The new Mouse was a lot closer to my personal vision I got of the character as I read the book, but I found him much less appealing than Marcus D'Amico's version. And the actress stepping into Chloe Webb's role just didn't have a chance, I mean really. And then the third one started using good old solid reliable and actually appealing Henry Czerny as some Jim Jones clone and I just checked out.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 3/21/14 at 9:45am

But as interesting as the original was, it still had some very weak moments.

For example, when Mouse and his boyfriend sleep together, the next morning, Mona knocks on the door with breakfast and says something like "You're the Hardy Boys and I'm Nancy Drew." Chloe Webb made it work in her offbeat way, but that is one big WTF moment.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 3/21/14 at 10:30am

The way Webb said the words 'sickle cell anemia' made me laugh out loud.

Can we discuss the fact that the actress playing D'orothea was aggressively terrible? It's the only casting in the series that makes me want to cut myself.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 3/21/14 at 10:31am

Which D'or? The first or the second?

Nevermind, you're talking about the first movie, so I'm sure you mean the first.
Updated On: 3/21/14 at 10:31 AM

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 3/21/14 at 10:33am

D'or the First.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 3/21/14 at 10:34am

I realized that as soon as I typed it. The second was kind of a non-entity. I just remember thinking for the longest time that the first D'or was played by Nicole Ari Parker.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 3/21/14 at 10:42am

Her first scene with Brian is the most cringe-inducing moment in the series. I think she's the only misstep. And I think the MVP that few focus on is Barbara Garrick's DeDe.