| MATT HELM [message #293301] |
Fr, 30 Juni 2006 00:12 |
|
Now that the four MATT HELM movies are out in a DVD collection, has
anybody thought of creating a new HELM--hopefully, one more faithful to
the novels of Hamilton?
|
|
|
| Re: MATT HELM [message #295563 ] |
Fr, 30 Juni 2006 17:36 |
|
On 29 Jun 2006 15:12:35 -0700, "juanjo" <HijodelCid [at] webtv.net> wrote:
>Now that the four MATT HELM movies are out in a DVD collection, has
>anybody thought of creating a new HELM--hopefully, one more faithful to
>the novels of Hamilton?
According to the Wikipedia entry for MH, there is some talk of
new movies. But I haven't heard anything about it anywhere else.
Frederick J. Barnett http://www.eatel.net/~fred/
"Someone's got to take the responsibility if the job's going to get done!! Do you think that's easy?!" Gregory Peck - The Guns Of Navarone
|
|
|
| Re: MATT HELM [message #295566 ] |
Sa, 01 Juli 2006 00:07 |
|
Frederick J. Barnett wrote:
> On 29 Jun 2006 15:12:35 -0700, "juanjo" <HijodelCid [at] webtv.net> wrote:
>
>> Now that the four MATT HELM movies are out in a DVD collection, has
>> anybody thought of creating a new HELM--hopefully, one more faithful
>> to the novels of Hamilton?
>
> According to the Wikipedia entry for MH, there is some talk of
> new movies. But I haven't heard anything about it anywhere else.
DreamWorks optioned the novels a year or so back.
--
-- Mac
SIG ON HOLIDAY
|
|
|
| Re: MATT HELM [message #295580 ] |
Sa, 01 Juli 2006 07:13 |
|
Mac wrote:
> Frederick J. Barnett wrote:
> > On 29 Jun 2006 15:12:35 -0700, "juanjo" <HijodelCid [at] webtv.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Now that the four MATT HELM movies are out in a DVD collection, has
> >> anybody thought of creating a new HELM--hopefully, one more faithful
> >> to the novels of Hamilton?
> >
> > According to the Wikipedia entry for MH, there is some talk of
> > new movies. But I haven't heard anything about it anywhere else.
>
> DreamWorks optioned the novels a year or so back.
> --
> -- Mac
>
> SIG ON HOLIDAY
I'll be impressed if anyone ever options Shell Scott. (Assuming Travis
McGee is completely out of bounds!)
|
|
|
| Re: MATT HELM [message #295581 ] |
Sa, 01 Juli 2006 12:57 |
|
> > DreamWorks optioned the novels a year or so back.
Dreamworks or specifically Spielberg? I had heard the latter, although
it's been a couple of years now with no further word. On the other
hands, he was clearly busy with "Munich" and some other projects.
If it really is Dreamworks, that could get interesting since the studio
and it's assets are now on the market.
|
|
|
| Re: MATT HELM [message #295582 ] |
Sa, 01 Juli 2006 13:48 |
|
Well... off the market now... Owned by Paramount.
Poor Man's JB wrote:
> > > DreamWorks optioned the novels a year or so back.
>
> Dreamworks or specifically Spielberg? I had heard the latter, although
> it's been a couple of years now with no further word. On the other
> hands, he was clearly busy with "Munich" and some other projects.
>
> If it really is Dreamworks, that could get interesting since the studio
> and it's assets are now on the market.
|
|
|
| Re: MATT HELM [message #295583 ] |
Sa, 01 Juli 2006 13:56 |
|
Poor Man's JB wrote:
>>> DreamWorks optioned the novels a year or so back.
>
> Dreamworks or specifically Spielberg? I had heard the latter, although
> it's been a couple of years now with no further word. On the other
> hands, he was clearly busy with "Munich" and some other projects.
>
> If it really is Dreamworks, that could get interesting since the
> studio and it's assets are now on the market.
DreamWorks was purchased by Viacom, owners of Paramount.
The Helm project was never intended for Spielberg; the director
attached from the outset was Robert Luketic.
--
-- Mac
|
|
|
| Re: MATT HELM [message #295597 ] |
So, 02 Juli 2006 00:30 |
|
> DreamWorks was purchased by Viacom, owners of Paramount. <
That was fast. That sort of acquistion normally takes months, even
years. Although in this case there was no tangible studio/backlot at
stake and not a great deal of "product" so it was possibly easier to
resolve.
> The Helm project was never intended for Spielberg; the director attached from the outset was Robert Luketic. <
My comment stemmed not so much from the notion of Spielberg being the
potential director but the idea that he would conintue to retain the
rights once Dreamworks was disbanded if he (or his corporate entity)
held the title as opposed to the studio.
|
|
|
