Instead of trying to maximize the box office by watering down "Barbarella" with mainstream, MOR 'superstars' like Nicole Kidman, Halle Berry and Jessica Alba, Universal needs to get it together and actually support a remake that has something remotely to do with the tone and message of the original.
Jane Fonda's sex kitten romping and wide-eyed camp from the original (not exactly Oscar-winning acting on her part by the way) need an actress considered 'edgy' for our current climate. Kidman, Berry, and Alba, while certainly possessing the sex appeal (and I'm sure the talent to explore the depths of Barbarella's character so that we can all really _ understand_ her), wouldn't step outside their boxes enough to be as risky and risque as would do the film justice. (innuendo unintended but hilariously discovered as an afterthought)
I'm guessing "Barbarella" isn't slated for the artsy "Eyes Wide Shut"/Kubrick market. Tossing a 'big name' into this picture is just going to pull it frightfully closer and closer to a PG-13 'grab the cash' rating which will only compromise the final product (but I suppose the revenue for the 'director's cut' DVD would be insured then).
McGowan, with whatever faults and flaws you may attach to her -- generated more so from her choice in bedmates I'd suspect -- is an excellent choice for this role, as 'demanding' as many may think it is. While she hasn't garnered attention for any political protesting in her own day, she certainly possesses the bad girl curiosity factor of "Hmm... I wonder just what _will_ go on in that movie with her in it..." as well as whatever talent is necessary to pull the role off in a believably unbelievable way.
McGowan would aim the appeal of this movie squarely at the audience the original was meant for in its time. Fonda was no 'good girl' in that phase of her career -- nor did she have the type of popularity associated with a Kidman, Berry or Alba. She was more like a more well-known...well...er...Rose McGowan? Kind of, I suppose. But she had her own edge and appeal that wasn't exactly placing her in the "I'd love my daughter to be just like her" catagory.
Sadly, Universal has chosen to 'manage the risk' by pulling out and not supporting the making of this film based on what it's actually ABOUT. Instead they want to insure as many people as possible will see the film (including 12-17 year olds with their disposable suburban cash-ola), and buy the DVD and soundtrack. The end result of which will be a watered-down, faded, too-slick, remake with about as much cult-cache as an episode of "Everybody Loves Raymond." Or a remake of "Bewitched" for that matter.
Instead of trying to maximize the box office by watering down "Barbarella" with mainstream, MOR 'superstars' like Nicole Kidman, Halle Berry and Jessica Alba, Universal needs to get it together and actually support a remake that has something remotely to do with the tone and message of the original.
Jane Fonda's sex kitten romping and wide-eyed camp from the original (not exactly Oscar-winning acting on her part by the way) need an actress considered 'edgy' for our current climate. Kidman, Berry, and Alba, while certainly possessing the sex appeal (and I'm sure the talent to explore the depths of Barbarella's character so that we can all really _ understand_ her), wouldn't step outside their boxes enough to be as risky and risque as would do the film justice. (innuendo unintended but hilariously discovered as an afterthought)
I'm guessing "Barbarella" isn't slated for the artsy "Eyes Wide Shut"/Kubrick market. Tossing a 'big name' into this picture is just going to pull it frightfully closer and closer to a PG-13 'grab the cash' rating which will only compromise the final product (but I suppose the revenue for the 'director's cut' DVD would be insured then).
McGowan, with whatever faults and flaws you may attach to her -- generated more so from her choice in bedmates I'd suspect -- is an excellent choice for this role, as 'demanding' as many may think it is. While she hasn't garnered attention for any political protesting in her own day, she certainly possesses the bad girl curiosity factor of "Hmm... I wonder just what _will_ go on in that movie with her in it..." as well as whatever talent is necessary to pull the role off in a believably unbelievable way.
McGowan would aim the appeal of this movie squarely at the audience the original was meant for in its time. Fonda was no 'good girl' in that phase of her career -- nor did she have the type of popularity associated with a Kidman, Berry or Alba. She was more like a more well-known...well...er...Rose McGowan? Kind of, I suppose. But she had her own edge and appeal that wasn't exactly placing her in the "I'd love my daughter to be just like her" catagory.
Sadly, Universal has chosen to 'manage the risk' by pulling out and not supporting the making of this film based on what it's actually ABOUT. Instead they want to insure as many people as possible will see the film (including 12-17 year olds with their disposable suburban cash-ola), and buy the DVD and soundtrack. The end result of which will be a watered-down, faded, too-slick, remake with about as much cult-cache as an episode of "Everybody Loves Raymond." Or a remake of "Bewitched" for that matter.