Keira Knightley is in talks to play Eliza DoLittle, according to EW, quoting Variety, via ONTD. My favorite of the bunch is Julie Andrews, even though I never saw her play Eliza – I just like her voice so much all of a sudden in my later years. Keira Knightley is more Audrey Hepburn-ish but watching them side by side diminishes Hepburn, imo. She sure was a loverly thing herself. Either way, Knightley is sure to be the weakest of the three. Not a slight against Ms. Knightley – in fact, she seems sort of suited for the role but she’s got some formidable competition there. Seriously.
42 Responses for "Wouldn’t it Be Loverly?"
I was wondering if you were going to pick up that story. Yes, I agree. Even if Knightley is a natural choice for the role, it’s not a choice that should be on the table. There’s sure to be a backlash. Hepburn is perhaps the single most beloved (not necessarily the most admired, as say Hepburn) screen icon we’ve got, and this was one of her most beloved roles. It’s not like remaking Pride and Prejudice, where the only decent version was a BBC miniseries. It’s a classic, and one EVERYONE knows.
If she were doing it on Broadway, I’d say fantastic. But for the silver screen? Backlash, I tell ya.
I agree that there WILL be backlash. But I was thinking… who would be better? Hollywood doesn’t have Audreys or Julies anymore. They need someone beautiful, charismatic, with a great voice, believable as both rich and poor, and who is a fantastic actress. Who? I have no suggestions.
Also, who for Higgins? I’m for Kenneth Branagh!
It’ll come as no surprise that I think this sounds great. I’m inclined to be more open to reinterpretations of stage plays than I am to remakes of movies, and I’m so inclined toward Keira Knightly that I’m in danger of tipping over.
My Fair Lady came up in discussion some time last year for some reason (can’t remember the context), and we pulled up the youtube clip of Audrey Hepburn’s screen test singing Wouldn’t It Be Loverly — in her own voice.
Though Marni Nixon did a brilliant job, I’ve always pined for the imaginary version of My Fair Lady that would be 100% Audrey. That would’ve been way more charming (and would’ve aged like fine wine).
I’m saying, c’mon, it’s not like Rex Harrison even tried to sing. The play’s the thing, and I’m excited to see the new staging and whatever new spin it’s given. We’ll always have our own personal versions we love the best, so I’ll be really sick of hearing from any critics who tries to act like Cukor’s version is sacred.
I really get off on the compare-and-contrast between different versions of the same classics. Good thing Branaugh is not intimidated by Olivier, right?
Looking for the “Audrey Hepburn Sings” video again this morning, I ran across another cool clip: Julie Andrews dubbed over Audrey’s scene!
Audrey Hepburn with her own voice.
Audrey Hepburn with Julie Andrews’ voice.
Can someone please feed Ms. Knightley? I’m seriously worried she’ll be taken away by a strong gust of wind.
Gimme a spoon. I’ll feed her. In fact, who needs a spoon?
Will Knightley ever stop making period movies and try a comtemporary movie? (I know she has made some but she can’t make period movie s forever)
nobody can replace Audrey Hepburn.she is elegant and nice.she is hollywood’ princess. i think remake will not successful original films.
im not suprise if they will “gone with the wind”, “casablanca”… movies make remake soon.
Ryan, I am thy nemesis.
I hate hate hate hate hate this idea. Cukor’s film was one of the best musicals ever put on film. All the trappings are legendary, and the performances are brilliant across the board. There is no way to update or translate this that will be of any use.
Why does hollywood hate originality, why must they remake films that, oh, I don’t know, WON BEST BLOODY PICTURE. Last one of those I remember was All the King’s Men…. I rest my case.
are they talking about MY FAIR LADY or PYGMALION?
either way a remake seems unnecessary. But anyone who wants to see a pitch perfect Higgins-Doolittle relationship the way Shaw meant it,
Immediately rent PYGMALION. Leslie Howard and Wendy Hiller are unimprovable.
In terms of Ms. Knightley, I’ve been and up and down fan of hers. ATONEMENT proved her ability to make homage to another time and style while working in newer material. I’d say that’s a rare ability and she should find more ways to utilize that, then say, more remakes.
What’s next? Remaking David Lean’s perfect BRIEF ENCOUNTER?
Oscar Wilde to George Bernard Shaw: My dear friend, surely you jest. Pygmalion is one of the greatest Greek myths of all time. It’s legendary! Why don’t you think of something original? I say this as your friend. A true friend stabs you in the front. Hey, that’s not bad. [jotting it down]
Alan Jay Lerner to Frederick Lowe: Holy smokes, are we sure we want to do this? Shaw’s Pygmalion is one of the greatest damn plays of all time. It’s legendary! Let’s think up something original. [Makes a mental note to phone up Lennie Bernstein for fresh ideas.]
James Whale to George Cukor: You can’t be serious. My Fair Lady is one of the greatest Broadway plays of all time. A legendary classic. Trust me darling, a film version would be pure folly and quite pointless.
(I couldn’t ask for a better nemesis, limeymcfrog. I know it’s a crazy idea, but I’d like to see what they do with it. Any old excuse for lavish sets, I’m there.)
You are not too fair. Comparing Knightley who is in the business like 10 minutes (alright, 5 years since her breakout) to legendary film icons like Audrey Hepburn and Julie Andrews, is just wrong. Of course she isn’t on their level, but since she is STILL only 23 (and already was nommed, made a bp nominee and starred a megahit-trilogy) one day she could be.
Personally I think it would be a wonderful casting (listen to her voice in The Edge of Love-trailer), and I’m looking forward to a great british adaptation of this great british piece.
By the way you’ve got to admit, that Knightley makes probably the smartest careeer moves among the young actresses.
And don’t get me wrong, I am a huge fan of both film legends, but you’ve got to ask yourself : where were they at age 23 ? Especially if you insist comparing them to a 23-year old.
I agree with phantomoto’s argument. Well said
T
Regardless of whether anyone thinks the movie is a good idea or not, I think it’s easy to see Ms. Knightley in the role of Eliza Doolittle. She has the bone structure (read: starved-looking) and the beauty. She has also managed to show in both Atonement and Pride and Prejudice that she’s actually a very nice actress when she sticks to what she does best. Regarding the talk that she should do more contemporary pieces, there was an article awhile back in which she addressed that very idea, saying that she wanted to stick to being British for awhile, since all of her attempts out of period-drama have been mostly dreadful (Domino, anyone?).
I personally am glad the movie is being made. I have no idea how it will turn out; it could easily be a disaster. But there’s no denying that the story itself is fantastic and the score is delightful. I think having Kiera headline will help draw younger audiences to the film. Since the movie industry has suddenly become (slightly) more musical-friendly, it’ll be nice to have a classic like My Fair Lady presented to a generation who might not know that the rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain.
my response is similar to that of Cary Grant’s when he was offered to play Henry Higgins in the movie. “If you don’t cast Rex Harrison, I won’t even bother seeing it.”
a remake is a strange/silly idea. i wouldn’t bother seeing it. especially with Knightley. Hepburn was a beloved star/legend and had already proved herself in a musical (FUNNY FACE). there are so many Broadway properties that have yet to be made into movies. why not start there? LES MIZ, 42nd STREET (the Bway show is way different than the Ruby Keeler movie), CATS, JOSEPH/DREAMCOAT, AIDA, RAGTIME, etc. etc. etc.
if you’re going to remake a musical, it makes sense to film one that had been done badly previously. CAMELOT, CAROUSEL, SOUTH PACIFIC, OKLAHOMA, and several others could do with a better movie production. LADY was a bit of perfection. besides, any new film would be a step down in so many ways–the 1964 film had the input of all the original creators including Lerner/Lowe, Cecil Beaton, Harrison, Previn, etc. etc. and it was filmed in glorious 70mm SuperPanavision. studios today don’t have the gumption nor the inclination to provide a similar experience. hell, they can’t even make trailers that indicate a movie is indeed a musical.
Plus, Macintosh wants Trevor Nunn to direct. Nunn has done some wonderful things onstage (the best with his directing partner John Caird), but his movies have been far less successful. also, he’s coming off a recent disaster with the recent London musical version of GONE WITH THE WIND.
does anyone remember the inspired idea to remake THE KING AND I a few years back as an animated film? funny how that didn’t catch on. even with the zany animal sidekicks.
ARGH! This would not be lover-ly in my opinion. In full disclosure I’m a Keira Knightly hatah so I won’t even take this idea seriously. She may have Audrey Hepburn’s bone structure and have Julie Andrew’s English accent but that does not make her eligible for this part. I find this to be a purely commercial, uncreative move. [And as far as the comparisons by age, at 23 (maybe 24) Audrey Hepburn won an Oscar for Roman Holiday. And I'm pretty sure Julie Andrews was playing Eliza on stage in her mid-20s. ].
I’d prefer that they put another actress in the part – Emily Mortimer, perhaps? Someone whose less commercial and well known (they can do that with the Higgins part. Daniel Craig, maybe? Colin Firth? Even whatisname from 300? He was in the film version of Phantom and has a good voice). Just please make the casting interesting. But. not. her.
Has anyone heard her sing in the Edge of Love? She’d be perfect!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtAE5NadZSA
I too agree with phantomoto.
You simply cannot compare Meryl Streep to a younger actress. Not fair on any side.
And I like the idea of updating older material. It gives something really good to younger audiences, since there hasn’t been much offered to younger ones today as there was say, 20, 30, 40 years ago.
Also, it’s been said in a few articles that they’ll include more material from the original play, SO, this may not be exactly a remake, but maybe a new reading of the original material. As I always say, let’s wait and see.
Finally, I absolutely love his direction in Twelfth Night. That movie is so lovely. If he directs along those lines, the movie could be wonderful too.
Oh, casting director game.
Seemingly, Keira Knightly would have been a perfect for the role just based on her “pluckiness” in the Pirates movie, and her cred in The Atonement and Pride and Prejudice (both have that plucky independent streak). But I don’t think Keira can turn to be lovely and charming.
You know who can: Anne Hathaway. She’s done this transformation stuff in the ALL OF HER MOVIES. She does it well.
Richard, I am sorry but Anna Hathaway might work for Disney but other than that she is not a great actress. I think that Phatomoto and Ryan said let’s not compare and let’s be open minded….
In related news, Sex and the City might not equal Sex and the City, and both pale in comparison to actual sex and the city. But I’m glad all three variations exist.
All this talk about doing a remake to bring a classic to a younger audience… well I say sit them down in front of the dvd!!!
I saw this for the first time as a teenager on TV (not great quality) and fell in love with it! Who could help cheering on Audrey Hepburn as she asks the king for “‘enry ‘iggins ‘ead!”
I’d be more in favour of a reimagining if they had to go and do it at all… and by all means Jeremy Northam as Prof Higgins!!!
I have to agree with AD on Anne Hathaway. I would actually say she’d be a horrendous choice for the part. She’s wan and shrill and has yet to shine, for me anyway, in any of her movies. In Brokeback she was constantly upstaged by the more talented actors around her; in The Devil Wears Prada she was only good enough to be unmemorable. Compare Kiera in Pride and Prejudice to Anne Hathaway in Becoming Jane and you’ll see what I mean; Hathaway just isn’t much more than an awe-shucks Disney princess. And of the Disney actresses, I’d actually prefer to see Amy Adams tackle it (not that she wouldn’t also be vastly inferior to Kiera.
There are fair enough reasons for remaking it. The original film was incredibly stagy and constricted in its set environment; although it is enjoyable it is bit creaky and dated.
Moreover, while Audrey Hepburn is wonderful, she was albeit miscast and is never entirely convincing as the character (her supposed transformation is never believable, coming from the supremely elegant Ms. Hepburn.)
Unfortunately However, they seem to have gotten the wrong end of the stick, attempting to recast Audrey Hepburn rather than just simply cast Eliza Dolittle. Keira isn’t all bad, but any attempt she makes as a ‘commoner’ comes off as incredibly mawkish and laboured, it’s when she is at her most irritable (much like Hepburn, yet she still carried it off with sufficient grace).
I say cast a worthy unknown; didn’t harm Hairspray, or Mary Poppins.
Keira played a commoner in “Pure” and that was neither mawkish nor laboured. Even had a cockney accent as well…
I’m also puzzled Sasha’s categorical statement that she’d certainly be worse than a performance she’s never seen. Makes loads of sense.
I wouldn’t be looking forward to this myself, but that’s because I dislike the story in general.
I’m in another stage of grief for my beloved My Fair Lady, but I suppose it could be decent, I just can’t see it being… worth doing. I’m sick of all these retreads, and not just because they make me feel old at the age of 27. Knightly is not bad, just too bloody obvious and, lest we forget, Hepburn couldn’t handle the challenging vocal score even though she had sung on broadway in Gigi, so what makes us think Keira won’t be either painful to listen to, or digitized worse than 2/3 of the cast of Buffy during that musical demon episode. (The award for most obscure reference goes to…) I just can’t be optimistic.
DA, I’m fairly certain that Sasha was too young to have seen Andrews’ stage performance in the late 50’s as were most of us commenting right now. However, it was kind of legendary and career making, so let’s just assume that it was kind of ok and a tall order for any actress to live up to; even your beloved Keira (who wears green dresses better than anyone in the history of film).
I’ll only watch this if someone agrees to feed Keira some food.
“limeycmfrog”, you’re absolutely correct that not very many people around now will have seen Andrews’ stage performance of the part and even fewer will remember it in any kind of detail.
Which means that it’s useless as any kind of point of comparison when it comes to present day stage performances – let alone an only somewhat related film version.
Should the news of the casting of the lead in a new film version of Hamlet be greeted with a long list of reportedly great previous stage performances of the part which must have been better although not seen by anyone currently alive?
Comparisons to old film versions can be valid. But never to old stage performances.
Blast you DA, I say neither Branaugh nor Olivier can match the technical perfection and intensity of the great Richard Burbage’s Hamlet! Jim Caviezel’s Count of Monte Cristo is but a moon cast shadow next to that of the great Edwin Forrest! And I still say that Thespus was the best actor of all time, no one in the past couple of millenia have matched him! (in other words, point taken)
But here’s why Andrews performance is different. There is a cast recording, so we can hear all of the songs she sang, so there is some kind of record of it. But, more than that, is the LEGEND of Andrews performance. She is a true movie star, and before My Fair Lady she was a third bananna supporting player on broadway. She won Best Actress for Mary Poppins (a good, but by no means revelatory, performance) BECAUSE people were so upset that she was left out of Cukor’s film. Hepburn, who does excellent work in the film, was not nominated for that same reason. Julie Andrews’ performance had an impact on people’s lives, they still remember it and speak of it in hallowed tones. When people think of Eliza Doolittle, I’m not sure most people don’t think of Julie Andrews instead of Audrey Hepburn.
SO, it isn’t Sasha making this unfair comparison, the world is. If Keira Knightly doesn’t go from being an A-List actress to being a household name and national treasure (Andrews is, even though she’s british) then she has fallen short of the impossibly high mark set forth.
That’s one thing that can be passed throughout the centuries, Impact. Edwin Forrest sold out show after show of his version of “The Count of Monte Cristo”. People refused to see him as anything other than Edmon Dontes becuase they loved him in that role so much. The recent version made 55mil at the box office and was forgotten by most. I’m not saying that the Caviezel film should have packed it in due to Forrest’s success, but they did at least have the courtesy to wait 150 years before trying it again.
Competing for public affection with the LEGEND of some acclaimed stage performance from long ago is indeed difficult. (And pointless because that performance is no longer there to be experienced so there’s no real basis for competition).
But that doesn’t make proclaiming one unseen performance weaker than another unseen performance any more valid. That’s a judgement about the actual performances – not about how they’re received.
DA, as far as Julie Andrews winning her Oscar for Mary Poppins because they felt upset she was left out of My Fair Lady is a bit of a stretch. It may have played a part, but let’s not forget the movie had 13 nominations! It was, to say the least, well-liked, and also it’s own sort of cultural phenomenon.
As for Hepburn not being nominated, remember she didn’t do her own singing. I don’t think Hollywood was somehow spiting her for taking Julie Andrews’ role; they didn’t want to nominate her for half a performance.
And on the talk of legends…well, legends aren’t usually made when we expect them. I don’t remember the last time I went into a movie thinking, “THIS is the time I’ll see a star born.” Who would have expected Johnny Depp to have been propelled from a wonderful, respected but off the radar actor to an Academy Award nominated, A-list movie star for a Disney theme park movie? Give the girl a shot; the results could be marvelous.
Bob, I think it’s me you’re arguing with.
Hepburn had a better and more interesting role than Andrews in Mary Poppins and the symmetry is too glaring to ignore. As for the “half a performance” argument, It didn’t stop them from nominating the non-singing Deborah Kerr for The King and I 8 years earlier (the songs were even dubbed by the same singer), so that doesn’t wash sorry.
The whole project seems wrong-headed from head to toe. Don’t do it again unless you can do it better, and I don’t see this being better. Taking on a legend on a project that has less relevance today than it did then is setting yourself up for failure.
Bob-I was pretty young when all this was going on (about 10) but even I remember the buzz about Julie Andrews, Audrey Hepburn and the Mary Poppins win. Probably I remember because those were the days that big films were like a theatrical event. My Fair Lady and Sound of Music were two. Tickets bought ahead of time, dress up to see the show, intermission and everything. I still remember the beauty of those flowers during the overture of MFL.
After her B’way performance, it was a huge snub to JA that she wasn’t cast in the MFL film. When Mary Poppins came out and was a big hit, and JA was nominated (and Hepburn wasn’t) there was an air of expectation for her win and payback for the snub. All seemed right with the world when she shared the award spotlight again with her B’way costar Rex Harrison. And then the next year she did Sound of Music and if folks didn’t think she deserved it for MP, there was no doubt of her right to the award.
Well, glad to see the Gays out in force today.
Just kidding Ryan, you rule.
As for MY FAIR LADY and Keira…..eh, why not?
Of course, I’m the same guy who liked AT WORLD’S END…errr…..
Sorry, I seem to be mixing up the names of whom I’m talking with!
I think the reason I’m less outraged than anyone else is because all of this drama/controversy occurred twenty years before I was born. I’m not denying the strength or beauty of either Julie Andrews or Audrey Hepburn as Eliza Doolittle, but really, I’m about as young as you can be and have even the slightest idea that this was a “legendary” role for JA. I can see how people who were more in tune with the period might find the movie too classic to be remade, and I definitely concede the point that near perfect movies don’t need to be remade to be brought to a younger audience. The fact is, however, that a new movie could make a new audience fall in love with My Fair Lady all over again, and isn’t that worth it?
Besides, the movie could still be quite good; Chicago proved that a good director can make someone old fresh and exciting. I’m not saying as good as the original, but I don’t know if that is even the goal. If the remake even does justice to the original, that would be enough of a success, I think.
Oh I can just see Jeremy Northam in the role of Henry Higgins…other than Colin Firth (who is a tad too rom/com for my tastes), there isn’t another actor to do justice to the role.
I really think Colin Firth would be purrr-fect for this role. He has done things other than rom-com, ya know.
What about his Lord Wessex in Shakespeare in Love? Or his Ben in Trauma? Give him a chance to show what he can do!
elemacd
Colin Firth cannot sing…period! That doesn’t make him a bad actor just not one who could carry a singing role in a movie like My fair Lady.
Jeremy Northam on the other hand CAN sing!…period!
Colin Firth was the only one of the Mamma Mia! trio who actually could sing and Henry Higgins is a role that is rarely (if ever) actually sung, so I don’t see a problem with casting him in the role. He’d be great. Although Clive Owen would be better…
And by the age of 23 (in 1958), Julie Andrews had starred on Broadway in The Boyfriend and opposite Rex Harrison in My Fair Lady; opposite Bing Crosby in the first made-for-TV movie High Tor; and in the legendary live TV broadcast of the Rodgers-Hammerstein musical Cinderella. In other words, a seasoned pro in musical comedy, an unknown quanity on the screen.
By the age of 23 (in 1952), Audrey Hepburn had debuted on Broadway in the title role of the non-musical version of Gigi and played less than ten (mostly minor) roles in film (including The Lavender Hill Mob) and television. In other words, she was less experienced than Keira Knightley is now.
Supposedly Stephen Daldry ( The Reader)is directing.
Wouldn’t he(Jeremy Northam)be loverly…singing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipVj5H7ULBY
Ah yes! The tall lean Jeremy Northam is the perfect Henry Higgins and he has a marvellous speaking and singing voice..
yh she is skinny but audrey hepburn was so much more skinnier and way way way prettier
Leave a reply