Ayer new 'Wild' man at Warners

By MICHAEL FLEMING


Warner Bros. has set David Ayer to helm "The Wild Bunch," a contemporized remake of the Sam Peckinpah action classic. He will be paid low seven figures for directing and writing the script.

Jerry Weintraub is producing; shoot is expected to start by next summer.

Ayer wrote the script for "Bunch" before making his feature directorial debut with "Harsh Times," a drama he wrote that stars Christian Bale and Eva Longoria.

Ayer considered his work on "Harsh Times" to be more intense and nerve-wracking than his stint as a sonar technician on a nuclear sub while in the Navy. Ayer mortgaged his home to self-finance the film and then watched a bidding war erupt after it bowed at the Toronto Film Festival, where Bauer Martinez bought distribution rights in a deal worth more than $6 million. "Ice cold terror is perhaps the best description of what it is like to violate the cardinal rule of never using your own money to make a film," said Ayer, whose effort paid off with a dream job even before "Harsh Times" reached a theater.

Weintraub and WB brass flipped for the film and gave Ayer the nod for "Wild Bunch."

"This is a film I wanted to make for a long time, and what's nice is this is David's vision," Weintraub said.

"I've introduced a present day setting, but there are very masculine themes and characters from the original that are still very relevant," Ayer said.

Mark Vahradian, president of Jerry Weintraub Prods., will exec produce with Susan Ekins. WB exec Jessica Goodman oversees for the studio.

The original Peckinpah pic followed a band of outlaws staging a robbery along the border of Mexico right before the start of WWI. The remake keeps the locale, but the contemporized version is a complicated tapestry involving drug cartels, the CIA and a heist. There'll be plenty of gunplay and action, something Ayer writes strongly, with credits including "Training Day," "S.W.A.T.," "Dark Blue," "The Fast and the Furious" and "U-571."

"It's not a Western anymore, but it still has the 'Wild Bunch' characters and the elements that made the original film so memorable," Weintraub said.

meh. I have no more outrage or surprise left in me.

*yawn*

One guess: the line "If they move, kill 'em." will be the only element that survives from the Peckinpah film.

Hey that's just great - way to go!

::cough, cough::

Too bad it won't have - William Holden, Robert Ryan, Ernest Borgnine, Edmond O'Brien, Warren Oates, Ben Johnson, L.Q. Jones, Strother Martin, Dub Taylor, etc.

...or Sam Peckinpah...of course the film won't have any of the violence that made it so popular or controversial.

Groovy, more shit that I'll never spend a moment of my life watching... Modern day Hollywood.

Lamest news I've heard in quite some time.

Sounds as if the only thing it will have in common with the original is the title.

The theme of the time of the classic western era passing the Bunch by (it's set in 1913) is so central to the movie that I don't think the period could be changed without making it a remake in name only. This whole theme of them being past their prime is pretty depressing when you think about it so anything resembling it will probably be gone (I'm speculating of course). Not to mention the inevitable Vietnam vibe, given the time the movie was made and the themes of violence and amorality by those on both sides of the law.

Who knows, the movie may be terrific, but I wish they would call it something else.

At least we'll be getting a (presumably) superior DVD of the original early next year.

That's just plain WRONG!

You don't need to remake a virtually perfect movie.

Come On!

Ditto.

Peckinpah is turning over in his grave.

fuck this.

Apart from the title, I don't see the connection.

I hate to quote tina fey but,
"this is great for people who liked the original, but wish it was crap"

At least it's not a casablanca remake with ben affleck and jennifer lopez

[QUOTE=lukewarmwater At least it's not a casablanca remake with ben affleck and jennifer lopez[/QUOTE]


Not yet!!!

Much like King Kong, another pointless remake.

I guess churning out countless sequels is now considered "Soooo ninetees"

Perhaps next up for Hollywood, will be a remake of Taxi Driver with Orlando Bloom as Travis Bickle.

No no no, although the original is a classic that remake is okay because it's being directed by the hobbit dude. I guarantee that if the fanboy idol Jackson were directing the Wild Bunch remake, this thread would be filled to bursting with huzzahs.

I couldn't have said it better.

it was a real remake instead of a film that has little to nothing incommon with the original. This is another script that should have been made under an original title, but studio heads thought it would get more people in the seats if it had a tie-in to a classic. Though a remake would be bad in anyway to me, that it's simply a money play to make a few thousand dollars on the back of the original is what pisses me off.

As a fan of Ocean's Eleven, I can't say that this bothers me. Some remakes are good, most remakes are bad. At least now by remaking this the Wild Bunch DVD will finally get an upgrade.

What you've said pretty much captures my feelings on this. It's just such a "cash grab" to try and call it "The Wild Bunch" (if they do stick with the title). Call it something else and I'd have far less venom for the project. As a matter of fact (and reminded by the DVD Bargain forum thread on the movie), wasn't the recent "Four Brothers" described by some as being a new spin on the classic John Wayne Western (and personal favorite of mine) "The Sons of Katie Elder".

On the general subject of remakes, or borrowing heavily from previous films, and the like - generally speaking (as I've been watching a much greater variety of cinema lately), I'm more at ease with it as I learn more and more about the history of cinema.

Although, as I've been watching a lot of foreign cinema over the past couple of years, I am growing a little concerned by the trend that a lot of foreign cinema (both Asian and European) seems to be losing touch with its "uniqueness"; basically, I feel that I'm watching the same Hollywood/American films except now being done by Asians or Europeans. To clarify, I mean stuff like, "this is a Korean or French version of "Dead Poet's Society"". I'm not well-versed enough in the long history of foreign cinema to know for certain that this hasn't always been the case, I know to some degree "yes", but my personal perception (wrong as it may be), is that the Americanization of foreign cinema is more predominant now than it used to be.

Back to what I meant to say earlier, I don't mind remakes but it seems to me that right now mainstream Hollywood cinema is way, way, way over-saturated with remakes, theatrical versions of TV shows, sequels, and the like --- "Bewitched", "The Manchurian Candidate", "Willy Wonka", "All the King's Men"......I'm personally weary of it all (aside: the over-reliance on CGI isn't helping me personally - what should have been a useful tool is now more a barren, lifeless, and sterile cinematic crutch). I'm sure there are many great writers out there......stop playing it safe and give 'em a chance to show me something fresh. I enjoyed the Edward Zwick/Tom Cruise film "The Last Samurai" but wasn't nearly as high on it as some others and while it wasn't a remake the recipe was, while readily acknowledged by Zwick/Cruise, too obvious (dash of Kurosawa, sprinkle of "Glory", and a couple of others that escape me right now). Actually, sometimes I don't understand why Quentin Tarantino gets dumped on so much (by a segment of people) for copying other films, a lot of Directors seem to do the same thing......Tarantino, at least, is very aboveboard about it and at least draws inspiration from a lot of foreign cult cinema that is less known to the general U.S. public. I'm most definitely not one of his fanboys and his films are hit and miss with me but at least his efforts, while not unique perhaps, play to me as more inspired than the normal rehash coming out of Hollywood. Heck, Spielberg can be seen as being just as guilty as Tarantino with his latest "War of the Worlds"......in remembrance of a fellow DVDTalkers sig - hey Steven show me what you can do not what you've watched ("The War of the Worlds" ('53), "ID4", "Signs", etc.).

All in all, I suppose it varies by viewer, what one may see as unique, inspired, and revelatory.......another may see as respectful homage........and another as derivative.......another as pointless clone.......or at the lower end maybe offensively plagiaristic. Which now makes me wonder why I bothered typing this ramble of a post...as long as I'm happy, who cares what you guys think ..........well except, how about you guys clicking over into the "11-minute Chen Kaige's "The Promise"" thread in this same forum.....there's a lot to chew on in that 11-minutes of material.

How about a film about a bunch of Hollywood studio execs who realize that time has passed them by - another sign that Hollywood is in it's death throes as mass entertainment. This is roughly equivalent to that oily trend of using pop songs as movie titles. Pointless remake in the extreme.

Yes, it is an updating of that movie. I honestly don't have a problem with remaking movies, much less if the origin of the first movie is from a book/play/etc. There's been some very very good remakes (Ocean's Eleven) and some very very bad ones (Solaris). I think in the end they will sort themselves out. That is, studios making lots of bad movies will sink.

Wild Bunch remake

fixed