Frank Lloyd Wright film in the works
Lionsgate has acquired screen rights to "Loving Frank," a historical novel about architect Frank Lloyd Wright by Nancy Horan.
John Burnham Schwartz ("Reservation Road") has been set to write the script.
Escape Artists partners Todd Black, Jason Blumenthal and Steve Tisch will produce with Stuart Parr and Allison Sarofilm.
"Frank" tells the pre-WWI story of the affair between Wright and Chicago society matron Mamah Borthwick Cheney.
" 'Loving Frank' unfolds in a unique historical milieu, yet it speaks to a fundamental aspect of human nature, that you can't help who you fall in love with," said Lionsgate production president Alli Shearmur.
---------------
No one has been cast for the lead. Any suggestions?
Loving Frank, the movie
-
Paul Ringstrom
- Posts: 4777
- Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
- Location: Mason City, IA
-
Wrightgeek
- Posts: 1548
- Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 5:21 pm
- Location: Westerville, Ohio
Loving Frank
Let's not overlook the obvious here, and BTW, remember that FLW would have only been in his mid 40's at the time of these events. Consider the following if you want guaranteed box office boffo. I would suggest a 40ish Brad Pitt as FLW, Angelina Jolie as Mameh, and Jennifer Aniston as the jilted and long-suffering Catherine Tobin/Wright.
This seems like a no-brainer to me. Pitt is obviously the film world's top leading man at the moment, as well as being a huge fan of FLW and architecture, and is also a very competent actor. Then there is the whole art imitating life/life imitating art angle, with Jolie and Aniston in their respective roles.
While it will never happen, this cast would create a media frenzy and would almost certainly assure a bonanza at the box office. And in the hands of the "wright" director, given the quality of the mostly true story and such a talented cast, the artistic value of such a film might just have a chance to measure up to the hype that such casting would create.
This seems like a no-brainer to me. Pitt is obviously the film world's top leading man at the moment, as well as being a huge fan of FLW and architecture, and is also a very competent actor. Then there is the whole art imitating life/life imitating art angle, with Jolie and Aniston in their respective roles.
While it will never happen, this cast would create a media frenzy and would almost certainly assure a bonanza at the box office. And in the hands of the "wright" director, given the quality of the mostly true story and such a talented cast, the artistic value of such a film might just have a chance to measure up to the hype that such casting would create.
edward norton:
http://www.bestweekever.tv/bwe/images/2 ... Norton.jpg
frank lloyd wright:
http://www.arc-design.com.au/Intro%20Ps ... age019.jpg
as much as i like josh brolin's acting, i can not see him as wright. pitt is closer, and obviously a crowd pleaser, but how about ed norton? he could be a bit young, but he is an incredible actor...
http://www.bestweekever.tv/bwe/images/2 ... Norton.jpg
frank lloyd wright:
http://www.arc-design.com.au/Intro%20Ps ... age019.jpg
as much as i like josh brolin's acting, i can not see him as wright. pitt is closer, and obviously a crowd pleaser, but how about ed norton? he could be a bit young, but he is an incredible actor...
I have to assume Wrightgeek was kidding. Actually, Edward Norton would be an excellent choice. Pitt is like Jim Carrey; entertaining but always playing the same person (himself). This film would be a waste if it didn't have some semblance of seriousness. Norton would bring a good balance of talent and a degree of anonymity, since the Wright character should have an individuality not possible with a super star.
Mamah: Laura Linney
Catherine: Hillary Swank is pretty good at simmering below the surface drama. I see Catherine's role as being barely, but "properly" under control of her situation.
Let's hope they build an accurate representation for the set of Taliesin 1, since it is a major part of the story.
Mamah: Laura Linney
Catherine: Hillary Swank is pretty good at simmering below the surface drama. I see Catherine's role as being barely, but "properly" under control of her situation.
Let's hope they build an accurate representation for the set of Taliesin 1, since it is a major part of the story.
-
Wrightgeek
- Posts: 1548
- Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 5:21 pm
- Location: Westerville, Ohio
In reality, I was only half kidding. You'll have to give me the benefit of the doubt, because although art and architecture are two of my greatest loves, in my professional life I was involved in sales and marketing for over 20 years.
Hence my previous casting suggestions, which were as much based on marketability, drawing power and creating a buzz as on content. Are there actors better suited for these roles? Certainly, from a purely thespian perspective, there are actors who could offer more accurate portrayals of these characters. By the same token, many great stories have been destined for obscurity by high-minded casting, poor screenplay adaptations, and/or misguided direction, all in the name of art. Most people do not like to have art shoved down their throats, but if it is mixed in with a little bit of entertainment, it goes down much easier.
While I am certainly not a fan of schlock and am not advocating such an approach for this project, I am also not a fan of art for art's sake. Some of the finest films ever made have been seen by almost no one, due in part to their overly high handed intentions. And what is accomplished by the making of a work of art that no one sees, other than a moral victory and maybe a statue or two. I would prefer to see a well made film that has an appeal to a wider range of the movie-going public, and that would generate more interest in the work of FLW and its preservation.
I would prefer to see the middle ground taken, with a capable but marketable cast, and just as importantly, screenwriters who understand the subject but also know how to turn a very good book into an excellent screenplay. As we all probably know, a good book does not always become a good/great movie. And finally, a capable director who can translate the written word into a palpable screen experience.
All that being said, I do like the suggestion of Edward Norton, as I think he is a fine actor who could probably pull off this role. I also think that George Clooney could do this role justice, and Kevin Spacey, Richard Gere and even Frank Langella could be possibilities, although Frank might be a bit long in the tooth at this point.
I love Laura Linney, but for some reason I see her as being better suited to the role of Kitty, for reasons that I can't explain, and in her younger days, Meryl Streep could have been very effective as Kitty . Obviously the casting of the role of Mameh could make or break the entire project. I think I could see Kate Winslet playing the part of Mameh very passionately, and I also like the idea of Diane Lane for one of these two roles as well. The more I think about it, the role of Kitty, while not the marquee part in the film, could actually be the plum part if cast correctly and played well.
And last but not least, before you are too quick to judge Brad Pitt as an actor, check out the movie Babel.
I think this is a fun topic and as such, I'd love to hear more suggestions, so by all means keeping them coming.
Hence my previous casting suggestions, which were as much based on marketability, drawing power and creating a buzz as on content. Are there actors better suited for these roles? Certainly, from a purely thespian perspective, there are actors who could offer more accurate portrayals of these characters. By the same token, many great stories have been destined for obscurity by high-minded casting, poor screenplay adaptations, and/or misguided direction, all in the name of art. Most people do not like to have art shoved down their throats, but if it is mixed in with a little bit of entertainment, it goes down much easier.
While I am certainly not a fan of schlock and am not advocating such an approach for this project, I am also not a fan of art for art's sake. Some of the finest films ever made have been seen by almost no one, due in part to their overly high handed intentions. And what is accomplished by the making of a work of art that no one sees, other than a moral victory and maybe a statue or two. I would prefer to see a well made film that has an appeal to a wider range of the movie-going public, and that would generate more interest in the work of FLW and its preservation.
I would prefer to see the middle ground taken, with a capable but marketable cast, and just as importantly, screenwriters who understand the subject but also know how to turn a very good book into an excellent screenplay. As we all probably know, a good book does not always become a good/great movie. And finally, a capable director who can translate the written word into a palpable screen experience.
All that being said, I do like the suggestion of Edward Norton, as I think he is a fine actor who could probably pull off this role. I also think that George Clooney could do this role justice, and Kevin Spacey, Richard Gere and even Frank Langella could be possibilities, although Frank might be a bit long in the tooth at this point.
I love Laura Linney, but for some reason I see her as being better suited to the role of Kitty, for reasons that I can't explain, and in her younger days, Meryl Streep could have been very effective as Kitty . Obviously the casting of the role of Mameh could make or break the entire project. I think I could see Kate Winslet playing the part of Mameh very passionately, and I also like the idea of Diane Lane for one of these two roles as well. The more I think about it, the role of Kitty, while not the marquee part in the film, could actually be the plum part if cast correctly and played well.
And last but not least, before you are too quick to judge Brad Pitt as an actor, check out the movie Babel.
I think this is a fun topic and as such, I'd love to hear more suggestions, so by all means keeping them coming.
A lot of snow today and I have some time on my hands....
Wrightgeek:
Your observations are spot on. However, IMO Wright himself is the biggest player here as a marketing tool. There have been many surprise "hits" that were not produced considering the market first and foremost. My point was that Frank deserves a great effort- "take care of the necessities and the luxuries will take care of themselves!" (sic)
Brad Pitt is not a bad actor, just not who I see as quite "Wright". Laura Linney would also work for Mamah to be sure, but assuming Catherine's role not as pivotal (based on reality as well as the book) she would be a good match with Norton for the same reasons he'd work.
I just don't see that whole "leading man-star power" thing as necessary in this case-unless that is the only thing driving it. The producer may be more telling than the director.
Wrightgeek:
Your observations are spot on. However, IMO Wright himself is the biggest player here as a marketing tool. There have been many surprise "hits" that were not produced considering the market first and foremost. My point was that Frank deserves a great effort- "take care of the necessities and the luxuries will take care of themselves!" (sic)
Brad Pitt is not a bad actor, just not who I see as quite "Wright". Laura Linney would also work for Mamah to be sure, but assuming Catherine's role not as pivotal (based on reality as well as the book) she would be a good match with Norton for the same reasons he'd work.
I just don't see that whole "leading man-star power" thing as necessary in this case-unless that is the only thing driving it. The producer may be more telling than the director.
Physical resemblance between actor and subject means more to me than to some, I guess. The Norton face seems apt. I don't know him as an
actor, however. In my estimation the age issue is one of those things that actors (and make-up people) know how to deal with, so the relative ages
of actor and subject seem less relevant to me.
While I have not seen his Nixon performance yet, Langella was interviewed recently for radio. He mentioned long struggles to "get"
Nixon, including his vocal mannerisms. Yet the brief clips presented included a decidedly British-accented moment or two. If this is the best
that can be done, by an accomplished actor, I fear for the future of bio-pics. . .!
Wright's honey-like tones, including a certain slight slurring of words, should be a focus of the chosen actor's work, it seems to me. The power
of his presence, so important to his success, must be a part of performance. . .
SDR
actor, however. In my estimation the age issue is one of those things that actors (and make-up people) know how to deal with, so the relative ages
of actor and subject seem less relevant to me.
While I have not seen his Nixon performance yet, Langella was interviewed recently for radio. He mentioned long struggles to "get"
Nixon, including his vocal mannerisms. Yet the brief clips presented included a decidedly British-accented moment or two. If this is the best
that can be done, by an accomplished actor, I fear for the future of bio-pics. . .!
Wright's honey-like tones, including a certain slight slurring of words, should be a focus of the chosen actor's work, it seems to me. The power
of his presence, so important to his success, must be a part of performance. . .
SDR
-
Wrightgeek
- Posts: 1548
- Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 5:21 pm
- Location: Westerville, Ohio
SDR-
If physical resemblance is to be an important factor, then Ed Norton or especially Frank Langella have a distinct advantage in that regard. Richard Gere, sorta maybe with some make-up help, but Clooney and Pitt do not have that virtue going for them, IMHO. I did allow that consideration to factor into my suggestions, to a point.
When I look at period photos from 1910 or so, a middle-aged Frank Lloyd Wright has a strong resemblance to Mr. Langella, and maybe a little less so to Mr. Gere and Mr. Norton. What do you think?
If physical resemblance is to be an important factor, then Ed Norton or especially Frank Langella have a distinct advantage in that regard. Richard Gere, sorta maybe with some make-up help, but Clooney and Pitt do not have that virtue going for them, IMHO. I did allow that consideration to factor into my suggestions, to a point.
When I look at period photos from 1910 or so, a middle-aged Frank Lloyd Wright has a strong resemblance to Mr. Langella, and maybe a little less so to Mr. Gere and Mr. Norton. What do you think?
Langella
Gere
-
Roderick Grant
- Posts: 11815
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am
Frank Langella? He's huge! At 6' 3", he should not even be considered. He's also in his late 60s. Ed Norton is also tall, 6" 1". Get Kevin Spacey to slouch slightly (from 5' 10" to 5' 8") and you have something. Catherine was taller than Frank, and not a particularly pretty woman, Swank would not do at all. Kate Winslet for Mamah would do just fine.
i had thought about fiennes, also. my guess is that he would have no problem with the voice. he has played numerous americans. check out the quiz show.
kevin spacey could certainly be considered for the other upcoming biography: "the mike huckabee story"
http://xs322.xs.to/xs322/07494/spacey-huckabee.jpg
kevin spacey could certainly be considered for the other upcoming biography: "the mike huckabee story"
http://xs322.xs.to/xs322/07494/spacey-huckabee.jpg
I think it's a fallacy to count height (or lack of it) as an important issue in film. Directors and cameramen seem able to disguise almost anything
related to scale, in movies; the stories about digging a trench for an all-important "walking shot" when one of the actors is the wrong size, are
legion.
Miracles occur regularly on the soundstage. When Martin Landau was cast as Bela Lugosi, in "Ed Wood" (1994), an issue was the difference in their
mouths. As Landau later explained, "Lugosi had a mouth like a black cave; when I open my mouth it looks like a grand piano. They made a 'piece' for
me to put in my mouth. . ." The result was certainly effective: you couldn't see any teeth at all.
They don't call it "movie magic" for nothin'. . .!
SDR
related to scale, in movies; the stories about digging a trench for an all-important "walking shot" when one of the actors is the wrong size, are
legion.
Miracles occur regularly on the soundstage. When Martin Landau was cast as Bela Lugosi, in "Ed Wood" (1994), an issue was the difference in their
mouths. As Landau later explained, "Lugosi had a mouth like a black cave; when I open my mouth it looks like a grand piano. They made a 'piece' for
me to put in my mouth. . ." The result was certainly effective: you couldn't see any teeth at all.
They don't call it "movie magic" for nothin'. . .!
SDR