Discussion:
MPI Movie news
(too old to reply)
Gianluca Ferri
2003-11-20 10:14:44 UTC
Permalink
http://www.channel4.com/film/newsfeatures/news_story.jsp?storyId=2638

:(
David Romas
2003-11-20 15:34:47 UTC
Permalink
In article <ou0vb.133109$***@twister2.libero.it>, Gianluca Ferri
says...
Post by Gianluca Ferri
http://www.channel4.com/film/newsfeatures/news_story.jsp?storyId=2638
:(
GREAT to hear from you Gianluca! :-)

I wonder if this news is for real. I kinda like Clooney, he's picked
some wonderful roles across his film career so far (some stinkers too,
of course). It's difficult to hear news (real or not) of someone else,
besides T.S., trying to land the "Magnum" role. But the idea of
Clooney doing it doesn't overly upset me, I have to admit. There could
be ALOT worse than him. From a box office perspective (does Hollywood
speak any other language?), Clooney sure would bring in the audience.
Money-wise, it would be like when Harrison Ford did _The Fugitive_, I
suppose.

His age does raise a question, though. Clooney is 42, which raises
the question of when in time the movie's story would be set. He's
too old already for the movie, if set in the present, to have a "next
generation" feel as many of the TV-to-movie projects lately...like
Mission Impossible, The Avengers or Charlies Angels for example.
And he's way too young for the movie to have a "here's where the MPI
characters would be today" feel. If that feel were the objective,
then the "Magnum" actor would need to be the same age as Tom Selleck
(ie, why not cast Tom Selleck?). Perhaps the movie will attempt to
feel like it is taking place back in the late 80s, when Thomas Magnum
really was 42. Or maybe the movie wouldn't attempt to tie-in with the
time-frame of the orginal series at all.

Curious.

David Romas
Magnum Memorabilia
438 Leroy Street
Ferndale, MI 48220
[NEW address above, as of Oct. 28, 2003]
All the News
2003-11-20 19:40:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Romas
His age does raise a question, though. Clooney is 42, which raises
the question of when in time the movie's story would be set. He's
too old already for the movie, if set in the present, to have a "next
generation" feel as many of the TV-to-movie projects lately...like
Mission Impossible, The Avengers or Charlies Angels for example.
And he's way too young for the movie to have a "here's where the MPI
characters would be today" feel. If that feel were the objective,
then the "Magnum" actor would need to be the same age as Tom Selleck
(ie, why not cast Tom Selleck?).
This, in my opinion, would be the best Magnum Movie.
Face it, any Magnum movie is going to aimed at the Magnum
fan audience. Why not do it with the actor(s) that will have
the most people be able readily identify with?

Chris
David Romas
2003-11-20 21:24:36 UTC
Permalink
In article <bpj5ck$1p9ps0$***@ID-63378.news.uni-berlin.de>, Chris
wrote...
Face it, any Magnum movie is going to aimed at the Magnum fan
audience.
I'm not so sure about that. Any Magnum movie made by you and/or me,
yes, would be aimed at the fan audience. But any Magnum movie made
by a Hollywood studio (with all the requisite econo-political
baggage intact) ought not to be expected to appeal to the fans of
the original TV series. Hollywood marketing, as one example, can
have much to do with how a movie is made...not just with how a
finished movie is marketed. I wouldn't expect Hollywood marketers
to push for this movie to be aimed at fans of the series.
Why not do it with the actor(s) that will have the most people be
able readily identify with?
Because the language is money. "Readily identify with" to TPTB in
Hollywood means "buy a ticket to go see." We on alt.tv.magnum-pi
most readily identify with Selleck, Hillerman, Mosley and Manetti.
But the broader ticket-buying world today, in Hollywood's mind
probably, more readily identifies today with the likes of George
Clooney. In other words, the original cast of MPI, while beloved
by we the fans, doesn't translate to big box office.

As an anecdote, and not necessarily meant to suggest proof of some
larger trend, when I mentioned to my wife today that there was a
new rumor cropping up that the rumored MPI movie might have
Clooney as "Thomas" her main reaction was (and I quote) "Yum!"
She thinks Selleck was a perfectly good "Magnum" but she clearly
would rather go to the movies to see Clooney than Selleck. I
think the studio whould be well aware, or at least of the opinion,
that many people across the general movie-going audience would be
going to this movie to see George Clooney, not "a Thomas Magnum
story." The fact that the story might be sort-of based on some
'80s P.I. show would be almost irrelevant. As a fan of the series,
who wants the movie to be aimed at me, my knowing (strongly
suspecting, at least) that I'm not in the target audience doesn't
make me feel good but, at the same time, I acknowledge it.
Hhhhmmmmm, I'd have to think about this one. I like Clooney, and
think he could do a decent job, and it should go without saying
that I'd prefer TS in the role. Clooney could fit the bill, though
many of the mannerisms that Selleck brought to the role might seem
forced coming through GC.
I agree. But this would be the case only if Clooney chose to let
any of Selleck's portrayal of Magnum influence his own. Clooney,
or any other actor, might come to the role trying to do totally
their own thing with the character; watching MPI episodes, perhaps,
but not trying to capture "Selleck as Magnum." ...Unless (perish
the thought) this movie were trying to be to the MPI series as the
Brady Bunch movies were to that series, with the contemporary
actors trying their darnedest to replicate all the idiosyncracies
of the TV show's actors/characters. In other words, some sort of
allegedly comedic satire of the original series. One would hope
that since MPI wasn't a sit-com it wouldn't inspire a satire movie
treatment. :-|

- DR
@ Mag. Mem.
Christian Clark
2003-11-21 02:41:58 UTC
Permalink
DR, I think we need to get George an invitation to the ng. I think Clooney
is a great actor and I'm a huge fan. I could defiantly see him as TM.
Besides, he is not afraid to wear a mustache and he looks good in one. He
has had some stinkers in the past Batman for example. But, It wasn't his
fault. Batman was played out in the fashion that the movies were being
made. His acting was quality, but the script sucked. I actually felt bad
for the guy.
If the story is right, and GC is a big fan of MPI then he'll try to keep it
good. Ocean's Eleven was different from the original, but it was a
fantastic version. I loved the original and I loved the remake.

The other characters are kept Top Secret. I have a few ideas for choices
based on the updated theme.

Sam Jackson or Don Cheadle (I really like him) as TC

Robbie Coltrane or John Cleese as Higgins. Different styles all together.

James Earl Jones as the Voice of Robin Masters.

Ray Liota as Rick

Heidi Klum as the Girl TM teaches to Snorkle in the Tide Pool
(Brrrrraaaaawwl. Hubba Hubba)
Post by David Romas
wrote...
Face it, any Magnum movie is going to aimed at the Magnum fan
audience.
I'm not so sure about that. Any Magnum movie made by you and/or me,
yes, would be aimed at the fan audience. But any Magnum movie made
by a Hollywood studio (with all the requisite econo-political
baggage intact) ought not to be expected to appeal to the fans of
the original TV series. Hollywood marketing, as one example, can
have much to do with how a movie is made...not just with how a
finished movie is marketed. I wouldn't expect Hollywood marketers
to push for this movie to be aimed at fans of the series.
Why not do it with the actor(s) that will have the most people be
able readily identify with?
Because the language is money. "Readily identify with" to TPTB in
Hollywood means "buy a ticket to go see." We on alt.tv.magnum-pi
most readily identify with Selleck, Hillerman, Mosley and Manetti.
But the broader ticket-buying world today, in Hollywood's mind
probably, more readily identifies today with the likes of George
Clooney. In other words, the original cast of MPI, while beloved
by we the fans, doesn't translate to big box office.
As an anecdote, and not necessarily meant to suggest proof of some
larger trend, when I mentioned to my wife today that there was a
new rumor cropping up that the rumored MPI movie might have
Clooney as "Thomas" her main reaction was (and I quote) "Yum!"
She thinks Selleck was a perfectly good "Magnum" but she clearly
would rather go to the movies to see Clooney than Selleck. I
think the studio whould be well aware, or at least of the opinion,
that many people across the general movie-going audience would be
going to this movie to see George Clooney, not "a Thomas Magnum
story." The fact that the story might be sort-of based on some
'80s P.I. show would be almost irrelevant. As a fan of the series,
who wants the movie to be aimed at me, my knowing (strongly
suspecting, at least) that I'm not in the target audience doesn't
make me feel good but, at the same time, I acknowledge it.
Hhhhmmmmm, I'd have to think about this one. I like Clooney, and
think he could do a decent job, and it should go without saying
that I'd prefer TS in the role. Clooney could fit the bill, though
many of the mannerisms that Selleck brought to the role might seem
forced coming through GC.
I agree. But this would be the case only if Clooney chose to let
any of Selleck's portrayal of Magnum influence his own. Clooney,
or any other actor, might come to the role trying to do totally
their own thing with the character; watching MPI episodes, perhaps,
but not trying to capture "Selleck as Magnum." ...Unless (perish
the thought) this movie were trying to be to the MPI series as the
Brady Bunch movies were to that series, with the contemporary
actors trying their darnedest to replicate all the idiosyncracies
of the TV show's actors/characters. In other words, some sort of
allegedly comedic satire of the original series. One would hope
that since MPI wasn't a sit-com it wouldn't inspire a satire movie
treatment. :-|
- DR
@ Mag. Mem.
ANIM8Rfsk
2003-11-21 04:46:57 UTC
Permalink
<< From: David Romas ***@wayne.edu >>


<< Unless (perish
the thought) this movie were trying to be to the MPI series as the
Brady Bunch movies were to that series >>

Given that they've hired a comedy writer to do the script, I'd say that's a
safe bet.


___________
  If You Get a Telemarketing Call:
· Tell the telemarketer you are on the Do Not Call List.
· Note the company and date of call.
· File a complaint by phone (888-CALL-FCC), or by e-mail (***@fcc.gov).
Anybody
2003-11-21 05:20:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by ANIM8Rfsk
Post by David Romas
Unless (perish
the thought) this movie were trying to be to the MPI series as the
Brady Bunch movies were to that series
Given that they've hired a comedy writer to do the script, I'd say that's a
safe bet.
Oh dear, yet another "remake/update" movie that's to be avoided. No
surprise there then. :-(
David Romas
2003-11-21 16:27:10 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@mb-m28.aol.com>, ANIM8Rfsk
says...
<< Unless (perish the thought) this movie were trying to be to the
<< MPI series as the Brady Bunch movies were to that series >>
Given that they've hired a comedy writer to do the script, I'd say
that's a safe bet.
It's not a lock but at least is a possible outcome, I cringe to say.
However, just because this writer appears to have done mostly comedy
before doesn't mean he is incapable of doing something else. If I,
personally, were known to be a prolific comedy writer and then I
landed my dream job of writing the script of a Magnum movie and then
somebody told me I probably would fail since my past hits were all
comedies, I'd be kinda ticked off. ;-)

- DR
@ Mag. Mem.
ANIM8Rfsk
2003-11-21 17:32:24 UTC
Permalink
<< From: David Romas ***@wayne.edu >>


<< If I,
personally, were known to be a prolific comedy writer and then I
landed my dream job of writing the script of a Magnum movie and then
somebody told me I probably would fail since my past hits were all
comedies, I'd be kinda ticked off. ;-) >>

Well, he's not exactly prolific. And if you look at his resume, it's the
viewing audience that ought to be ticked off.

He's also got a credit on THUNDERBIRDS, where it's clear nobody involved
watched the original show at all, and horrible changes were made to the
premise, that have had series fans screaming. They made 2 of the adult
regulars kids. So I guess, what, Rick and Higgins will be 10 years old?


___________
  If You Get a Telemarketing Call:
· Tell the telemarketer you are on the Do Not Call List.
· Note the company and date of call.
· File a complaint by phone (888-CALL-FCC), or by e-mail (***@fcc.gov).
Anybody
2003-11-21 21:40:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by ANIM8Rfsk
<< If I,
personally, were known to be a prolific comedy writer and then I
landed my dream job of writing the script of a Magnum movie and then
somebody told me I probably would fail since my past hits were all
comedies, I'd be kinda ticked off. ;-) >>
Well, he's not exactly prolific. And if you look at his resume, it's the
viewing audience that ought to be ticked off.
He's also got a credit on THUNDERBIRDS, where it's clear nobody involved
watched the original show at all, and horrible changes were made to the
premise, that have had series fans screaming. They made 2 of the adult
regulars kids. So I guess, what, Rick and Higgins will be 10 years old?
Yep, Thunderbirds is going to be awful. Same with the new Battlestar
Galactica due in a few weeks. :-(
ANIM8Rfsk
2003-11-21 21:49:04 UTC
Permalink
<< From: Anybody ***@anywhere-anytime.com >>


<< Yep, Thunderbirds is going to be awful. Same with the new Battlestar
Galactica due in a few weeks. :-( >>

Urgh, yeah, Battlestar is gonna be a stinkbomb. I'll check some of it out,
'cause I've got a friend who doesn't get sci-fi and is a big fan of the
original so I'll tape it for him.

His wife got him the original series on DVD for Xmas, and I'm getting him the
soundtrack, so we'll wash his brain clean of the new stuff. :-)


___________
  If You Get a Telemarketing Call:
· Tell the telemarketer you are on the Do Not Call List.
· Note the company and date of call.
· File a complaint by phone (888-CALL-FCC), or by e-mail (***@fcc.gov).
Kurt Pickering
2003-11-22 23:25:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Romas
says...
<< Unless (perish the thought) this movie were trying to be to the
<< MPI series as the Brady Bunch movies were to that series >>
Given that they've hired a comedy writer to do the script, I'd say
that's a safe bet.
It's not a lock but at least is a possible outcome, I cringe to say.
However, just because this writer appears to have done mostly comedy
before doesn't mean he is incapable of doing something else. If I,
personally, were known to be a prolific comedy writer and then I
landed my dream job of writing the script of a Magnum movie and then
somebody told me I probably would fail since my past hits were all
comedies, I'd be kinda ticked off. ;-)
- DR
I shoulda read further being posting. Romas said it better than I did, or could.
Post by David Romas
@ Mag. Mem.
Kurt Pickering
2003-11-22 23:24:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by ANIM8Rfsk
<< Unless (perish
the thought) this movie were trying to be to the MPI series as the
Brady Bunch movies were to that series >>
Given that they've hired a comedy writer to do the script, I'd say that's a
safe bet.
Not necessarily. Leopards may not change their spots, but people do.
I was a journalist for 20 years, now I'm a government spokesman.
Higgins was a soldier for more years than he really could've beeeeeen,
then he's a major domo.

Magnum was a Naval officer for years, then a beach bum, then a lucky
live-in, then a Naval officer again. He also went from saying "I'd
make a terrible husband" (what was that, Dave or Mike, "All Roads Lead
to Floyd"?) to being a great dad for Lily.

And Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat.
Sterusmall
2003-11-23 00:21:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kurt Pickering
And Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat.
Yeah, back when being one didn't mean you hated guns and the military and
didn't mean you loved welfare and supporting every special interest group that
might give you a few votes.

S.M./FL
Aj
2003-11-27 07:29:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sterusmall
Post by Kurt Pickering
And Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat.
Yeah, back when being one didn't mean you hated guns and the military and
didn't mean you loved welfare and supporting every special interest group that
might give you a few votes.
Why the nasty political comments, I'm a life-long liberal Democrat and
love Magnum PI, I also dont have anything against guns or the
military. Dont stereotype people, your sounding like Joseph McCarthy
with your comments.

Aj
ANIM8Rfsk
2003-11-27 12:32:48 UTC
Permalink
<< From: ***@lava.net (Aj) >>

first:

<< Why the nasty political comments >>

then:

<< your sounding like Joseph McCarthy
with your comments. >>

So, a big PKB to you, followed by a spelling flame. Sheesh.


___________
  If You Get a Telemarketing Call:
· Tell the telemarketer you are on the Do Not Call List.
· Note the company and date of call.
· File a complaint by phone (888-CALL-FCC), or by e-mail (***@fcc.gov) or
online at www.donotcall.gov.
Jake Mabe
2003-11-27 14:56:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Aj
Dont stereotype people, your sounding like Joseph McCarthy
with your comments.
That statement in and of itself is perpetuating a stereotype.

On a better topic, Happy Thanksgiving everybody. May this one be a very merry
and safe one for you and yours.

Best,

Jake


To respond please remove "nospam"
-------------------------------------
"I'd rather you not like me for who I really am as to have you like me for who
I'm not."----Nolan Ryan.
ANIM8Rfsk
2003-11-27 15:27:23 UTC
Permalink
<< From: ***@aol.comnospam (Jake Mabe) >>


<< On a better topic, Happy Thanksgiving everybody. May this one be a very
merry
and safe one for you and yours. >>

And to you and yours Jake!

Gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble
gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble
gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble
gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble
gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble
gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble
gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble
gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble
gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble


___________
  If You Get a Telemarketing Call:
· Tell the telemarketer you are on the Do Not Call List.
· Note the company and date of call.
· File a complaint by phone (888-CALL-FCC), or by e-mail (***@fcc.gov) or
online at www.donotcall.gov.
Sterusmall
2003-11-28 00:00:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jake Mabe
n a better topic, Happy Thanksgiving everybody.
Happy Thanksgiving to all!

S.M./FL

Jim
2003-11-20 22:00:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by All the News
Post by David Romas
His age does raise a question, though. Clooney is 42, which raises
the question of when in time the movie's story would be set. He's
too old already for the movie, if set in the present, to have a "next
generation" feel as many of the TV-to-movie projects lately...like
Mission Impossible, The Avengers or Charlies Angels for example.
And he's way too young for the movie to have a "here's where the MPI
characters would be today" feel. If that feel were the objective,
then the "Magnum" actor would need to be the same age as Tom Selleck
(ie, why not cast Tom Selleck?).
This, in my opinion, would be the best Magnum Movie.
Face it, any Magnum movie is going to aimed at the Magnum
fan audience. Why not do it with the actor(s) that will have
the most people be able readily identify with?
Chris
What a JOKE...This has to be a mistake...Tom Selleck is the only one who could
do this role.

I have to wonder what Ron "HAPPY DAYS" Howard is drinking with his water?

Has Looney ever watched this series? My guess is no...

All this is to Looney is a paycheck at our expense...

I will forgo this movie and thats my 2 cents.

No Tom Selleck no Movie.
Elmo P. Shagnasty
2003-11-20 22:46:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by All the News
Face it, any Magnum movie is going to aimed at the Magnum
fan audience.
Not at all. It's going to be aimed squarely at the demographic audience
who pays to go see movies.

And that's not the Magnum fan audience at all. Demographically, the
main paying audience for movies wasn't even born when Magnum was on the
air.
kevin
2003-11-20 20:07:58 UTC
Permalink
Hhhhmmmmm, I'd have to think about this one. I like Clooney, and
think he could do a decent job, and it should go without saying that
I'd prefer TS in the role. Clooney could fit the bill, though many of
the mannerisms that Selleck brought to the role might seem forced
coming through GC.

-Kev
Post by David Romas
says...
Post by Gianluca Ferri
http://www.channel4.com/film/newsfeatures/news_story.jsp?storyId=2638
:(
GREAT to hear from you Gianluca! :-)
I wonder if this news is for real. I kinda like Clooney, he's picked
some wonderful roles across his film career so far (some stinkers too,
of course). It's difficult to hear news (real or not) of someone else,
besides T.S., trying to land the "Magnum" role. But the idea of
Clooney doing it doesn't overly upset me, I have to admit. There could
be ALOT worse than him. From a box office perspective (does Hollywood
speak any other language?), Clooney sure would bring in the audience.
Money-wise, it would be like when Harrison Ford did _The Fugitive_, I
suppose.
His age does raise a question, though. Clooney is 42, which raises
the question of when in time the movie's story would be set. He's
too old already for the movie, if set in the present, to have a "next
generation" feel as many of the TV-to-movie projects lately...like
Mission Impossible, The Avengers or Charlies Angels for example.
And he's way too young for the movie to have a "here's where the MPI
characters would be today" feel. If that feel were the objective,
then the "Magnum" actor would need to be the same age as Tom Selleck
(ie, why not cast Tom Selleck?). Perhaps the movie will attempt to
feel like it is taking place back in the late 80s, when Thomas Magnum
really was 42. Or maybe the movie wouldn't attempt to tie-in with the
time-frame of the orginal series at all.
Curious.
David Romas
Magnum Memorabilia
438 Leroy Street
Ferndale, MI 48220
[NEW address above, as of Oct. 28, 2003]
Elmo P. Shagnasty
2003-11-20 22:44:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Romas
Or maybe the movie wouldn't attempt to tie-in with the
time-frame of the orginal series at all.
Bingo.

This is Hollywood. This movie will have as much to do with the TV show
as the Charlie's Angels movies had to do with that TV show.

Which is to say: nothing beyond a very vague, general premise--all
updated to fit with what the main moviegoing audience of today wants
(the 17 year olds going on dates, none of whom would understand the
Vietnam themes anyway).
Sterusmall
2003-11-20 23:54:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Romas
Clooney
Great, a gun-hating, anti-war prick who will be playing a gun toting war vet in
the movie.

S.M./FL
ThomasH
2003-11-20 19:25:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Romas
says...
Post by Gianluca Ferri
http://www.channel4.com/film/newsfeatures/news_story.jsp?storyId=2638
:(
GREAT to hear from you Gianluca! :-)
I wonder if this news is for real. I kinda like Clooney, he's picked
some wonderful roles across his film career so far (some stinkers too,
of course). It's difficult to hear news (real or not) of someone else,
besides T.S., trying to land the "Magnum" role. But the idea of
Clooney doing it doesn't overly upset me, I have to admit. There could
be ALOT worse than him. From a box office perspective (does Hollywood
speak any other language?), Clooney sure would bring in the audience.
Money-wise, it would be like when Harrison Ford did _The Fugitive_, I
suppose.
He *is* my secret top favorite for the role!

Thomas
Post by David Romas
His age does raise a question, though. Clooney is 42, which raises
the question of when in time the movie's story would be set. He's
too old already for the movie, if set in the present, to have a "next
generation" feel as many of the TV-to-movie projects lately...like
Mission Impossible, The Avengers or Charlies Angels for example.
And he's way too young for the movie to have a "here's where the MPI
characters would be today" feel. If that feel were the objective,
then the "Magnum" actor would need to be the same age as Tom Selleck
(ie, why not cast Tom Selleck?). Perhaps the movie will attempt to
feel like it is taking place back in the late 80s, when Thomas Magnum
really was 42. Or maybe the movie wouldn't attempt to tie-in with the
time-frame of the orginal series at all.
Curious.
David Romas
Magnum Memorabilia
438 Leroy Street
Ferndale, MI 48220
[NEW address above, as of Oct. 28, 2003]
xob nob
2003-11-22 07:39:40 UTC
Permalink
David Romas <***@wayne.edu> wrote in message news:<***@drn.newsguy.com>...

From a box office perspective (does Hollywood
Post by David Romas
speak any other language?), Clooney sure would bring in the audience.
Yeah, just like the audience he drew in for his last two endeavors.
Meribor
2003-11-21 09:12:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gianluca Ferri
http://www.channel4.com/film/newsfeatures/news_story.jsp?storyId=2638
:(
ewwwwwww..........

on top of the fact that I think TS should play TM again, I've never much
liked George Clooney..... :-\
Rolie1
2003-11-21 18:14:22 UTC
Permalink
Simply surprised that some of you guys like Clooney. My knowledge of him is
gathered from what I hear from his lips and "He ain't no Magnum" kind-a-guy.
This would be a fraudulent pic and to my disdain, I'd keep as far a distance
from the theater from anyone playing the role other than TS himself. Why
everyone's so hell bent on the age thing is puzzling as well. I just don't
get it I guess and as far as the audience goes, it's TS as TM most would
prefer. Daffy duck playing bugs bunny.... naa, not gonna work. Anyway, my
input is a rather immature one but it works for me. Life need not be so
complicated with the choices we make and the choice to play brother Thomas
is Thomas. Can anyone imagine Lilly being a major character as TM's
sidekick apprentice. A fatherly Magnum....... mmmmmm. Hip hip... a jolly
good day ya'll.

Rolie
Post by Meribor
Post by Gianluca Ferri
http://www.channel4.com/film/newsfeatures/news_story.jsp?storyId=2638
:(
ewwwwwww..........
on top of the fact that I think TS should play TM again, I've never much
liked George Clooney..... :-\
Anybody
2003-11-21 21:45:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Meribor
Post by Gianluca Ferri
http://www.channel4.com/film/newsfeatures/news_story.jsp?storyId=2638
:(
ewwwwwww..........
on top of the fact that I think TS should play TM again, I've never much
liked George Clooney..... :-\
George Clooney the looney who eats candy with a spooney. ;-)


It'd be a horrible movie, but it be a weird twist of fate if Harrison
Ford played Magnum in the movie. Harrison Ford takes Tom Selleck's
place as Indiana Jones and then does it again as Magnum. :-)
KY Computer Dr
2003-11-21 21:27:46 UTC
Permalink
I guess I just don't get it. What does Hollywood have against Tom Selleck. He
has had some hits. I mean it is not like Kevin Costner has not BOMBED... but
they still let him do movies. You know if CBS had not screwed up and let Tom
do "Radiers of the Lost Ark", we would not even have to worry about him being
in a movie. And the age thing is stupid. Kevin Costner is older, Robert
DiNero is older, Tommy Lee Jones, Mel Gibson... all of these men are OLDER and
they still make movies. Ok so Tom did not have MAJOR hits and I think this is
the MAIN reason why this did not happen for Tom. But at the same time, I think
people who could have made the movie - Bellisurus (sp) really blew it and I
think the reunion should have happened a long time ago. I mean when CBS did
they anniversary show.. did you all hear the cheer every time Tom or Magnum was
mentioned? People still love the show and cast. This just is joke that people
will do this kind of crap. Did not they learn from Charlie's Angels -which has
not been a success, Brady Bunch, Wild Wild West, and some of the other TV
REMAKE BOMBS. Man I hope this is just a bad rumor. There is only ONE THOMAS
MAGNUM - Tom Selleck. George Clooney is NO TOM SELLECK OR THOMAS MAGNUM.
KY Computer Dr
2003-11-21 21:41:35 UTC
Permalink
LOL I just re-read what I wrote and as you could tell I was a little upset. So
I missed up on my wordings. Please forgive.
Loading...