The internet shook it’s collective head when news recently raced over the wire that Sam Mendes would direct a film based on the long-running Garth Ennis/Steve Dillon comic series Preacher. But that news may have been premature, Mendes tells Empire.
“I’d love to make Preacher, but there’s no script,” Mendes says. “This is a typical Variety announcement. ‘Mendes to direct Preacher’ – I wish! Basically they should have written, ‘Mendes in development with Preacher’. What I’m doing is, I’ve gotta find a script. I’ve just got to get it written.”
The good news is that Mendes seems to be fully aware of the scope of the material, and that it requires more than just one little movie. (How could he not be, really? But many have doubted.) “There’s so much of it you couldn’t possibly fit it all into one movie. It’s just about what you keep and what you leave out, and how you structure the story. But just to have that toy set again, being able to paint on a big canvas and to say ‘I am gonna do crazy crane shots and massive action sequences again because I want to,’ it’s exciting..”
The question stands as to whether this story is adaptable at all. It’s a violent, sick, deliberately transgressive piece of work. Even the most absurd, stupid moments have their charm on paper, but on film I wonder if it wouldn’t just end up looking squalid and silly.
10 comments
They can't get it right but.. at least it should be fun to watch.
Squalid and silly? You say that like it's a bad thing. The pulp sublimity of this thing could and should be translated to film, by someone with the skill and balls to do so. (Unlike Watchmen, which should never be adapted to another medium. Anyway.) I would line up for the spin-off, ARSEFACE: THE MOTION PICTURE.
Anything is adaptable. There have been greater works of fiction adapted to the screen. Look at Apocalypse Now (Heart of Darkness) or Catch-22. Neither films are perfect (AN is close to perfection) but they're serviceable and they evoke the original source texts in their own ways. Besides, it's Preacher. The series was more interesting when I was an angry, Christ-hating early twenty-something who laughed heartily at fag and retard jokes. Who cares if they fuck it up?
They should do the stand-alone Saint story. That would be easily adaptable.
The reason the Saint story would adapt so well to film is that it was a story adapted FROM film. In fact, grab your copy of Preacher: Ancient History and read Ennis' intro. The Saint is basically Clint Eastwood and Lee Marvin's bastard lovechild.
To do it in one film means losing most all of the flashback stuff, all the Vietnam stuff, Arse Face, New Orleans, Sheriff Jesse, Bill Hicks…
Would it still be Preacher if it was just an action movie?
It does break down into three films pretty nicely.
squalid and silly? maybe, after all NOOOOOOOBODY likes violent and sick movies do they? i can't think of a single film with a vampire in it that has done well. And all the sex! my god, we can't put sex in a film that would just be silly. and squalid. apparently.
This would be much better as an HBO or showtime series
Just give it to the Crank guys and be done with it. They have to make it work as one film though – no way this makes enough money to warrant a trilogy.
I think if you look at the entire series, you can make two or three movies. The most important thing would be to get the spirit and ideas behind the story. It would be impossible and unwise to do a direct port. but the story adapted into film format, portrarying the same character, humour, and message. Should work.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.