Jump to content
Gerard Butler GALS
Sign in to follow this  
becozy

11/10 - Diana Gabaldon OUTLANDER movie update Gerard Butler

Recommended Posts

from: http://voyagesoftheartemis.blogspot.com/20...ews-update.html

MOVIE NEWS UPDATE

I've been getting a number of enquiries, since press releases have started appearing about the movie production of OUTLANDER—excited folk asking "Is it true?" "When?" and (I hope you'll pardon a brief roll of the eyes here), "Who would you cast?" (I couldn't begin to guess how many thousands of times I've been asked that over the last twenty years.)

It's very early days as yet, but I'll answer what I can.

Yes, Essential Productions is developing OUTLANDER as a "major motion picture." (What that means is that they want to make a two-to-two-and-a-half hour feature film.)

And yes, Randall Wallace (the talented gentleman who wrote both BRAVEHEART and PEARL HARBOR—hey, ancient Scots and WWII, how about that?) is writing the script.

No, I have absolutely nothing to say about the casting of the movie. The production people do occasionally ask me what I think of this or that person, but this is simple politeness on their part.

No, I have no control whatever regarding the script.

No, I really don't want to have anything personal to do with the development of the movie.

Why not? Well, two major reasons (putting aside the fact that producers seldom want the original writer sticking his or her oar in and causing trouble):

1. I have books to write and a family to be with. I can't be hopping planes every other week or dropping everything else at a moment's notice to do script adjustments. (I do know that all movie scripts go through many (many, many) iterations, rewrites, etc. in the process of development and filming.) That kind of thing eats your time and sucks your soul, and to no good end.

2. For nearly twenty years now, people have been saying to me, "Oh! I'm dying to see the movie of your books! But I want it to be just like it is in the book!" To which the only possible reply is, "Yeah? Which forty pages do you want to see?"

Obviously, a book of the size and complexity of OUTLANDER won't fit into a two-hour movie. But it might be possible for a good movie based on the book to exist.

Adaptations can be either good or bad—they're seldom indifferent—but a skilful adaptation is just as much a feat of skill as is writing an original book or script.

Yes, I could adapt the book myself. With the net result that even if a) no one then messed with the script (and they would; that's how film works), and b) the end result was wonderful (odds of about 900:1)—ten million people would still email me about, "But how could you leave out that scene?" Or "But why did you change this character?" Or "But you left out my favorite line in the whole book!"

I'd really rather write a new novel.

Now, do bear in mind a couple of things here:

1. Essential Productions have an option on the book. This means that they paid us a modest amount of money and we gave them a span of time, in which they can do anything they want to, in order to put together the necessary financing and logistics to make a movie (that includes hiring a scriptwriter).

We (my agents and I) get a lot of option requests. We decided to grant Essential Productions an option because we like them, we think they understand the book and its central characters, and insofar as such a thing is possible, we trust them to do their best to make it a great movie.

But it is an option.

2. Not all movies that are optioned actually get made. Even movies that have excellent scripts, A-list directors and recognizable stars don't always get made. Naturally, we hope this one will, because we do like the EP people and think that of all the producers who've approached us about the film rights, they have the best chance of succeeding in making a great movie.

But we'll all have to wait and see what happens next.

And that's all I can tell you.

Le meas,

--Diana

P.S. Well, I can also tell you that a) yes, Gerard Butler is a fine-looking specimen of Scottish manhood, even if he is a Lowlander, but b) I think he might have difficulty playing a 22-year-old virgin; c) Keira Knightley would probably make an excellent Claire (she has the accent and the capacity for sarcasm), if she gained forty pounds, but d) James McAvoy is probably a wonderful actor, but he's only 5'7", for heaven's sake. (Mind, none of the production people has mentioned any of these actors to me as serious casting prospects, either.) Posted by Diana Gabaldon at 1:07 AM

_________________________________________

Note:

This is already being discussed in a thread that was started previously here.

Article announcing Essential Prodctions/Oultlander deal may be read at Variety here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for this Barb!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, Barb. I think Gerry's acting range is extraordinary, and he can play nearly everything (except the guitar), but I think it would be a stretch to make that sexy man look virginal! His sexiness drips off him, and there is no way that someone who looks like him would be left alone to remain a virgin! :whome2:

**OK to say the v word? Diana did!**

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

b) I think he might have difficulty playing a 22-year-old virgin

:lmao: This woman is a hoot. That one line may just inspire me to re-read her wee tale.

I'll say it again. Gerard Butler as Jamie's slightly wicked Uncle Dougal. (I hope I got that right)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Barb! Cannot wait to see the final result!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Barb! Cannot wait to see the final result!

Sounds to me as though Diana is not so sure, herself, whether her wonderful series should receive the "Hollywood" treatment. Regardless of who they select for Jamie, GB will always be my image of him and no one can change that! Personally, if GB can't be Jamie, then I don't want him in the movie at all, certainly not as the uncle. She is also right that no matter how you film a beloved book, someone will always be disappointed. The film (actually mini series) that came closest to another favorite book was Lonesome Dove. Excellent casting and beautifully filmed rendition. I wish they would do the same with Outlander. :)

Edited by Xan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

b) I think he might have difficulty playing a 22-year-old virgin

:lmao: This woman is a hoot. That one line may just inspire me to re-read her wee tale.

I'll say it again. Gerard Butler as Jamie's slightly wicked Uncle Dougal. (I hope I got that right)

Oh wow, I never thought of that. Although I ended up hating Dougal he played a very important part in the 1st books and was described as dark and handsome. rawr.

Okay I am definitely now supporting Gerry Butler for Dougal!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say is that there is no way they can compact OUTLANDER into a 2-2.5 hour movie without leaving out 60% of the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Gerard as Jamie would be great, if not then the son-in-law. He has dark hair and scottish accent. Only the movie may not go that far into production. You need someone with Gerard's height and built and sexual attraction. I guess we just have to wait and see.

ginnywhit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

b) I think he might have difficulty playing a 22-year-old virgin

:lmao: This woman is a hoot. That one line may just inspire me to re-read her wee tale.

I'll say it again. Gerard Butler as Jamie's slightly wicked Uncle Dougal. (I hope I got that right)

LOL.

I agree with you Kristine, that Diana G is just about the wittiest writer around (after you, of course, you gorgeous girl). Gerry as Dougal would be *shiver* a pairfect casting choice, IMHO.

I'm embarrassed to say that I can't even recall how many times I've re-read the Outlander series, but, for sure I've re-read them all each time a new installment is about to be published...

*sigh*

Connie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say is that there is no way they can compact OUTLANDER into a 2-2.5 hour movie without leaving out 60% of the story.

Unless... they turned it into a "franchise" of sorts. This would also allow different actors to play Jamie at different ages... :hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please do excuse my butting in, I seldom contribute but read posts veryoften.

As scripts do change and we have Botox, who says the novel has to start with him being a 22 year old? Maybe a Virgin...if the character says so..... Mr. B looked good in PSLY and who cares how young he was supposed to be. All he needs is a good shave and get him thinner. There is no one with the needed charisma other than the Butler to carry the role of Jamie. Mr. Macavoy is too boyish, short and frankly this role needs a manly man. there are flashbacks in film. Mr. B is in his prime as I would imagine him when Claire returns to him. I don't really care who plays the female role. It would be a terrible mistake to cast anyone else in my book. As with DaVinci Code, there is no way that Tom what's his name could ever have the dstinction and the personality needed for the lead, great actor but no sex appeal, just a good examp[le of a gross miss-cast. Jamie Frasier is all about macho, smart and sex appeal. The only other actor that might be close is older than the B and that's Clive Owen, Then the Butler has the Jamie profile describerd in the novel.

Just MHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please do excuse my butting in, I seldom contribute but read posts veryoften.

As scripts do change and we have Botox, who says the novel has to start with him being a 22 year old? Maybe a Virgin...if the character says so..... Mr. B looked good in PSLY and who cares how young he was supposed to be. All he needs is a good shave and get him thinner. There is no one with the needed charisma other than the Butler to carry the role of Jamie. Mr. Macavoy is too boyish, short and frankly this role needs a manly man. there are flashbacks in film. Mr. B is in his prime as I would imagine him when Claire returns to him. I don't really care who plays the female role. It would be a terrible mistake to cast anyone else in my book. As with DaVinci Code, there is no way that Tom what's his name could ever have the dstinction and the personality needed for the lead, great actor but no sex appeal, just a good examp[le of a gross miss-cast. Jamie Frasier is all about macho, smart and sex appeal. The only other actor that might be close is older than the B and that's Clive Owen, Then the Butler has the Jamie profile describerd in the novel.

Just MHO

Excuse me, but were we separated at birth? :D You mirror my thoughts exactly, even about The Da Vinci Code, the casting of which was one of the great travesties of recent memory. Hanks was as wrong for the role as McAvoy would be for Jamie. Both great actors, but not Robert Langham and definitely not Jamie Fraser. While I am not sure GB could play the very young Jamie, he would be ideal, as you say, for the slightly older Jamie, who takes us through most of the books. If, however, they are only going to concentrate on Outlander, then I guess some "new" face will be needed. GB will always be my Jamie, but I guess he can't play a 22 virgin. Oh, but to see Gerry in some of the scenes from those books. :cunning:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

b) I think he might have difficulty playing a 22-year-old virgin

:lmao: This woman is a hoot. That one line may just inspire me to re-read her wee tale.

I'll say it again. Gerard Butler as Jamie's slightly wicked Uncle Dougal. (I hope I got that right)

LOL.

I agree with you Kristine, that Diana G is just about the wittiest writer around (after you, of course, you gorgeous girl). Gerry as Dougal would be *shiver* a pairfect casting choice, IMHO.

I'm embarrassed to say that I can't even recall how many times I've re-read the Outlander series, but, for sure I've re-read them all each time a new installment is about to be published...

*sigh*

Connie,

Your siggie of Gerry's eyes took my breath away, and made my stomach flip flop. Those eyes!!

Judy

Connie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming out of lurkdom to reply......

I am a big fan of Diana Gabaldon and her books. Actually, a HUGE fan. I bought them all - plus the audio books.

She is right! She should be writing another book - it is what she does very well, and I always anticipate new ones.

She may not be the right person to petition in this regard. It may be difficault for novelists to see their work in movie format.

I sense, however, she does not get novel-based movie making.

Recent example: "Twilight" - the book: extremely handsome vampire with plain jane female - the movie: attractive man (but not killer) and hottie female!

Another: HBO series TrueBlood vs the novels.

Old example: "Thorn Birds" the book: Father Ralph is dark curly haired - Popular TV series: Richard Chamberlain, not dark and curly haired

Another old example: "Wuthering Heights" - Sir Laurence Olivier as a peasant boy? Impossible; but one of the greatest love stories ever, and the ealry movie totally changes the generational aspect.

This list is certainly endless.

Truth is Gerard Butler, who is not red haired or a 20-something virgin (we can be absolutely certain of both), is one hell of an actor, and would be well placed in that movie. The lines to see this movie would be longer than the early election voters in Florida.

How can it work?

Simple screenwriting tricks: Start with Gerry staring through a window at Claire in the future, clad in kilt at his current age, but roughed up. Then go back in time with him telling of how they met - voila! suspesion of disbelief and the movie continues.

Cast someone like Alan Rickman as Lord Randall - Alan can easily look older than Gerry and Gerry is good at playing the straight love interest of a man with Lord Randalls proclivities.

I can just *see* this movie, and judging from comments across the Internet, I am not the only one - but therein lies the problem - this is not a presidential election. When the people speak they have already conceived the story and that ruins its potential freshness. Although, I wish someone would talk me out of this position.

-----Gerry IS Jamie-----

Shelley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming out of lurkdom to reply......

I am a big fan of Diana Gabaldon and her books. Actually, a HUGE fan. I bought them all - plus the audio books.

She is right! She should be writing another book - it is what she does very well, and I always anticipate new ones.

She may not be the right person to petition in this regard. It may be difficault for novelists to see their work in movie format.

I sense, however, she does not get novel-based movie making.

Recent example: "Twilight" - the book: extremely handsome vampire with plain jane female - the movie: attractive man (but not killer) and hottie female!

Another: HBO series TrueBlood vs the novels.

Old example: "Thorn Birds" the book: Father Ralph is dark curly haired - Popular TV series: Richard Chamberlain, not dark and curly haired

Another old example: "Wuthering Heights" - Sir Laurence Olivier as a peasant boy? Impossible; but one of the greatest love stories ever, and the ealry movie totally changes the generational aspect.

This list is certainly endless.

Truth is Gerard Butler, who is not red haired or a 20-something virgin (we can be absolutely certain of both), is one hell of an actor, and would be well placed in that movie. The lines to see this movie would be longer than the early election voters in Florida.

How can it work?

Simple screenwriting tricks: Start with Gerry staring through a window at Claire in the future, clad in kilt at his current age, but roughed up. Then go back in time with him telling of how they met - voila! suspesion of disbelief and the movie continues.

Cast someone like Alan Rickman as Lord Randall - Alan can easily look older than Gerry and Gerry is good at playing the straight love interest of a man with Lord Randalls proclivities.

I can just *see* this movie, and judging from comments across the Internet, I am not the only one - but therein lies the problem - this is not a presidential election. When the people speak they have already conceived the story and that ruins its potential freshness. Although, I wish someone would talk me out of this position.

-----Gerry IS Jamie-----

Shelley

Glad you came out of lurkdom.............. :kisswink: Oh, to have Oprah Winfrey's money so GB fans could make the Outlander series.......... I have to agree, so I can't talk you out of your position. Gerry IS Jamie, always has been, always will be, no matter who they cast. JMHO, natch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read this yesterday with great excitement! I was dragged into reading Outlander on the basis of Sally's recommendation. She agrees with everyone about Gerry playing Jamie, but to honest I never saw it. While I did fall in love with Jamie, he never in my mind's eye look like Gerry. it wasn't until the 3rd book, when Roger came to the forefront that I finally saw where Gerry would fit in. Roger is 6'3" with long black, wavy hair and vivid green eyes. Who does that sound like ladies???

And I do agree that Alan Rickman or even Jason Issacs would be great as Jack Randall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

;)

Can someone Tell me What she Meant BY"even if he is a Lowlander"

Any Scots can get a meaning

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I did fall in love with Jamie, he never in my mind's eye look like Gerry. it wasn't until the 3rd book, when Roger came to the forefront that I finally saw where Gerry would fit in. Roger is 6'3" with long black, wavy hair and vivid green eyes. Who does that sound like ladies???

I'm with you there! And who doesn't love Roger? :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, come on Diana! Jamie Fraser was the least virginal of men - even when he WAS actually a virgin. :funnyup: He still had that sexy presence. I'm sure our Gerry with his acting chops could pull it off. Look how hesitant he is with the witch (her name escapes me right now) in "Beowulf and Grendel". He can do innocence. And talk about the ultimate virgin, how about The Phantom, hmm? He certainly did a wonderful job portraying Erik's sexy innocence.

I'm with you GALS. Just can't picture James Fraser as anyone but Gerry.

Susan

b) I think he might have difficulty playing a 22-year-old virgin

:lmao: This woman is a hoot. That one line may just inspire me to re-read her wee tale.

I'll say it again. Gerard Butler as Jamie's slightly wicked Uncle Dougal. (I hope I got that right)

Oh wow, I never thought of that. Although I ended up hating Dougal he played a very important part in the 1st books and was described as dark and handsome. rawr.

Okay I am definitely now supporting Gerry Butler for Dougal!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerry will fit in the movie somewhere! He is 6'2" with a wonderful face & build & Scottish! Glasgow is in the lowlands but who cares! Gerry was meant to play in this movie! He definitely couldn't play a 22 year old virgin! Too much life flowing off of him!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from: http://voyagesoftheartemis.blogspot.com/20...ews-update.html

MOVIE NEWS UPDATE

I've been getting a number of enquiries, since press releases have started appearing about the movie production of OUTLANDER—excited folk asking "Is it true?" "When?" and (I hope you'll pardon a brief roll of the eyes here), "Who would you cast?" (I couldn't begin to guess how many thousands of times I've been asked that over the last twenty years.)

It's very early days as yet, but I'll answer what I can.

Yes, Essential Productions is developing OUTLANDER as a "major motion picture." (What that means is that they want to make a two-to-two-and-a-half hour feature film.)

And yes, Randall Wallace (the talented gentleman who wrote both BRAVEHEART and PEARL HARBOR—hey, ancient Scots and WWII, how about that?) is writing the script.

No, I have absolutely nothing to say about the casting of the movie. The production people do occasionally ask me what I think of this or that person, but this is simple politeness on their part.

No, I have no control whatever regarding the script.

No, I really don't want to have anything personal to do with the development of the movie.

Why not? Well, two major reasons (putting aside the fact that producers seldom want the original writer sticking his or her oar in and causing trouble):

1. I have books to write and a family to be with. I can't be hopping planes every other week or dropping everything else at a moment's notice to do script adjustments. (I do know that all movie scripts go through many (many, many) iterations, rewrites, etc. in the process of development and filming.) That kind of thing eats your time and sucks your soul, and to no good end.

2. For nearly twenty years now, people have been saying to me, "Oh! I'm dying to see the movie of your books! But I want it to be just like it is in the book!" To which the only possible reply is, "Yeah? Which forty pages do you want to see?"

Obviously, a book of the size and complexity of OUTLANDER won't fit into a two-hour movie. But it might be possible for a good movie based on the book to exist.

Adaptations can be either good or bad—they're seldom indifferent—but a skilful adaptation is just as much a feat of skill as is writing an original book or script.

Yes, I could adapt the book myself. With the net result that even if a) no one then messed with the script (and they would; that's how film works), and b) the end result was wonderful (odds of about 900:1)—ten million people would still email me about, "But how could you leave out that scene?" Or "But why did you change this character?" Or "But you left out my favorite line in the whole book!"

I'd really rather write a new novel.

Now, do bear in mind a couple of things here:

1. Essential Productions have an option on the book. This means that they paid us a modest amount of money and we gave them a span of time, in which they can do anything they want to, in order to put together the necessary financing and logistics to make a movie (that includes hiring a scriptwriter).

We (my agents and I) get a lot of option requests. We decided to grant Essential Productions an option because we like them, we think they understand the book and its central characters, and insofar as such a thing is possible, we trust them to do their best to make it a great movie.

But it is an option.

2. Not all movies that are optioned actually get made. Even movies that have excellent scripts, A-list directors and recognizable stars don't always get made. Naturally, we hope this one will, because we do like the EP people and think that of all the producers who've approached us about the film rights, they have the best chance of succeeding in making a great movie.

But we'll all have to wait and see what happens next.

And that's all I can tell you.

Le meas,

--Diana

P.S. Well, I can also tell you that a) yes, Gerard Butler is a fine-looking specimen of Scottish manhood, even if he is a Lowlander, but b) I think he might have difficulty playing a 22-year-old virgin; c) Keira Knightley would probably make an excellent Claire (she has the accent and the capacity for sarcasm), if she gained forty pounds, but d) James McAvoy is probably a wonderful actor, but he's only 5'7", for heaven's sake. (Mind, none of the production people has mentioned any of these actors to me as serious casting prospects, either.) Posted by Diana Gabaldon at 1:07 AM

_________________________________________

Note:

This is already being discussed in a thread that was started previously here.

Article announcing Essential Prodctions/Oultlander deal may be read at Variety here.

As much as I adore GB, I can say from reading the series, he would have made a great Jamie Fraser back in his early days but I don't see it knowing the characters in Diana's books the way I do. I can see him as an older Jamie but I definitely dont see him as a 23 year old virgin.

Deb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerry will fit in the movie somewhere! He is 6'2" with a wonderful face & build & Scottish! Glasgow is in the lowlands but who cares! Gerry was meant to play in this movie! He definitely couldn't play a 22 year old virgin! Too much life flowing off of him!

Just because he is Scottish doesn't mean that he has a chance in a movie about Scotland! This is Hollywood, remember? Mel Gibson played one of the greatest Scottish heroes and the last time I looked Mel wasn't Scottish. I have great fear that Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt may be the next Jamie Fraser. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...