Page 3 of 3
Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:23 pm
by rs_milo_whatever
Hmm No posts here in a while. Well, a sudden burst of curiosity urged me to search for Hairspray 2 news and here is what I found:
Last month, we broke big news on John Waters’ bizarre, top-secret script treatment blueprinting the upcoming “Hairspray 2.” The details were so weird, in fact, that as news spread across the Web some people thought composer/producer Marc Shaiman was joking.
Naturally, we had to take the story to the man himself, “Hairspray” director Adam Shankman – who not only confirmed it all, but also told us about a title possibility and the big-name star who won’t be returning when the sequel hits theaters in July 2010.
“It’s crazy,” Shankman laughed. “[The treatment] is amazing, but it’s crazy. There are things in there that I was like ‘Can we do that?’ It’s real John Waters-y stuff, and it was more like a sequel to his movie than to our movie. Which I love, because then that becomes re-interpreted.”
Shankman admitted that while Waters does indeed want squeaky-clean Zac Efron to take acid (“or something like that”), the director will likely yank out that controversial story detail before they go to script. “I think that’s probably part of the treatment that won’t get used. And in the treatment, [Efron’s drug use] is an accident,” he said, explaining that he also won’t be asking the “High School Musical” star to have trippy conversations with the acne on his forehead. “That’s the kind of stuff where you’re like: ‘Yeah, I don’t know if that’s going to work.’”
The director (whose Adam Sandler comedy “Bedtime Stories” hits theaters Christmas Day) did say, however, that he’ll most likely keep John Travolta’s weight-loss storyline. “It has Edna getting hooked on diet pills,” he said of the parts he liked about Waters’ treatment, including a possible title. “Let’s put it this way: It’s called ‘Hairspray 2: White Lipstick.’ [That’s a] butch title. That’s what the treatment was called!”
As die-hard Waters fans know, his original title for 1998’s “Hairspray” was “White Lipstick,” named after the Sixties fashion fad.
Rumors have been swirling for months that John Travolta doesn’t want to don the fat suit again, but Shankman was quick to shoot them down: “That’s not what he said. He’s like ‘No, just keep going. And if it’s funny, I’ll do it.’”
The director did admit, however, that one person who most likely won’t return is the evil Velma Von Tussle. “Yeah, probably [no Michelle Pfeiffer],” he revealed. “Not because we didn’t love her, but because we just thought different adversaries [would be necessary].”
“There’ll be a change in villains,” he explained, likely also subtracting Brittany Snow, who played Pfeiffer’s daughter in the hit 2007 flick. “[Waters’ treatment] is ideas that we’re just going to pick and choose from, and we’ll see what happens with it.”
Oh, and here’s one last interesting tidbit: Although it is known that the film will use the Vietnam War as a backdrop, it’s not Zac Efron’s Link Larkin who’ll be drafted.
“No, it wasn’t Zac,” Shankman said, before catching himself. “Wow, you’re getting a lot out of me for something I said I wouldn’t talk about.”
Are you as sad as I am that Zac won’t be taking a far-out trip in “Hairspray 2”? Or is Shankman making the right call?
So there you have it, a very appropriate sub-title as a nod at the working title for the first Hairspray, and Waters more involved here than in the first. I still don't know if a sequel is a good thing, but will most likely be seeing this opening weekend.
Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:36 pm
by ajmrowland
a Hairspary...sequel? I seriously missed this whole thread, then.
Re: Uhh... HAIRSPRAY 2??
Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 5:51 am
by Someday...
JiminyCrick91 wrote:Harbinger wrote:New Line asks for more 'Hairspray'
John Waters to write treatment for sequel
but for now all I can say is 'Grease 2'.
-Sky
I had the exact same thought[/u]
Re: Uhh... HAIRSPRAY 2??
Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 10:30 am
by xxhplinkxx
Someday... wrote:JiminyCrick91 wrote:but for now all I can say is 'Grease 2'.
-Sky
I had the exact same thought
Then this movie should rock. I love Grease 2. And no, I'm not being sarcastic.
Re: Uhh... HAIRSPRAY 2??
Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 11:53 am
by Flanger-Hanger
xxhplinkxx wrote:Then this movie should rock. I love Grease 2. And no, I'm not being sarcastic.
You also love Mannequin. What does that say about your taste in films?
Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 1:57 pm
by xxhplinkxx
It means it's great.
And what's wrong with Mannequin?? Who doesn't love some Kim Cattrall and Estelle Getty?
Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 2:11 pm
by PeterPanfan
I like Mannequin! And seriously, Kim Cattral looks NO different now than she did then.
Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 3:08 pm
by xxhplinkxx
PeterPanfan wrote:I like Mannequin! And seriously, Kim Cattral looks NO different now than she did then.
Cause she's a hot bitch!
Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 3:26 pm
by SpringHeelJack
...and because of extensive plastic surgery.
Posted: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:16 am
by PatrickvD
I hope they keep the Zac Efron taking acid story detail. How awesome would an acid-fueled musical number be? That would be like... the second coming of Pink Elephants on Parade!
I love the idea of John Waters being more involved. If they stick closer to his material the sequel can be different from the original. And let's face it, pretty much every sequel ever made makes the mistake of rehasing the original. I see potential in a Hairspray sequel now. And is Travolta in or out?........ and no I don't mean the closet.
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2009 9:53 am
by zackisthewalrus
Adam Shankman interested in making Hairspray 2 in 3-D?
Our last update on Hairspray 2 was in January, from director Adam Shankman, who explained John Waters' had written a crazy script treatment that they were going to borrow ideas from. Thanks to Collider we have a new update from Shankman, but unfortunately (for those who are actually excited for this sequel), it doesn't seem to have moved too far along. "There are some really funny ideas, [but] we don't have a writer for it yet." New Line was hoping to have Hairspray 2 ready for release in July of 2010, but they probably won't make that date. However, the most interesting news is that Hairspray 2 may end up in 3-D.
Shankman is producing Step Up 3-D, which is not only the third sequel in that series, but being shot in 3-D. "We were blown away with the tests we just did [for Step Up 3-D] and seeing the dance in 3D, and an arm coming out and flips that are going by your head. It was such an incredible experience." I'm already getting ill just thinking about that, but some people do like that kind of gimmicky experience. And what about using it for Hairspray? "Yeah, that would be cool in 3-D because it has a pop-sensibility. 3-D should be regulated to things with a pop-sensibility because that’s the experience you want from those kinds of films."
Obviously this is by no means a confirmation, but simply an expression of interest in the prospect of using 3-D for Hairspray 2. Above all, I'm curious to see what people think about this idea. Is anyone even excited to see Step Up 3-D? And what if 3-D was used for Hairspray? I actually really enjoyed Shankman's Hairspray, for more reasons than just the dancing and energy of it all, but because it actually had a good story. I don't think I would have liked it as much of it was just used as a way to showcase the gimmick of 3-D dancing. That's meant for movies like Step Up 3-D, which I don't watch anyway. What do you think?
http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/04/13/ ... -2-in-3-d/
I think that this movie is doomed.
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:51 am
by SpringHeelJack
Everything is doomed on paper.
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:23 am
by rs_milo_whatever
What is this sudden obsession with 3D? Must all movies be 3D? Really? another Step Up sequel requires that one random girl flipping her hair into the audience? Everyone complains when they come out of an animated movie for which they payed extra to watch on 3D; it's always "not enough cheesy three-dimensional tricks" and I rarely hear on person that got their money's worth with that one movie
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2009 12:15 pm
by PeterPanfan
Ugh. And then they suck on DVD because it has all these cheesy moments where you know it's supposed to be 3-D, and it ends up looking just bad.
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2009 2:12 pm
by SpringHeelJack
He didn't say it was going to be in 3-D. He said it would maybe be neat if it were in 3-D. Let's not put too much stock in this. I once remarked that it would be neat if I stripped to my undies and ran through my dorm, but I didn't follow up on it.
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2009 2:36 pm
by Flanger-Hanger
SpringHeelJack wrote:He didn't say it was going to be in 3-D. He said it would maybe be neat if it were in 3-D. Let's not put too much stock in this. I once remarked that it would be neat if I stripped to my undies and ran through my dorm, but I didn't follow up on it.
Dang, I wish we could still nominate stuff for the forum awards! This quote would get my pick for best of the year!
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 1:22 am
by SpringHeelJack
I think it's technically eligible for next year's noms, Flangy, I'll remind you about it then.
Additionally, part two of the phrase was "Later that week, I stripped to my undies and ran through my dorm suite," but I didn't think that was the right place to end it. I'd show the pics, but they say this is a family friendly forum.
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 5:25 pm
by Mickeyfan1990
The sequel has been called off.:
http://www.moviehole.net/201025043-adam ... -happening
I'm kinda glas 'cuz I don't know how they were going to pull off a sequel. Though they say "Look before you leap."
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 6:18 pm
by zackisthewalrus