Wasn’t The Untouchables an excellent movie? Does it need Brian DePalma to make some prequels to bolt on the beginning? Perhaps he’s heard the Hollywood penchant for prequels, who knows. The news from Cinematical is that he’s going to be doing just that:
…director Brian DePalma is reportedly working on a movie that will focus on Al Capone’s rise to power in Chicago. A parallel story will follow the earlier life of Johnny Malone, the one honest cop in a corrupt city played in the original by Sean Connery.
Now I can see that the early life of Capone could make for a good movie. He’s a strong unique character with a huge life filled with mythology, so there’s plenty of scope there to make a movie that would truly stand on its own. However, the character of Malone is one that for most of us exists in the original movie and is truly dominated by Connery, is there any way that he could stand for himself in a complete story without directly linking to the Untouchables? Could these work, and can DePalma pull it off to the original level?
just because you can make a sequel doesn’t mean you should, the same goes for prequels. BUT, if they do things right and can bring back the feeling of the original, then a prequel would be awsome. I would love to see the antics and blood baths involving Al Capone on the big screen. It was good to go into the 1930’s setting with the oringinal, but we only got to see the end of his prime and inevitably his capture and defeat against a fish. I wonder if Pierce Brosnan will play the young Johny Malone?
Psst, the link to The Untouchables doesn’t work ;X
It has potential. It would cool if it has a noirish feel to it.
DePalma has my vote of confidence. I absolutely loved the Untouchables.
I think they’re only planning one prequel (that statement is just implying that there’s going to be a storyline revolving around Capone and a storyline revolving around Malone).