"Drip dry."
Cary Grant standing in a shower, wearing his
suit - his glasses on. Although fully-clothed, he takes a
shower. Using the soap, water turned on - his hair all wet.
From the doorway, Audrey Hepburn watches and in her eyes and
smile - we see how enchanted she is by the image before her.
Grant casually describes his actions as "drip dry," and
wipes away excess water from his face. She laughs and cannot
help it, falling further in love with a stranger - a man who
had walked into her life when she was most vulnerable.
The above is a famous scene from "Charade,"
a 1963 thriller starring legends Cary Grant and Audrey
Hepburn, along with James Coburn, James Kennedy and Walter
Matthau. Directed by Stanley Donen, the thriller combined
comedy and suspense, mystery and romance. It featured great
performances and stylish direction. Now, almost forty years
later, the thinkers in Hollywood have decided it’s time to
release a remake. Or is it more of a retelling? Mark
Wahlberg defended "Planet of the Apes" last year by
explaining that it was not so much a remake, but a
"re-imagining" by Tim Burton. Will the same defense be
needed for "The Truth About Charlie"?
The Players
Inspired by "Charade," "The Truth About
Charlie" tells the story of a young woman (Thandie Newton)
who suddenly finds herself in the middle of chaos as her
husband’s unexpected death has left her as the living key to
millions of dollars. Baddies come out of the woodwork and
she is confused and alone in Paris. Enter a charming,
handsome stranger (Wahlberg) who tells her that the money
her husband (Charles) had was his and that he’d like to get
it back. Should she trust him? Will she fall for him?
In the movie, Mark Wahlberg is Cary Grant
and Thandie Newton is Audrey Hepburn. From the trailers and
commercials I’ve seen, I think the casting of Newton was
very good. She has a British accent and is petite like
Hepburn. One can see her being both vulnerable and strong.
Director Jonathan Demme ("The Silence of the Lambs") worked
with Newton on "Beloved" in 1998 and no doubt saw her
potential for this role. As for the casting of Wahlberg, he
was apparently the second choice after Will Smith had to
drop out. Though I think he can be charming in a
street-smarts kind of way, I don’t see how he can bottle the
charm of Cary Grant -- the ultimate charmer. Who could? It’s
a very tall order. Can he pull it off?
And perhaps that is the biggest problem
facing "The Truth About Charlie," in that it is a remake of
a classic thriller - one that many love. How do you improve
on the original and if you cannot, then why spend all the
money and talent trying? Is "Charlie" being unfairly
cornered with comparisons? The comparisons, like it or not,
are there and the movie I believe will face a considerable
test in creating its own buzz.
Adding It Up
With only a few days to go before its debut,
"The Truth About Charlie" needs to get its name out and
about. So far, I’ve seen little advertising for it.
Commercials, yes, but there haven’t been many. The studio
seems to be promoting it as a mystery, a thriller, and a
dark comedy. The best joke so far has been Thandie Newton
becoming exasperated by baddie Tim Robbins and his
not-so-subtle warnings and threats. But is this enough?
As for star power, the film doesn’t offer a
great deal of wattage. The commercials do not even say that
Newton and Wahlberg star -- perhaps realizing that the
biggest factor in "Charlie"’s success is the story. The film
is the first starring role for Newton and the third in a row
for Wahlberg. Their most successful films prior to "Charlie"
have been special-effects wonders "Mission: Impossible 2,"
($215M) "The Perfect Storm" ($182M) and "Planet of the Apes"
($180M).
In "Charlie," there are no special effects.
It’s about the people, a romance, and the solving of a
mystery that no one is quite sure of what the facts are.
Such a movie seems to be made for a thinking audience; one
intrigued by plot and characters. With Jonathan Demme as the
director, "Charlie" should attract an older audience; one
that remembers "Lambs," "Beloved," and "Philadelphia."
Given that the theaters are gearing up for
big releases in November and December, I don’t think
expectations for "Charlie" are very high. The
highest-grossing movie for the weekend of October 18 was
"The Ring" with $15M. And if a supernatural thriller like
that can only scare up $15M, I don’t see why "Charlie"
should be expected to do the incredible.
Also, where are the magazine covers? I
haven’t seen any. When "Planet of the Apes" came out, Mark
Wahlberg appeared on "Vanity Fair" as well as "Entertainment
Weekly." No such promotion has been given "Charlie" even
though I realize that this is a totally different film
experience than "Planet" was. The posters have been
interesting, but perhaps too bland for those not familiar
with the story. I still hope it’s given a chance by the
public and if good, I hope it generates business through
word of mouth.
The Truth
In the end, "The Truth About Charlie" looks
to be destined for a short run in the top ten. It’ll
probably land in the latter-half of the pack this week with
"Ghost Ship" and "Jackass: The Movie" both being released.
In the few weeks following, it’ll no doubt fall into the
second tier of ten and then further.
But with Universal releasing it on only
700-plus theaters, perhaps the thinking is that it will
build its audience with time. Or perhaps the studio knows
its audience is small and thus - is offering "Charlie" in
only a select number of theaters just enough to meet demand.
With the inevitable comparisons to "Charade," "The Truth
About Charlie" will probably fall before it can swim. But
commercial success does not have to be so long as the movie
is of quality. Let’s hope "Charlie" has at least that.
Opening weekend - about $2M.
