TV, Film, and Entertainment News Daily

Don Quixote Action Movie To Kick Ass, Miss The Point

Not content with turning Sherlock Holmes into a big-budget man of action, Warner Bros. is turning his attentions to another literature classic with an eye to… well, bastardizing it. Are you ready for a burly, explosive Don Quixote?

Empire reports that Warners and producer Joel Silver are looking at developing a somewhat literal, action-based take on Miguel de Cervantes’ 17th century story that will make Quixote’s fictional giants somewhat more real, because mixing special effects and name recognition is more important than being faithful to the intent of the original, apparently.

As Empire notes, this is yet more bad news for director Terry Gilliam, whose own attempts to create a film based on the story have been so troubled that they’ve resulted in a movie of their own.


  • Sijoy2k5

    The story of Don Quixote is hundreds of years old; should EVERY version of him be exactly the same? As a public domain character, cannot he be reinterpreted as an Action Hero if that's what producers (and the audience) want? I've seen takes on Quixote that range from insane comedy to true tragedy; I'd say Quixote The Action Movie is perfectly fair. After all, we still have the original novel for those who want historical accuracy, and we will most likely STILL have it long after this movie has been forgotten.

  • JRC

    If, for example, Alan Moore was doing it, no one (few) would have a problem.
    Someone that has respect for the characters core ideas, but wants to make an absurd jump is one thing.
    But then all interpretations are not created equal.

  • Mike

    I don't think the issue it's reinterpretation. It's the fact that the reinterpretations are vapid and show how shallow the culture has become. It's rarely done meaningfully and hence hints of exploitation, regardless of how legal it is. The work is stripped of it's integrity, that quality that made it timeless to begin with, and becomes another come and go “blockbuster.” Perhaps if there was an attempt to reinterpret the magic of character and story of the first, instead of just rehashing plot and loading in special effects often at the expense of theme and complexity, then McMillan would be less disenchanted. And I don't blame him. Even suggesting that maintaining historical accuracy in a film for some kind artistic cred is ultimately superficial, as in the film sense that primarily comes down to the “look” of the film.


    JOEL SILVER is a fan of B MOVIE, i had some good experience with it and sometime he give a chance to a real artist (KISS KISS BANG BANG) and sometime he produce big pile of phophorescent shat (SPEED RACER), so why not having fun with it like HOLMES.

    but if that cut the grass under the foot of GILLIAM (which i love), well what can you say. i'll have to wait more. SILVER can put a movie on track pretty fast and GILLIAM have to do his sisyphe work… may be he could later put his version on track faster (dreams).
    the studio never looked twince to put two movies with the same picth on screen at close release date… (METEOR movies) so may be it could help GILLIAM after all ^^

  • s1rude

    Hey, Speed Racer was AWESOME! There are plenty of examples of “lesser Silver” productions – the Jet Li-DMX collabos, anything with Mel Gibson after Lethal Weapon 2 – no need to disparage something as visually inventive and flat-out fun as SR