- Joined
- Jun 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,353
If theres no cartoon in the film then how is the pink cartoon character associated with the French detective?
Pink Panther
- Thread starter MaxMolyneux
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2002
- Messages
- 19,407
I suspect you might have things the wrong way round - the cartoon character came after the films.
It appears in the title sequence of the films and in the first film The Pink Panther was a large gem.
The cartoon character was popular enough to spawn its own animated series. The first film was released in 1963 and they brought out the cartoon in 1964.
See the Wikipedia entries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pink_Panther
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pink_P ... aracter%29
I think a better question would be if there is no Peter Sellars in the film way make another one? It sounds dire.
I also thought the cartoon was pretty rubbish too.
It appears in the title sequence of the films and in the first film The Pink Panther was a large gem.
The cartoon character was popular enough to spawn its own animated series. The first film was released in 1963 and they brought out the cartoon in 1964.
See the Wikipedia entries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pink_Panther
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pink_P ... aracter%29
I think a better question would be if there is no Peter Sellars in the film way make another one? It sounds dire.
I also thought the cartoon was pretty rubbish too.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,353
Yeah kinda mixed my question up.
Why draw a panther in the title sequence when the panthers a gem?
Why draw a panther in the title sequence when the panthers a gem?
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2002
- Messages
- 19,407
MaxMolyneux said:
It was the sixties man.
Of course in the more cynical age one might imagine they'd done it to test the character in preparation for a spin off series....
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2002
- Messages
- 13,692
That's it - when the diamond is held at a certain angle, there appears to be a pink panther in it's midst.
I'm going to start ranting now, so be warned.
The original Clouseau movies, especially the first two (or three if I'm being generous) were spot on, funny-as-hell and had Sellars at his absolute pinnacle*. A Shot in the Dark remains one of my all time favourite films - so, as we so often bewail in this very forum - why the badgery fuck remake any of them?
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THE ORIGINAL.
I do like Steve Martin. I preferred him twenty odd years ago, when he was far more inventive and subversive rather than being "slightly careworn everyman who goes a bit zany", but I'll happily watch him nonethless. However, I won't be watching him in this, as THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THE ORIGINAL. It doesn't need updating (which these days seems to mean that no-one has cell-phones or net access in the original, reagrdless of whether or not this is relevant to the plot), it doesn't need "re-imagining for today's audience" (ie using shorter words and adding gratuitous CGI to appease the cretinous attention span of the terminally Sunny Delighted): it doesn't need one of today's foremost comic actors bringing a fresh perspective to the role because, in glorious technicolor, we already have arguably THE finest comic actor of his age performing the role he was born to play to utter sodding perfection. In the name of all humanity, and for the last time, in capitals, THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THE ORIGINAL.
If you're going to remake a film, remake something with a good central idea that was comprehensively screwed up as a movie first-time around. How many films are a total mess? Hundreds of them. So go and take your pick from them, and leave perfectly good films the fuck alone.
Rant over.
*IMHO Sellars' single greatest performance, however, was his 5 minute cameo in "The Wrong Box", which by happy coincidence is on Channel 5 this afternoon. Granted, the movie does wander a bit, but it's still great fun to watch.
I'm going to start ranting now, so be warned.
The original Clouseau movies, especially the first two (or three if I'm being generous) were spot on, funny-as-hell and had Sellars at his absolute pinnacle*. A Shot in the Dark remains one of my all time favourite films - so, as we so often bewail in this very forum - why the badgery fuck remake any of them?
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THE ORIGINAL.
I do like Steve Martin. I preferred him twenty odd years ago, when he was far more inventive and subversive rather than being "slightly careworn everyman who goes a bit zany", but I'll happily watch him nonethless. However, I won't be watching him in this, as THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THE ORIGINAL. It doesn't need updating (which these days seems to mean that no-one has cell-phones or net access in the original, reagrdless of whether or not this is relevant to the plot), it doesn't need "re-imagining for today's audience" (ie using shorter words and adding gratuitous CGI to appease the cretinous attention span of the terminally Sunny Delighted): it doesn't need one of today's foremost comic actors bringing a fresh perspective to the role because, in glorious technicolor, we already have arguably THE finest comic actor of his age performing the role he was born to play to utter sodding perfection. In the name of all humanity, and for the last time, in capitals, THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THE ORIGINAL.
If you're going to remake a film, remake something with a good central idea that was comprehensively screwed up as a movie first-time around. How many films are a total mess? Hundreds of them. So go and take your pick from them, and leave perfectly good films the fuck alone.
Rant over.
*IMHO Sellars' single greatest performance, however, was his 5 minute cameo in "The Wrong Box", which by happy coincidence is on Channel 5 this afternoon. Granted, the movie does wander a bit, but it's still great fun to watch.
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2003
- Messages
- 3,534
While of course Steve Martin's Clouseau couldn't ever be anything other than second-rate, the character isn't necessarily synonymous with Peter Sellers - Alan Arkin played him in Inspector Clouseau and wasn't half-bad, if memory serves...
Rather fond of The Optimists of Nine Elms, meself...
stuneville said:
Rather fond of The Optimists of Nine Elms, meself...
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2002
- Messages
- 13,692
That is true - he came from the other direction, IIRC (long time since I saw it), very little of the slapstick and silly voice, more of an awkward, slightly out-of-his-depth-and-he-knows-it portrayal. Arkin's brilliant at that sort of role.WhistlingJack said:
No, no argument with someone else playing Clouseau per se: my objection is an existing film being remade, with someone not in Sellars' league as a comic character actor playing the lead.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,353
Mighty_Emperor said:
