4 Shares1 Comment
Sure, it sounds like a good idea — zombies in a Jane Austen setting — but I never really thought it could have been all that good. In novel form, you could do lots with it — the imagination is a wondrous thing — but as a movie? I seriously have my doubts. I don’t know if that’s the reason why every director attached to the big-screen adaptation of Seth Grahame-Smith’s novel have bailed on it, but it wouldn’t surprise me if they saw all the pre-production stuff, including the script, and thought to themselves that this is just a train wreck waiting to happen.
Whatever the reasons, it looks like “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” has lost yet another director, with “Fright Night’s” Craig Gillespie (left) reportedly dropping out of the picture. Gillespie joins David O. Russell and Mike White as directors attached than lost on the project. Meanwhile, author Grahame-Smith has already made it public that Yes, he’d direct the movie if Lionsgate would let him. So why won’t you let him, Lionsgate?
Besides needing a new director, the Lionsgate genre mash-up still hasn’t been able to scrounge up a leading lady yet, with Emma Stone apparently electing not to take another turn in the zombie-verse post-“Zombieland”. At present, the film only has Dominic Cooper attached to play Mr. Darcy, though how long he stays onboard is open to debate when everyone else is jumping ship, or unwilling to come onboard in the first place. The film is also being produced by Natalie Portman, who mysteriously enough, doesn’t seem especially interested in starring in the movie. I guess she just wants the producing credit.
Personally, I think they should just let George Romero direct the sucker. He could toss in some social allegory about the evils of Victorian-era England and whatnot. He’s good at that stuff.