Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

3 Early Test Screening Reports on Jonathan Demme's remake of the classic CHARADE called THE TRUTH ABOUT CHARLIE!

Hey folks, Harry here... This is one of those remakes that I just never really understood. I love CHARADE to death. How could you ever hope to cast two more perfect people than Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn, personally I feel that's genetically impossible. Those two are magic people, and truthfully we don't have many, if any, magic people in films today. But this was a Jonathan Demme project, and while I feel it is a thankless useless task in remaking a classic, I've been interested in it. Now remember, this is an extremely early TEST SCREENING. The film isn't due till the second week of October, and on movie like this feedback is very very valuable to the director. Especially a director as talented as Demme. So if you read these reviews, realize that this film will most likely be played with quite a bit by Demme and may even have additional scenes or 30 minutes missing. It is all in Demme's hands now! Well hopefully it is, fucking studios need to sit out this process. Ahem... Here's the reports...


Here's that review I promised you, for Demme's new film. He was there, just observing the crowd in his green hunter's coat. As for the film . . . well . . .


I have just returned from the first test screening of Jonathan Demme's remake of Stanley Donen's delightful 1963 film, Charade. That film is one of the best, scripted by Peter Stone. It has romance, charm, and wit in spades. Sadly, Demme's The Truth About Charlie has none of these.

The first problem with this film is that the lead roles, initially played by Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn, are portrayed by Mark Wahlberg and Thandie Newton, respectively. While Grant and Hepburn had a crackling romantic dynamic, Wahlberg is woefully miscast, offering a thoroughly leaden performance for the whole show. From their very first encounter, Wahlberg's Joshua Peters and Newton's Regina Lambert produce zero chemistry. There is nothing to engage the viewer, to lead one to care about either of them, or even believe the "romance" that is supposed to be growing between the pair. George Clooney is the only actor who could even begin to fill Cary Grant's drip-dry suit, and as my friend noted, he already did that in Out of Sight, which is far more deserving of the mantle of the modern Charade. Thandie Newton is fine; that is to say that she does nothing wrong in her part. It is simply that the material she is presented is relentlessly devoid of passion, suspense, or tension of any kind. The only two performances in the film that are truly bad are those from Mark Wahlberg and Tim Robbins. Robbins, assuming the role played by Walter Matthau in the original, is awful--his character is set up as the dramatic and emotional lynchpin in the climactic scene, and it all comes to naught. Robbins even apes Matthau's speech patterns, to (unintentional) comedic effect.

While Charade was scripted by Peter Stone, The Truth About Charlie is "inspired by the motion picture screenplay" by Stone. The film itself is written by Demme, along with Steve Schmidt and one other writer whose name now escapes me. The banter between Grant and Hepburn is wonderful, and is nowhere to be found here. There are a couple of instances where the dialogue nods back to the original, but to no effect.

When Audrey Hepburn said "Do you know what's wrong with you? ... Absolutely nothing," to Cary Grant, the line is at once witty and terribly romantic. When Thandie Newton says the same to Mark Wahlberg, the viewer has seen nothing to evoke such sentiment from her. As such, the dialogue plays through with no weight whatsoever. Charade is also a great suspense picture, often touted as the greatest Hitchcock movie that Hitchcock never made. The ending of the original is drastically altered, seemingly for the sole purpose of extracting any suspense from the story.

Matthau's Carson Dyle is a bitter, vicious man fully capable of murder. Tim Robbins has an illogical turn in his thought process towards the end of the film that makes no sense, and is painfully trite. The final act of the film should have the audience concerned for the welfare of Regina Lambert, but at no time is there any real sense of peril or danger.

Finally, the direction by Jonathan Demme is overly stylized, for no reason connected to the narrative, and he doesn't even stick with any single style. There are *many* scenes where the camera is needlessly jittery, and Tak Fujimoto's cinematography manages to waste the setting of Paris. The film strikes as though Demme wanted to make an action picture, with his slam cuts and obviously handheld camera. However, interspersed between these scenes are also realistically staged scenes, and the juxtaposition of these styles only serves to draw the viewer out of the narrative. The very last segment of the film, after the climax, involves a sequence that goes completely against the style and nature of anything the viewer has heretofore been shown.

In closing, anyone who is fond of Charade ought to stay away from The Truth About Charlie. Dry, limp, and uninteresting, this is another pointless remake of a wonderful film. Call me . . . Andrew Repasky McElhinney.

Here's the most positive of the reviews...

I was lucky enough to attend a test screening of "The Truth About Charlie," Jonathan Demme‚s remake of Stanley Donen's "Charade," in Philadelphia On Tuesday, 04/09. The picture looked nearly finished, with only some misplaced music cues and less-than-stellar print quality marring it from a technical standpoint.

The story borrows most of the major plot points of Peter Stone's script for "Charade." Those unfamiliar with that film should know both it and "...Charlie" deal with a young woman (Audrey Hepburn originally, now Thandie Newton) living in Paris who crosses paths with a debonair stranger (Cary Grant originally, Mark Wahlberg here) and a gaggle of criminals, cops, and federal agents (embodied by, among others, Tim Robbins, Lisa Gay Hamilton, Ted Levine, and Joon Park-Hyun). All this comes about by way of her recently deceased husband, the titular Charlie. He had his hands on a vast number of diamonds that have disappeared, and everyone suspects his widow holds the key to their whereabouts. Delving much deeper would threaten to give away the twists the story thrives on; suffice to say that except for the heroine Regina (Newton), no one is what they seem.

Overall, the picture came off well enough. Audience reaction seemed positive, with no walkouts and only a few sequences garnering unintentional laughs. Demme's direction had a calculated looseness to it that matched the story well, and was a welcome change from the more weighted looks of his last few (much more serious-minded) pictures. The temp soundtrack was a hodgepodge of French and American pop, and proved to be a highlight. One can only hope it'll make it through to the final cut.

Wahlberg seemed a little uncomfortable slipping into Grant's suave shoes. His taut facial features and New Yawk accent (hidden with intermittent success) too heavily belied his 'kind stranger' act. Newton is no Audrey Hepburn (but who is?), however she fared a little better and made for another strong Demme heroine (don't forget this IS the man who brought us "Caged Heat," "Silence of the Lambs," "Beloved"). To his credit, Demme has assembled a great supporting cast, and the rogue trio of Levine, Gay Hamilton, and Park-Hyun is a lot of fun to watch (pity they didn't score more screen time as a unit).

Tak Fujimoto's lensing was almost too freewheeling for its own good. Certain scenes that should've played more seriously were undermined by the constant snapping of the camera back and forth between characters and unnecessary Dutch-angle cuts. There was far too much motion within the compositions, and frequent transitions composed of time-lapsed footage of Paris only made matters worse. Some sequences did come off well however, such as a brief stop at a club where all of the major characters surfaced on the dance floor to try and entice Newton to divulge information. The most kinetic sequence was a superbly crafted late-game race to Newton's apartment between Wahlberg and Park- Hyun (the Korean superstar of "Nowhere to Hide" fame, garnering a surprising amount of screen time and acquitting himself quite well in his first English-language role).

Throughout the picture, Demme's subtle handling of material that bordered on being overly ironic or too unrealistic (in particular the dance sequence and the occasional appearances and songs by a Parisian crooner named Avazaro (I think)) saved the day, and on many occasions elicited applause from the audience. "...Charlie" has enough charm going for it, but offers little in the way of anything we haven't seen before. What made the original "Charade" so much fun was that is came during a cycle of hard-edged spy pics (including the first few James Bond offerings) and worked to deconstruct their tenets. Here, it isn't hard to get the feeling of talent spinning in endless circles. How much the film will change between now and its eventual release date is unsure, but in this form it has the makings of an enjoyable 2 hours of escapism, if nothing else.

Meanwhile, Reno's Freudian slip in misnaming the film, might have had a clue as to his overall opinion of the film...

Hey Harry, Reno here with a report on this evening's test screening of THE TROUBLE WITH CHARLIE held in Philadelphia. Why the City of Brotherly Love you may ask? Well, it seems that director Jonathan Demme wanted to see how his new flick played in his old hometown.

And what, you may ask, is THE TROUBLE WITH CHARLIE, all about? Well, a wealthy woman returns to her Paris home from vacation with the intent of divorcing her husband only to find he's up and gotten himself murdered. Aided by a mysterious and charming stranger and hounded by three sinister strangers, she tries to unravel the reason why her husband was killed and what is the treasure that he was killed over.

Sound familiar? Of course it does, if you‚ve seen Stanley Donen's CHARADE with Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn than you've seen this movie. Yes, it's another remake folks, with Mark Wahlberg in the Cary Grant role and Thandie Newton taking over the Audrey Hepburn part.

But while most remakes are taking the source material are mutating them beyond all recognition in the name of 're-imaging,' CHARLIE stays fairly faithful to the original story. So much so, in fact, that there are no real surprises for anyone who has seen the original. But then again, seeing as how the original was made in 1965, I would guarantee that a majority of this film's target audience (ages 25-35 I would guess due to its lack of wall to wall rock music soundtrack) probably haven't seen the original.

To be sure, there are a few changes- Josh Newton's confrontation with one of the three nominal bad guys has been changed from a roof top fight to a bit of cat and mouse on a train. Unfortunately, its resolution doesn't play as well as in the original. Demme has also included a new character in the form of Charlie's crazed mother. If she was added as a red herring to the storyline, she doesn't work very well. Fortunately, she's only in the film for a few scenes and only one is pivotal to the plot. (Though she does provide a bit of denouement in a scene during the film's closing credits.) Another Demme addition that works better is the beefing up of the police inspector character, so much so the she (as opposed to being a he in the original) takes an active part in the finale.

My biggest gripe is that Demme is a little too slavish to the source material. I was hoping that someone of his caliber would bring a new twist or two to the material.

But I know what some of you may be thinking? How are Wahlberg and Newton? Do they fill the mighty big shoes of Grant and Hepburn? Well, yes and no. Newton is absolutely charming and a genuine delight, considering I thought her performance in MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 2 was fairly bland. Wahlberg is as good as he can get, but he's never impressed me as having the charisma for pulling off the charm and suave sophistication that the role really demands. Fortunately, Newton works hard and manages to pull him up most of the time.

I don't want to give the impression that the film was all bad. There are several things to recommend it. Tim Robbins is great as a government agent. The script is entertaining and will keep the initiated guessing and those of us familiar with the original will get a kick out of spotting some of the dialog from the original that's been transplanted. There's also a nice tribute to Truffaut that adds a slightly bizarre tone to the last minute and a half of the film, but yet oddly doesn't detract.

RENO out.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • April 10, 2002, 7:16 a.m. CST

    Exactly how much cocaine was floating around the meeting where s

    by exit272

    First Planet of the Apes, now this. How many bad remakes will poor Marky Mark be forced to show his inadequacies in? Poor guy.

  • April 10, 2002, 7:46 a.m. CST

    Should have been George Clooney, Julia Roberts, Steven Soderber

    by Steal_Dragon

    Would have been much better, come on, most people don't even know who Thandie Newton is, all I know her from is Mission:Impossible-2 and that jacked up her chances for playing Alex Munday in "Charlie's Angels". Like I said before it should have been George Clooney as Peter, Julia Roberts as Regina, Steven Soderbergh as direcor, and M. Night Shyamalan as screenwriter, I like his twist endings at the end.

  • April 10, 2002, 7:49 a.m. CST

    Should have been George Clooney, Julia Roberts, Steven Soderber

    by Steal_Dragon

    Would have been much better, come on, most people don't even know who Thandie Newton is, all I know her from is Mission:Impossible-2 and that jacked up her chances for playing Alex Munday in "Charlie's Angels". Like I said before it should have been George Clooney as Peter, Julia Roberts as Regina, Steven Soderbergh as direcor, and M. Night Shyamalan as screenwriter, I like his twist endings at the end and also Ted Griffin (Ocean's Eleven) as screenwriter.

  • April 10, 2002, 7:51 a.m. CST

    STeal Dragon

    by t-squared

    Yo. Thandie Newton was in "BELOVED" with Oprah Winfrey. Thandie played the title role. I believe she's a brit stage actress. Gorgeous. Mark Wahlberg sucks. He should get out of entertainment. He can't rap and his acting is LIMITED at best.

  • April 10, 2002, 8:09 a.m. CST

    Park Joong-Hoon

    by Cinemama

    Not his first English language role. He was also in the "American Dragons" with Michael Biehn. Not a high spot for either one of their careers.

  • April 10, 2002, 8:28 a.m. CST

    Marky Mark in a Cary Grant role??

    by Aronld Scazziger

    Muahahahhahahhahhahaaa ... doomed to failure

  • April 10, 2002, 8:28 a.m. CST


    by RenoNevada2000

    Man is there egg on my face. Of course the damn thing is THE TRUTH... not THE TROUBLE. I blame it on my mother who, if she got a name wrong in her head could never get it right again to save her life...

  • April 10, 2002, 8:51 a.m. CST

    Charade was just on AMC on Monday, and it is quite a film...

    by JTylor

    I mean, jeez, it's got James Coburn in it! It references An American in Paris... and a twist at the end that still blindsides you after all the twists that have come already. Seriously, the studios shouldn't try to remake any of the old Hitchcock/Hitchcock homage films: you can't replace Cary Grant, Jimmy Stewart, Audrey Hepburn, or (sigh) Grace Kelly with anyone from the modern age (except, as someone noted, George Clooney, but he does the "ratty suave" better; he could never touch Cary in true suavity. Clooney I'd put in for a remake of Father Goose, for instance. That'd be fine). Needless to say, I won't be seeing this one. Probably just find the DVD of Charade (Donen may be aping Hitchcock a little, but he does find some great camera angles and shots, and the script ranges from the really funny to thumbscrews-tense). Anyway, that's enough of a (too-early in the morning) rant.

  • April 10, 2002, 9:17 a.m. CST

    New Yawk accent?

    by The Colonel

    Wahlberg is from Boston, dipshit. There's a BIG difference between those two accents. GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS!!!!!

  • April 10, 2002, 9:42 a.m. CST

    Actually, Harry the title of the film IS The Trouble With Charli

    by racurnutte

    ...not The Truth About Charlie. I was in Philadelphia this weekend and spoke with the guy recruiting for the test screening. At least, he was calling it The Trouble With Charlie.

  • April 10, 2002, 9:44 a.m. CST

    Well, never mind, IMDB says it's called The Truth About Char

    by racurnutte

    You'd think they'd have the people doing the test screenings using the film's actual title. Ignore my previous post.

  • April 10, 2002, 10:44 a.m. CST


    by gladiatrroxx20


  • April 10, 2002, 11:50 a.m. CST

    Charade rules and I'm sorry they remade it

    by the_pissboy1

    How can you put Marky Mark in a film as a suave guy? He's too small and soft-spoken to be a witty, dahsing, sophisticated super-spy. And we're supposed to be some fabo babe as regina? That character was made perfect by Hepburn's unusual combination of cuteness, wry humor and smoldering sexuality. Newton's just sexy...she's not witty and certainly not cute. bad, bad, bad casting. But then again it's a remake and that's just plain wrong.

  • April 10, 2002, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Marky Mark

    by hatchling

    To be frank, he makes my skin crawl. I saw Charade on Monday night too. Great film, great, no, perfect, actors. Why on earth remake it? Bottom line, there is no reason to ever redo a superior movie, except laziness. This isn't the stage, with elusive live performance begging for reinterpretation. Thandie...fey sex kitten indeed, should be ashamed to have even tried on Hepburn's shoes.

  • April 10, 2002, 12:32 p.m. CST

    You can catch lightning in a bottle, but you can't catch a b

    by Carson Dyle

    While no one enjoys the original

  • April 10, 2002, 12:32 p.m. CST

    I started reading the first review, but when I got to the words

    by Sod Off Baldric

    Mostly due to the fact that I was too busy shaking my head in disgust. I will admit that I liked Marky Mark in Boogie Nights...he played his charcter incredibly well. Of course, I think that was more due to the fact that he wasn't really acting...he was playing himself. What has happened in Hollywood? I look at remakes and I think to myself "How do you make the leap from this to that?" For does one make the leap from Charlton Heston (Charlton FREAKING Heston) in Planet of the Apes to Marky Mark in Planet of the Apes? Another does one make the leap from James Caan in Rollerball to Chris Klein in Rollerball? Now we go from Cary Grant to Marky Mark. What's next...remake a John Wayne movie with Freddy Prinze, Jr? My head hurts...I'm going to go lie down now.

  • April 10, 2002, 1:02 p.m. CST


    by VincentSpain


  • April 10, 2002, 1:19 p.m. CST

    So, we're led to believe that Thandi Newton is good. The mo

    by Hedley Lamarr

    Doesn't sound so bad for a freakin' research screening. Honestly, since I know that nothing can touch Charade in terms of energy and style and wit, I don't expect this to. Yeah, it's the same story... but - as I learned a long time ago- when it comes to remakes, approach the new one as it's own movie. While Marky Mark is always a little soft, I thought he was good in Rock Star and Boogie Nights. He's got a little charisma, Thandi's got a lot (and she's nice to look at), so I'm gunna have a little faith that Demme delivered on this. Sorry, thanks for the reviews but, if it's all the same, I'm gunna give it a shot for myself.

  • April 10, 2002, 1:48 p.m. CST


    by RenoNevada2000

    - WEll if you like to look at Newton, this film does give you a lot to see in one sequence!

  • April 10, 2002, 2:30 p.m. CST

    Rumour has it Jonathan Demme's original choice for the male

    by Ben fong Torres

  • April 10, 2002, 2:58 p.m. CST


    by Hedley Lamarr

    Thanks for the scoop!

  • April 10, 2002, 3:51 p.m. CST

    This film should be scrapped for the sake of all people.

    by Vicconius

    I hated this idea from the get-go. Charade was perfect just the way it was. Just watch it. I have friends over for movies and once in awhile I'll slip in a classic like Charade, To Catch A Thief or North By Northwest just to show the young punks what good movies are. Man, every girl went into a panic when Cary Grants character slips through the window to reveal he's in cahoots with the bad guys. There were audible gasps of "oh no". The distrust throughout the movie after that scene, especially from the women was palpable. Just leave it alone. No George Cloony or Julia Roberts. They can't carry Cary or Audrey's jock strap. Hollywood, just drop it now and we will take it easy on you. Drop the film can and back away slowly.

  • April 10, 2002, 4:09 p.m. CST

    Ohhhhh man, I was curious about this project. But Wahlberg inst

    by Lenny Nero

    Even if it's the producers' fault, Demme will still get the blame. Ohhhhh man. Sorry, man.

  • April 10, 2002, 4:12 p.m. CST

    racurnutte, no harm no foul. The original title for this is too

    by Lenny Nero

    And it's just a weird title anyway. I think they should go back to "Charade," but after hearing that it's Marky Mark, they should distance themselves from that classic.

  • April 10, 2002, 9:12 p.m. CST

    To anyone who holds the original in esteem:

    by artsnob

    It was movies like CHARADE that made the MPAA rating system necessary a few years later! It's a classic example of the "no lay" romantic films of the era that had run out of ways to keep the leads out of bed for the entire duration of the film. Would you want to see ALL mainstream romantic movies evade sexual issues & encounters like CHARADE does? Once upon a time, they HAD to. The stifling constraints of the Hayes Office were finally becoming unraveled in the 60's, but CHARADE couldn't have cowtowed to them any more faithfully. Thank God SOMEBODY was pushing the envelope in that era!

  • April 10, 2002, 9:52 p.m. CST


    by TomVee

    SOunds like the only one who cold have pulled off the Cary Grant role is George Clooney. What must the producers been thinking of? Also, Thandie Newton??? Why not someone like Julia Roberts? This part calls for a "glamorous" actress, not some mannequin. Sorry to hear this was even remade.

  • April 10, 2002, 10:27 p.m. CST

    Cary Grant / George Clooney / Chow Yun Fat

    by Cinemama

    I like George Clooney fine but whenever I try to think of a modern day Cary Grant I always think Chow Yun-Fat. He can be suave and sophisticated or comical. His English movies haven't been so hot but I feel that virtually every movie could be improved by having more Chow.

  • April 11, 2002, 1:01 a.m. CST

    "I like his twist endings at the end."

    by gurglesnap


  • April 11, 2002, 2:06 a.m. CST

    re: Sod Off Baldric, Slimefree

    by Mithril

    Slimefree: there are auteurs. The best example of this is if you compare Hitchcock's Psycho and its remake. Same exact script, heck, even the same exact camera angles. But yet, the remake stunk to high heaven. Why? Because Hitchcock had a style of his own, and every camera angle he used meant something to him and was used for a reason. He was an auteur. Oh, and true, the script is what matters. But hello! Demme was one of the scriptwriters. It's his fault if the script ain't good! ***Oh, and Sod Off Baldric, yes indeed, the next remake will undoubtedly be Rio Bravo, renamed something godawful. Starring Freddie Prinze, jr. in John Wayne's part, with Matthew Lillard and Ashton Kutcher taking over from Dean Martin and Ricky Nelson. Pappy will be played by either William Shatner or Chris Elliott (pretty much the king of bad movies these days), while the love interest (formerly Angie Dickinson) will now be played by Estelle Warren, the most lifeless "actress" - if I can even bring myself to call her that - I've ever seen. The baddie brothers trying to take over the town will be played by Seann William Scott and Emilio Estevez.

  • April 11, 2002, 10:44 a.m. CST

    "No Magical People Working Today" A-MEN, Harry!

    by Drath

    I wonder if it's even possible in this day an age to have stars with Grant or Hepburn's presence. I always thought that George Clooney resembles Cary Grant at times, but had a kind of class you just don't see anymore(and possibly never will again). Meanwhile Audrey Hepburn had a balance of innocence and likability that I just can't see any actress having today. It's so easy to come across as naive in the most incredibly sexist way, I don't think modern audiences would allow it--not for more than one role anyway. Look at Calista Flockhart. In another day and age, she might have been just like Hepburn, but here and now her Ally act has worn thin and she's the poster girl of the eating disorders brought on by sexist male-driven Hollywood. Maybe it's our fault, we're the ones who by People Magazine and all these paparazzi feeding rags that exploit the stars outside of their controlled screen appearances. Back in the day of Grant and Hepburn, their relationship to the audience was kept under control by the studios and there weren't tabloids about all their dirty secrets(true or untrue) like there are today. To comment on this story, don't think a remake of Charade is something you could market as a remake. It would have to work so differently, there's no point in connecting the two movies unless you wanted to emphasize how much things have changed--of course that way only leads to unfriendly comparisons.

  • April 12, 2002, 3:18 a.m. CST

    What do all you guys have against Mark Wahlberg?!?

    by Moll1992

    Okay, he wasn't that great in POTA, I'll give you that. But he was terrific in "Boogie Nights" and in "3 Kings" (especially in the torture scene). And I don't think he was just playing himself in BN like a previous poster said. He made some terrible mistakes in his past, served his time for them, and has moved on. He doesn't deserve this hostility from you guys. And one last thing, why do people still call him Marky Mark? THAT WAS 10 YEARS AGO FOR CHRIST'S SAKE!!

  • April 20, 2002, 1:38 a.m. CST

    Pimp smooth and other stuff

    by Sade

    Okay, whoever described Wahlberg as "pimp smooth" has me cracking up!! I saw Charade for the first time and loved it! Can we say, my jaw dropped at all the twists and turns. Furthermore, its because I was watching Charade that I didn't finish my homework. Nevertheless, I was really impressed with the movie, mainly the plot, script and characters. Okay my next statement isn't going to make many people happy, but I am not a fan of Audrey Hepburn. She reminds me of a small child. But I liked her in the movie in certain parts, other parts her character seemed really naive and childlike. I would really be interested to read the original reviews for Charade and see what they thought about Hepburn and Grant back in the day. Lastly about Wahlberg, I think the reason he doesn't sit well in these rolls is b/c of his lack of emotion. He is so stoic in all his rolls, you never see him cry or spill like Tom Cruise In Jerry McGuire. I think if he was a little more transparent in his roles people would receive him better. By the way, he has admitted to having a very robust sex life, so I must agree with the person who said he was playing himself in Boogie Nights. I'd like to see Mark Wahlberg show a little more emotion. As far as Thandie Newton is concerned, I love her. I saw a movie on HBO where she plays a runaway slave, she was awesome! I also saw bits of Jefferson in Paris. I hope she does a good job in the flick, if not maybe that new girl from Amelie should have played in Charlie, people are calling her the next Audrey.

  • April 20, 2002, 1:52 a.m. CST

    Maybe John Cusak

    by Sade

    I just realized what I truly wanted to state and that is this: Hollywood seems to be under the impression that the only way to get people in the theaters is to cast young, sexy heart throbs in old classics - partialliy in an effort ot lift morals in society - due to recent current affairs. I study art, and we have been told by teachers that there is a return to the days of old, classics, hence the reason we are seeing do many television reunions of old shows on the tele. I guess it helps people to remember yester-year and feel safe and happy. But I disagree with casting people just b/c they look good and you'll get a larger turnout. I like to watch talent - Nicholas Cage, John Cusak - - Now I think John Cusak could have pulled off this remake, or better yet Harrison Ford. Cary Grant was aged in Charade, that bit of silver streak in his hair. As far as someone else playing the sexy naive girl, maybe Drew Barrymore, Famke Jensen, or better yet the girl playing in Star Wars, I keep forgetting her name she was in the Professional ( the little girl who survived) and Where the Heart Is - - she's good at being naive yet smart yet sexy yet not, Natalie Portman -