Messages

True. There's something to that for sure. Whenever I think of 1991 with movies, the two that spring to mind first are TMNT 2: Secret of the Ooze" and "Rocketeer". Concerning the latter, it's kinda interesting to think that during the 1990's, Hollywood made several attempts in adapting pulp and strip characters (Dick Tracy, Rocketeer, The Shadow, The Phantom) with varying degrees of success. Dick Tracy being the more successful of the bunch. Especially in leaving more of an impression on a generation I would say.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II was the first movie-going experience I remember. Every kid in the audience, including me, went absolutely wild when we first saw the Turtles literally spring into action. The filmmakers were absolute masters at building up anticipation and having the most satisfying payoff. I still remember hearing all the screams of agony when it appeared that the Turtles were going to be killed by being impaled that quickly turned to cheers of joy when Splinter saved them with his bow and arrow.

Speaking of bow and arrows, '91 was also the summer of Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves which had a big impact on myself, despite it being wildly criticized for not being for children when not complaining about Kevin Costner's lack of an (nonexistent) English accent. Roger Ebert review of it is particularly insulting because he essentially complained about the movie not being the Errol Flynn version, despite it being driven by the same swashbuckling excitement of the original, abet more violent. When Mel Brooks decided to parody Robin Hood again (following his television series When Things Were Rotten), he displayed that attempting to translate the Flynn version to modern audiences would be laughable, as Cary Elwes' largely played Robin with that Flynn sensibility.

That along with the highly anticipated Terminator 2 sadly squashed The Rocketeer from achieving more success that summer. The filmmakers of Rocketeer were initially afraid that if Dick Tracy had been more successful, it would've squandered their potential for a franchise. They were temporary relieved when Tracy didn't achieve the success Disney hoped it would, but their efforts ended up not faring any better. It's interesting to note that the Rocketeer had the opposite distribution switch Tracy ended up with. They were wanting to be a Touchstone film and ended up being a Disney film.

Yeah. I do recall Beatty talking about showing "Bonnie and Clyde" to one of the Warner Brothers who was still head of the studio at the time, and was asked to edit it following the screening. Beatty altered the opening (incorporating a slide show of old photographs), but left the film intacked. Following the 2nd screening, it was given the greenlight, but not before the head of the studio made sure to let Beatty know that he was aware that nothing was trimmed, but if he had actually listened to him, Beatty would make nothing but flops. 

All of these stories remind me that I need to watch the Bonnie and Clyde special features again. I believe in that same argument that's when Jack Warner (the sole Warner brother that was there until the studio was sold off) tried to win the argument by boasting, "Whose name do you see out there on that water tower?" Beatty just casually said, "Well, it's MY initials." Such a great story of how the old studio system was dying and people like Beatty were moving in to take over for the next decade of film history that was driven by the filmmakers instead of studio heads.

If I am not mistaken, wasn't Dick Tracy as a franchise seriously being looked into as far back as the 1970's, as Paramount's answer to Eon and United Artists James Bond franchise? What you said about Gould makes me wonder if he had any meetings with Paramount during the developmental phase?

Yes, the first notion to make Dick Tracy into a film was by producer Michael Laughlin, who was told by François Truffaut after he made Two-Lane Blacktop that is next movie should be an "American film." Laughlin didn't know what he meant until he visited a New York City bookstore and came across copies of The Celebrated Cases of Dick Tracy and decided this would be his "American film." This is when Warren Beatty caught wind of this project and apparently secured a first look deal. Subsequently, the rights lapsed and when producers Art Linson and Floyd Mutrux took over, that's when they were trying to sell it as the next James Bond series.

I'm always trying to look for more concrete details about what Chester Gould thought about the film's development. He had retired from the comic strip in 1977 and he seem to be dismissive of other adaptations derived from his work. He was set in stone of doing his work that helped sell newspapers, and apparently had a mentality of whatever merchandise or spinoffs from the newspaper would help it as well. The only real creative input I remember reading was from when Tom Mankiewicz was attached to write the script and he came up with the opening of a sketch artist taking a description from a dying victim, and before the artist can finish the face, the victim cries, "That's him!" and dies. Apparently Gould loved that idea but Mankiewicz cited that Gould wanted creative control, which I doubt is true.

Jack's impression of Valenti's bewildered reaction towards his comment that no one in the industry was qualified to estimate the top of Batman, with Valenti exclaiming, "What? -- Wha ... What?!?" is pretty hilarious. Especially with before the Oscars were over that night, the story was starting to make the rounds back to him.

Another fine example of if you look good and talk well, everyone will believe you. Nowadays, if someone were to make those claims, you would get 50% of people telling you you're right and the other 50 telling you you're wrong. Definitely an advantage and disadvantage to not being attached to information at all times.

Right. True. I think the Blank is a cool visual, with The Question being about as closest to the overall look. Admittedly, as far as the 1990 film goes, I really do like Beatty's direction in how he chose to reveal the Blank. By briefly stepping out of the shadows to reveal the blank mask, and the line, "You don't. Because you never saw me." Very effective.

The way it came off in the final film is better than the dialogue that was initially written. It felt to forced when Keys was supposed to simply say can I see your face and The Blank complies by revealing the blank face. Definitely a great example of how rewriting improves overtime.

Now that you mentioned it, I do seem to recall something about Tracy coming in at #1 in a poll for comic properties to adapt by Dozier. Which is very telling in just how popular the character truly was, and for decades at that. Shame the show never got a season or two. The makeup work were on point for the villains at the time, but yeah, the show still needed some work in order to be ready for prime time. Unfortunately, as you noted, by the time Dozier could produce the show, that window of financial opportunity had just about closed, and apparently the risk was a bit too much for whatever reward was left to be had. I'm sure that had the Dozier Dick Tracy received a season or two, and had been spruced up to make it more fast paced and overall more entertaining, it would have had no problem in being a ultimately better representation of the strip compared to the Ralph Byrd serials and such. Which I've never really can get into all that much personally.

I think another issue it would've faced was that Dragnet was essentially a Dick Tracy show played entirely straight with no colorful villains. Batman was just completely out of the box with its campy approach and something like that applied to Dick Tracy I don't believe would've connected with audiences of the time. While Batman was very strait-laced in approaching crime and I don't think audiences would've connected with that being applied to just a guy in a fedora. That is inherently a conflict as to why something like that man has endured all these years, and Tracy is just a footnote in the zeitgeist of the medium. That's why other attempts of adapting comics like The Phantom or pulp heroes like The Shadow failed because it's too much of one thing while Batman provides a good mixture of both.

Ah, ok. I was thinking you meant back in the 1990's right after the film came out or thereabout. Yeah, the IDW stuff is just okayish to me. Personally, I'd rather IDW just reprint Tracy strip arcs in color like Gladstone was doing in the early 1990's to be perfectly honest. I think IDW has done a service in their reprint collections of the Gould material, but at the same time, it is fun and a novelty seeing the same strips in comic book format, and in color. Gladstone's color reprints of the Itchy Oliver, and the 1st Mumbles arcs were my introduction to Gould's Dick Tracy as a kid.

I'll have to hunt down some of those color re-prints. I have the entire Gould collection of strips and own the initial publishing of Celebrated Cases that had the first couple of stories colorized. They're fun to view as long as it's acknowledged that the originals are preserved. I've also been meaning to re-search when exactly it was decided that Dick Tracy's hat and coat were yellow. I've also seen him clad it with a green hat and sometimes an orange coat.

I'm shocked that they haven't done a 4K already. If they do it right that 4K could be demo disc material. As you said, this is a movie that was made for 4K. Should've been a flagship release for Disney years ago imo.

Hope it definitely gets released on 4K through Kino, who had released Disney owned films in the past.

Can I recommend another great podcast on the film? Check out Saturday Night Movie Sleepovers episode. They did a 3 hour podcast that went into the history of the comics and the film. It's a great listen.

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. The host a really great at explaining just how complicated a simple shot appears to be in the movie that is actually multiple layers in focus to achieve the perfection of a drawn image. It might take me a day or two to completely listen to it but I'm sure they address the fact that this was the first movie to be mixed digitally, which, of course is common place today, but incredibly innovative at the time.

Apparently, this is one of those situations where perception if reality. As you said, the Tracy image was literally EVERYWHERE by summer 1990, so it felt like a huge deal and evidently not as outright popular as one would be lead to believe given the profit. Another B89 factor that bled into the release of Dick Tracy.

Yeah, it is always a good thing to ponder whether or not Tracy would have been more successful if it was not released in the wake of the success of Batman. I kind of wish it had came out a year later for the strip's 60th anniversary. Perhaps that would have been enough time for the general public to want something like that again. I always remember a post made by someone on the IMDb message boards where they thought there was too many close comparisons to Batman '89 that he apparently said out loud that he would walk out if he saw Tracy jump through a skylight. We all know how that turned out...

Yeah, I've read similar stories where Beatty would demand multiple takes for simple enough shots, and wouldn't be happy until he got exactly what he wanted or something along those lines. I've even heard the story that some Disney execuitive had to step in eventually and tell Beatty, directly right in front of the crew, that he needed to move production along, and that they couldn't continually induldge his artistic individualism on their dime.

Beatty's influence over the industry was definitely dwindling by this point in his career and the infamy of Ishtar flopping must have really put him in his place when he was told that. He was used to being right since Bonnie and Clyde was a huge success despite the powers that be saying otherwise. It says a lot when Dick Tracy was later proven to be Beatty's highest grossing film.

Yeah, true. I can appreciate the self depricating humor from the TCM specials, where Tracy the "character", doesn't have a too-high opinion of Warren Beatty the actor, but it seems like that's essentially the entire schtick of the specials. Outside of the first one having sort of a cinematic history of Tracy, but on a very moderate level of course.

What I'd love to know is if he ever got the opportunity to speak with Gould himself and what his opinion was. I know that the writers said they talked to him and the only advice he gave was to "make it hotter." I'm not sure entirely what that was in regard to but I know he was satisfied at the prospect of Tracy becominh a major motion picture instead of the B-movies that proceeded it. Collins had his criticisms of the movie's plot, which is reflected in his novelization. It was remarkable that some of the reshoots utilized material that first appeared in his novel, namely the subplot of Tess going to her mother's, whose words convince her to return and attempt to reconcile that leads to her climactic kidnapping.

Oh, that would be outstanding! Yeah, his then-newly filmed interview segments for the "Batman 1989" 2005 SE made it very discernable that he continues to have a unconcealed affection for the character. Even commenting that even though he could find humor in many things, there were some stuff that would make him feel uneasy (Nicholson is an art collector), but noted that the Joker had no such restraints. It's a literal free-for-all with him. 

It'd be great to hear more stories from him like when he told Jack Valenti, the president of the Motion Picture Association of America, at the Oscars that there wasn't an analyst qualified to estimate the top grossing figure for Batman while he caught him in the bathroom which was his method of guerilla promotion. Despite Nicholson not giving interviews at the time of Batman's release, he was doing his part to get the word out that got him the highest paycheck any actor ever received. It also great to hear any story from Michael Keaton, whom Nicholson called "Keats," when they wee filming. Hope he'll leave something behind before he passes.

From what I know about the newspaper strip, the Blank was one of the, if not the first, truly "colorful" villain that appeared as a antagonist. In that, it makes sense why the writers had him as the predominant villain for the film before things changed. Still, it's surprising that there's been no real push to have the "Blank" guise revived in the strip even if someone else (not Redrum) would be revealed to be under the mask.

Right, The Blank was indeed a first of the grotesques. It such an irony that a faceless character could be so enduring compared to the other deformities Gould depicted for his other villains. 

Kind of a shame the '60's pilot never got picked up. Even if had been successful for a brief period of time, it might have gone a long way in keeping Dick Tracy name in the public consciousness, especially if it ended up being a long-standing show for re-runs, and could have been a benefit for the 1990 film...

I'm trying to uncover more details over what exactly was in mind for the Dozier produced series. I do know that before Batman was produced, a poll was conducted on what comic character would audiences like to see turned into a television series. Tracy was ranked number one and Batman was number three or four. Dozier couldn't do Tracy at first because it was in development elsewhere. By the time a pilot was produced, the fad Batman started was dying down and the attempt at doing a serious approach with The Green Hornet didn't work out. It also didn't help that the pilot script they went with was very dull and not taking advantage of the characters and environment Gould created.

Oh, Archie Comics was interested in doing a Dick Tracy comic? That would have been interesting. Especially so considering how Archie handled "Sonic the Hedgehog", and took "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Adventures" from a derivative from the 1987 Fred Wolf animated series, to something that really developed and expanded the Fred Wolf TMNTverse. A Archie Comics Dick Tracy title could have had the potential to be something really unique for sure.

I should clarify that this was first announced back in 2017. Some artwork for it is out there and something of note is how Tess is portrayed with red hair, an innovation of the film. This could have caused listening issues and made the comic come to a halt. Hermes Press was also supposed to do a Tracy graphic novel that hasn't seen any further development either. We've since then got two series of comics from IDW.

Ok. Grain of salt then. 

That's the right idea. "Insiders" like Harry Knowles can't be right all of the time, even though they act like they are.

 

I'm kinda surprised by that, given that the budget was supposedly between $50-60 million, and the box office being a little over $162 million. I'm aware that Disney chose to spend in or around the same amount for marketing, but I figured various merchandise, licensing fees, television rights, ect would have pushed it well into the black by 1992. At the very least, break even, but not in an actual deficient. I guess it is what it is...

The same profit sheet detailed that they did spend as much on advertising as they did on the film itself. This was another annoyance with Beatty as he felt this was overexposure and setting the film up to be the next Batman '89 in terms of box office receipts that pulled in just as much in merchandising. As mentioned before, most of that stuff ended up in clearance aisles and dollars stores, which may have not brought in the bucks but it definitely left an impression on those who took advantage of these mark downs and helped cement its cult status.

That's possible. There was a youtube video I remember watching a few years ago, that had someone (his name escapes me) who was associated with the film being open to discuss his experiences, but when it came time to conduct the interview, he suddenly got cold feet. The joke from the narrator, was that Warren Beatty must have gotten to him. If I can find that video again, I'll post it.

Please do if you find. I recently came across one from a technician who grew annoyed at Beatty's insistence on multiple takes on an expensive setup that kept driving the budget up. I believe he said that later came to a stop when Disney told Beatty to back off. Something that stood out to me in a behind the scenes special was when Beatty was doing shots of Tracy beating up thugs, one stuntman appears to have been launched into the air backwards as Tracy punches. After he was clear, Beatty shouted at him "GET IT RIGHT!" The stunt looked well executed to me so I'm not sure what was done wrong. Must have been the perfectionist side of Beatty he's often cited for breaking out for that particular moment.

At this point, I'll take anything over the barely minimum effort the film has so far received on DVD/Blu. Would be amusing to get Beatty to conduct a director's commentary by telling him that a commentary would also count in retaining the film rights. lol

I definitely would welcome something more complementary from Beatty. The TCM special feel very off putting hearing him mainly bring up the criticisms of the movie that are voiced through his characterization of Dick Tracy. I've often thought about what an opportunity it would be to personally speak to him about it but I've been plenty satisfied about what he said during the publicity and asking him about details that accrued over three decades ago at his age would be a stretch. He likely wouldn't even remember when Landis and Hill were slated to direct.

Haha! I wasn't aware of that, but that's pretty funny. I do recall Beatty giving an interview, speaking about, I believe, casting for "Reds", and asking Jack Nicholson just who would be believable as a romantic competitor against himself, and Jack responding something along the lines of, "Well, there can be only one choice." Referring to himself. 

Jack's wit shines through! I hope one day he'll be willing to do a long series of interviews before he passes. He was really remarkable talking about being The Joker for the special features of Batman '89.

That would be an intriguing mystery route to take, but yeah, I would say the Blank certainly could fall into a guise that different people with their own personal agendas could adopt. Sorta/kinda like there being multiple Green Goblins (along with variations) in the Marvel Comics Spider-Man history.

It's just fun to picture a character like Michael Myers lurking through Tracy's city, not knowing whether he's a friend or foe. I can definitely see why Cash and Epps singled out The Blank to be predominant villain who originally was more of a presence and Breathless was more of a background character. It wasn't until the third draft when Hill came onboard where they decided to make Breathless more predominant with her relationship with Tracy.

True. Though I would have liked to have seen the Tracy makeup job, I can fully understand the viewpoint of the studio on this one.

I've seen a portrait drawing of Beatty depicted as Tracy that was later emulated as the poster. Might be a fun project in the future to modify it to emulate Tracy's features from the comics.

Yeah, I could see Regan making a self deprecating joke in jest. I seem to recall that Regan got a kick out of him being mentioned as President in 1985 in "Back to the Future", and Doc Brown scoffing at the notion.

The only way I can see a strong resemblance between Regan and Pruneface, would be in a caricature sort of way. Personally, I've always felt Pruneface was borderline body horror in how he's showcased (same for Mrs. Pruneface really), where Flattop is admittedly more cartoony and less of an eye sore so to speak.

You're right in a realistic caricature manner. I guess it's because I can see how the final makeup design emulated Regan's features on Armstrong, abet with an emphasis on his overly wrinkled face. John Chambers actually did a more comic accurate makeup for Dick Tracy project in the 60's that had Lon Chaney Jr. in the role. Sadly, there's not exact details for what it was for other than Chambers also providing makeups for Flattop and The Brow.

I wasn't aware of the Tribune stipulation, but it's understandable. As interesting as a more violent Dick Tracy movie would have been, it's readily apparent that "Batman 1989"'s success was one of the major objectives Disney wanted to emulate for the summer of 1990.

The PG-13 was just beginning to rise in predominance with the release of Batman '89 and it would be another 13 years before Disney would allow a PG-13 rating with the first Pirates of the Caribbean. I am amazed that they allowed the shot of Madonna in her see through nightgown but they had to cut her appearance in blue outfit that showed her cleavage that appeared in the trailer.

Yes indeed. A Workprint would be amazing to see. I wouldn't even care about splicing prestine looking footage with that of footage that's obviously degraded by comparison. Stuff like that doesn't bother me in the slightest. Whenever I watch "Silent Night Deadly Night", I usually always go for the unrated cut, which uses various sources with differing quality. Sure, you notice it, but it doesn't lessen the enjoyment any. 

I feel the same way. You gotta take what you can get since a lot of this deleted material sadly disappears over time in a film format and all exists is video tape and that too fades over time. This is evident with all of the deleted material we've been graced with for John Hughes movie and is likely the only way we'll get to see that Schumacher cut of Batman Forever if it ever gets out further than Kevin Smith's screenings.

Was the Bruce Campbbell pitch during the early-mid 1990's?

Yeah, I don't think anything of real quality would have came out of any sort of WB/CW/SyFy production of Dick Tracy. I believe SyFy has tried with Lee Falk's The Phantom (which will fall into the public domain in about 9 years from now) a few different times, and those attempts are pretty much forgotten about already. The pulp/comic strip characters of the 1930's are becoming increasingly niche, and it's pretty much gotten to the point where I would expect a fan film made by passionate fans funded by a kickstarter campaign yielding better results than anything that would come out of Hollywood these days.

Fortunately, or unfortunately.

Right, it certainly was a bombshell to learn that when Campbell revealed that. He was involved in such high quality productions like Brisco County and Jack of All Trades that I'm sure would have been reflected in this series. There definitely is more freedom in creating a fan series. A hurdle that would be hard to avoid is material that's exclusive to the film. I believe that was a factor that stopped a new comic book series that was supposed to be released through Archie Comics.

I'm glad you brought that up about the Vista Series DVD, because that was actually something i was going to inquire about, as I too remember something about that being in the cards right around the same time of the release of the "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" 2-disc Vista Series DVD set. Around 2004-ish? If I am not mistaken. It's a shame that never happened. As I'm sure there are a wealth of interviews that could be conducted with the cast and crew, that would give much insight on BTS info that we've never been privy to. I'm certain a "Extras" 30-45 minute interview with William Forsythe reminiscing about his portrayal of Flattop, and the production would be absolutely fascinating to watch.

Given the visual style of the film with its emphasis on color, it seems like a 4K scan of "Dick Tracy" would be a no brainer for Disney. As such a scan would really allow for the color palette Beatty was working with to really pop visually. Personally, I would absolutely love for a physical media boutique company like Arrow, or Vinegar Syndrome to get their hands on this in order to provide a quality scan, and loads of extras. The barebones release we've been stuck with ever since the early 2000's is just a crime. 

I seem to remember that the only source to the idea of Dick Tracy getting this treatment was from Ain't it Cool News. There was never a formal announcement for it, like say the Yule Love It Edition we were supposed to get of the Richard Donner directed Bill Murray movie Scrooged. Apparently the kibosh was put on that release because it was a very troubled production, and the details of it weren't going to be special feature friendly. There's also a bit of contention on everyone's part due to a very scathing memo Jeffrey Katzenberg sent out when Dick Tracy under performed at the box office. According to a profits report, I obtained, in 1992 the movie was $90 million in the deficit so it wasn't considered a success to justify the means, and perhaps, with little reluctance from the cast to reminisce about their involvement that didn't go into contention probably made the idea of a special edition fall through and instead, we ended up with just a bare-bones release.

I do wish that we had a high definition version of the 4X3 version of the film as I've often heard that's how the movie was framed in order to accurately emulate a comic strip box. I believe we would've gotten a fullscreen version along with the widescreen version if it was a Visa, as that was done with Roger Rabbit.

True. I later became aware that Pacino's Big Boy bore little resemblance to the Big Boy that was depicted in the strip during the early 1930's. As he was essentially, like you said, a stand in for Al Capone. Even the various make up tests for Pacino's Big Boy makeup bares this out. Admittedly, I do like the presentation that Pacino's Big Boy as a humpbacked gangster with a obvious Napoleon complex.

Yeah the final results of the work was truly marvelous and thankfully they didn't go as extreme as some of the make up test shots displayed. It a great notion to make him appear diminutive with enlarged features like his chin. There's also a lot of Pacino's Richard the III in the role as well, especially with that hunchback. Not sure if you're aware of the story how Beatty got Pacino to do the film by inquiring to him who could play this part and Pacino said, "Me! I can do it!" and Beatty had to pretend like that idea didn't even occur to him. It is true that flattery will get you everywhere.

Nicholson as Frank Redrum would have been pretty cool. I wasn't aware of this false rumor, but it does get the imagination going. Actually, given the Epps treatment for the proposed third film incorporating Flattop Junior and Heartless Mahoney, and had that movie been made, I think Redrum's Blank winding up as the central villain, and perhaps pulling the strings might've made things more interesting, and bringing the overall theoretical trilogy full circle. Conceivably even having Tracy, during the rourse of the film, suspect the resurrected Blank is Heartless, given the events of the first film, but it being later revealed to be Frank Redrum instead. Just an idea.

Yeah, it would've been fun to of had The Blank be a recurring legacy character because it can literally be anyone under the faceless mask. It's an idea that I've entertained in my own treatment for a Dick Tracy series where I want it to be that The Blank's identity is never revealed and he never speaks. Every time they think they catch him, it turns out somebody is under the mask with their mouth taped shut.

Ah, ok. Yeah I forgot about Itchy's name being changed as well. Something of which I wasn't aware of until I read a colorized reprint of the Itchy arc from Gladstone comics (I think). Never understood the reasoning for the Oliver/Rossi name change either. lol

I guess it must've been an in joke for the writers because that same name was used for another villain in a previous draft and somehow Itchy inherited it. There was also rejections from Disney when Collins wanted to use Flattop's last name from the comics, Jones. Maybe there was a licensing issue that made them favor the names they created instead of pre-established ones.

I can see that. To William Forsythe's credit, I liked how he portrayed Flattop with the allotted screen time and few lines that he was given. His Flattop clearly exudes a outwardly smugness, and sense of menace that I don't think was always present with the other rogues in the film. Thus making Forsythe's portrayal stand out amongst a crowded field. Had Kurtwood Smith played the part, especially with that Clarence Boddicker energy, I think there would have been a air of wickedness and depravity with Flattop that would have been undeniable.

I do recall there was sort of a big stink about why did they want name actors in the parts when they were going to be mostly deemed unrecognizable with their heavy make ups. Much like what was said about the initial Planet of the Apes film, it was their acting ability that needed to shine through to make it work. It's a shame that we never got to see how Beatty would have looked like if he was given Tracy's hawk nose and squared jaw. Test for this look were conducted in his own home with no cameras allowed but the make up artist convinced Beatty not to cover up his own trademark face for the role and it would save him time in the make up chair when he was already pulling triple duties as lead actor, producer and director.

I have a hard time believing that they realistically thought they could get Regan to return to acting post serving as POTUS. To humor this notion, had this actually happened, and what a tall order that would have been, I can't imagine Regan's Pruneface NOT casting a large shadow over the entire film. As that would have generated publicity that would have made the whole Warren Beatty/Madonna dating blitz insignificant, and no amount of over the top acting from Pacino could have made a difference. As that would have been a novelty of the very highest order. lol 

I'll have to look into this further, but there may have been a joking remark from Reagan at the time his term was up that he would go back to acting and that's probably what fueled that idea. You can't deny that he does closely resemble what Chester Gould drew.

I get that. I'm pretty happy with the final product we have, but it's always fun to imagine how things might have panned out had the film incorporated a more violent tone. Which as merit in the grand scheme of things, considering that the Dick Tracy strip was a standout for decades for being considered extremely violent for that sort of format. This sentiment, being carried over into a big budget live action depiction, shouldn't be considered something out of left field considering the history.

The extreme violence presented in the original comic strips does show you how the sensibilities were back then that comics weren't just for kids. Apparently it was a stipulation from the Tribune Company that's a Dick Tracy film adaptation could not be R-rated. We've all heard the stories about how Tobe Hooper attempted to make the first Texas Chainsaw Massacre PG rated with emphasis on terror and less on gory violence and we all saw how that turned out. I think they didn't want to push any envelopes like that and just shot it bloodless to avoid any potential controversy. Nowadays, you'd have no trouble depicting violence like what's in the after mention films and get away with a PG-13 rating.

I agree. Had Landis directed, it's debatable that perhaps the film would have been treated more kindly than as it currently stands. As the film would arguably be more energetic in it's overall presentation than what we ended up with under Beatty's direction. Which is certainly unique, and visually pleasing to look at, but as you said, not treated especially dynamic in the overall presentation.

I think the most perceivable glimpse of what a John Landis directed Dick Tracy movie could have been, that we truly got, was the first trailer for the 1990 film. Which is excellent, BTW. 

Absolutely spot on with that trailer! The energy driving that trailer is exactly what I would've loved to of seen in the final film. I was disappointed to see that the trailer music Danny Elfman, composed for this trailer wasn't included in the Intrada expanded edition of the score. They managed to find the one he did for the Edward Scissorhands trailer, but we're unable to locate this one that us Batfans can hear a few familiar sounding cues within it. Tying into my after mentioned words about a possible workprint, I would love to see the initial opening credits sequence that utilized the more Gershwin sounding cue that became Tess' Theme with a slower pan across the cityscape that sounds like it was to resemble the opening of Mary Poppins but was changed later to a faster pace to accommodate the change of music that became Tracy's Theme.

True. It's like the focus was so laser fouced on the city's aesthetics where even trash cans are colored, that Beatty and crew forgot to fill it with people. There is a sense of hollowness where Tracy's Chicago is conferred. I can't deny that.

The hollowness may have also been a deliberate choice as Edward Hopper was also cited as an inspiration for the look of the film and a recurring theme in his work is lots of open space.

Yes, it's observable that Beatty remains protective of the character and has gone thru some TCM lengths to continue to hold the film rights. As much as I would like to see Beatty do something with Tracy, I think it's more about his caution of not wanting to see the character made a mockery of in the modern day. Which could very well happen. However, the public domain draws nearer every year, and there will come a time where Dick Tracy will wind up in the PD. Though, I assume the Chicago Tribune will still have some bargaining power given that the majority of the classic villains were not created until the 1940's, and thus will remain out of the public domain for a good 15-20 years or so. Given that movies/songs/written works from 1927 went into the public domain in 2023, apparently the Blank, for instance, won't fall under that purview for about 10 years from now.

Beatty's reluctance to do not allow anything with his rights to the character is particularly frustrating. I was really upset when Bruce Campbell apparently wanted to do a Dick Tracy television series when he had a development deal with Disney that Beatty shut the door on him for. On the other hand, his interference helped in not getting a series to be made for The WB that likely would have been as terrible as their attempt to make a Lone Ranger series and the Sci-Fi Channel's attempt at adapting Flash Gordon to the small screen. With each passing year as it steps closer to be public domain, the interest level gets lower and lower. There was an attempt earlier this year to bring back the hard boiled Phillip Marlowe character back but the movie flopped and the Perry Mason HBO series just got cancelled. I fear that even if we hit exactly what we wanted, it wouldn't last very long.

Ah, nice. Thank you for such a detailed response. Yeah, I can see how such an opening scene wouldn't really be necessary and cut for a variety of reasons. Sure, it would have provided Tracy an alternate introduction within the film, but his formal arrival at the fallout of the Seventh Street garage massacre works just as well.

You're very welcome! This project of mine has been the result of over a decade of research and each passing year when new details are unearthed, you begin to understand how and why things turned out the way they did. There's always been murmurs of an extended director's cut of Dick Tracy existing ever since it was initially announced at getting a Visa Series DVD release, but it seemed that Beatty shot down that prospect years later when he said that the theatrical cut was his final cut, as I'm sure I'd stipulated in his contact. Despite this claim, there were a few scenes that may have been cut or altered in favor of maintaining a PG rating and also to accommodate the runtime to include a Roger Rabbit cartoon. One of these examples was how Tracy effortlessly identifies all of the murdered gangsters and shows his authority by barking out orders to everyone at the crime scene. If there were to be an extended cut of the film, this would be a welcome change. Maybe one day we'll get lucky like what happened to Super Mario Bros. and we'll unearth a workprint edition of Dick Tracy that includes this scene.

Now that you mention it, I think I do vaguely remember something about Hoffman being ill on the set, and all his scenes being filmed pretty much subsequently in order for him to get in and out quickly. I agree, Hoffman was very entertaining and memorable in the part. Had a trilogy actually panned out with the original pitches covering the 1940's, and then 1950's, it would have been interesting seeing Mumbles in cameo parts with each film. In my mind, this would be somewhat akin to how The Scarecrow was handled in Christopher Nolan's "Dark Knight" trilogy.

That would be an absolutely perfect approach as a throughline for the series. I believe Collins did just that in the sequels and there was an idea for the third film's treatment to make him a beat poet, similar to Mumbles being a musician in the comic strips. I loved hearing an anecdote from Collins that he had attended the premiere and got to meet Hoffman and he read the comic strip that week that featured Mumbles and performed it for his amusement.

True. Another I think probably would have worked well, would be Bob Hoskins. I can envision him, under John Caglione Jr. and Doug Drexler's makeup and slotted into the stool pigeon part, quite easily.

Speaking of that character, was there any reason why the Mole's name was changed to "The Rodent"? He's not given a name within the actual film, but the "Rodent" name was used for the movie's trading cards and action figure from Playmates.

I too thought about Hoskins but decided that he would have been a swell Big Boy if they had gone with how he was more of a Al Capone expy in the comics. If you haven't seen him in the gangster film The Long Good Friday, you'll see what I'm talking about. Hoskins was also very infamously let go from playing Capone in The Untouchables and replaced with Robert DeNiro.

There was also a false rumor going around that Jack Nicholson was going to be The Blank. It would have been fun if they had incorporated Collin's subplot in the novelization where everyone fears The Blank is the return of a known criminal out for revenge for those who sent him to prison and disfiguring him, reflecting his appearance in the comic strip. It would have been fun to have seen Nicholson as a mugshot, like the one he had in Batman '89, but apparently he had the same sentiments as Hackman and swore not to work with Beatty again. The movie really is only missing those two actors that defined that era.

Speaking of that character, was there any reason why the Mole's name was changed to "The Rodent"? He's not given a name within the actual film, but the "Rodent" name was used for the movie's trading cards and action figure from Playmates.

I'm curious about that change too. I think he was just chosen based on his appearance and I believe was the only villain in the film that appeared in the 50's era of the strip. The movie is supposed to be set in 1939 and utilized villains from both the 30's and 40's. They probably wants to avoid confusion on the spelling of the character, like how Itchy went from being named Itchell Oliver to Jake Rossi. Collins' novelization originally had the comic strip names and Disney forced him to revise it to how it appeared in the script.

Ah. Now that's interesting! I mean, I think William Forsythe was pretty great as Flattop given what he had to work with, but I dare say that Kurtwood Smith would have outright conveyed a (if only slightly) more sinister presence as Flattop (or Pruneface for that matter). Especially with that sardonic grin of his.

Yeah, his Clarence Boddicker energy would have been warmly welcomed. I believe the makeup artists also thought his head structures would have been fun to work with to craft a Chester Gould villain. They also had their sights set on Ronald Regan returning to acting after serving his terms as the President playing  Pruneface and actually ended up basing the makeup on Regan, especially the distinctive liver spots.

Right now I can just imagine the McDonald's Happy Meal parents losing their mind over such scene back in 1990! haha! Especially so had it been Kurtwood as Pruneface instead. Such a scene would have, I think, resulted in Pruneface making more of an impression than he ultimately does in the final film. As such a scene would allude to the idea that Pruneface's choice of poison, would be burning his enemies alive, where Big Boy's was already established as 'the bath' aka burying someone in cement. Conclusively, resulting in Pruneface as more sadistic of the two depending on one's own viewpoint. Yes, shame that scene was cut. Again, the Happy Meal parents would have gone completely apes**t back then, but I'm sure I would have gotten a kick out of it even being such a young kid at the time. 
 

Part of me does wish that the movie's violence had been on the level of Bonnie and Clyde and The Godfather and the movie was already pushing the limits of what was considered to be Disney entertainment for the time. This was initially intended to be a Walt Disney Picture and they were accommodating by depicting no blood or wounds occurring when characters are killed by gun fire. This is especially clear in the final Tommy Gun shootout at the end. Despite this, they ended up releasing it though Touchstone Pictures, like what happened with Roger Rabbit. Things may have been different if it was decided to be this from the start, a lament the filmmakers of The Rocketeer felt would have strengthened the movie had it been a Touchstone release, which it got outside of the United States.

Ok. Cool. It would have been interesting to see such a film produced during the early-mid 1980's under John Landis' direction for sure. Personally, I'm glad Walter Hill wasn't given the full green light. As much as I like Brian De Palma's "The Untouchables" (along with Ennio Morricone's masterful score), I just don't think such a approach would have ultimately been all that satisfying for a Dick Tracy movie. I think I remember something about Hill being asked about Tracy sporting his trademark yellow trench coat, and Hill's response was, "Absolutely not.". Eh. That's essentially like Flattop just being a guy simply wearing a gatsby hat. Sure, you can do that, but where's the fun in that really?

My sentiments exactly. I do wish that Landis had directed the film because a common criticism was that under Beatty's direction it lacked a sense of kinetic energy that flows through Landis' body of work. I would have loved to have seen his version of the end shootout that would have been crazier and frantic rather than the rather systematic method it plays out with one car at a time clearing the garage. The method Beatty and cinematographer Vittorio Storaro worked out where every shot emulated a comic strip box was very effective in terms of viewing the movie in stills but in motion it made its pace seem slow and was perhaps a factor in why it didn't catch on to the public on a wider scale because it was indeed old fashioned compared to contemporary films. They seemed to just think the interest in Beatty and Madonna's relationship at the time was enough publicity, combined with the massive merchandising push that mostly ended up in discount stores.

I do appreciate how greater in scale The Untouchables is with its depiction of Chicago. I would have loved it if the city in Dick Tracy had been depicted like how Joel Schumacher did Gotham City in Batman Forever where set bound environments were at a minimal and real locations adapted to the comic esthetic. It would have helped another criticism that the movie feels very abandoned with very few pedestrians on the city streets and the lack of differing weather conditions makes it feel generic in a bad way. It's rather jarring to see everyone dressed for the Midwest winter setting that leads into New Year's but it looks like the temperature never changes like in Los Angeles.

Hill's reluctance to not embrace the comic strip esthetic is definitely a blessing that he was never realized for exactly the sentiment you stated. I think the whole reason Beatty was interested in doing this was because he had an attachment to the material from his youth and emulating a comic strip was more unique and interesting than a straight laced approach that may have worked if Hill wanted it to be in black and white like the daily strips were. Thankfully everyone held out for Beatty who had secured a first look deal when it was first brought up to him in the 70's and despite Beatty wanting directors like Bob Fosse and Martin Scorsese, he eventually took on the job himself.

That would have been interesting, though obviously evocative of a similar sequence in the original "Robocop" involving a Detroit councilman. Are you aware if it was cut due to similarities? Or just because of budget/time restraints. I'm aware that the production ran well over its original slotted budget.

I did come across a transcribed conversation between the writers and Beatty where he commented that this opening sequence would be an expense and wasn't keen on keeping it since it didn't tie into the rest of the story. The similarity with the scene in RoboCop also may have been a contributing factor in having it removed. I remember on the audio commentary for RoboCop, cowriter Ed Neumeier mentioned that the sequence was inspired by the killing of Harvey Milk. I asked co-writer Jack Epps Jr. if this too was their inspiration  and he denied it. I would like to further research if this occurred in other films, because the only one I could think of was Last Action Hero that came 3 years later. There's also a detail about how RoboCop producer, Jon Davidson, was at one point attached to work on Dick Tracy, but decided to work on the sequel to RoboCop instead for more creative freedom than he would have working with Beatty. Perhaps that was a contribution of Davidson's with prior knowledge of the previous drafts for the mayor hostage scene. I do know that at one point Richard Benjamin was attached to direct Dick Tracy, and subsequently left to direct 1930's period film City Heat where a music choice and ending shootout sequence was lifted from the Tracy script that the writers were not happy to see utilized in another movie.

The Mole was one of those Dick Tracy villains that later reformed, correct? Actually, that would have made some sense for the Mole to be something of a double agent/informant/stool pigeon given the character's history from the strip. With the "Mole" name being rather on the nose, but hey that's the fun of it!

Right, one of the few reformed villains, along with Steve the Tramp. I hope I can one day uncover why this change occurred. There probably concerned about how to portray Mumbles' mumbling. Hoffman knocked it out of the park thanks to Beatty direction of having him do an impression of a mutual friend of theirs (Beatty has said it was a Los Angeles Times reporter, but other sources sound like it was more than likely producer Robert Evans). As you may be aware, Beatty dared Hoffman into being in this movie by telling him he going to use his impression for the original actor cast as Mumbles, Harry Dean Stanton, Hoffman wasn't fond of someone doing his impression so he told him he would do it. We were lucky Hoffman got to contribute because he only had a short window in his schedule as he was prepping up do Hook and when he arrived on set the day after, he won the Oscar for Rain Man, he was suffering from the flu. Now that I think about it, I think Harry Dean Stanton would've been a good choice for The Mole. Danny DeVito would've been as well, but that's a little too obvious.

I believe your segment was right after the very nice interview with the late Lena Headey. It was great to hear how acceptable Warren was towards Lena's idea of dying her hair red, rather than leaving it as is, due to how color rich the film was itself.

I wasn't aware of the falling out with the writers. That's interesting.

I do need to listen to that episode again. I remember being quite surprised to hear myself follow her interview, and it's a shame that I never had an opportunity like the hosted to talk to her more about her experiences. I do remember reading that Beatty wanted Tess to be redheaded instead of a blonde, like she was in the comic strip, as a tribute to his mother who read him the Dick Tracy comic strips as a boy and for his sister who I'm sure you know is Shirley MacLaine. It's just interesting to note how Vicki Vale in Batman '89 went from redheaded to blonde haired.

I wasn't aware of the falling out with the writers. That's interesting.

It wasn't necessarily a falling out as it was just carrying out business. The script, for the movie was dormant for almost a half a decade until it got back up and running again when Beatty made his deal with Disney to make the movie. By that time, the writers were tackling other projects, and it is normal for further revisions to be handled by other riders that many times don't go credited because of a stipulation by the guild that states that you have to contribute more than 33% original ideas to get credit. The basis of their arbitration statement to get full credit, mainly detailed how Beatty and Goldman had simply rearrange scenes and changed dialogue which didn't necessitate a worthy credit.

Oh, for sure. This is all just fantasy booking of course, but it would have made all the sense in the world, had the 1990 been more successful and Disney wanting a sequel right away, for the Brow and especially Pruneface to be the villains during the backdrop of WW2. I mean, I think it's arguably safe to say that Pruneface is probably Tracy's most recognizable villain outside of Flattop, so it's easy to imagine him being saved and utilized for a sequel had Pruneface not been killed off already in the 1990 movie.

Conceding that Pruneface's appearance been postponed for a sequel, I have doubts as to R.G. Armstrong being cast in the role. Mainly due to the role certainly being beefed up and more flashier I would assume. As this probably would have resulted in something akin to how Warners was handling casting the Batman villains at the time, and I would think a somewhat bigger name would have been sought after to follow in the steps of Pacino's Big Boy.

I can sorta envision possibly Dennis Hopper accepting the part. I believe he and Beatty were friends. Gene Hackman as Pruneface in a Dick Tracy sequel would have been great, but I don't think he was too crazy about working with Beatty. Having already turned down appearing in the 1990 because of this if I am not mistaken...

I do like your casting suggestions for Pruneface. I've read an interview with the makeup artists where they heard that Kurtwood Smith was apparently up for a role and they were excited at the prospect of him playing Flattop but we're disappointing to hear he was up for the role of Pruneface. He definitely would've excelled in the role if his character was saved for a World War II era sequel. The casting of Armstrong seems off with his Texas-accent when you're aware of his status as a German spy from the comics. Something that I really wish would've survived into the final film was that Pruneface was supposed to be a pyromaniac (a detail that survived into the character description and accessories for the Playmates action figure) and instead of Tracy being covered in cement, he was supposed to be doused with gasoline and Pruneface taunts him with a lit match but is rescued as he is in the film by The Blank shooting Pruneface. Despite this loss, Collins got a lot of mileage out of the more sinister Mrs. Pruneface who placed Tracy is his most famous death trap.

I wasn't aware of this, but that's something to think about. Interesting route to take for sure. Do you know if Landis was planning on using a multitude of villains for his version? Or was Landis planning on taking the more common approach and just use one villain (and stock henchmen) from the rogues gallery? I believe you said that Landis was also going to use Big Boy as the main villain, but I can't recall if you mentioned any others that were in the cards during his time on the project...

Yes, the final movie is pretty much what Landis was intending to direct from the beginning. I spoke to Landis about his involvement and he said that he implemented the idea that Beatty eventually followed through of making the film look like the comic strip. He had confidence in make up artist Rick Baker to have the villains look like real life incarnations of their drawings and his wife, costume designer Deborah Nadoolman, was interested in doing multicolored period clothing, including Tracy's trademark yellow hat and coat. When Landis had to step down and director Walter Hill took over, Hill didn't want to take that approach and was envisioning something that Brian de Palma would eventually carry through with The Untouchables.

I think Beatty did a pretty good job with the 1990 Dick Tracy movie. Arguably, he incorporated as many of the heavy hitters as possible from Chester Gould's Tracy rogues gallery, but you're right, some were left. I understand there were a few prequel comics, and Max Allan Collins writing the movie novelization, along with two sequel paperbacks. Wasn't Shakey and B.B. Eyes a few of the villains he used?

B.B. Eyes was utilized in both the prequel comics written by comics writer and co-story consultant/editor of 1990 Flash television series, John Francis Moore, and in Collins' first sequel novel. Shakey also appeared in both and there was a one point in the scripting phase where he appeared in a pre-credits sequence where he's convict who takes the mayor hostage and demands a swap for Tracy who is called to the scene via the two-way wrist radio while attending the opera. The sequence was subsequently cut and shifted so that Tracy is called to the scene of the Seventh Street garage massacre.

Many other characters from the strip appeared in the original drafts and were subsequently replaced with others. Even though the early drafts always utilized Mumbles as the stool pigeon character, for some reason one of the later drafts that was close to the final shooting script utilized The Mole and this was reflected in the Disney Audio Adventures two part comic adaptation. Even during production they were adding characters with some input from Collins. One of these was Influence who never appeared in any previous drafts. His character didn't even get to use his gimmick of being able to hypnotize people, and was simply chosen because of his skull like face that complemented Henry Silva's natural face.

Honestly, I found out about these listening to a podcast some time back covering the Beatty film. According to the guy that supposedly read them, the sequel would have taken place during WW2, focusing on an espionage plot involving Pruneface and The Brow. Which makes sense, considering the villains themselves from the strip, but apparently the writer was unaware that they were already appearing in the final film itself.

If it was for The Projection Booth, that was definitely yours truly. All of the details were indeed derived from those treatments and while there were some erroneous errors of repeating villains that were killed off in the final film, to the writers' credit, when they wrote the two sequel proposals, they weren't privy to who was being used as Beatty and Bo Goldman were revising the screenplay without their input. This would later became of moment of contention when Beatty and Goldman wanted credit and the original writers filed an arbitration to the Writers Guild stating that their work wasn't substantial enough to get credit and thus split residuals. Beatty would subsequently dismissed their sequel ideas when they were presented to them.

As I mentioned earlier with Influence, The Brow was another great looking villain they wanted to use for the opening card game that also appeared on many of the promotional material like the McDonald's scratch off game. When Collins was writing the first draft of the novelization, he was thinking ahead and decided that The Brow and others' place in the World War II era of the comic strip would be better utilized and decided to create other characters to replace them. Disney did not like this change and ordered him to stick to the script so he had to reluctantly use them although they would've been fine additions to his subsequent World War II era sequel.

There is some details about Beatty being interested in doing a previous iteration of Dick Tracy that involved the character dealing with Nazis kidnapping Oppenheimer, while the War of the Worlds broadcast is going on that would make it more of a historical fiction instead of the comic strip, cops and robbers approach that was first developed while John Landis was attached to direct in the early 80s that became the final film.

It is sort of funny that almost exactly 23 years after the "yellow spandex" line... well, here we are.

X-Men First Class technically did it first and we did get that tease of the Wolverine costume in The Wolverine.

In some ways, Daredevil (2003) reminds me of how Warren Beatty approached Dick Tracy back in 1990. Sure, there were plenty of nods, but it's also discernible that the idea was basically, "Let's try and get as much as we can in, cause we don't know if we'll be making another one!".

With Dick Tracy, it was more about throwing in as many of his rogues gallery into the movie as possible. With Daredevil, as already stated, the decision to try and squeeze in by establishing Matt's origin, Daredevil as a crime fighter, Kingpin as the antagonist, Elektra's saga, Bullseye as a villainous rival, Ben Urich's investigation, the Coolio subplot, ect was a gutsy undertaking. Even if the execution wasn't always satisfying, it's commendable it turned out as good as it did. Especially the Director's Cut.

The early-mid Marvel comic book movie boom had no formulaic approach and brand to go by, it was a time of experimentation. Trial by error essentially.

Ooh, I always love a conversation involving Dick Tracy as that's been my main area of research. It is true that they did indeed include a lot of characters in that film but the beauty of having a comic strip that ran for over a half a centenary at the time it was released was that was just a taste of who could appear in subsequent follow ups. Max Allan Collins was able to carry on with new villains in his follow ups to his novelization that could have gone on further if he wasn't let go from his writing position for the comic strip.

The deal with Daredevil was that it seemed like the filmmakers were set on adapting the Frank Miller run of the character as that was deemed to be the definitive take on the character and that made it much easier and condensed to tell the story they wanted to tell. I do remember thinking after I first saw this film was who or what could be included in a sequel as this one seemed self contained and didn't know any Daredevil villains that could succeed Kingpin, Bullseye or Electra. It all seemed fitting as Affleck made that after-mentioned humiliation quote about doing Daredevil. I hope one day he will address that and just say he was just full of himself back then, because it was a point of contention when he excepted the role of Batman, and pretty much showed that he should've followed his own advice if he wanted to avoid being humiliated, which did happen once Batman v. Superman wasn't the critical success I'm sure he thought it would get.

In both cases of Dick Tracy and Daredevil, the idea of consolidating everything into one film paid off as the sequel prospects didn't pay off.

Lucas could have directed Raiders himself, and I get the impression he was planning to do so before the stress of making Star Wars impacted his health (he wouldn't direct another film after that until The Phantom Menace two decades later).

I wish we knew more about Philip Kaufman's involvement with Raiders of the Lost Ark who is credited with developing the story with Lucas and was always subsequently credited for the characters. The only real concrete detail we have is that Kaufman was the one who came up with the Ark of the Covenant being the McGuffin. I wonder if he was originally slated to direct as well, but once Spielberg showed his interest in directing, Lucas went with him instead. A similar incident happened when John Milius was supposed to direct 1941, but when Spielberg read the script, he said he wanted to do it, and everyone obliged, because the movie's budget could increase.