When I was trying to figure out which remake to write about for this contest I was torn between two options. My first choice was Scarface, but somebody beat me to it so it made the choice pretty easy. In actuality, I was happy because although I love Al Pacino and especially Michelle Pfeiffer, I wasn't sure I was in the mood for 3 hours + of immoral, unrelenting drugs and violence. Dirty Rotten Scoundrels on the other hand, while certainly unethical, is still a lot of fun to watch. Especially the remake.
I started by watching the first one, Bedtime Story, from 1964, starring Marlon Brando, David Niven, and Shirley Jones. Having already seen the remake a few times, it was fun seeing it done with different actors. Brando played a convincing soldier but I had a hard time buying him as the idiot brother of David Niven's prince. There were certainly some funny moments, but Steve Martin was far better in the second one.
Niven, however, was very, very good. In fact, I liked his portrayal of the suave, sophisticated Lawrence Jamieson significantly more than I did Michael Caine's version. Not that Michael Caine was bad by any means. I really liked his performance...until I saw Niven's. Niven played the part with such a natural ease that it hardly seemed like he was acting. It was more like they cast the real-life version of the guy in the movie.
Having watched the first one, I went ahead and watched the remake again as well for fresh comparisons. This starred the aforementioned Michael Caine and Steve Martin, as well as Glenne Headly as the female lead. As I said, Niven was much better than Caine, but the funniest parts of both movies came from Martin. His portrayal of the idiot prince is classic Steve Martin. Funny, yet totally believable. I'm chuckling just thinking about it. Plus, he is able to add an element of vulnerability that I just wasn't buying from Brando.
What I found truly amazing was how true they stayed to the script. Many of the lines and scenes were virtually verbatim from the 1964 version. It wasn't until the end that the remake went full creative license on it, and changed the script.
Whereas in the first, one gets love and the other returns to his playboy ways, in the second they throw in a third con-artist who adds a very enjoyable and surprising ending to the entire movie. Shirley Jones was about as sweet as you could possibly imagine with her innocent Midwestern charm. Headley's performance, while also sweet, definitely had a little more of an "acting" feel to it. Of course, she was acting, both as the actress playing the part and in what she was doing in the movie. So, in that respect, I think both Jones and Headley played their roles perfectly and were completely sympathetic characters in their respective films.
Overall, the remake is definitely better. The ending notwithstanding, the performances and chemistry between the leads on screen was obvious and fun to watch. The relish with which Caine whips Martin's legs and the facial expressions Martin puts on are priceless. The twist at the end is definitely an enhancement to the old script and lets you walk away feeling good about the time you just spent watching the movie.
In watching both of them back to back, I can't help but wonder how good the movie would have been with Niven and Martin paired together. It's kind of like trying to compare athletes from different eras. It can never happen but it's fun to think about.
Overall, I highly recommend checking out Dirty Rotten Scoundrels if you've never seen it. And, if you've got some time to kill, Bedtime Story is worth a watch as well.
This review was written for the CineTV Contest, favorite remakes.
