This is a highly appropriate piece of movie news to be posting on the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday. It appears as if Oliver Stone has one less project to worry about, and whether that is good or bad is up to you. The director is no longer attached to the developing biopic on Martin Luther King Jr., but the reason as to why may perk your interests.
The angle that Oliver Stone was going for was more of a controversial approach, and plenty of people can see how unappealing that could be in the eyes of a studio. He’s been busy at work on this project, but it wasn’t until today that he announced he was no longer a part of it. Oliver Stone went to Twitter to vent about what he could have made for audiences, but from the sounds of it, it could have sparked quite a number of debates about his interpretation of the man who lead on the Civil Rights movement:
“The script dealt with issues of adultery, conflicts within the movement, and King’s spiritual transformation into a higher, more radical being… I’m told the estate and the ‘respectable’ black community that guards King’s reputation won’t approve it. They suffocate the man & the truth… I wish you could have seen the film I would’ve made. I fear if ‘they’ ever make it, it’ll just be another commemoration of the March on Washington… Martin, I grieve for you. You are still a great inspiration for your fellow Americans–but, thank God, not a saint.”
After reading that short paragraph, I can completely understand why any studio would be hesitant to let Oliver Stone go about with his own version of the biopic. While it could possibly be a bit more truthful, Martin Luther King Jr. is an iconic figure in history and not many people would like to see anything that could taint the way this man is perceived in the eyes of the nation and the world. Warner Bros and DreamWorks still have their hands on the picture, but I’m interested to read the script that Stone put together for this biopic.
Do you think Oliver Stone should have been given the boot off the biopic? Why or why not?