Posted on Friday, September 16th, 2011 by Angie Han
The last time we reported on the Baywatch movie, Russ wrote that he hoped it would “just dry up and go away.” For a while, it seemed he’d gotten his wish, as the project didn’t seem to be making much progress. But it’s back now, with a script newly rewritten by Rescue Me co-creator Peter Tolan. And for better or worse, it’s apparently totally unrelated to the show — aside from a couple of planned appearances by David Hasselhoff and Pamela Anderson. More details after the jump.
Speaking on the Matthew Aaron Show (via Coming Soon), Tolan revealed that he had just submitted a script for the Baywatch film to Paramount. Previously, The Break-Up writer Jeremy Garelick had been tapped to direct and rewrite the film (from a more action-oriented 2005 draft by Jay Sherick and David Ronn) as a comedy. Though Garelick is no longer attached, it sounds like Tolan’s vision isn’t too different — as Garelick had about his script, Tolan referenced Stripes in describing his version.
But while Stripes served as an inspiration for the movie, the original Baywatch, oddly enough, did not. “It’s not based on the show in any way, though there are a couple of winks at the show,” said Tolan. “I don’t know anything about the show. I didn’t watch it in preparation for writing this.” Although he did write parts for Hasselhoff and Anderson, the show’s famous alums will not be reprising their roles from the original series.
My immediate reaction was “Why?” Why bother making a Baywatch movie at all if it has nothing to do with the Baywatch show? But then I remembered that this is Hollywood, which has also created a Lord of the Rings-inspired adaptation of Candyland and a Twilight-esque teen drama series based on Teen Wolf. As with those properties, it seems the people behind Baywatch want to capitalize on the brand name while still allowing themselves room to create their own thing. (And perhaps reboot the franchise, as The Playlist suggests.) I wish I’d say it wasn’t working, but we’re reporting on it, aren’t we?