The 2006 movie, The Devil Wears Prada is iconic for many reasons, and all of them are Meryl Streep and the character she plays—Miranda Priestly, the ice-cold editor of the fictional fashion magazine Runway. The very idea of anyone else playing this role is sacrilege, even if it is Vanessa Williams, who played a similar role in the American series Ugly Betty. She will be the new Miranda in the Broadway musical iteration of The Devil Wears Prada.
It makes no sense. Streep’s acting and mannerisms, as well as her impeccable sartorial choices, elevated the movie to the cult status it enjoys today. It won’t be the same with Vanessa Williams.
There is no actor that can replace or re-create what Streep has already done, period. And it is not a comment on Williams’ acting prowess, but rather on the fact that one can hardly recreate or duplicate perfection. There is only one Streep and only one Miranda who can make everyone around her tremble. That will be all.
There has been a tradition of borrowing musicals to become feature films and vice versa. But it should not apply to films like The Devil Wears Prada, which was never really known for its song-and-dance viability, but for its withering comments, mouthed by Streep, among other things.
It is as unnecessary as the Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge musical where Austin Colby plays Raj, a role perfected by Shah Rukh Khan.
Also Read: ABBA’s isn’t just a cash-grab comeback. It reminds us of their staying power in pop culture
Irreplaceable Meryl Streep
Streep was nominated for Best Actor in a Leading Role for the 2006 movie at nearly every major awards show that season, and won a Golden Globe and Satellite, to name a few. Initially almost losing out on the role, Streep made it one of the most memorable films of her career, prompting a rewatch every few months or years, depending on how big a Streep fan one is.
What makes The Devil Wears Prada such a watershed moment, simultaneously in Hollywood and the world of fashion is the inspiration behind the character of Miranda Priestley—Vogue America editor-in-chief Anna Wintour. The movie was adapted from the 2003 novel of the same name, written by Lauren Weisberger who drew from her stint as Wintour’s assistant at Vogue.
The movie uses the legend of Wintour and the whispers of her chilly demeanour but impressive and impeccable sense of style and editorial command to create Priestly—an editor both feared and respected. It also gives us a peek into the world of fashion. Her speech where she uses the colour of Andy’s sweater to explain the trickle-down effect of fashion has been dissected and examined several times over the years.
Hollywood seems to have borrowed a page from the tendency in India to ‘remix’ popular songs and to completely destroy their appeal. Cue Chamma Chamma from China Gate (1998) to Dus Bahane of Dus (2005). They have all been duds, not to mention unnecessary.
Also Read: Ali Sethi, Pasoori are so big that Arijit Singh looks small for trying to own it
Nostalgia should be guarded
The casting is also unfair to Williams because unwittingly, people will have certain expectations of her performance. She will always be compared to the original Miranda.
There is also the element of it being a film rooted in the times. The same goes for other contemporary adaptations of popular movies like Pretty Woman (1990) to a musical in 2018, or even Legally Blonde (2001) in 2007.
Rarely do they manage to create the same impact as the original movies, or even successfully incorporate the contemporary into the dated, yet highly loved and revered movies. The world changes, but these movies are a glowing reminder of the years in which they came out.
The only remakes that have managed to retain, evolve and better their original spirit and charm are probably those of Mean Girls (2004). Both the Broadway musical in 2017 and the movie musical this year have been successful. But that’s also because it has always been closely helmed by its OG creator, Tina Fey.
Nostalgia is a powerful element in the world of movies, and as such, it should be guarded not copied.
Views are personal.
(Edited by Theres Sudeep)