Entertainment Weekly is reporting that Clint Eastwood is in talks with Warner Bros. to direct a remake of the musical, A Star is Born, and Beyoncé is in negotiations to star. Deadline first reported the story, and Warner has confirmed it. The article at EW.com has a few more details.
The original A Star is Born was a 1937 romance and drama starring Janet Gaynor and Fredric March. The best known and perhaps most popular version is the 1954 musical directed by George Cukor and starring Judy Garland and James Mason. In 1976, the story was retold with Barbra Streisand and Kris Kristofferson, which is apparently the most successful version at the box office.
If you visit the EW article, please read the comments section which is filled with the general moron-arama that is practically every Internet comment section. So many seem up in arms about Beyonce ruining a classic and expressing dismay that the great Clint Eastwood would dirty himself by directing a no-talent like Beyonce.
I imagine that quite a bit of the complaints center around the fact that this possible Eastwood/Beyonce version mainly offends fans of the 1954 Garland version. So all the (drama) queens are out in force to protect Garland. Beyonce may not have 1/10th the talent that Garland had (as one wag put it), but nor is she 1/10th the pill-popper Garland was (Why did I go there, Lord?). I think Beyonce is quite a talent and quite a star and doesn't need to measure herself against a woman who was dead long before Beyonce was born.
If all it takes is a Beyonce version of A Star is Born to ruin the Garland film then Garland's wasn't shit to begin with. The simple fact is that A Star is Born is the intellectual property of a hugh corporation that can be exploited whenever the owners see fit and however they see fit. The only one that can force you to see a new version is yourself, although I'm sure some people will see it just to complain about it.
I'll update when I get more information.