Realistically, I think Streisand could still play Rose, provided it didn't get dragged out much further than two more years or so. She looks 20 years younger than she is, and still has amazing pipes (or did last month at both shows I saw at the Bowl) if a bit rough around the edges. Remember people looked MUCH older than their years back then. She frankly doesn't look much older than Russell did at the time she made the film. If you were to look at a picture of my grandmother in her 40's, you'd swear by today's standards you were looking at a 60 year old woman. I'm not holding my breath for it to happen, and if it does, I won't hold my breath over whether they'll do right by the property. Barbra has a tendency to take good material and make ill advised changes and slightly dumb it down (Nuts and The Mirror Has Two Faces, both of which were much better in their previous incarnations). I think the potential for greatness is there still, but even as a huge admirer of the woman, I'm not sure that the end result would be as great as it could be. I just don't think there are any Ray Starks and William Wylers today who would collaborate with her and bring out her best, but not let her run roughshod over every choice. Maybe every idea she has for the piece will be perfect, but based on her track record of the last few adaptations (including, to a dregree, The Prince of Tides, which fared batter than the other two I mentioned), I'll take a wait and see attitude. And then again, maybe Gypsy will always be of the stage and just doesn't translate to film no matter what. I have never found anything to admire in the Russell film, save for Natalie Wood's performance (and I usually love Russell).