|
Post by Hey Man on Apr 8, 2013 8:05:18 GMT -5
So are we saying here that remakes are fine as long as top quality directors are doing them? No, but they tend to be a reflection of the artist making them. I'd rather Martin Scorsese tackle anything than Uwe Boll, for instance. I know those might be extremes, but the one thing the movies you keep bringing up have in common (including Scarface) is a quality director. The reality is that a lot of these TV-to-film extravaganzas and many of today's remakes get handed to either up-and-comers on which to cut their teeth or to people who are lesser-knowns because they come more affordably than a big name. Not to say that a lesser known can't knock one out of the park or that a dog can't have his day, but we're largely talking about average talent making questionable films or doing movies that don't need to be remade, like Halloween or Psycho. They're genre classics. Leave them alone. Mostly it's just average working with average producing average. You would go on a killing spree wouldn't you if J.J. Abrams was going to remake Star Wars with a new cast for Han, Luke, Leia, etc? I think the problem is that the remakes as of late are genre movies ala action, horror and so forth. Scorcese for example is remaking The Gambler - which was an early 70's movie with James Caan (and awesome by the way). I am sure the remake will be fantastic and no one is going to complain about it, because most people haven't even seen the original.
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 8:09:15 GMT -5
Not really (Han, Luke, Leia). I mean, if the story picked up right after Jedi they'd have to. If you advance it 30 years or so, why not just use the originals? Depends on where you pick up. I trust Arndt and Abrams to not fuck it up, at least right now. I think they'll work around the characters/actors abilities and charms and not push it too much.
I think you're right (action films, horror...again, tv shows too, I'll add). But if Marty is going to do something, I'm interested. I heard the Coens were doing True Grit and was immediately interested. Not that they can't fuck up and disappoint me, but I'm excited when compelling remakes are in capable hands instead of just cheap ones going for the cheap buck. Huge difference in that potential.
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Apr 8, 2013 8:16:24 GMT -5
Not really (Han, Luke, Leia). I mean, if the story picked up right after Jedi they'd have to. If you advance it 30 years or so, why not just use the originals? Depends on where you pick up. I trust Arndt and Abrams to not fuck it up, at least right now. I think they'll work around the characters/actors abilities and charms and not push it too much. I think you're right (action films, horror...again, tv shows too, I'll add). But if Marty is going to do something, I'm interested. I heard the Coens were doing True Grit and was immediately interested. Not that they can't fuck up and disappoint me, but I'm excited when compelling remakes are in capable hands instead of just cheap ones going for the cheap buck. Huge difference in that potential. No, I am talking reboot of Star Wars - same story, new design for Darth Vader, same characters, etc.
|
|
|
Post by lugnut on Apr 8, 2013 8:20:27 GMT -5
Scorcese for example is remaking The Gambler - which was an early 70's movie with James Caan (and awesome by the way). For a second there, I actually thought you meant he was remaking this one - www.imdb.com/title/tt0080993/
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Apr 8, 2013 8:24:39 GMT -5
Scorcese for example is remaking The Gambler - which was an early 70's movie with James Caan (and awesome by the way). For a second there, I actually thought you meant he was remaking this one - www.imdb.com/title/tt0080993/Ah no. I would be worried if he was. ;D
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 8:31:12 GMT -5
Not really (Han, Luke, Leia). I mean, if the story picked up right after Jedi they'd have to. If you advance it 30 years or so, why not just use the originals? Depends on where you pick up. I trust Arndt and Abrams to not fuck it up, at least right now. I think they'll work around the characters/actors abilities and charms and not push it too much. I think you're right (action films, horror...again, tv shows too, I'll add). But if Marty is going to do something, I'm interested. I heard the Coens were doing True Grit and was immediately interested. Not that they can't fuck up and disappoint me, but I'm excited when compelling remakes are in capable hands instead of just cheap ones going for the cheap buck. Huge difference in that potential. No, I am talking reboot of Star Wars - same story, new design for Darth Vader, same characters, etc. No, I'm not down for that. I wasn't down with it with Psycho, with Halloween...I'm not down for it with Star Wars or Casablanca either. I know eventually it'll happen, but it doesn't excite me.
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Apr 8, 2013 8:50:35 GMT -5
No, I am talking reboot of Star Wars - same story, new design for Darth Vader, same characters, etc. No, I'm not down for that. I wasn't down with it with Psycho, with Halloween...I'm not down for it with Star Wars or Casablanca either. I know eventually it'll happen, but it doesn't excite me. What if Scorcese was doing Casablanca?
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 8:55:46 GMT -5
No, I'm not down for that. I wasn't down with it with Psycho, with Halloween...I'm not down for it with Star Wars or Casablanca either. I know eventually it'll happen, but it doesn't excite me. What if Scorcese was doing Casablanca? You see and there's where I pull the plug on "depends on who's directing" because I just don't want the big time classics (Oceans 11 was never that level to me) fucked with. I also don't think Marty or anyone with any sense would willfully touch that anyhow. So no....no remakes of Casablanca by anyone.
|
|
|
Post by Cducharme on Apr 8, 2013 11:15:13 GMT -5
And really, that's what we're talking about: today's climate. It doesn't matter if a great remake was made 30 years ago, 45 years ago, etc. What counts is what's being made right now. THEN it wasn't an excuse to not have to write a script and now Hollywood would just as soon remake Psycho (please) or The Hills Have Eyes 2 (desperately heaving basketballs in the dark) than work on something original and viable. Even ones you think stand a chance of improving on the limited scope of the originals often fail. Tron had great potential, given the original was such a cheese fest. Same with Clash Of The Titans. Both turd remakes. I keep thinking I'd like to see a modern retelling of Logan's Run (given the comical-though-award-winning fx from '76), but I'm afraid it would get handed to some hack director and, like most of these, fall flat. I've heard Peter Jackson's name mentioned with this for years now, but who knows. Probably be handed off to the guy handling the re-telling Basket Case 2, Leprechaun IV, or doing a modern hip-hop version of The Godfather with Wesley Snipes as Michael Corleone (now MC called Tizzle in the script).
Sorry, mostly not impressed. Certainly not impressed enough to justify the quantity of remakes being made. It's desperate....but of course it's easy, so it's obvious WHY they're drawn to it like stink on shit. You have a format, characters, a story, a built-in market already in place. It almost doesn't matter that it's not very good, so long as it does pretty well in week 1. Just because you named it they ARE remaking leprechaun. Hope you're fucking happy!!!! (OK fine, it's been in pre-production for months) Also, Basket Case 1 & 2 better be left the fuck alone. Great films.
|
|
|
Post by Cducharme on Apr 8, 2013 11:24:18 GMT -5
See for me I approach it on a case by case basis. Yes, I am sick of re-hash/re-makes. Or "re-imaginings" or whatever bullshit term hollywood is shoving down our throat. But at the same time, if a quality film results I'm happy. Carpenter's The Thing (itself a re-make) got a "prequel" with the exact same name a few years back. I may be one of the only people on earth who enjoyed it, but I thought they did damn good justice to the film I remember from my childhood, the acting was solid and the story was great. The CGI was barely noticeable, and that's a fucking good thing.
I'm excited for the Evil Dead one, I believe it's got the ingredients the first one had (why does everyone expect some character development filled saga?!?! It's fucking evil dead, the first film had 0 development and hammy as shit acting and yet I loved it) to at least be a good horror film.
Of course to me there's two big differences with these re-makes versus your average one. The original directors at least had a hand in the films somehow, some way. Carpenter was kind of hands off, but he approved the script at all stages and to me it showed in the quality of the film.
|
|
|
Post by Cducharme on Apr 8, 2013 11:34:47 GMT -5
I actually didn't mind The Thing prequel thingy either, wouldn't watch it again but it wasn't the usual trainwreck these things are. But, there's a remake of Citizen Kane in the works and what is the motherfucking point? Wait... WHAT?!?!?! I knew about Casablanca 2 (written by the original author before he passed even) but Citizen Kane is being remade?!?!?!
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 12:15:25 GMT -5
And really, that's what we're talking about: today's climate. It doesn't matter if a great remake was made 30 years ago, 45 years ago, etc. What counts is what's being made right now. THEN it wasn't an excuse to not have to write a script and now Hollywood would just as soon remake Psycho (please) or The Hills Have Eyes 2 (desperately heaving basketballs in the dark) than work on something original and viable. Even ones you think stand a chance of improving on the limited scope of the originals often fail. Tron had great potential, given the original was such a cheese fest. Same with Clash Of The Titans. Both turd remakes. I keep thinking I'd like to see a modern retelling of Logan's Run (given the comical-though-award-winning fx from '76), but I'm afraid it would get handed to some hack director and, like most of these, fall flat. I've heard Peter Jackson's name mentioned with this for years now, but who knows. Probably be handed off to the guy handling the re-telling Basket Case 2, Leprechaun IV, or doing a modern hip-hop version of The Godfather with Wesley Snipes as Michael Corleone (now MC called Tizzle in the script).
Sorry, mostly not impressed. Certainly not impressed enough to justify the quantity of remakes being made. It's desperate....but of course it's easy, so it's obvious WHY they're drawn to it like stink on shit. You have a format, characters, a story, a built-in market already in place. It almost doesn't matter that it's not very good, so long as it does pretty well in week 1. Just because you named it they ARE remaking leprechaun. Hope you're fucking happy!!!! (OK fine, it's been in pre-production for months) Also, Basket Case 1 & 2 better be left the fuck alone. Great films. See, that's how sad it is. I even guess this stupidity correctly.
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 12:18:36 GMT -5
See for me I approach it on a case by case basis. Yes, I am sick of re-hash/re-makes. Or "re-imaginings" or whatever bullshit term hollywood is shoving down our throat. But at the same time, if a quality film results I'm happy. Carpenter's The Thing (itself a re-make) got a "prequel" with the exact same name a few years back. I may be one of the only people on earth who enjoyed it, but I thought they did damn good justice to the film I remember from my childhood, the acting was solid and the story was great. The CGI was barely noticeable, and that's a fucking good thing. I'm excited for the Evil Dead one, I believe it's got the ingredients the first one had (why does everyone expect some character development filled saga?!?! It's fucking evil dead, the first film had 0 development and hammy as shit acting and yet I loved it) to at least be a good horror film. Of course to me there's two big differences with these re-makes versus your average one. The original directors at least had a hand in the films somehow, some way. Carpenter was kind of hands off, but he approved the script at all stages and to me it showed in the quality of the film. You're right that it's case-by-case for sure. My problem is the track record, especially in recent years as Hey Man has pointed out, isn't all that great. I'm not sure what percentage of success I'd assign remakes in general or in recent years, but it could be higher AND there could also be fewer made, as my ridiculous stab in the dark with Leprechaun seems to suggest. ;D I shouldn't be right about that.
|
|
|
Post by R&ROVER on Apr 8, 2013 12:28:34 GMT -5
That's actually not bad!
|
|
|
Post by Cducharme on Apr 8, 2013 13:19:13 GMT -5
The F13 remake almost had me, but why's Jason running, or setting traps? He's fucking retard!
|
|
|
Post by B5Erik on Apr 8, 2013 16:17:12 GMT -5
Scarface isn't very good either. Not in my opinion. I'll take Carlitto's Way or Donnie Brasco over that one any day. The rappers sure love it though. Yeah, the Scarface remake was a total mess of a movie. It was all about being shocking when it should have been about making a great movie. Carlito's Way and Donnie Brasco were both great (or near great) movies with similar themes. Infinitely superior to Scarface.
|
|
|
Post by kissoff on Oct 31, 2023 23:42:03 GMT -5
Absolutely no way in the world you could pay me to see Bad News Bears or The Gambler remake. Those films are perfect.
|
|
|
Post by Hey Man on Nov 1, 2023 10:55:23 GMT -5
Absolutely no way in the world you could pay me to see Bad News Bears or The Gambler remake. Those films are perfect. The Gambler could have been good, but Mark Wahlberg pretty much sucks as an actor. Even in great movies like The Departed, he is the one that could easily be replaced.
|
|