jjbrr Posted October 21, 2014 Report Share Posted October 21, 2014 I saw a letter from Stanley Kubrick threatening another director to death because he was planning on making an Odissey in Space sequel, and Stanley found he couldn't stop he legally. Not a remake though. I am with Cyberyeti, the only films I don't want a remake are those who suck in first place, Beowulf (christopher lambert) or Zoo Warriors (Chinnese film) come to mind. hwæt? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenMan Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 I am with Cyberyeti, the only films I don't want a remake are those who suck in first place, Beowulf (christopher lambert) or Zoo Warriors (Chinnese film) come to mind. Sometimes a movie's suckage is a good reason for a remake. Example from TV is Battlestar Galactica, which was pretty bad the first time around and remarkably powerful the second. Most movies don't get remade because they're addressing some common theme in a way slightly (or not at all) different from what came before, and it's just as easy to start fresh with your own wrinkle, especially since you don't have to negotiate a license to use the previous characters or what have you. I read somewhere that the Spider-Man movies are getting remade just so the rights to the franchise don't revert back to Marvel from Sony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 to be fair there are three basic themes in literature and movies, these themes are very well known. btw your comments about marvel are just legally and logically wrong in every sense of the word. The theme about Casablanca..the story is common....the art is where we movie lovers marvel. For example take Star Wars. The theme is common...the story is common yet we marvel at Star Wars 1970's...and worry about star wars 2015. The majesty is in the art the wonder of art. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenMan Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 btw your comments about marvel are just legally and logically wrong in every sense of the word. The movie rights contracts for Marvel comic-book characters revert back to Disney/Marvel if X years go by without a movie being made. It's already happened with the Punisher, for instance. Word is that Sony/Columbia hasn't been happy with the box office for the last two Spider-Man films, and no wonder since that ground was still so recently trodden, but they'll keep at it because they're still making money and even the smaller paydays are better than just letting the rights expire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winstonm Posted October 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 I think the worst remake I've seen is The Day the Earth Stood Still. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Sometimes a movie's suckage is a good reason for a remake. Example from TV is Battlestar Galactica, which was pretty bad the first time around and remarkably powerful the second. If they butcher a good book or TV series that's one thing, that could be remade, I was talking about original material that just wasn't very good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 btw your comments about marvel are just legally and logically wrong in every sense of the word.His comment was that he had read something somewhere. How is that legally and logically wrong? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenberg Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 I remember this remake coming out, although I'm not sure I saw it. Then I IMDb'ed it, to see who was in it. And that reminded me that I haven't seen Harry Anderson in anything for a while. He's apparently mostly dropped out of Hollywood for the past dozen years -- his only appearance was in a 2008 episode of "Third Rock From the Sun" where several "Night Court" cast members appeared. But he's also in a new movie coming out this year. I just watched this remake of Harvey and it is a good illustration of one of the points of view. Harvey, the original with James Stewart, was a lot of fun. I think that Stewart was in the original stage version as well. You couold, if you wanted to be a little harsh, say that Harvey was a corny movie and Stewart a corny actor. Maybe true, but it was fun. The remake just didn't work. I asked Becky if she thought she would have liked it if she had seen only this remade version, and she thinks no. I agree. The original had the right role matched with the right person and it's hard to improve on that. I can easily understand not much liking the whole idea of Harvey, but if you go with the idea, then in this case you go with the original. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winstonm Posted October 23, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 I just watched this remake of Harvey and it is a good illustration of one of the points of view. Harvey, the original with James Stewart, was a lot of fun. I think that Stewart was in the original stage version as well. You couold, if you wanted to be a little harsh, say that Harvey was a corny movie and Stewart a corny actor. Maybe true, but it was fun. The remake just didn't work. I asked Becky if she thought she would have liked it if she had seen only this remade version, and she thinks no. I agree. The original had the right role matched with the right person and it's hard to improve on that. I can easily understand not much liking the whole idea of Harvey, but if you go with the idea, then in this case you go with the original. To my way of thinking, the marriage of role to a specific actor/actress is what makes a movie near-perfect. I can't imagine different actors improving a makeover of Lawrence of Arabia, for example. It is not so much the quality of the movie (I, too, liked the original Harvey) but (IMO) the pairing of script with the right actors that makes for special moments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdeegan Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 To my way of thinking, the marriage of role to a specific actor/actress is what makes a movie near-perfect. I can't imagine different actors improving a makeover of Lawrence of Arabia, for example. It is not so much the quality of the movie (I, too, liked the original Harvey) but (IMO) the pairing of script with the right actors that makes for special moments. "When God made you a fool, he gave you a fool's face" That's about as good as it gets. Don't "Play it again Sam". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.