I'm only vaguely aware of Kingdom Hearts, and I'd forgotten about the 90s Mickey Mouse Club, due to only hearing about it years after the fact despite being roughly in the target demo. Huh.
Is The Disney Company a hoarder that destroys our favorite franchises?
- Thread starter Sci-fi fan
- Start date
It's also on Heroes & Icons, and IFC.
I used to watch it all the time as a kid. It blew my mind a few years back when I found out who a bunch of those kids were: Justin Timberlake, fellow NSYNC member J.C. Chasez, Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, Ryan Gosling and Keri Russell. My dad always referred to li'l Timberlake as "that camera hogging ham".
A botched sequel or remake doesn't "ruin" the original. PSYCHO is still a classic, despite the ill-conceived remake. JAWS is just as entertaining and suspenseful as ever, despite the increasingly silly sequels. THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN is still a classic, despite the tedious remake with Sting and Jennifer Beals which nobody even remembers anymore.
Forgettable remakes and sequels tend to fade into obscurity, but people still watch and enjoy the classic versions.
Plus, there's no rule that says there can only be one "definitive" version of any given story or that the first version is always the best. I've enjoyed multiple versions of The Three Musketeers, Dracula, The Hound of the Baskervilles, etc. (And before somebody points out those are all adaptations of books, let me observe that so were THE WIZARD OF OZ and STARSHIP TROOPERS and any number of classic movies.)
The way I see it, it's a no-lose scenario:
If the remake fails, we still have the previous version.
If the remake works, we now have TWO good movies.
The more, the merrier.
Last edited:
Everything that man touched turned to gold. Even though that Ned Kelly film was kind of mediocre, he brought the character to life in a way that nobody else ever did.
It's funny. When the GHOSTBUSTERS movie came out, I ran into a fan who told me that he hoped it was terrible because he loved the original so much.
I honestly don't understand that mentality. Why would you want a movie to be bad? What does the one have to do with the other? You're not "cheating" on an old favorite if you enjoy a new version as well. Why not enjoy both versions if you can? It's not like you have to choose one over another.
I honestly don't understand that mentality. Why would you want a movie to be bad? What does the one have to do with the other? You're not "cheating" on an old favorite if you enjoy a new version as well. Why not enjoy both versions if you can? It's not like you have to choose one over another.
Last edited:
I knew about the rest of them, but that's the first I've heard about Ryan Gosling and Keri Russell.
Remakes and reboots don't destroy the original. It's even possible they improve on the original. *looks over at Sinatra's Ocean's 11*
You can possibly make a case for THE THOMAS CROWN AFFAIR as well.
And the 1970s version of THE THREE MUSKETEERS, directed by Richard Lester, is arguably the best-ever version of that oft-filmed novel. Suppose audiences had rebelled against it out of a nostalgic fondness for the old Gene Kelly/Lana Turner version from 1948? (Which, to be clear, I also love.)
A couple of bad versions of The Lone Ranger haven't displaced Clayton Moore. And Tyrone Powers and Basil Rathbone's Zorro was an awesome film but was no reason to stop the fun Bandares films. Or all the other Zorro productions. I still think of John Robinson as Zorro every time I see Guy Williams on Lost in Space.
Last edited:
Some people feel threatened when the new thing becomes more popular and more widely recognised than the old thing. Just about the only fandom I've seen that didn't get like that at some point is the Mad Max fandom, I guess they were just thrilled to see another big budget Aussie action movie.
If the internet existed in 1940: "WTF? They're remaking THE MARK OF ZORRO? They're going ruin the original 1920 movie! Who the hell is this Tyrone Powers loser? Nobody can ever replace Douglas Fairbanks as Zorro!"
Everything old is new again.
Thanks for your posts, Greg. It is always good to have a reminder that Hollywood has always relied on remaking previous films and drawing its source materials from other sources. In many ways, it is a lot like the perennial "kids these days" argument. As much as people think things are different now, evidence proves otherwise.
Same can be said for prequel series which many deplore, Black Sails was one of the most awesome prequels ever made. I'd love the show runners to come back and make Treasure Island.If the internet existed in 1940: "WTF? They're remaking THE MARK OF ZORRO? They're going ruin the original 1920 movie! Who the hell is this Tyrone Powers loser? Nobody can ever replace Douglas Fairbanks as Zorro!"
Everything old is new again.
True story: Not too long ago, I was at an open-mic night at a local coffee shop when a young, twenty-something guy got up and launched into a whole spiel lamenting about how Hollywood was rebooting the beloved franchises of his youth -- like Power Rangers and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.
I laughed out loud, took the mic from him, and did a spontaneous three-minute riff on what it's like to see your old favorites get rebooted and recast over and over and over again over the course of decades. "Trust me, you get used to it."
From where I'm sitting, fretting that Hollywood is churning out sequels and remakes is kinda like complaining that the sun rises in the east or that water is wet. 'Twas ever so.
Precisely this. This attitude of "I hope the new one fails!" confuses me. If it fails it doesn't mean they'll make the version the fans want. It means the company might sit on it.
And none of that destroys the originals. Nothing Disney does now will ruin these franchises for me.
As far as I know, the first movie prequel was possibly THE GOLEM: HOW HE CAME INTO THE WORLD way back in 1920, while the first movie sequel I know of was DON Q, SON OF ZORRO back in 1925.
The more things change . . ..
Somebody mentioned this upthread, but it deserves repeating.
Without Disney, we most likely would not have had more Star Wars movies for a long time, if ever. Now we have four (soon to be five) pretty decent films, all of which I have enjoyed to one degree or another.
It is also possible that we would never have had the MCU.
Without Disney, we most likely would not have had more Star Wars movies for a long time, if ever. Now we have four (soon to be five) pretty decent films, all of which I have enjoyed to one degree or another.
It is also possible that we would never have had the MCU.
If the internet existed in 1940: "WTF? They're remaking THE MARK OF ZORRO? They're going ruin the original 1920 movie! Who the hell is this Tyrone Powers loser? Nobody can ever replace Douglas Fairbanks as Zorro!"
Everything old is new again.
To say nothing of how they "rebooted" Phantom of the Opera with Claude Rains in 1943.
True story: Not too long ago, I was at an open-mic night at a local coffee shop when a young, twenty-something guy got up and launched into a whole spiel lamenting about how Hollywood was rebooting the beloved franchises of his youth -- like Power Rangers and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.
I laughed out loud, took the mic from him, and did a spontaneous three-minute riff on what it's like to see your old favorites get rebooted and recast over and over and over again over the course of decades. "Trust me, you get used to it."
From where I'm sitting, fretting that Hollywood is churning out sequels and remakes is kinda like complaining that the sun rises in the east or that water is wet. 'Twas ever so.
I don't really mind remakes or sequels if they're well made and find their own style.
For example Star Trek - i adore the Shatner and Picard Trek movies (with the exception of 5 which i'm meh about and 10 which i outright loathe) but i also liked Abrams Trek movies.
Sure they lack the core of what set Star Trek apart from most other SciFi shows.. its optimism and humanistic approach to storytelling, it's allegories on our modern world mixed with aliens, technology and space battles. The new Trek movies lacked some of that but then again they are brilliant popcorn movies, i was thoroughly entertained for each of their 2 hours, was fighting back tears when Kirk was born while his father sacrificed himself to save his family and others and whooped out loud in laughter when they started to blast Beastie Boys to initiate a bigass space battle
Disney will do whatever they need to in order to maximize profits.. if they believe a PG13 version of Walking Dead is the way to go they will do it, if they want to reboot their own movies they will do it and the reboot/remake of Lion King and its success at the box office is proof that they are doing it right.
I am not forced to watch any remake or reboot.. i couldn't care less if Star Wars would be remade by Uwe Boll as i would only check it out for a short while to confirm my suspsicions and if they turn out to be right turn it off and probably put in the Holy Trilogy and relive my childhood.
Similar threads
