• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The unnecessary reboot/remake of the week thread

Tarkin could have been via hologram but Leia had to be aboard the Tantative IV as its next stop was Tatooine....

Yeah, I guess, but she could’ve been included in any way that the plot demands. I mean, you could’ve had her father back on Alderaan receive a message from her, saying that the ship was about to be boarded.

Speaking of Tarkin, should they ever make a Tarkin movie with him rising through the ranks up to serving Vader, they should pick Cillian Murphy.

I so can’t see that. Other than the high cheekbones, there’s no resemblance. The guy who plays Arthur on Peaky Blinders looks more like Peter Cushing than Murphy does.
 
^^ I don't see how you can do a story about the Death Star without it's commander. Having Tarkin appear only as a hologram wouldn't have worked.
 
^^ I don't see how you can do a story about the Death Star without it's commander. Having Tarkin appear only as a hologram wouldn't have worked.

There’s already a built-in plot route with the rivalry between him and Krennic. Have Tarkin on another ship tell Krennic, who thinks that he’s going to be commanding it, that he’s coming to take command of the Death Star; or simply have Tarkin called away from the DS to meet the emperor so as to update him on the station’s progress, but on his way back to it towards the end of the film. Anyway, it’s all hypothetical now.
 
I so can’t see that. Other than the high cheekbones, there’s no resemblance. The guy who plays Arthur on Peaky Blinders looks more like Peter Cushing than Murphy does.

True, but the more I thought about it, I realized that a person's facial structure changes drastically the more one ages. We've only ever seen Tarkin as an older man, not a younger one.
 
True, but the more I thought about it, I realized that a person's facial structure changes drastically the more one ages. We've only ever seen Tarkin as an older man, not a younger one.

Google-image Young Peter Cushing, he looks pretty much like middle aged and older Cushing. And nothing like Murphy.

I mean, if one takes the view that it doesn’t matter that the actor playing a younger version of a character looks like the older one, so long as they capture their essence, well, fair enough. But seeing as SW first cast a lookalike for ROTS & then digitally recreated Cushing for RO, it does seem to matter to them.
 
I mean, if one takes the view that it doesn’t matter that the actor playing a younger version of a character looks like the older one, so long as they capture their essence, well, fair enough.

That was my thought, but perhaps you have a point. I just thought he'd be close enough. We've seen many performances of historical characters that have looked really nothing like them, but managed to capture the essence of their character.
 
That was my thought, but perhaps you have a point. I just thought he'd be close enough. We've seen many performances of historical characters that have looked really nothing like them, but managed to capture the essence of their character.

Yeah, I don’t think anyone could claim that Anthony Hopkins or Frank Langella are the spitting image of Richard Nixon but they both got Oscar nominated for playing him. Or, sticking with sci-fi, of the new Star Trek cast only Zachary Quinto really looks like the original actor playing his part, but Chris Pine etc do a good job in capturing the essence of their original counterparts (and of course any differences can be explained away because it’s a different timeline). But Star Wars definitely seems to have tried to keep the physical resemblance when trying to cast younger versions of its characters (potentially unpopular opinion - I never found Donald Glover convincing as a young Billy Dee Williams).
 
I never found Donald Glover convincing as a young Billy Dee Williams)

Neither did I. He's a good actor, but he didn't really convey the same gravitas. In the original movies, he's portrayed as a larger-than-life figure. What they did get right though was the clothing he wore. But yeah, good points. I think it's always a careful balance that is managed, but in the end I think it comes down to an actor's ability. A good actor can often win someone over with their performances even if they don't look like them a bit. So, what brought me to suggest Cillian Murphy was his gravitas, and to me he's shown similar qualities in Peaky Blinders, the stare being one of them.
 
So, what brought me to suggest Cillian Murphy was his gravitas, and to me he's shown similar qualities in Peaky Blinders, the stare being one of them.

I agree with you. It's not his overall look really, it's Cillian Murphy's eyes. Have you ever seen Red Eye? His eyes make him terrifying and I think that would be great for a young Tarkin movie.
 
I agree with you. It's not his overall look really, it's Cillian Murphy's eyes.

That's it. It's not that he has particularly menacing eyes, but a set of commanding eyes. He doesn't have to say much, but one knows he means business, particularly when he's looking at someone and able to make them quiver. And then there are the quiet introspective moments where he's just gazing out, and all of that really reminds me of Tarkin.

No, I haven't seen Red Eyes. Is that a movie he's in?
 
That's it. It's not that he has particularly menacing eyes, but a set of commanding eyes. He doesn't have to say much, but one knows he means business, particularly when he's looking at someone and able to make them quiver. And then there are the quiet introspective moments where he's just gazing out, and all of that really reminds me of Tarkin.

No, I haven't seen Red Eyes. Is that a movie he's in?

Red Eye is a movie he's in from 2005. He kidnaps a woman on a plane, so he's nice to the flight attendant and everyone else, but his evil looks he gives the woman knows he will go through on his threats. I haven't seen it in years, but I remember enjoying it.
 
On the coattails of a new cast preforming freshly dug up scripts of "All in the Family" and "The Jeffersons", dreamful stagnation also rears its head again in regurgitating "Good Times":

https://urbanhollywood411.com/2019/11/05/good-times-all-in-the-family-remakes-coming-to-abc/

DYN-O-MITE!

I loved the original shows (Esther Rolle is definitely missed and when John Amos left the show floundered) but why remake them as carbon copy when this isn't the era of Shakespeare from 1590 when few playwrights, much less ideas, even existed? Just swapping topical figures' names in scripts, assuming they're doing even that, seems a bit lame, but then again Shakespeare's plays have also played out and as verbatim for centuries, or the few one-off times when they replaced ye olde bantereth with then-contemporary equivalents.

Of course, Shakespeare didn't have home video and I'm only bringing him up for historical purposes... just think if a meddler went back in time with a betamax recorder (new for only $1199 at Sears forty years ago!) and other related operational equipment?
ABC is still kicking itself over the fact that they turned down the pitch for the show that started it all, All In The Family, back in the late sixties. this is them trying to cash in on what they missed decades ago.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Mark Wahlberg is Spencer. Winston Duke is Hawk.

Not saying it's unnecessary since both this and the original TV series are based on prior material, but I thought I'd throw it out there.
 
I remember after Rogue One voicing a concern that someday we'd end up with live actors being digitally created for movies rather than actually having them do the movies themselves. I hadn't considered dead actors being recreated to play new characters. That's pretty fucked up.

For me, one of the biggest concerns is that acting is itself a craft and not necessarily one that a bunch of CGI artists understand. So much of acting is making billions of tiny choices every second. We may not notice every single micro-expression on a conscious level but we definitely notice when they're not there. Now, if they're able to convincingly create CGI people to that level of detail, I think that it would be a fascinating technological achievement and could make a good movie. But I doubt that they've fully thought through all of the layers of artistry that would be required to pull this off. And once the novelty wears off, the process will still be so expensive & time-consuming that it would just be so much more efficient to just hire an actor in the first place.

Yeah, I don’t think anyone could claim that Anthony Hopkins or Frank Langella are the spitting image of Richard Nixon but they both got Oscar nominated for playing him. Or, sticking with sci-fi, of the new Star Trek cast only Zachary Quinto really looks like the original actor playing his part, but Chris Pine etc do a good job in capturing the essence of their original counterparts (and of course any differences can be explained away because it’s a different timeline). But Star Wars definitely seems to have tried to keep the physical resemblance when trying to cast younger versions of its characters (potentially unpopular opinion - I never found Donald Glover convincing as a young Billy Dee Williams).

Oh, don't get me started on Presidents. I'm still annoyed at how James Cromwell doesn't look a damn thing like George Bush Sr.! (Also, I will not accept any fictional version of Nixon that's not played by Dan Hedaya! :D )

None of the new Star Trek actors bear much of a physical resemblance to their TOS counterparts. A lot of people seem to cite Quinto as being the exception but I think he looks way too fleshy to match the long, drawn face of Leonard Nimoy. John Cho is probably the worst though. Other than the fact that they're both Asian, he doesn't look anything like George Takei. John Cho's face is too angular. George Takei is much more rounded. (They didn't really sound anything like them either. It's a strange thing that pretty much everyone in the new cast has a higher voice than the original. Uhura is perhaps the only exception there.)

I liked Donald Glover's version of Lando. I certainly thought that he did a better job of evoking Billy Dee Williams than Alden Ehrenreich did with Harrison Ford.

I think Murphy could pull off a young Tarkin. He doesn't look that much like Peter Cushing. But then, James McAvoy & Michael Fassbender don't look very much like Patrick Stewart or Ian McKellen. But they were still great.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top