Robert Zemeckis finds Beatles for 'Yellow Submarine'

[auntiehill]

Better according to WHOM?

If someone wants to make an animated movie, why copy or "remake" one that's already been done, and frankly, isn't that old?

I loved the quirkiness, the silliness, the absolutely-stoned-out-their-minds artwork, and best of all, the personalities and music of the Beatles themselves. THAT's what made the film popular. No half-assed modern remake can top that.

Here's an idea---come up with YOUR OWN idea, directors and producers. Take source material that hasn't already been done by another filmmaker.

 

[Mysterion]

Better according to WHOM?

If someone wants to make an animated movie, why copy or "remake" one that's already been done, and frankly, isn't that old?

I loved the quirkiness, the silliness, the absolutely-stoned-out-their-minds artwork, and best of all, the personalities and music of the Beatles themselves. THAT's what made the film popular. No half-assed modern remake can top that.

Here's an idea---come up with YOUR OWN idea, directors and producers. Take source material that hasn't already been done by another filmmaker.

^^^^
This.

 

[Gojirob]

with the Snow White example, I meant get the same designs, dialogue & backgrounds as the original 1939 film and just redo them as cgi. They were actually going to do this with Peter Pan back when Eisner was still in charge. It was going to be scene for scene word for word exactly the same as the 1953 film but in cgi. Which is just pointless. Maybe a better example would be comparing it to a cgi remake of Nightmare Before Christmas?

Its hard for me to say. When I was in Orlando in 2006, I saw an attraction wherein a CGI Donald 'fell in' to CGI versions of famous scenes from Aladdin, Little Mermaid, and Lion King. If the remakes were done that way, they might look pretty darn good--if still redundant.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Better according to WHOM?

If someone wants to make an animated movie, why copy or "remake" one that's already been done, and frankly, isn't that old?

I loved the quirkiness, the silliness, the absolutely-stoned-out-their-minds artwork, and best of all, the personalities and music of the Beatles themselves. THAT's what made the film popular. No half-assed modern remake can top that.

Here's an idea---come up with YOUR OWN idea, directors and producers. Take source material that hasn't already been done by another filmmaker.

And you just won the thread. Congratulations.

 

[Level 2 Diagnostic]

I guarantee you the people complaining the most about this remake will be the first in line to see it when it opens.

 

[Hoser]

Iohknow. Maybe they'll re-release the original on DVD so I can pick it up finally (only have the VHS).

 

[Dusty Ayres]

Better according to WHOM?

If someone wants to make an animated movie, why copy or "remake" one that's already been done, and frankly, isn't that old?

I loved the quirkiness, the silliness, the absolutely-stoned-out-their-minds artwork, and best of all, the personalities and music of the Beatles themselves. THAT's what made the film popular. No half-assed modern remake can top that.

Here's an idea---come up with YOUR OWN idea, directors and producers. Take source material that hasn't already been done by another filmmaker.

And you just won the thread. Congratulations.

No, you lost the thread, and your criticism's bogus as well!

If Broadway/The West End can do endless revivals of plays and musicals, as I've said in past posts on the same subject, then Hollywood can damn fucking well do remakes of everything under the sun-including a rethink of Yellow Submarine in mocap 3D CGI. As I said before, posing as a hypothetical motion picture studio exec, 'I'll stop doing remakes when Broadway stops doing revivals.' Let's see them do that, and maybe we can get some original things going in both spheres-I said maybe, because there is nothing new under the sun, and also because there is only a couple of stories that exist that are the basis for everything else that we tell and write.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

I imdb'ed those four guys. Cannot predict which one plays which Beatle. Not a good sign.

 

[Kirby]

Each of the characters should be wearing Bad Idea Jeans throughout the movie.

 

[Kegg]

No, you lost the thread, and your criticism's bogus as well!

If Broadway/The West End can do endless revivals of plays and musicals, as I've said in past posts on the same subject, then Hollywood can damn fucking well do remakes of everything under the sun-including a rethink of Yellow Submarine in mocap 3D CGI.

Normally I'd agree with you but Yellow Submarine crosses a line into stupid that I find sort of baffling. The importance of the film is pretty much as a Beatles tie-in.

That's different from a play or a musical, or even someone covering a Beatles song. This isn't just a product of its time, it's something that taken outside of that sort of loses all meaning. What exactly is this when the context is removed? Zemeckis recovering his youth as someone said above; or maybe just a nostalgic pop tribute to the sixties, or whatever.

 

[Mark de Vries]

I agree with Kegg.

A good portion of the charm and appeal of Yellow Submarine lies in the fact that it was a Beatles product. Even if the Beatles didn't actually voice their characters, the characters were supposed to be them. Tie that into the Yellow Submarine album and the Beatles actually all being alive and performing as a group at the time, and you get a whole different dynamic around the film.

Yellow Submarine is not a standalone product.

Redesiging it with new actors playing characters who are not active as such anymore, let alone relevant in the same way, will turn this into just another gimmicky film, just like Beowulf was: a showcase for motion capture technology wrapped in a story that has been told before or is simply very random.

 

[Zulu Romeo]

It just won't be the same without Dick Emery.