Barbarella TV series in development

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

Unfortunantly any reimaging (or whatever the katest buzz word is) is compared to at least the previous incarnation if not all previous incarnations.

That's often the case, although some previous incarnations come and go so quietly and so quickly that they make no lasting impact on the public's imagination. Plus once enough time has gone by you can make a fresh run at a property secure in the knowledge that most younger people have never seen the previous incarnations.

 

[MacLeod]

^The line's actually

"GORDON'S ALIVE"



The soundtrack by Queen certainly helps.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

Damn, both my Flash and Barbarella DVDs are buried in a box somewhere at the moment. I may have to do some rummaging soon.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Some of my favorites, according to IMDb:

"Tell me more about this man, 'Houdini'."

"Don't empty my mind! I've spent my whole life filling it!"

"I knew it was one of the prime numbers of the Zenith series. I haven't changed."

"They just winged me!"

"DIVE!"

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

Before quotes were available on the internet some of Kala's lines were pretty much unintelligible. I now know she said, "Dispatch war rocket Ajax to bring back his body," but in the old days it took a lot of guesswork to try and decipher that one.

 

[Redfern]

But the one really great Flash Gordon movie out there is the one hardly anyone's seen, the 1979 Filmation TV movie that was aired only once in 1982 and apparently no longer exists in a sufficiently high-quality form to get a DVD release. Most of it was broken up and restructured into episodes of the 1979 TV series (which is on Hulu now), but the more adult parts like the WWII opening are not included. It is on YouTube, but in rather low quality.

I saw that when it aired. NBC broadcast it around 11 or 11:30 PM, an insane hour if you are wanting viewers. But yes, it's probably the closest adaptation to the original Alex Raymond newspaper strips as it was presented as a period piece, when Nazi troops invaded Poland. And being animated, it could afford to present a sense of scale usually only available to big budget films.

I did not yet own a VCR, so I recorded the audio upon a cassette recorder. (I've since lost those tapes.)

But I thought the holdup for a DVD release centered around ownership disputes rather than quality of existing footage. At least, that's what I read.

Sincerely,

Bill

 

[sojourner]

"What do you mean, "Flash Gordon approaching"?

 

[startrekwatcher]

So what else should (or shouldn't) they remake?

I hope they never make another remake--they all suck and never live up to what the original had going for it--whether it be a film or tv remake(V, Knight Rider, Bionic Woman, Star Trek Abrams, Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween, Melrose Place, 90210, Dallas etc). Here is an idea get creative writers to come up with something new and fresh instead of living off the bones of earlier successful properties.

 

[Greg Cox]

So what else should (or shouldn't) they remake?

I hope they never make another remake--they all suck and never live up to what the original had going for it--whether it be a film or tv remake(V, Knight Rider, Bionic Woman, Star Trek Abrams, Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween, Melrose Place, 90210, Dallas etc). Here is an idea get creative writers to come up with something new and fresh instead of living off the bones of earlier successful properties.

Nah, there are plenty of remakes that are as good or better than the originals: The Lord of the Rings, Battlestar Galactica, The Thing, The Fly, The Fugitive, The Addams Family, The Thomas Crown Affair, The Wizard of Oz (1935), The Maltese Falcon, Some Like It Hot, Victor/Viktoria, Ben-Hur, The Ten Commandments, The Thief of Baghdad, The Man Who Knew Too Much, The Horror of Dracula, the 1970's version of The Three Musketeers . . . etc.

Hollywood has been making remakes since the silent era. Many of the classic films of the 30s and 40s were remakes of old silent films. The idea that "all remakes suck" flies in the face of pretty much the entire history of movies and TV.

 

[Christopher]

I saw that when it aired. NBC broadcast it around 11 or 11:30 PM, an insane hour if you are wanting viewers.

I doubt it was that late, since I wouldn't have stayed up that long at my age then (or now, for that matter). My recollection is that it was on in prime time.

But I thought the holdup for a DVD release centered around ownership disputes rather than quality of existing footage. At least, that's what I read.

Maybe the rights are an issue too, but from what I've been told, apparently the available version is not quite DVD quality (although that hasn't stopped some DVD releases).

I hope they never make another remake--they all suck and never live up to what the original had going for it--whether it be a film or tv remake(V, Knight Rider, Bionic Woman, Star Trek Abrams, Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween, Melrose Place, 90210, Dallas etc). Here is an idea get creative writers to come up with something new and fresh instead of living off the bones of earlier successful properties.

It's a fundamental mistake to think that originality comes only from creating new characters and titles and things. There are only so many basic stories and character types, after all. There are countless "original" stories with new titles and character names that are just tired rehashes of old cliches, but there are also plenty of remakes or reimaginings that are wildly original and innovative. For instance, Bryan Singer's X-Men and Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight are both based on pre-existing properties, yet totally reinvented the superhero film; and Ron Moore's Battlestar Galactica was a remake that was radically inventive and pioneering in its approach and profoundly different from its source material. And of course there's my standard point that virtually all of Shakespeare's plays were remakes or adaptations of previous works. He reused pre-existing concepts -- as, indeed, most art and literature throughout human history has done -- but he found ways of telling them that had a revolutionary and profound impact on language, theatre, and society. Originality and quality are in the execution, not the concept.

 

[Redfern]

I saw that when it aired. NBC broadcast it around 11 or 11:30 PM, an insane hour if you are wanting viewers.

I doubt it was that late, since I wouldn't have stayed up that long at my age then (or now, for that matter). My recollection is that it was on in prime time.

It may have aired at 9 and finished around 11 PM. I just know I was up late and I had an early class at college next morning.

In the spirit of the discussion, here's a render a composed recently. Ming the Merciless and his daughter, Aura.

Sincerely,

Bill

 

[MacLeod]

I saw that when it aired. NBC broadcast it around 11 or 11:30 PM, an insane hour if you are wanting viewers.

I doubt it was that late, since I wouldn't have stayed up that long at my age then (or now, for that matter). My recollection is that it was on in prime time.

But I thought the holdup for a DVD release centered around ownership disputes rather than quality of existing footage. At least, that's what I read.

Maybe the rights are an issue too, but from what I've been told, apparently the available version is not quite DVD quality (although that hasn't stopped some DVD releases).

I hope they never make another remake--they all suck and never live up to what the original had going for it--whether it be a film or tv remake(V, Knight Rider, Bionic Woman, Star Trek Abrams, Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween, Melrose Place, 90210, Dallas etc). Here is an idea get creative writers to come up with something new and fresh instead of living off the bones of earlier successful properties.

It's a fundamental mistake to think that originality comes only from creating new characters and titles and things. There are only so many basic stories and character types, after all. There are countless "original" stories with new titles and character names that are just tired rehashes of old cliches, but there are also plenty of remakes or reimaginings that are wildly original and innovative. For instance, Bryan Singer's X-Men and Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight are both based on pre-existing properties, yet totally reinvented the superhero film; and Ron Moore's Battlestar Galactica was a remake that was radically inventive and pioneering in its approach and profoundly different from its source material. And of course there's my standard point that virtually all of Shakespeare's plays were remakes or adaptations of previous works. He reused pre-existing concepts -- as, indeed, most art and literature throughout human history has done -- but he found ways of telling them that had a revolutionary and profound impact on language, theatre, and society. Originality and quality are in the execution, not the concept.

I would tend to agree, part of the success or failure is in the execution.

The remake of BSG is generally considered to be superior to the original. But what about V which is better the original mini-series or the remake? I would go with the original being better, though that being said when they did a series proper instead of mini-series it got worse.

Is it harder to remake a show that was considered one of the more must-see programmes when it first came out. Did the original V get something like 40m viewers in the US when it first aired? Yes I know more stations have appeared since then, but I suspect even then not every show got that level of viewership.

 

[Sindatur]

^Right, and I'm sure that the first articles reporting on the announcement of the Abrams Star Trek reboot, before anyone was cast or anything, were illustrated with shots from the old Star Trek, that articles on Superman Returns were illustrated with shots from the Reeve movies, etc. Because, seriously, what else is there? It doesn't make sense to accuse someone of bad journalism for failing to use imagery that does not yet exist.

The winky face after the "Bad Journalism" sentence, followed up by "Good Point" and an embarrassed face indicates a joke

 

[Christopher]

The remake of BSG is generally considered to be superior to the original. But what about V which is better the original mini-series or the remake? I would go with the original being better, though that being said when they did a series proper instead of mini-series it got worse.

The V revival was awful, but the point is that it wasn't bad because it was a remake, it was bad because it was bad -- because the people making it had no guiding vision or purpose beyond filling the sci-fi void left in ABC's schedule when Lost ended. Quality doesn't come from category, it comes from execution. Remakes can be wonderful, mediocre, or awful, just like any other category of creative work.

 

[Greg Cox]

For instance, Bryan Singer's X-Men and Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight are both based on pre-existing properties, yet totally reinvented the superhero film; .

The Dark Knight is a great example. I've always suspected that most of the people who complain that "remakes suck" and "Hollywood has run out of ideas" also venerate The Dark Knight, even though it's the seventh Batman movie (not counting the old b/w serials), at least the second reboot of the Batman franchise, and the third to feature the Joker . . . .

Which is not to be taken as a dis at The Dark Knight, which is indeed a terrific movie. I'm just pointing out that the argument seems to be "remakes suck--except when they don't!"

I was also amused/appalled a few weeks back to see people vehemently objecting to the idea of remaking The Mummy, arguing that the immortal Brendan Fraser version should be left alone--despite the fact that the Fraser movie was, of course, the umpteenth remake/reboot of the original Karloff film!

The whole "remakes suck" often seems to lack a certain historical perspective. It usually just means "my nostalgic favorites matter more than any other version, past or present."

 

[startrekwatcher]

The Dark Knight is a great example. I've always suspected that most of the people who complain that "remakes suck" and "Hollywood has run out of ideas" also venerate The Dark Knight, even though it's the seventh Batman movie (not counting the old b/w serials), at least the second reboot of the Batman franchise, and the third to feature the Joker . . . .

I thought The Dark Knight was an overrated mediocre film myself. It was too long and amounted to nothing more than a few action set pieces stitched together with a tacked on half-realized theme rather than a coherent interesting story. Ledger's performance as the Joker wasn't the tour de force people made it out to be--in fact, the character was rather one-note. Maggie Gyllenhall fell flat as a love interest. Two face was merely a footnote. It was a marvelous action spectacle but pretty generic.

I still say that remaking tv shows is rarely a smart move. Whatever magic that came together--the writing staff, the actors, the time out of which it was borne--can never be recaptured and any attempt to resurrect it fails because the stars don't align like that again--all it does it create a lot of resentment towards lazy writers coming in and trying to give it a modern sensibility thinking they can improve upon it.

 

[sojourner]

That's nuts. Ledger was one of the best examples of the star becoming the role instead of the usual role becoming the star we get from hollywood.

 

[Christopher]

I still say that remaking tv shows is rarely a smart move.

The fundamental flaw in the argument "Category X is a bad idea because it usually doesn't work" is that most movies or TV shows of any category turn out poor or mediocre. The ratio of bad remakes to good remakes is probably no worse than the ratio of bad mysteries to good mysteries, bad horror movies to good horror movies, bad cop procedural shows to good cop procedural shows, bad superhero movies to good superhero movies, etc. The odds of doing something high-quality in any creative category aren't great. But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be tried.

Anyway, when were we talking about remaking TV shows? The thread is about Barbarella, a comic-book series that's had a motion-picture adaptation. We were also discussing Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon, which originated as comic-strip series. Okay, Galactica and V also came up briefly, but they've been a small part of the discussion.

Whatever magic that came together--the writing staff, the actors, the time out of which it was borne--can never be recaptured and any attempt to resurrect it fails because the stars don't align like that again...

Well, of course not. What would be the point of remaking something just to copy what the original did? The purpose of a remake is to find a new way of interpreting the underlying concept, a new variation on the theme. People who dislike a remake simply because it isn't a slavish, beat-for-beat copy of the original are fundamentally misunderstanding the purpose of the exercise.

 

[Greg Cox]

I still say that remaking tv shows is rarely a smart move.

The fundamental flaw in the argument "Category X is a bad idea because it usually doesn't work" is that most movies or TV shows of any category turn out poor or mediocre. The ratio of bad remakes to good remakes is probably no worse than the ratio of bad mysteries to good mysteries, bad horror movies to good horror movies, bad cop procedural shows to good cop procedural shows, bad superhero movies to good superhero movies, etc. The odds of doing something high-quality in any creative category aren't great. But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be tried..

Nicely put. There's a tendency to point to a notable failure and use that to prove that such-and-such is a bad idea when sometimes it's just that, well, that particular movie or tv show was badly executed.

The recent Night Stalker reboot didn't fail because it was a remake. It failed because it wasn't very good.

In theory, somebody could still do a kick-ass reinterpretation of Carl Kolchak that blows us all away.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

In theory, somebody could still do a kick-ass reinterpretation of Carl Kolchak that blows us all away.

Johnny Depp certainly hopes so.