How Dare They?

[Turtletrekker]

This announcement compelled me to re-watch the original today. It has actually been a long time. For as memorable and quotable as the movie is, there's so much that I didn't remember and was delighted anew about.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

This announcement compelled me to re-watch the original today. It has actually been a long time. First memorable and inscrutable as the movie is, there's so much that I didn't remember and was delighted anew about.

I watched it last night and haven't watched it in a long while and I still managed to laugh a lot even though I knew what was coming.

 

[Gavin70]

Really the only thing that could be improved on in the original movie would be some of the special effects. Those rats, for example.

 

[Tosk]

But that's exactly what a ROUS looks like.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

But that's exactly what a ROUS looks like.

Yes but it looked like a guy in a suit rolling around, which it was, I think that's what he was trying to say.

 

[Tosk]

I was nae being serious.

 

[Nakita Akita]

I think with all of the books that have been written, someone could read one and make a movie from a different one.
I'm just not sure why everything is being redone all of the time.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

I think with all of the books that have been written, someone could read one and make a movie from a different one.
I'm just not sure why everything is being redone all of the time.

It's the path of least resistance.

Known popular movies are ripe for remakes so it's an easy path.

But when the remake bombs well they never seem to learn now do they?

 

[Mysterion]

I think with all of the books that have been written, someone could read one and make a movie from a different one.
I'm just not sure why everything is being redone all of the time.

1) Hollywood is creatively bankrupt and they don't to take a chance on something new.
2) Fans are insular and only want the stuff that makes them comfortable.
3) Both 1) and 2)
4) None of the above.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

1) Hollywood is creatively bankrupt and they don't to take a chance on something new.
2) Fans are insular and only want the stuff that makes them comfortable.
3) Both 1) and 2)
4) None of the above.

Also 5) Lots of those books aren't really original, either.

 

[Reverend]

Genuinely curious: can anyone actually name an instance where an inferior remake has actually damaged the original work in any appreciable way?
I can certainly think of a number of bad remakes that flopped and were almost instantly forgotten, leaving the original just as well liked and perhaps possibly more, thanks to the remake introducing people the the concept and driving some of them to go check out the original. But I can't say that I can recall the opposite happening.

For that reason most of all, I'm indifferent about this news. It'll probably suck and vanish without a trace. And if it doesn't suck: win-win!

ETA: -

Just for shits and giggles though: for the sake of argument, who would we think would be good casting for which role?
I'm going to go with: Patton Oswald as Vizzini, Chris Hemsworth as Humperdinck, Maisie Williams as Iniga Montoya (see what I did there?), and what the hell, may as well get Billy Chrystal back as Max. Just don't bother so much with the make-up this time!

Oh and if they want to be super meta about it, get Fred Savage to play The Grandfather (or I guess, "The Uncle" or something, since he's a little too young to be a grandfather) and make the thing not just a remake, but a retelling of the story, in continuity with the original framing story.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Genuinely curious: can anyone actually name an instance where an inferior remake has actually damaged the original work in any appreciable way?

How about the way the first Tom Cruise Mission: Impossible movie just totally shit all over the character of Jim Phelps?

Now, obviously the Cruise M:I films can't possibly take place in the same timeline as the TV series, but the basic thrust of the gist is the same.

Spoiler: spoiler

Because you know there are gonna be a misguided few who think that because the movie Phelps was dirty, the TV series version must have been as well. Even though, as I said, they can't possibly be the SAME Jim Phelps.

 

[Greg Cox]

How about the way the first Tom Cruise Mission: Impossible movie just totally shit all over the character of Jim Phelps?

But has that actually impaired anyone's ability to go back and enjoy the original shows? Is it now impossible to watch a vintage M:I episode without thinking "Damn, I used to think Phelps was so cool, but now that I know he's a FILTHY, NO-GOOD BASTARD, I can't root for him anymore"?

Or do old-school M:I fans simply watch the original episodes as they were meant to be watched, without retroactively adding any baggage from the movies? One can certainly argue that the first M:I handled Phelps badly, but did that somehow make the old episodes less entertaining from then on?

Seems to me that's a valid reason to dislike that movie, if one feels so inclined, but it doesn't damage the originals any.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Is it now impossible to watch a vintage M:I episode without thinking "Damn, I used to think Phelps was so cool, but now that I know he's a FILTHY, NO-GOOD BASTARD, I can't root for him anymore"?

You never know. Some people just might do exactly that.

EVEN THOUGH the two Phelpses are obviously not the same.

Once the seed of doubt has already been planted... it's not so easy to kill.

 

[Reverend]

How about the way the first Tom Cruise Mission: Impossible movie just totally shit all over the character of Jim Phelps?

Now, obviously the Cruise M:I films can't possibly take place in the same timeline as the TV series, but the basic thrust of the gist is the same.

Spoiler: spoiler

Because you know there are gonna be a misguided few who think that because the movie Phelps was dirty, the TV series version must have been as well. Even though, as I said, they can't possibly be the SAME Jim Phelps.

Does that damage the franchise as a whole though? I mean it's just adding a twist, and in my mind that's not really a remake so much as an adaptation to a new medium. If it was a new TV series on the other hand, that argument might have weight...assuming it's not done well. Context matters. I think (despite its' flaws) the BSG remake proved you can massively screw with the source material and still turn out something of decent quality that's well regarded, or even arguably improve on said material.

Anyway, you can't really damage the MI TV show since while it was fondly remembered by those old enough to have seen it, I don't think it was particularly treasured. Indeed I'm pretty sure the movies rescued it from relative obscurity.

 

[JD]

I watched first saw the TV series, long after I saw the movie, and the movie never really even came to mind for me. They're just too disconnected for it to really have had an impact for me. Now, if the movie had really been treated more as a direct follow up to the show, like Star Trek: The Motion Picture or Generations, it would have been a different story.

Also 5) Lots of those books aren't really original, either.

6) It is very, very hard to find a successful original concept, but if you go with something with a built in fan base, you're almost guaranteed a hit.

Oh and they want to be super meta about it, get Fred Savage to play The Grandfather (or I guess, "The Uncle" or something, since he's a little too young to be a grandfather) and make the thing not just a remake, but a retelling of the story, in continuity with the original framing story.

I really, really want them to do this if it actually does happen.

 

[Greg Cox]

You never know. Some people just might do exactly that..

And yet . . . have either of us ever encountered such people, in real life or on-line? Or are we simply talking about the show being hypothetically damaged for a tiny percentage of hypothetical viewers who may or may not exist?

Not sure that kinda "damage" counts.

 

[Gaith]

Oh and if they want to be super meta about it, get Fred Savage to play The Grandfather (or I guess, "The Uncle" or something, since he's a little too young to be a grandfather) and make the thing not just a remake, but a retelling of the story, in continuity with the original framing story.

No reason they couldn't do that, but with him reading a sequel to the original book...

 

[Greg Cox]

6) It is very, very hard to find a successful original concept, but if you go with something with a built in fan base, you're almost guaranteed a hit.

If only! Somewhere in box-office limbo, The Lone Ranger, The Green Hornet, Dark Shadows, The Men in Black, Robocop, Total Recall, the Predator, and The Mortal Engines are shaking their heads sadly.

When it comes to show-biz, nothing is guaranteed. It's always a horse race. In the immortal words of William Goldman, author of The Princess Bride:

“Nobody knows anything...... Not one person in the entire motion picture field knows for a certainty what's going to work. Every time out it's a guess and, if you're lucky, an educated one.”

― William Goldman, Adventures in the Screen Trade

 

[Gaith]

No reason they couldn't do that, but with him reading a sequel to the original book...

Lemme add: the Fred Savage character should be reading his own sequel/fanfic, thus giving an in-universe explanation for why the new story would inevitably look and sound different than a movie from the late 80s!