Soylent Green remake in 2012?

[Gary Mitchell]

^ Yeah, they had a whole rainbow, didn't they? Soylent green, yellow, red, orange...I distinctly saw some soylent BLUE being sold as well (looked like muffins/rolls). I wonder what THAT was made out of...

"Soylent Blue is Smurfs!"

Actually, it's made out of the same stuff that they make 2000 Flushes out of. Just don't tell anyone.

 

[Lt. Trull]

I always though it didn't matter what color the soylent was.... it was people.... no matter the color... the environment took a dip way before the movie was supposed to take place and our "beneficial benefactor of a government" is always looking for was to help us, especially with the truth.

 

[Ethros]

Will there be Soylent Cola?

 

[The Wormhole]

Will there be Soylent Cola?

I hear the taste varies from person to person.

Meanwhile, after hearing about the Ms. Marple remake that's in the works, a part of me fears that this Soylent Green remake will be Soylent Green that isn't people...

 

[Expo67]

Just what the world doesn't need. Another goddamned remake.

Honestly, Hollywood is really bankrupt of creative ideas. First there is talk of remaking Logan's Run and now this 1973 MGM science fiction classic.

Charlton Heston and Edward G. Robinson must be rolling in their graves!

Why don’t they(the studios)release any good films anymore?

To quote actor Jack O'Halloran(Non from Superman - The Movie and Superman II): The problem with Hollywood is that bankers took it over, and they got into these movie stars and these casting people and there are some great actors. Michael Caine done a lot of junk because he just took the money and did it. He is a brilliant actor. When he did something that he liked, he won an Oscar. A lot of people like Jack Nicholson are not put into the right roles, and it is sad because it is deals that are made by ICM and big ad agencies and they put together a cast factor. Somebody brings a film in, and the bankers get behind it because of the bankable actors, whether they are good for the piece or not. That is the problem with Hollywood.

There isn't any more creativity in Hollywood. You notice that everything is a remake. Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake, Black Christmas remake, the Hitcher remake, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory remake. They are just sending out watered down versions of the real film from when it was fresh. They are remaking classics that they have no right touching. They had no right to touch them. To remake The Producers, a Gene Wilder classic? I mean it’s a good film, but how do you outdo Gene Wilder? They put in Johnny Depp and because of who he is, the picture made a fortune! It wasn’t a great movie. They take liberties like crazy, man.

Like Sir Alan Parker, Jack O'Halloran could not have phrased it any better.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Pretty sure there were remakes before the bankers took over. Films like "Wizard of Oz" and "The Maltese Falcon". Not to mention "Dracula" and "Frankenstein". People have a surprisingly short memory.

 

[Greg Cox]

Pretty sure there were remakes before the bankers took over. Films like "Wizard of Oz" and "The Maltese Falcon". Not to mention "Dracula" and "Frankenstein". People have a surprisingly short memory.

Exactly. Hollywood has been in the remake business since the days of the silents. And the world is full of classic films that were actually remakes: "The Thing," "The Fly," "Ben-Hur," "The Thief of Baghdad," "The Man Who Knew Too Much," "The Horror of Dracula," "House of Wax," the Richard Lester version of "The Three Musketeers," "Casino Royale," etc.

Hell, in 1922, there were at least three different silent versions of "Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde." And the 1932 remake was better than all of them!

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I always though it didn't matter what color the soylent was.... it was people.... no matter the color...

The only soylent we saw being made out of people (in the processing plant) was the green kind. It's supposed to be the most popular and so it's probably in shortest supply, which is why they had to resort to making it out of people.

What I don't get, though, is Thorn's rant about "they'll be breeding us like cattle for food". There's already overpopulation anyway, and thus a plentiful supply of bodies already available to use. So why would he say this?

Although I do agree that Soylent Corporation itself probably has a stake in trying to ensure that the environment does NOT get better, and the overpopulation does NOT level off, simply because they'd lose their monopoly on Soylent products.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Just what the world doesn't need. Another goddamned remake.

Honestly, Hollywood is really bankrupt of creative ideas. First there is talk of remaking Logan's Run and now this 1973 MGM science fiction classic.

Charlton Heston and Edward G. Robinson must be rolling in their graves!

Why don’t they(the studios)release any good films anymore?

To quote actor Jack O'Halloran(Non from Superman - The Movie and Superman II): The problem with Hollywood is that bankers took it over, and they got into these movie stars and these casting people and there are some great actors. Michael Caine done a lot of junk because he just took the money and did it. He is a brilliant actor. When he did something that he liked, he won an Oscar. A lot of people like Jack Nicholson are not put into the right roles, and it is sad because it is deals that are made by ICM and big ad agencies and they put together a cast factor. Somebody brings a film in, and the bankers get behind it because of the bankable actors, whether they are good for the piece or not. That is the problem with Hollywood.

There isn't any more creativity in Hollywood. You notice that everything is a remake. Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake, Black Christmas remake, the Hitcher remake, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory remake. They are just sending out watered down versions of the real film from when it was fresh. They are remaking classics that they have no right touching. They had no right to touch them. To remake The Producers, a Gene Wilder classic? I mean it’s a good film, but how do you outdo Gene Wilder? They put in Johnny Depp and because of who he is, the picture made a fortune! It wasn’t a great movie. They take liberties like crazy, man.

Like Sir Alan Parker, Jack O'Halloran could not have phrased it any better.

Boy, I hope Michael Caine can weather this criticism of his movie choices from the guy whose main claim to fame is being the dude who grunts in the Superman movies.

I'm sure the fact that Superman was a comic strip, comic books, a radio series, multiple animated and live-action theatrical serials, a feature-length film comprised of episodes of the television show, a Broadway musical, and two TV cartoons all before the two Superman films he was in came out just slipped his mind when he was going on his rant about how creatively bankrupt Hollywood is. I guess the movies should have never been made because the story had been done before.

 

[Lt. Trull]

Pretty sure there were remakes before the bankers took over. Films like "Wizard of Oz" and "The Maltese Falcon". Not to mention "Dracula" and "Frankenstein". People have a surprisingly short memory.

Exactly. Hollywood has been in the remake business since the days of the silents. And the world is full of classic films that were actually remakes: "The Thing," "The Fly," "Ben-Hur," "The Thief of Baghdad," "The Man Who Knew Too Much," "The Horror of Dracula," "House of Wax," the Richard Lester version of "The Three Musketeers," "Casino Royale," etc.

Hell, in 1922, there were at least three different silent versions of "Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde." And the 1932 remake was better than all of them!

What?... you make it sound like the only original ideas come from the independent film makers... and hollywood only copies what they think are the successful ones...

 

[JoeZhang]

Pretty sure there were remakes before the bankers took over. Films like "Wizard of Oz" and "The Maltese Falcon". Not to mention "Dracula" and "Frankenstein". People have a surprisingly short memory.

Exactly. Hollywood has been in the remake business since the days of the silents. And the world is full of classic films that were actually remakes: "The Thing," "The Fly," "Ben-Hur," "The Thief of Baghdad," "The Man Who Knew Too Much," "The Horror of Dracula," "House of Wax," the Richard Lester version of "The Three Musketeers," "Casino Royale," etc.

Hell, in 1922, there were at least three different silent versions of "Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde." And the 1932 remake was better than all of them!

What?... you make it sound like the only original ideas come from the independent film makers... and hollywood only copies what they think are the successful ones...

Holy shit - it's almost like Hollywood is a big money making business and always has been!

Anyway, must go, I am investigating reports that the Pope is a catholic.

 

[Mistral]

Will there be Soylent Cola?

I hear the taste varies from person to person.

Meanwhile, after hearing about the Ms. Marple remake that's in the works, a part of me fears that this Soylent Green remake will be Soylent Green that isn't people...

I'm telling you-Soylent green is monkeys.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I prefer Diet Soylent Green, its made from Supermodels.

 

[The Wormhole]

^^ It took me a moment to get that.