There can be never too many remakes of The tempest...
"Hell is empty
And all the devils are here"
worst sci-fi TV series of post 1964
- Thread starter jefferiestubes8
- Start date
There can be never too many remakes of The tempest...
"Hell is empty
And all the devils are here"
I agree
Yes. Worse than Zardoz.
Some of the Tromaville's are so out there and Ridiculous that they are so bad they're good in a schlocky fun kinda way (Toxic Avenger, Class of Nuke 'em High). Some others are so horrible, they make Zardoz and Battlefield Earth look like High Art.
I saw this one, about a Bus Ride somewhere, that just didn't work for me at all, the 45 minutes I gave it to catch my attention, seemed like hours. It had Hell or Devil in the title I believe
And, I'm sure many Super Heroes movies are loathed (I believe there was an awful Capt America in the 70s or early 80s, and some of the recent ones in the 2000s, such as Ben Affleck's Dare Devil, or the Elektra Spin Off...)
I saw this one, about a Bus Ride somewhere, that just didn't work for me at all, the 45 minutes I gave it to catch my attention, seemed like hours. It had Hell or Devil in the title I believe
And, I'm sure many Super Heroes movies are loathed (I believe there was an awful Capt America in the 70s or early 80s, and some of the recent ones in the 2000s, such as Ben Affleck's Dare Devil, or the Elektra Spin Off...)
Last edited:
Zardoz at least has Sara Kestelman, known to SW KOTOR fans as the voice of Kreia/Darth Traya.
And "young Kreia" is badass.
Last edited:
Because things can look dated. Because technology moves on. Because social change moves on (eg, the role of women in the original FP). Because even a sharp script like thta can be tightened and redefined for a new generation and their faster blink rate. Because there aren't already enough flip one-liners out there.
Actually, I'm wrong. There are already enough flip one-liners out there.
Funny you should mention this. Saw a preview for a new Three Musketeers before Thor yesterday. Hope you like wire foo.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1509767/
Expo67
Captain
Christ, how many versions of Alexander Dumas' The Three Musketeers do we need?
Oh, that looks like fun.
This ties in, sort of and in a weird way, to DC's announcement that they're rebooting their entire comics line this fall. It's one more step in a process by which comic book characters today are essentially remakes of the characters I grew up with.
I loved the "Silver Age" Superman when I was a kid, but my initial exposure to the character was late "Golden Age," through the time-honored process of inheriting a ton of old comics from an older kid up the street when his mom was ready to chuck 'em in the trash.
By the mid-1960s, though, Supes had become repetitious and dull - the storytelling was essentially a ritual of scribbling in the margins. Superman could do anything, had done everything, and the only way to make him interesting was the occasional "Imaginary Story."
John Byrne's "Man Of Steel" reboot got me reading the character again, as an adult. Supes has had his ups-and-downs since then, but he's never become quite as stale as he was in the late 1960s and 1970s.
In a real sense, Superman and Batman are not the same characters they were forty years ago. They're remakes, sequels to the older versions. Same for Hal Jordan as Green Lantern. And now DC looks like they're going to do it again, remaking all the characters they own as new versions.
That looks like fun, too.
You're right. They should have stopped at the 1903 film. Not only were the 1911, 1914, 1916 and 1921 remakes bloody unnecessary, they made a fifth remake also in 1921 starring Douglas Faribanks!
That's like asking how many versions of his son's Lady of The Camellias, or Carmen, we need. Never enough. If the source work is good, can be interpreted anew time and again...
I think we can all agree that the lost 1903 version is the only one that should have ever been made. Everything since then has just been cashing in on its legacy. By the same token, the lost first film Ben Hur should have been the only films made about that subject.
Well, at least we can agree that Jeffrey Hunter was a better Jesus than Jim Caviezel, right? Enough Jesus movies, already! 
I'd say it'll take at least a dozen or so more just to cleanse the collective palate of the 1993 version with Chris O'Donnell, Oliver Platt, Kiefer Sutherland, and Charlie "Winning" Sheen.
Expo67
Captain
As much as I like Michael York, Charlton Heston, Oliver Reed, Christopher Lee, Simon Ward, and Raquel Welch(I mean who doesn't like Raquel, let alone looking at her)...well, I hate to say this, but given the fact that the classic story has been remade way too many times(let alone the Seventies version being distributed by the Salkinds and directed by Richard Lester - both of whom would end up seriously derailing the Superman franchise with the absurd Superman III), I'd say, we probably would have been better off without it.
Especially, since the Salkinds tried to cheat the actors out being paid for two films, instead of one. Both The Three Musketeers and The Fourth Musketeers were filmed simultaneously.
Expo67
Captain
With Charlie Sheen in any production, it's going to take a lot to cleanse the collective palate.
I'm still amazed that that son of a bitch hasn't overdosed himself to death on whatever illegal substance he has indulged himself in. Let alone contracted something from the numerous women he has slept with.
Expo67... try to make use of the Edit button and or the Multi-quote button when you have multiple things to say. It helps keep the discussion a bit more streamlined.
As to the topic.... I didn't take offense at Dennis' comment, but instead saw it as a bit of parody on the discussion. He seems to feel your stance is too extreme, and is using the vehicle of films about Christ to make a point.
Regarding remakes though..... my take is that there does come a point where it seems Hollywood is bereft of any originality. Remaking:" earlier films and stories almost seems to be taking the easy way out. To be sure, many remakes do seem to be little more than a waste of time ("Psycho" for example). And yet, to deny any remake to be made would require ignoring the advances in technology which might - and I emphasize "might" - make a new film better. I tend wonder why studios do remake a classic, widely regarded success when so much time is past. But while it seems a dicey proposition at best, often it does work well. It can even bring new appreciation for earlier versions.
As to the topic.... I didn't take offense at Dennis' comment, but instead saw it as a bit of parody on the discussion. He seems to feel your stance is too extreme, and is using the vehicle of films about Christ to make a point.
Regarding remakes though..... my take is that there does come a point where it seems Hollywood is bereft of any originality. Remaking:" earlier films and stories almost seems to be taking the easy way out. To be sure, many remakes do seem to be little more than a waste of time ("Psycho" for example). And yet, to deny any remake to be made would require ignoring the advances in technology which might - and I emphasize "might" - make a new film better. I tend wonder why studios do remake a classic, widely regarded success when so much time is past. But while it seems a dicey proposition at best, often it does work well. It can even bring new appreciation for earlier versions.
Similar threads
