May was hillarious, Session 9 was jusr eerie. Though both were highly entertaining. :-D Thanks for the Jan Svankmajer thread. I'll check it out. :-o
Of course something new will come up! The problem is that so far no one has come with that yet. The remake of Alice looks quite interesting, the art and production desing teams must have had a whole lotta work there, but they did it magnificently. PS: I´m kinda drunk right now.:redwine:
I just wonder, if curious Asian movie people are too lazy to read the subtitles and enjoy the original movie instead of remakes, why cant Hollywood just dub the movie and dont remake it??
You'd be surprised by the mentality of some knuckle-scraping moviegoers. I know quite a few folks who, in addition to avoiding subtitled movies like the plague, will also stay away from foreign movies if they know they've been dubbed. Don't ask me why....
Ugh... I mean, that's a really good film IMHO, but making a remake with Cage, filming it (as far as I understood) in Asia and making his character being able to speak... :shake:
Well, hey..Most Americans like boobs, blood, and gore.. So therefore, why watch a movie with subs and read when we could remake it in English with boobs, blood and gore?? I think for some odd reasons, American horror-watchers have these weird, invisible rules of horror, if a movie doesn't have people being hacked a lot, or babes going around everywhere..It's crap. Hey, I don't know why, but that's what I think..
Wow!That's a helluva generalization,Dabo127. Anyway, just to perk y'all up here's some more remake news: http://www.twitchfilm.net/archives/006532.html Actually, this one sounds kind of interesting.
I think that if you're going to remake a film, you should remake overlooked gems that had little distribution or a budget that limited the original director's initial vision. I'd like to see some great b or z quality films get a facelift by talented directors. I respect Tarentino. He takes b quality ideas and delivers remarkable product. Imagine what he could do with 'Street Trash', 'The Dead Next Door', or 'Dead and Buried'.
There are no movies that ever need to be remade at any time. It is impossible for the original atmosphere of any film to be recreated at a later date. If the film was great to begin with, then it does not need to be remade. If it failed the first time around, perhaps a remake could be justified, but I still think that it deserves to be left alone. How many failures actually have any sort of merit in them? I find it funny when people say that a remake is good if it draws attention to the superior original. I don't agree since this poor remake will forever stain the reputation of that which came before. I would rather have the film be unknown and unspoiled. Those who would love it will eventually find it, especially in todays day and age where it's relatively easy to find anything you could want. It seems that remakes are respected by many in the film world, but how would the same people feel if one of their favourite albums was going to be remade? Music, like film, cannot have it's original atmosphere recreated at a later date. If you loved it the first time around, the second time will never live up to the original.
That's a bold and sweeping statement. I don't necessarily disagree, but I have seen dozens....maybe hundreds of movies....that could have been made better. To expect every movie made today to be like divine creation...a lightning bolt in a fishbowl that creates life, is a little naive. All movies are inspired by, based on, a nod to, or a copy of something else. It's the great director's that don't let on where they got it from. 99% of Hollywood pitches are "[this great movie] meets [that successful movie]". I agree with this mostly, and the thought of a Seven Samurai remake makes my stomach churn. At the same time, Ocean's 11 was a crappy movie to begin with, and for its remakers to shine that turd into 110 minutes of entertainment is worthy of a tip of my hat. This seems like a comment on something I said on these forums earlier. I would agree, for a cultural heart-beat, the remake will stain the original, but even with fresh remakes (The Hulk, Dukes of Hazzard) people soon forget the crappy Hollywood versions, and go back to the originals. I understand the theory, but I don't think it holds. AND there would have never been an official US DVD release of Ringu without The Ring. I know at least eight people that saw Ringu thanks to The Ring. Even if they didn't see The Ring. I don't think that remakes are "respected" in the film world, but are a natural fact when security and the amount of money changing hands is so great. Why throw 100 million dollars at a new idea, when a bigger, better sequel is a safer bet. Remakes are the same way. And to think music artist don't flat-out steal from each other is silly. Have you heard Jessica Simpson's latest single? It's Madonna's "Holiday". The recent remake of the Manchurian Candidate is arguably better than the original, and I much prefer the more recent Ocean's 11 to the Rat Pack slop-fest.
That's the point really: nowadays it seems to me that it has nothing to do with gaining respect for art's sake and everything to do with gaining respect for milking money from the cash cow mainstream cinema audience, which is why remakes stick in my craw too. It seems to me that most oftentimes the only movies that get remade are the ones which did huge box office in their country of origin already - just look at the way the Hollywood studio vultures started circling this year's giant smash hit in Korea, The Host, even before it opened! 8O My point being: if crap movies got remade - if a risk was taken for the sake of art (or even potential big bucks, come to that) - I'd happily give it my sanction. My problem is when great movies are remade simply because of the kerching factor - not because anyone is trying to improve on a bad movie that had good ideas to expand :x Jessica Simpleton is nothing but a plastic record company puppet that can't even string one word together and does whatever she's told to do. She's no artist! :lol: After all, she doesn't choose what she records - some PR guy chooses for her based on market demographics - which makes her little more than a major label whore for cold cash. She has no personal input into what she releases other than her ghastly warbling So I don't know if you can make a satisfactory comparison there TBH, apart from the fact it's all let's extract as much money as we can from the mainstream audience - which does sort of prove a point I think :wink:
Yes, it is a bold statement but one I obviously wasn't afraid to make and will stand by. It may be possible that there is a remake that was better than the original but I have yet to see it. I'll be the first to admit my mistake when I do. And simply because a movie could have been made better, doesn't mean that it has to be remade. Yes, everything now is built upon what came before. There is absolutely nothing wrong with finding inspiration in the work of others. After all, no one creates in a vacuum. However, I don't understand how this justifies remaking films. You can take the germ of an idea from someone and expand on it, that hardly deserves to be called a remake. Yes, bad films do come out and I am definitely not naieve enough to expect "every movie made today to be like divine creation...a lightning bolt in a fishbowl that creates life". What I'm saying is, let the bad ones go! If there was a germ of an idea (and let's face it, if it was that bad, it couldn't be much more than a germ) that was good, save it but don't bother trying to revive the dead. Inspiration and recreation are not the same thing. Perhaps "respected" was the wrong word. I should have gone with "accepted" since that is what most people are doing. I'd rather be vocal about my hate rather than sit by and let it go (even though I'm powerless to stop it). And no, I haven't heard the new Jessica Simpson single. I go to great lengths to avoid exposure to popular music. I know that musicians "steal" from each other and I did not try to imply that they didn't. I was talking about remakes, not plagiarism.
It's fun when passionate people share ideas, and it's one of my favorite things about this forum, and the amazing job our hosts have done at keeping out the riff-raff so movie nerds can go at it fair and square. Last things first, on the Jessica Simpson point, maybe she is too extreme (in the most mainstream way) of an example, but I think my point is easier explained in the pop music world than movie world: K. Sear, I agree with you about Top 40 radio. I can easily fill my listening time without being spoonfed prefabricated crap put together by suits with Scantron data trying to design the next big thing. Most of the people who spend a lot of money on music are between the ages of 12 and 25, so the big businesses go for them. Smaller, smarter, more original music is mostly ignored by pop-radio, but that doesn't mean it's inaccessable, it just takes a little more effort on our part. For the most part, remakes are top-40 radio. It is rare for remakes to be up for Oscars or win awards at festivals. For the most part, they come out in summer, and are big-studio cash cows. We can say "Why do they keep recycling this crap?" But we all know the answer: they make money. The moment that stops happening, you will never see another one again. But let's be careful not to assume Hollywood is making remakes INSTEAD of something totally awesome and cool. Like I said, they throw that money at something that will profit. If it's superhero movies (like it has been the last 6 years) then they will throw money at superhero movies. It just depends on the fad....the Top-40 of movies for the moment. But those cool and awesome movies are also being made, it just means we have to work a little harder, wait a little longer (maybe for DVD) to see them. We come to these forums for a reason, right? I can't tell you how excited I am for some of the movies coming out this fall. (The Oscar movie time...) It's time to wipe the suntan lotion off your brain and get ready for some exciting, new, "original" movies! I am talking about Children of Men, Idiocracy, This Film is Not Yet Rated, A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints, The Black Dahlia, Hollywoodland, Volver, The Science of Sleep....and that is just September! I agree, Mandi. Wouldn't it be cheaper just to rerelease the original (which sometimes happens)? You know, this September, we'll also see remakes of All the King's Men and Wicker Man. Now, to be honest, neither movie NEEDS to be remade, but the trailers for both are quite interesting (ducking tomatos....I actually didn't really like the original Wicker man....ducking more tomatos)....I just wish you could get people to take a chance (I call it "Not renting off the wall") and enjoy an older movie that might just blow the socks off you. Oh, they are out there...but it doesn't really lend to the point, and your feelings are understood by me. I think accepting the fact that big motion picture studios are going to be remaking old movies and foreign movies into English is a fact that is here to stay, for a while. You are NOT powerless to stop it, as you can choose not to buy tickets. That's the one thing that studio heads will respond to. I think we have this image of studio heads laughing as they force crap down our throats, but it's quite the opposite. We have them by their....ahem....and the fickle and unpredictable nature of the public has these guys in ulcer clinics, therapy and rehab in droves. Seriously, in the past 6 months I have read about at least 5 big studio producers dying of heart attacks, all under the age of 55. Maybe it's their 20-year-old mistresses overworking them, but I like to think otherwise...
A lot of excellent points very well made there (and thanks for the compliment too! ) You're quite right of course - talk to the studio execs in the only language they understand, how many units they can shift, hence my one-woman boycotting of Pulse :snigger: - but they know full well that the curiosity factor is going to be high enough to flog tickets to even the most doubtful of doubters, because this stuff already has a fanatical following. It is extremely sly practice, but what does anyone expect from money men?
We can say what we want about Hollywood, and all the phoniness and baloney, but from what I know (Easy Riders, Raging Bulls is an EXCELLENT story of Hollywood from the mid-60s to early 80s) that there are still a lot of amazingly creative people trying to make magic there, and as long as audiences respond and festivals and award shows happen, they will put their passion into bringing those amazing stories to the public. How's THAT for a love-in?.....now back to topic.
have anyone seen the thread in IMDB on A Tale of Two Sisters that said that A Tale of Two Sisters is a rip-off of Sixth Sense? What a stupid statement.
yes. they were watching the same film. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365376/board/nest/46477108 check it out.
Not to be churlish, but I'm a little uncomfortable about people critiquing the workings / posts of other boards. I'd certainly be unhappy if there was an open discussion on another board about the shortcomings of SAF, so it's only fair to respect the integrity of other forums. So, no off-site drama please. Thanks.
