PDA

View Full Version : Remake Or Re-Interpretation?



Barbarella
08-09-2011, 03:51 AM
DIRTY DANCING TO BE REMADE



http://uk.news.yahoo.com/film-studio-announces-dirty-dancing-remake-102910809.html

Dirty Dancing, the 1980s blockbuster starring Patrick Swayze and Jennifer Grey, is coming back to the big screen.
Hollywood film studio Lionsgate says it is remaking the 1987 film about a naive dance student and her teacher who becomes her lover.
It has been confirmed that Kenny Ortega, who choreographed the original film, will direct the remake.

Ortega also directed the Michael Jackson movie This Is It and High School Musical.

"Patrick Swayze set the bar for men dancing in the movies as Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire did before him," Ortega said in a statement.
"I believe everywhere you look there is evidence that the talent is out there and I can't wait to begin the process of discovering the next breakout triple-threats."

Dirty Dancing won Oscars for best music and best original song for its emotional closing song, (I've Had) The Time of My Life, and inspired a hit stage show in London and six other countries.

A much-delayed remake of the 1984 film Footloose - starring newcomer Kenny Wormald and Julianne Hough is due in cinemas in October.

---

My only question is "Why?" I loathed the original although I'm aware it was a smash hit and a lot of people loved it but does this really warrant a new version.

Perhaps we should have a thread entitled "Remakes". :P

Mi-CroMartie
08-09-2011, 06:48 AM
What next? I predict Flashdance.. And I heard somewhere that there's an official Pet Sematary remake as well. FUCK THIS!!!

Barbarella
08-09-2011, 11:05 AM
I predict Flashdance.
I wouldn't rule it out.


And I heard somewhere that there's an official Pet Sematary remake as well. FUCK THIS!!!
Why am I not surprised?

Hexon.Arq
08-09-2011, 07:32 PM
I was about to say, "What? But I just saw the trailer for this at the theater." But then I remembered that that was for a remake of Footloose. And then I realized that I didn't really know the difference between those movies.

Barbarella
08-10-2011, 04:11 AM
I realized that I didn't really know the difference between those movies.
I can't say I blame you. They're kind of interchangeable.

Mi-CroMartie
08-10-2011, 05:24 AM
There's even a Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Oldboy remake as well. I officially had it up to here with remakes of that. I already saw those originals.

S.D.
08-13-2011, 06:19 AM
I think the reason why some remakes seem futile is because the original source material was so good in the first place. I mean, throughout theatre and film history there's always been repeat performances or renovations of classic plays and books - think about how many different versions of Shakespeare there are. But the difference between adaptations and remakes is that you can always find new interpretations within a text that had no set actors or moods to it. Remaking something that was designed for a specific purpose seems more sacriligious because it implies there's some fault with the original, or that audiences should just keep demanding something be improved, replaced, overwritten, re-designated. That's the aspect I don't like.

I can easily accept re-imaginings of say, the Batman franchise, because it's not set in stone that any one version is the true canon. I don't even like to compare and contrast, something like Batman Returns is beautiful and epic in entirely different ways to how The Dark Knight is beautiful and epic, there's enough space in my brain that I don't need to forego one for another.
I think I've written about this here somewhere before, but what I infinitely prefer are films where the subject matter knowingly sources other texts, I love post-modernism in that respect. Things like Planet Terror, The Devil's Rejects (yes I know Rob Zombie remakes movies, but I actually don't mind his approach, it seems less exploitative), LA Confidential, or Mullholland Falls are great examples of films taking inspiration from older, established movies and paying homage to them whilst simultaneously telling a different, original story. Instead of remaking The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, you can have films like Severance, The Human Centipede, or House Of 1000 Corpses and experience a modernised take on the atmosphere and ethos of the original phenomenon.

In relation to the opening post, it's worth noting that even if you're not a fan of a film that gets listed for remake status, they don't always happen. I remember a couple of years ago some ass-clown reported that Rosemary's Baby was getting the remake treatment with Jessica Alba or someone, which made me cringe, but it never panned out.


Perhaps we should have a thread entitled "Remakes". :P
I imagine with its title, this one will serve that purpose nicely. :)

Norsefire
08-13-2011, 10:50 AM
I remember when I was actually excited to see The Wicker Man remake, I love the original, and because I love it so much I was excited to see what a remake could be like, and then it turned out to be total rubbish :(
It was a little bit different to the original and I don't mind that because an exact copy would be boring and pointless, but the wicker man remake was just terrible in my opinion.

Not all remakes are bad, as S.D. pointed out, Rob Zombie remade Halloween movie's and I thought those were really good.

I have the Psycho remake on DVD and I think I've watched it once, so forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think I'm sure it was almost scene for scene remake which I thought made it pointless, just watch the original.

Lucille
08-16-2011, 08:54 PM
WHY?! Godddd. I for one have loved that movie since I was like 5 years old. It's classic and so perfect the way it is. There is NO NEED for a remake! Why not just watch the original?! I don't understand! UGHHHH Like it's not like it's a remake of some effects heavy horror/sci-fi film that at least has improvements in technology as a slightly valid reason for its existence. Why can't Hollywood actually take a chance on new material and believe in fresh new screenplays. The reason there's so much great stuff in the past is because it was new and they took a chance on it and it proved successful. I feel like every other mainstream film that comes out now is either based on a book or a remake of something done before. It's a hideous loop and it needs to end. It's like that with mainstream music, and with mainstream film. The only mainstream category that IMO is actually experiencing a golden age and producing quality right now is cable television. There has been an influx of really great new shows this past decade that are really well written and executed, not to mention original.

I really really wish they would give up on trying to cash in on nostalgia and move on, because if they don't then their entire industry is doomed to never progress further and will just become a hideous cycle where things get remade over and over, each time losing more and more value, to the point of being completely void of ANYTHING which could remotely be considered art or entertainment.

Golden Eel
08-16-2011, 10:43 PM
I've posted this idea elsewhere, but I'll do it again. The reason remakes continue to be made is because people watch them and buy DVDs. Hollywood execs know a remake is far more likely to earn money than an original idea that they'd have to play Russian Roulette with. If you want them to stop remaking films, stop watching them and tell your friends to do the same. Hollywood doesn't care about creating new ideas, they care about making money at any means necessary.

Barbarella
08-17-2011, 06:47 AM
I've posted this idea elsewhere, but I'll do it again. The reason remakes continue to be made is because people watch them and buy DVDs. Hollywood execs know a remake is far more likely to earn money than an original idea that they'd have to play Russian Roulette with.
I've said all that too in the past but no fucker listened.

C'est la vie.

Mi-CroMartie
04-05-2012, 03:27 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GljhR5rk5eY

1st there was Conan The Barbarian (haven't seen the remake only parts of the 80's version on TV.). What's next, people? The 1st Terminator and Abyss? Or Commando and Predator? Sigh... Sharon Stone was awesome in the 90's. Nuff said.

adamchabbi6
04-05-2012, 04:04 AM
Yeah, the remakes are pissing me off as well. I would be furious if there was a Terminator remake.

Hollywood has obviously run out of ideas, so they need to remake classics but I think it's time that someone steps in to help cinema go back to the way it used to be.

Whereas for Sharon Stone in Total Recall, she was the master of seducing. She was even better in Basic Instinct though. ;)

Hazekiah
04-05-2012, 04:08 AM
Schwarzenegger wasn't in The Abyss, lol.

And while the Verhoven adaptation of Total Recall was GREAT, this is supposed to be much more faithful to the original short story upon which both are based. Even if that weren't the case the gap of almost a quarter century since the first adaptation has yielded MASSIVE improvements in the world of special effects, so it's worth it for that alone. The early effects work seen in the trailer pretty much says it all.

I don't see a problem here AT ALL.

:P

Golden Eel
04-05-2012, 04:13 AM
The only problem I have with most of these remakes is that they were shitty to begin with and they'll be shitty the second time.

Mi-CroMartie
04-05-2012, 04:55 AM
Schwarzenegger wasn't in The Abyss, lol.



P

I know.. Who knows? Maybe they'll even rape James Cameron's classic flicks aside from Arnold's stuff.. And Mars in Total Recall is supposed to have blood red skies.. Instead we have a 5th Element-ish visuals going on here.. Me NO GUSTA.

iggy
04-05-2012, 06:13 AM
Well, this technically isn't a remake. It just shares the same name. Personally I can't wait for this. Total Recall basically butchered the story it was based on "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale", by Phillip K Dick. Being a massive fan of Dick (lol), I'm more than a little excited at the prospect of a more precise film adaptation.




Also the Conan remake was fucking amazing.

ThreeEyedGod
04-05-2012, 09:26 AM
The early effects work seen in the trailer pretty much says it all.

Mad respect for early effects work.

Hazekiah
04-05-2012, 09:45 AM
I know.. Who knows? Maybe they'll even rape James Cameron's classic flicks aside from Arnold's stuff.. And Mars in Total Recall is supposed to have blood red skies.. Instead we have a 5th Element-ish visuals going on here.. Me NO GUSTA.

Well, YOU might know Arnold wasn't in The Abyss...but try telling that to your thread title and OP, lol.

And show me WHERE in the trailer we see a martian skyscape again...? As far as I can tell all we see there is the skies of future-Earth. And even if we DO see a blue-tinted martian sky...TERRAFORMING, remember?

Think. THEN judge. Perhaps even see the movie FIRST.

Come on now.

:-\

Sans Agendum
04-05-2012, 10:15 AM
I'm with Iggy. Seeing as this is more of a re-imagining of the Book "We Can Remember It for You Wholesale" by Philip K. Dick than a 'remake' of an arny flick, I'd say give the film a chance. It looks well done and, as in the book, it doesn't take place on Mars. It takes place on earth and is more about the memory change conspiracies than aliens with three tits. It should be a good movie. I always liked the story and thought it got way dumbed down in the Arny version.

Dronepool
04-05-2012, 10:39 AM
Is this a big deal? Since when is a movie with Arnold that isn't Terminator sacred? Most were just decent action movies. Better to make a better or more interesting version of it than some no-name random action movie.

Think of it as 'Total Recall (Begins)'

This looks amazing.

iggy
04-05-2012, 10:56 AM
Is this a big deal? Since when is a movie with Arnold that isn't Terminator sacred? Most were just decent action movies. Better to make a better or more interesting version of it than some no-name random action movie.

Think of it as 'Total Recall (Begins)'

This looks amazing.


Total Recall totally IS sacred. Remaking this is just a stone's throw away from having Michael Bay remake Bladerunner(also based on a Phillip K. Dick book). That might not mean much to most people but to any sci fi fan it's just plain offensive.

That said, it not a remake. They just used the name to draw in more sales.

Norsefire
04-05-2012, 12:40 PM
I would rather watch the original Total Recall than this new one just judging on the trailer.
It might be a great film but that trailer really put me off it, although it has made me want to watch the original Total Recall tonight.

I will probably wait for this to be out on DVD or on sale on DVD before I get around to watching it.

Adonai
04-05-2012, 01:58 PM
The original Total Recall kicks ass!

I've heard of the new one, but I haven't seen the trailers yet. I haven't even been interested. In a world full of reboots, remakes, prequels, and sequels ... just the title alone is enough to put me off. If anything, anyone from my generation is going to look at the title and go, "Fuck, here we go again, another uncreative Hollywood P.O.S. remake."

I must admit though, I am looking forward to Prometheus.

Sans Agendum
04-05-2012, 02:19 PM
Prometheus is gonna be amazing. That's not really a remake or a prequel though. Just a new story that takes place in the same fantasy future envisioned by Ridley Scott. Will not have the trademark aliens and will be more about the "Space Jockey" beings. You probably already knew that though. I'm very excited about that one.

Dronepool
04-05-2012, 04:06 PM
For some reason I was never crazy about the original Total Recall, I don't know why. I guess I never figured it was a sci-fi charm.

Hazekiah
04-05-2012, 04:20 PM
Prometheus is gonna be amazing. That's not really a remake or a prequel though. Just a new story that takes place in the same fantasy future envisioned by Ridley Scott. Will not have the trademark aliens and will be more about the "Space Jockey" beings. You probably already knew that though. I'm very excited about that one.

Um. It is a DIRECT PREQUEL to Alien.

The same director takes The Company to LV-426 where the crew finds the Space Jockey and its ship with a field of eggs and a facehugger. If you think you're NOT gonna see a xenomorph by the end of that movie or that it ISN'T a prequel then you are officially beyond all hope, lol.

o_O

Mi-CroMartie
04-05-2012, 04:26 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mm12NYSBg84

OMNONOMNOMNOMNOMN Sharon Stone in spandex, man, used to have crush on her...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=400dBQ4Ahhs

Sans Agendum
04-05-2012, 08:43 PM
Um. It is a DIRECT PREQUEL to Alien.

The same director takes The Company to LV-426 where the crew finds the Space Jockey and its ship with a field of eggs and a facehugger. If you think you're NOT gonna see a xenomorph by the end of that movie or that it ISN'T a prequel then you are officially beyond all hope, lol.

o_ONo. It isn't a direct prequel. It takes place 300 years before the first Alien and Ridley Scott has confirmed there will be no Xenomorphs, nor will it end anywhere close to the beginning of the first alien film. There will be the eggs but they will not hatch in this movie. The story for this one is that they go to the Space Jockey civilization and discover that THAT race is the origin of man and OTHER life forms in the universe. There will be no Xenomorphs. Ridley himself said this already. Regardless of who is right in this, your disrespectful tone is pretty unnecessary and not typical of your usual character.

EDIT: If you'd like to discuss Prometheus further let's do so through Private Messages or on Facebook, as this thread is about Total Recall. Or maybe we can have this part of the discussion moved to the Prometheus thread.

Hazekiah
04-06-2012, 12:34 AM
Hey, I said "lol." Calm down!

Yeesh.

And I know what Ridley's said about the movie and the general dealings of the story and context within the overall framework of the franchise...but I also know that every single thing we know about the movie is a direct set-up for what comes later while expanding upon ideas and characters and settings from the previous films and that we've even got a facehugger in action in the trailer!

I'll concede that doesn't necessarily dictate that "there will be full-blown xenomorphs, oh, yes, there will be xenomorphs"...it's certainly quite clearly prequel territory, regardless of what Ridley says to avoid spoilers and such.

Anyway, fair enough...moving on.

Dammmmn, I was already looking forward to this even before realizing Jessica Biel would be in it...and playing a rebel sex worker, no less!

*SLURP*

And watching the flickers of contrasting emotions play across Colin Farrel's face in the trailer as he shocks himself by suddenly going all Jason Bourne on their asses is quite possibly the finest and most subtle work I've seen him execute in his career yet. Hell, yeah...very impressed.

iggy
04-06-2012, 07:38 AM
I've posted this idea elsewhere, but I'll do it again. The reason remakes continue to be made is because people watch them and buy DVDs. Hollywood execs know a remake is far more likely to earn money than an original idea that they'd have to play Russian Roulette with. If you want them to stop remaking films, stop watching them and tell your friends to do the same. Hollywood doesn't care about creating new ideas, they care about making money at any means necessary.

If we just stopped watching remakes, they'd fall back on their other cash cows: sequels and re releases. And with the recent trend of 3D conversions (Titanic, Star Wars, The Nightmare Before Christmas) studios should have no problem milking successful franchises for decades to come.

21Faces
04-08-2012, 02:16 AM
Total Recall totally IS sacred. Remaking this is just a stone's throw away from having Michael Bay remake Bladerunner(also based on a Phillip K. Dick book). That might not mean much to most people but to any sci fi fan it's just plain offensive.

That said, it not a remake. They just used the name to draw in more sales.
Whoa whoa whoa! Let's Slow. The fuck. Down. Bladerunner =/= Total Recall by any stretch of the imagination. Not even close, lol. I mean sure, Guatto was funny and the three-tittied lady was cool, but seminal sci-fi epic Total Recall is not. On the topic of Blade Runner, though, they are apparently working on another story set in the same universe a la Prometheus.

And in regards to remakes in general:

Remakes, re-imaginings, adaptations, sequels- it's all fine. This idea that narrative art should try to be original all the time is actually a pretty new. Humans have been looking to hear the same stories longer than we've been looking for something different. Have people gotten tired of Shakespeare yet? When most people claim they want more original films what they actually mean are the same types of characters, devices, premises, and contrivances they know and love simply recycled and repackaged. Whenever directors ACTUALLY give us something different- Enter the Void, The Tree of Life, Funny Games, Melancholia, Inland Empire, Somewhere, Uncle Boonme Who Can Recall His Past Lives, Visage, etc. the reaction from audiences is almost always a collective WTF!?

iggy
04-08-2012, 06:42 AM
They're actually a lot closer than you'd think. Both being film adaptations of legendary Sci Fi author Phillip K Dick, both having altered titles relating to the massive liberties the films took, and both directed by someone who had never read the source material. Main difference other than the obvious plot and setting being that Bladerunner ended up being much better.


I don't really know how I feel about the Prometheus style side story though, the Bladerunner universe just isn't large enough to support it. There are four Alien movies. There's one Bladerunner. Unless they intend to expand upon the posthumous novels, but the existence of those books is insult enough. I'd much more prefer a more accurate adaptation of it's source material "Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?". There's a ton of material left out of Ridley Scott's depressing epic. Self medication, the hallucinatory religion and universal consciousness known as Mercerism, the rush to flee a radiation filled Earth, while not letting any social or genetic rejects escape their fate, the nearly complete extinction of all animal life.


There's absolutely tons of material in that book, and while the original film adaptation is a masterpiece, it could be so much more :(

21Faces
04-08-2012, 01:54 PM
They're actually a lot closer than you'd think. Both being film adaptations of legendary Sci Fi author Phillip K Dick, both having altered titles relating to the massive liberties the films took, and both directed by someone who had never read the source material. Main difference other than the obvious plot and setting being that Bladerunner ended up being much better.


I don't really know how I feel about the Prometheus style side story though, the Bladerunner universe just isn't large enough to support it. There are four Alien movies. There's one Bladerunner. Unless they intend to expand upon the posthumous novels, but the existence of those books is insult enough. I'd much more prefer a more accurate adaptation of it's source material "Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?". There's a ton of material left out of Ridley Scott's depressing epic. Self medication, the hallucinatory religion and universal consciousness known as Mercerism, the rush to flee a radiation filled Earth, while not letting any social or genetic rejects escape their fate, the nearly complete extinction of all animal life.


There's absolutely tons of material in that book, and while the original film adaptation is a masterpiece, it could be so much more :(
I'm aware of the similarities, but for the bolded reason you mentioned- that's why another adaptation of Total Recall is not whatsoever the same thing as one of Blade Runner (PARTICULARLY one by the black hole of artistry called "Bay." I will probably wonder until I die whether he is actually an incredibly stupid person who can only make stupid movies because he's... stupid. Or if he's just a hollow shell of a person who doesn't care how detrimental his "contributions" to human culture are as long as they make unholy sums of money).

Also I feel like the universe of Blade Runner is far deeper and has much more potential for more material than Alien/Prometheus. First, for all the material in the source that you mentioned- maybe all those elements you felt were missing might be incorporated into the next story? And further because Blade Runner the film is actually set "in the world." It's inhabited. In contrast and in spite of it's numerous installments, the Alien series developed a tradition of featuring stories about roughnecks or military types cramped into ships, an abandoned colony (which for all intents and purposes still felt like a spaceship) or all-male penal colonies. None of these premises exactly gives us a great deal of insight into the world of Alien. Prometheus seems to follow this tradition as far as the trailer indicates.

In any case, as long as Ridley is involved I am extremely excited for both of them.