SciFi remakes The Thing and Andromeda Strain

[trekgeezer]

SciFi  channel has contracted with Ridley Scott to produce a 4 hour remake of The Andromeda Strain and with Frank Darabont to produce a 4 hour remake of  The Thing, based on the original story.

See the full story here:   SciFi Remakes

[Scott]

They don't need a remake under the same title as ANDROMEDA STRAIN, but they could do a new virus movie as the subject is interesting.

THE THING has been made well twice. Why a third? And I'm not sure about Sci Fi Channel making films as the ones I've seen are not that good. Maybe story, but not general effectiveness, atmosphere, etc.

Ridley Scott doing a four hour versions maybe interesting. We'll have to see.

[Mr. Hockstatter]

All they'd have to do is go to their local library and look at the volumes and volumes of "Best Sci-FI Short Stories" from every year for the past several decades.  There are a few real gems in every one of those, really original stuff, and I'm sure the authors would love to get some royalties if they were made into movies.

But no, we get remakes.

[trekgeezer]

These are going to be mini-series. SciFi has been getting really great ratings with these the last couple of years.  Taken, Battlestar Galactica,  and Dune have all been really good.  In December they will be showing Earthsea, based on the Ursula K. Leguin  novels.

I would like to The Thing done like the original novella it is based on. John Carpenter did a pretty good job, but still changed the nature of the creature a little. It would be cool if they made it as period piece set in the 1930's .  George Clooney was supposed to make a live version of the story the way he did with Fail Safe, but it never happened.  

If you want to know more about Carpenter's version and read the original story by John W. Campbell, you can visit this site dedicated to it .     The Thing

I agree that they would be hard pressed to outdo the original Andromeda Strain movie.

[AndyC]

I don't really mind if they go back to the book. A fresh adaptation is not really a remake in my mind. And I can also see the need to retell a good story every few decades, in order to keep it alive. It's just the amount of it going on at once that's a problem. Personally, I'm looking forward to these.

Mind you, I doubt The Thing could be done much better than Carpenter did it. I thought he captured the Campbell story pretty well, and made a fun movie of it, with a cast that's hard to beat. And I just can't see a four-hour movie, since there wasn't much more to the story. There's likely to be a lot of embellishment going on.

With the Andromeda Strain, there is much more of Crichton's book that could be captured in the four-hour format. The same is true for a lot of books that were just too complex for a movie of average length. For example, the longer TV adaptation of Dune that came out a few years ago, while not as visually impressive or polished as the Lynch version, told the story a lot more clearly.

The only problem I have with the Andromeda Strain is that the original was an all-around good movie. Crichton has other books that were badly adapted to the screen, and would benefit from a longer, more faithful adaptation. Sphere comes to mind.



Post Edited (09-07-04 16:56)

[Mr_Vindictive]

Frank Darabont and Ridley Scott?

That's some pretty heavy talent.......with the SciFi channel?

I'll watch both, but I don't know if even Darabont and Scott could make a good SciFi feature.

[Mr. Hockstatter]

As far as the need to retell a good story, in the case of The Thing (horrible moster stalks people in a confined space), that story has been retold in Alien I, II, III and IV, Creature, Jason X, Killer Rats, Lethal Target, Spiders and Spiders II.  And that's just the stuff from my tiny DVD collection.  I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to come up with a few dozen more.  Pretty much every slasher movie borrows that plot.  Then there was Boa, Python II, Boa vs. Python, Dragon Killer (or something like that, the one with that Clark guy from Lois and Clark).  Gimme ten more minutes I'll come up with 30 of 40 more times it's been retold.  :)

[Eirik]

The Andromeda Strain was an awesome movie, but I felt the story suffered BADLY from being in a TV format with commercials - it sort of took you out of the isolated biolab setting too often and at bad points in the action.  Since Sci Fi channel seems to run a four minute commercial spot after every ten minutes of actual show, I think their version of AS is going to drag even more.

The original Thing and the Carpenter Thing were both good for different reasons - I thought the first was spookier and the second was downright shocking and scary.  If they can combine the strong poiunts of each, then go for it.  Otherwise, please don't bother.

I don't think I have four hours to spare on either of these.

[AndyC]

Mr. Hockstatter wrote:
> As far as the need to retell a good story, in the case of The
> Thing (horrible moster stalks people in a confined space),

That's an oversimplification. There is far more to the J.W. Campbell story 'Who Goes There' than a monster stalking people. Hell, there was more to the Carpenter movie than that. Ripping off the general idea at its most basic level is not the same as faithfully retelling the story and giving credit to the author.

Besides, by your reasoning, nobody needs to retell the Superman story, because there are other superheroes around, and we don't need a new take on Frankenstein every once in a while, because there have been other stories of science gone awry, and War of the Worlds shouldn't be retold because other 'alien invasion' movies have accomplished that. This implies that they're all basically the same, that there is no distinctiveness or quality beneath the superficial resemblance. None are particularly significant or special.

On the other hand, it might also be true that some stories are classics, not just another example of a subgenre. These stories were and are significant, and of sufficient quality to be worth retelling, reinterpreting, and revisiting. The best of them transcend any one particular cinematic incarnation. They are worthy of recognition and preservation.

Many classic tales have had several cinematic incarnations, and nobody b***hes about it.

Granted that Hollywood is currently remaking every good movie or piece of crap there is, Some are still too recent for this treatment, and many are undeserving. Yes, there need to be a lot more original ideas. Still, there is nothing wrong with remaking a classic every now and then. Remakes do have a place.

And The Thing, or rather the story on which it's based (which you should read before equating it with slasher films), is worthy of this. J. W. Campbell is, by all accounts, the father of modern science fiction. He wrote relatively few stories in his lifetime (preferring to mentor such youngsters as Isaac Asimov in the role of editor), and this is one of his best. So don't go knocking it.

Yes, we're all fond of old movies. However, unless a story like this is remade now and then, it fades into obscurity. We might still be enjoying it, but the majority are forgetting it, and giving credit for the idea to inferior knock-offs. If we really love these stories, we should be supporting faithful retellings of them. It would be shortsighted to think otherwise.



Post Edited (09-08-04 07:57)

[AndyC]

Eirik wrote:
>Since Sci Fi channel seems to
> run a four minute commercial spot after every ten minutes of
> actual show, I think their version of AS is going to drag even
> more.

I'm just going to wait until the video is released and rent it.

[George]

4 hours = too long for the Andromeda Strain