I just saw a preview for the remake of Willard. Where will this madness end?!?!?
I have been able to not watch anyone remakes, except Mutiny on the Bounty. Hopefully I won't begin. Some director said that there are only so many story types to choose from when making a movie and that they would throw darts at a wheel that had story ideas on it and do the film that the dart would hit. They might change the settings or something, but it would basically be the same story. The key seems to be new combinations of ideals with unique characters that make for an "original" movie.
yup, don't forget the upcoming Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake!! woo hoo!
Meh. Not all remakes totally suck...and "Willard" shows potential. While it certainly has its fans, the original movie is hardly considered a fantastic uber-classic; this constitutes what others here have previously called for: remaking the awful or the mediocre, not the true classic.
That's its own slippery slope: if Hollywood made a coherent, exciting, serious version of "Robot Monster" with top-notch special effects, would that not suck worse than the gorilla-in-a-diving-helmet one? Better, real-life example: the color "Night of the Living Dead" is good, but doesn't hold a candle to the black and white original. (And if "Willard" makes dough, will they try to salvage "Ben?" God, no. Please.)
The "Willard" trailer does have one jawdropper of a shot in it, and it's actually a parody of a scene from Kubrick's "The Shining."
are you talking about when the elevator opens and its full of rats and they flow out of the elevator?
Deej wrote:
>
> yup, don't forget the upcoming Texas Chainsaw Massacre
> remake!! woo hoo!
>
You have GOT to be kidding about "woo hoo!" over the TCM remake. The concept has been done to death already, and TCM: TNG was in itself a remake of the original!
Good God....filmmakers don't have an original idea in their damned heads anymore! What with WILLARD, the impending TCM remake, proposed remakes of DAWN OF THE DEAD and also DAY OF THE DEAD, the Australian classic PATRICK, the remake of ROLLERBALL....which BOMBED HORRIBLY, btw....and God only knows how many others I've forgotten about.
NOT to mention filmmakers who periodically reedit their own films INSTEAD of coming up with something ORIGINAL for God's sake (I've lost all respect for Spielberg because of what he's done reediting some of his films).
It's just really, lame, and stupid, IMHO.
I, too, have seen the trailer for the remake of "Willard." Having seen the original, I don't know whether I'll see the remake or not, but, it'll be hard for the remake to top the original cast of Bruce Davison, Elsa Lanchester, Ernest Borgnine, and Sondra Locke.
I was wondering, if the remake of "Williard" is a success, will they also do a rremake of "Ben," which was the sequel spawned by the original "Williard." And if there is a remake of "Ben," will they get Michael Jackson to sing the theme song, like he did in the orignal "Ben."
All this got strarted, when Stephen Gilbert wrote a novel called "Ratman's Notebook."
I remember seeing WILLARD in the 70's and haven't seen it anywhere on tape or on TV since. I remember that is was really some film. At the time I considered it as great as PSYCHO and THE BIRDS. It was an effective film and a very memorable film.
Then there's the Hollywood problem of 'argh, subtitles! Better remake it into an English version'. 'The Ring' is what springs to mind, I'm holding out til I can buy the Japanese trilogy on DVD. With the Kurosawa films they remade they strongly adapted them and re-interpreted them, which I see as the only respectable kind of remake. That's how 'Fistfull of Dollars' and 'The Magnificent Seven' came about, among numerous others.
Pete
I haven't seen the trailer, but I'm sorta looking forward to Willard. It's about time we got any Hollywood movie where Crispin Glover gets top billing, let alone one where he goes crazy, talks to rats, and kills R. Lee Ermey.
The IMDB used to have two entries for SECONDS--one was the John Frankenheimer classic, the other was some kind of proposed remake that I've heard nothing about beyond seeing its IMDB listing. Does anyone know anything about this? Frankenheimer's version certainly doesn't need to be updated; it's perfect as it is--though I would like to see the missing Leonard Nimoy footage.
Vermin Boy, if you haven't already, you should really check out Apple.com's Quick Time Trailers (http://www.apple.com/trailers/). You can see every trailer for upcoming movies from nosepunchin' superhero ya-ya like "X2," "The Hulk," and "XLG" (which lets us know, in no uncertain terms, that it's well past time to retire this stupid habit of abbreviated "code" titles) to just-for-the-buck slapdash sequels like "2 Fast 2 Furious" (again with the ******* "codes") to the arthouse stuff. And you don't have to huck out eight bucks and sit through a crap movie to watch 'em.
(Stupid Question #1: If they made a sequel to "Cradle 2 The Grave," what would they call it? Stupid Question #2: If "Rambo: First Blood Part Two"--the sequel to "First Blood"--was followed by "Rambo III," then what happened to "Rambo II?")
Don't forget the Stepford Wives remake is also being done. Apparantly Nicole Kidman is to star, so it has at least one thing going for it. I personally love the original, and I think it could still be done well today, if true to the source material
'' I'll just die if I don't get that recipe ''.
Let's face it . . . now that CG effects are so common, just about every movie ever made that relied on real animals, rear projection monsters or mechanical models will probably be remade so that the computer nerds in Hollywood can prove to the world how cool they are.
I would choose Bruce Davison and his real rats over Crispin Glover and his CG rats any day of the week.
I would also rather watch War of the Worlds and When Worlds Collide than Star Wars Episodes I and II.
Give me the Towering Inferno and The Poseidon Adventure . . . you can keep Backdraft and Titanic.
Is MJ going to sing the song again??? that could be really funny if he does...
Also some bad remakes should be shelved... I dont know about you guys but a remake supose to improve on the orginal movie... As for Night of the Living Dead I did find the remake enjoyable and almost better then the orginal 1969 movie... but Rollerball on the other hand should of been tossed in a bond fire and never released... God, what the hell were they thinking on remaking the classic Rollerball story with a crap remake [the remake sucks because of two things... 1, the writers never seen the orginal movie and dont know what is was about... 2, the director never seen the orginal movie either...]
:D
Both Willard and Ben were released on video by Prism Entertainment. When Prism crashed and burned when the video bubble burst in the late eighties, Paramount Video picked up most of Prism's library and release Willard and Ben for a brief time (I own copies of those editions).
The remake looks fairly good, and the casting of R. Lee Emery as the boss from Hell is truly inspired.
What I'd like to see is instead of remaking a good movie, remake one that sucked. Maybe it was a good story, but the actors were bad, or the director was drunk, or the writers were on a cocaine high all the time. . .
It'd be really neat if some director said "well, that movie was a piece of crap, but I'm so damn good that I could remake it into something worthwhile." But no, they don't have the balls to do that. Instead, we get people saying "that movie was good, I can redo it and make a fortune!" Here's a hint, Hollywood: How many remakes have made a lot of money? Huh?
What I'd like to see is instead of remaking a good movie, remake one that sucked. Maybe it was a good story, but the actors were bad, or the director was drunk, or the writers were on a cocaine high all the time. . . Sounds like the making of Death Sport... A remake could be much better... :D
There was a thread of conversation along the lines of remaking bad movies well...a few weeks back, iirc