With the many reamkes of old movies and tv shows being made these days Ive begun to wonder what movies and tv shows might be remade 30 years from now and also what improvements might be made to them.With the heavy use of special effects now days it seems that many movies might be a very daunting task to remake.
So what movies do you think will be remade 30 years from now and how would they be improved or made suck.
I think in 30 years we will see a remake of Blade Runner.It would have a vast improvement to special effects but propbably wont have the same emotional impact.
I could see possible remakes of Willie Wonka and The Chocolate Factory,The Blob,Conan the Barbarian,and maybe Star Wars and Alien.
How about a remake of the series FRIENDS about 30 years from now.
Excuse me . . . I have to go hang myself.
WIlly Wonka is going to be remade, word has it Johnny Depp will be starring and Tim Burton will be directing.
How about a remake of the series FRIENDS about 30 years from now.
Anybody really looking forward to "That 90s Show"
I sort of miss "That 80's Show". The show itself was cheesy as all get out, but they had some good talent in the cast.
But I'd give another 10 or 15 years before "That 90's Show". Just picture it: people in Reebok Pumps doing the Macarena while shopping for Beanie Babies at the mall after catching their 12th viewing of "TItanic"...
>>The Blob<<
Wasn't the blob already remade? :)
Susan wrote:
> >>The Blob<<
>
> Wasn't the blob already remade? :)
>
Once is never enough.
Just think about all the Hound of the Baskervilles
Actually, if it got remade again, the producers would probably claim they were remaking the 1988 version of "The Blob".
How about THE BLOB OF THE BASKERVILLES. Sherlock Holmes battles an alien menace!
What is needed for a good remake is the right combination of characters, atmosphere, and dialogue. Actually they shouldn't really bother.
A significant film dosn't need to be remade. Whatever the original film created it was also those elements made it a significant film. Why remake it. A remake can be done only if the film couldn't get anything significant on screen. If a film couldn't capture anthing significant then it wouldn't be significant and hardly anyone would have seen it and nobody would have used the same title of a poorly executed film.
There was be a number of films out there that had great stories and ideas, but were so poorly executed that nobody cared. In this case a film could be remade and put under a different title with a few other changes.
Well Scott wether or not a movies should be remade is not the point.Movies are always going to be remade by some jackoff director who thinks they can do better
Post Edited (10-19-03 15:46)
2004 MOVIE LIST
(let me know if there should be more).
SEQUELS, PREQUELS and RIPOFFS (oh my!)
Barbershop 2
Kill Bill: Volume 2
Agent Cody Banks 2
Scooby Doo 2
Shrek 2
Cats & Dogs 2
Mulan 2
The Ring 2
Spiderman 2
House of 1000 Corpses 2
Princess Diaries 2
Scary Movie 4
Halloween 9
Exorcist: The Beginning
Dirty Dancing: Havannah Nights
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
The Whole 10 Yards
Oceans 12
Chronicles of riddick
Alien vs predetor (not sure how to classify this)
The Bourne Supremecy
Son of the Mask
The LiongKing 1 1/2 (what the heck is this?)
Fletch Won
REMAKES
Starsky & Hutch (more of a big screen adaptation)
Dawn of the Dead
A Cinderella Story (technically not a remake of a particular movie but when will the cinderall movies END?)
Same with King Arthur
and..Phantom of the Opera
It's a bit harder to initially spot the remakes and in some cases the sequels since Hollywood often changes the title.
Btw in my search I found this hillarious plot for a movie :
GINGERDEAD MEN:Evil yet adorable Gingerbread men come to life with souls of three convicted killers - these real life cookie monsters reak havoc on girl who sent the killers to the electic chair)
GINGERBREED: When disaster strikes on a Martian Research complex, the American and Russian governments, in the midst of the cold war, grudgingly join forces. They quickly assemble a crew of the finest astronauts and cosmonauts, and mount a daring rescue, in which they must fight off killer martian gingerbread men.
....
Post Edited (10-19-03 15:43)
"these real life cookie monsters reak havoc on girl who sent the killers to the electic chair)"
"in which they must fight off killer martian gingerbread men."
i always knew the little buggers were evil, i just knew it.
ever since i heard the words "you can't catch me i'm the gingerbread man" i always thought that they had some evil reason for running!!
oh god, i can here them now, the pitter patter of tasty snack feet...
BTW i wouldn't be surprised if someone, somewhere down the line tries to pitch the idea of batman the live action tv series, but they try and make it like smallville or something silly like that [though i don't actually mind smallville]
also i can imagine a remake of minority report somewhere down the line, but the person in charge is probably going to still be speilberg, out to make a quick buck.
oh, and he replaces all the guns with walkie talkies! :-P
Nah-- with all the nostalgia rampant in the 90s, That 90s Show would just be a bunch of people watching That 70s Show.
The s**ttiest remake is the american version of "the ring". For crying out loud the original (and by far the best ) japanese version was brillent. Bloody sceary , great directing, just a awsome movie. Until you get some american ass changing it all around, making it into just another horror wannabe. Even the lesser ring0 and ring 2 by them selves are better then the remake. I really pitty the people who like the remake and dont even know its a remake and havnt even seen the Japanese ones.
The biggest let down in the remake is that Sadako,in the original version had this brillient way of moving and walking that was so fricken sceary and eery. The american version of corse totally screwed that up.
And they totaly missed the meaning of the ring. Its not a physical thing that you can see(like they did in the remake).
So anyway, i hope the people responsable for the remake die and burn in hell...
HK streetfighter Pod
Mofo Rising wrote:
> How about THE BLOB OF THE BASKERVILLES. Sherlock Holmes
> battles an alien menace!
Allready avialable! Go to your local bookstore for a copy of "Shadow Over Baker Street". An anthology based on "What if Sherlock Holmes faced off against the Cthuhlu Mythos?"
Hey I kn ow the Ring is a re make of the much slower based and poorly acted Ringu and I like it.
However, I do not think any movie is safe from remake, look at Planet of the Apes, oh boy. Also, I just saw T3, and while a fun experience, it just lacked what the rest of the series had in acting, story, robots, etc. and was just too self parodying, which is the annoying trend of all recent remakes/sequals.
As for Friends, I think that you are mistaken, it is already being re made, Joey is getting his own show with (surprise) guest appearences by former Friends, and the new show taking its time slot is called Coupled about a bunch of white middle class friends sleeping with each other. Wow, how original.
Um... I think The Ring was a definite improvement over Ringu. My friends and I had all seen The Ring, we thought it was ok. Not spectacular, but ok. Someone got their hands on Ringu, so we decided to watch it, thinking it would be better because it was the original.
While it wasn't horrible, Ringu was slow and really boring for the most part. Yeah, and the acting was weak too. The few creepy parts from The Ring are pretty much non-existant.
Yeah, you know, I liked the remake (The Ring, as opposed to Ringu) better myself. I sense a case of "it was forign and the original version so it must be better" syndrome. But, then, that's the vibe I get any time someone tells me Ringu is better than The Ring.
See, in The Ring, the characters actually had to figure things out. There was a mystery there, and as a part of the audience, I got caught up in that. There was a mystery in Ringu, too - but instead of figuring things out, the lame Psychic Flashback (c) plot device is used. This plot device, a staple of Anime and Japanese live-action horror, is merely an excuse for lazy writing - the screenwriter tells us, in essence, the following: "I can't figure out a real way for these people to figure this out, so I'm just going to hand it all to you through a contived deus-ex-machine style plot device."
Now, was the chick in Ringu scarier than the one in The Ring? Yes and no. She did have a cool, spooky movement about her that was, in all honesty, better than the special effect that was the end of the Ring. But the goofy wall-eyed stare pretty much ruined it for me. It made the horror of it unearthly and implausible to me (not that anything in either movie was all that plausible, but hey...). The fact that there was a direct explanation as to why the freaky chick in Ringu was the way she was also did the movie no favors. In The Ring, there is no true explanation for the evil - it just is evil. And the little girl in the roll spooked me out with her one or two lines of dialogue a hell of a lot more than the crazy-eyes no-talkie schtick in Ringu. To be honest, when I saw that eye, I laughed.
In short, to HK streetfighter Pod, you are more than entitled to your opinion. But please understand that your opinion makes as little sense to me as mine does to you.