|
|
Post by achilles on Mar 31, 2019 18:44:36 GMT
Now it's "The Craft"  . And we've had Robocop , The A-Team , and many others. Just because Hollywood can't be bothered anymore to make original content. But the remake business hardly ever works out well. |
|
|
|
Post by Stephen Day on Mar 31, 2019 18:57:25 GMT
I agree with you for the most part, but they do it because it can work at times. A Star is born is something like the third or forth version of that move that has been made since the American movie industry got started. That's just one example.
I agree that it doesn't work too often, but it works enough times that I don't think there's anything that can be done about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by mothman on Mar 31, 2019 19:13:55 GMT
Its easier to bet on something with an already existing audience.And Studios just arent taking any risks anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by achilles on Mar 31, 2019 19:55:41 GMT
Its easier to bet on something with an already existing audience.And Studios just arent taking any risks anymore. True, but it's a shortsighted play on the part of the studios. These things plus comic book movies are crowding out any chance for new, original movies. Where will the new Robocops, Buckaroo Banzais, the new Back to the Futures, or new Raiders or Star Wars come from? The new Highlanders, new Stargates? And I am of course not talking about remakes of these existing series, but stuff that is comparably original and great made for our times. After all, the stuff that they're remaking WAS original once. Instead of this endless frenzy of remaking old stuff and comic book movies, why not simply make new stuff? Do a good job with a good idea, and there's less risk than it seems. Rather than spend $300 million making the next Terminator reboot, why not make a new movie that has a comparable impact to the original Terminator, but for maybe $40 or $50 million? You risk is mitigated by lower cost...which could be lowered by directors who can do low budgets, (and I'll point out that Spielberg himself noted that if he had more than $19 million to make Raiders, it would have been a much more pretentious movie---in other words he acknowledged that more money would have made a worse movie), and far less use of CG and more practical FX plus fewer big stars. And where will the new movies like...well...F/X come from? |
|
|
|
Post by Amoebas on Mar 31, 2019 21:55:02 GMT
"new Buckaroo Banzai"?!? Really? You need to tell this Blue Blazer Irregular more!  |
|
|
|
Post by sdsichero on Mar 31, 2019 22:41:07 GMT
I'm going to make a new thread remaking this one.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdsichero on Mar 31, 2019 22:46:36 GMT
"new Buckaroo Banzai"?!? Really? You need to tell this Blue Blazer Irregular more! Not sure but I know there was supposed to be a TV series. That was stalled though.
|
|
|
|
Post by achilles on Mar 31, 2019 23:35:08 GMT
"new Buckaroo Banzai"?!? Really? You need to tell this Blue Blazer Irregular more! No, sorry, Buckaroo Banzai Against The World Crime League would have worked had they made it a year or so later, but now with old Peter Weller, it'd be...something else. And accept no substitutes for Weller or any of the others. Perfect cast, perfect time, and you can't do a good one this long after. |
|
|
|
Post by glaeken on Apr 1, 2019 0:54:38 GMT
Legendary doing a big budget pg-13 remake of Toxic Avenger? Um...no thank you. I'd advise you to not even do a movie adaptation of the musical. It'll just damage what made them unique, and the sequels did enough of that. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsichero on Apr 1, 2019 2:51:26 GMT
Legendary doing a big budget pg-13 remake of Toxic Avenger? Um...no thank you. I'd advise you to not even do a movie adaptation of the musical. It'll just damage what made them unique, and the sequels did enough of that. Are you saying the brand is toxic? |
|
|
|
Post by mothman on Apr 1, 2019 11:32:20 GMT
Plenty of people talked about this before.
But bottom line is,its just safer to bet on something with a preexisting audience.Make a generic space action movie,you can go either way,but slap Star Wars on it,and you will at least be in the plus.
Or take last years Predator-it sucked,but I still went to see it,because you know,its Predator.And maybe its not as bad as they say.It was worse,actually.
Point being,its our fault for buying tickets.
|
|
|
|
Post by achilles on Apr 1, 2019 11:54:57 GMT
Plenty of people talked about this before. But bottom line is,its just safer to bet on something with a preexisting audience.Make a generic space action movie,you can go either way,but slap Star Wars on it,and you will at least be in the plus. Or take last years Predator-it sucked,but I still went to see it,because you know,its Predator.And maybe its not as bad as they say.It was worse,actually. Point being,its our fault for buying tickets. What do you mean "our" fault? I haven't seen Predator 29 or whatever it was. |
|
|
|
Post by mothman on Apr 1, 2019 12:00:53 GMT
The audience.We,the general audience.
And you went to see Star Wars 9: Yodahs Bar Mitzwah,right?
|
|
|
|
Post by achilles on Apr 1, 2019 12:16:20 GMT
The audience.We,the general audience. And you went to see Star Wars 9: Yodahs Bar Mitzwah,right? Damn, yes, that was nearly the best Star Wars ever, except Star Wars 10: Rey's Quinceañera. Those sorts of movies though are just sequels, not remakes of old properties, like say The Craft remake, or even the Ghostbusters remake. |
|
|
|
Post by mothman on Apr 1, 2019 15:08:41 GMT
The audience.We,the general audience. And you went to see Star Wars 9: Yodahs Bar Mitzwah,right? Damn, yes, that was nearly the best Star Wars ever, except Star Wars 10: Rey's Quinceañera.Those sorts of movies though are just sequels, not remakes of old properties, like say The Craft remake, or even the Ghostbusters remake. Still better then what we actually got.  Its the same principle.Everything is a sequel,prequel,reboot or remake.Because they want that existing audience. TBF,the make a ton of original stuff...horrors and romantic comedies mostly.Because they are cheap to make and you basically cant lose money. |
|
. And we've had Robocop 
