Just wondering because i was thinking the other day about how Kurosawa films have been remade multiple times.
Yojimbo westernized as italian spaghetti western A fistful of Dollars, and also remade as the 1996 gangster bruce willlis film last man standing.
The Seven Samurai remade as the magnificent seven.
Sanshiro Sugata remade a bunch of times.
Hidden Fortress remade as The Last Princess.
An anime series loosely based on the Seven samurai called Samurai 7.
Another adaption of Seven Samurai is rumored by imdb fr 2011. That cannot be right though, probably a year or two away.
Who could forget the remake that almost happened the star wars treatment and first draft as ripoffs of Hidden Fortress.
I guess it is fitting when Kurosawa himself claimed he was inspired by John Ford. But none of Kurosawa films i have seen are really ripoffs of John Ford films as far as i can see except maybe by influence and composition behind the camera.
“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.
I think they all need to be judged on their own merits.
I used to be a real 'remakes are so lame' kinda film snob, until I learned "The Maltese Falcon' is a remake OF A REMAKE! (third version of that story). "The Wizard of Oz" is also a remake.
I like ReBoosts.
the first two film versions of The Maltese Falcon were duds. I'm betting the original Wizard of Oz was a silent movie. Alot of classics were remakes of silent movies.
Warbler said:
the first two film versions of The Maltese Falcon were duds. I'm betting the original Wizard of Oz was a silent movie. Alot of classics were remakes of silent movies.
A lot of other remakes are remakes of b/w movies. Or 3:4 aspect ratio movies. "Clash of the Titans" was a remake of a 2D movie. Does new technology make a remake necessary?
I don't think it does, but I stand it's best to judge all remakes on their own merits as films.
"Clash of the Titans" was poop, not because it was a remake, but because it was a poopy movie. The new "True Grit" is amazing, not because the old one was good or bad, but simply on its own.
TV's Frink said:
I like ReBoosts.
Thanks dude. :)
Warbler said:
I'm betting the original Wizard of Oz was a silent movie.
Yes, and I read it was an odd version, as far as the adaptation went. It featured Larry Semon and Oliver Hardy:
I like the new Star Trek. Its better than all the other Star Treks and the Star Wars episodes 1-3 put together.
Its got a kind of Riddick meets Star Wars feel to it.
Battle droids the robotic incarnations of Jar Jar Binks.
A lot of remakes or reboots are worth it. Battlestar Galactica 2004 took the original's premise and expanded on it to make some great drama. Star Trek 2009 took the original's characters and placed them in fun new situations. As long as they are creative with the source material and don't just remake something for the sake of remaking it, I'm ok with it. Same goes with cover songs. If your cover song is indistinguishable from the original, what have you accomplished?
Star Wars Revisited Wordpress
Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress
doubleofive said:
If your cover song is indistinguishable from the original, what have you accomplished?
1. Cover song.
2. ???
3. Profit
Like all things it depends on the end results and the quality of the original work.
I didn't have a problem with reworking Battlestar Galactica because while it was fun in it's original form it was short lived and rather cheesy.
The reworking made for some of the most gripping television I've ever seen.
I would have been very miffed if the plans to 're-imagine' Doctor Who had come to be in the mid nineties.
The post 2005 series has some of the strengths and some of the problems of the original show but it at least is a continuation of the series that began in 1963.
There is a difference between making a different adaptation of a story originating in a different media.
There have been many film adaptations of Shakespeare plays and Jane Austin novels so I don't have a problem with dropping the continuity of one series of films based on Batman for another.
So what about the new version of the Hulk or the upcoming Spiderman? These make me wary of reboots, I think they get out of hand.
There is also a remake of Conan coming out I believe this summer, I really don't know how this is going to be, Arnold's Conan The Barbarian was GREAT!
I think you should have to wait a few years before rebooting something...Sluggo said:
So what about the new version of the Hulk or the upcoming Spiderman? These make me wary of reboots, I think they get out of hand.
Star Wars Revisited Wordpress
Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress
The reboot of V was a horrible mess. You watch the entire series and the V's as they are now called havent even declared their motives for being on earth. The original mini series and the final battle was fantastic sci-fi , the weekly t.v. series was a let down and suffered badly from reused stock footage but was still enjoyable compared to the new show.
I don't have anything against remakes or re-boots as an idea. The problem arises when more new movies are remakes than original ideas.
But seriously, for as many terrrrible remakes as there are, some of my favorite movies are remakes. The Thing, the '78 Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Hitchcock's second The Man Who Knew Too Much.
And there have been some great reboots, as well. Battlestar, as has been mentioned. The new Star Trek (I don't care how many "Trekkies" hated it). Batman Begins.
Then there are remakes that just get under my skin, like Quarantine (Americans don't like foreign movies, so we have to remake [REC] a year after it comes out! Right? Right?), any of the recent horror movie remakes (Friday the 13th, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween), Clash of the Titans, Death at a Funeral (let's use the same script and the same midget actor as that British movie that came out a year ago, only let's cast a bunch of black actors and ghetto it up first!) ... the list goes on.
So, while I'm not against remakes in general, I acknowledge that the good remakes are rare, and the terrible ones I can just pretend don't exist.
ChainsawAsh said:
So, while I'm not against remakes in general, I acknowledge that the good remakes are rare, and the terrible ones I can just pretend don't exist.
skyjedi, I firmly believe that if you could apply this attitude towards most of the things you hate, you'd be a much happier dude.
The concept of the remake doesn't bother me, but the execution thereof usually does.
It's Spidermankini!
I dislike the term "reboot." It seems to me like more of a marketing term than anything creative. Dont get me started on "reimagining!"
With remakes and all being so ubiquitous, I propose a new term that encompasses them all- remakes, reboots, semi-sequals
REDO.
I haven't watched many remakes or reboots but the ones I like are Batman and Bond reboots. Both series were going into the toilet so a reboot was needed. Also the new Superman series could be fun since the last film wasn't.
And in the time of greatest despair, there shall come a savior, and he shall be known as the Son of the Suns.
I don't really have strong feelings on remakes one way or the other. They're either as good or better than the original; 3:10 To Yuma, Ocean's 11, Batman Begins, Casino Royale*, Star Trek09, True Grit - or they're bad; Planet Of The Apes, Willy Wonka.
I'm not big on the term reboot, because it seems to be nothing more than a new way to market a film, to give it some sort of gravitas beyond remake.
*Casino Royale may be the one instance where I understand the need for a more thorough description because some of the characters or situations were kept current (M, the world dynamic, calendar), while some were started over (007 and his status in MI6).
For the record; Batman Begins, Casino Royale, Star Trek09, & True Grit are all films which, to me, far surpassed earlier versions. In the case of Casino Royale, for me it far surpasses all other 007 films. That's coming from a lifetime 007 uber-nerd.
I guess my point with all of this is that better is better. Time made has nothing to do with it.
I don't really have strong feelings on remakes one way or the other. They're either as good or better than the original; 3:10 To Yuma, Ocean's 11, Batman Begins, Casino Royale*, Star Trek09, True Grit - or they're bad;Planet Of The Apes, Willy Wonka.
So, they are either good...or they are done by Tim Burton? ;)
It's my understanding that films like True Grit attempt to better present the original source - usually a novel, than previous attempts.
Movies like casino Royale and Star Trek generally attempt to bling in a new audience and in both cases they succeeded.
I saw Star Trek [09] with some friends who all have wildly different tastes and some who had never been interested on Star Trek. We all walked away satisfied and entertained.
Geez, I guess I'm the only person on this forum with enough discerning taste to hate the new Star Trek movie. ^_~
Seriously, though, I agree with what Boost and the others have said. I don't necessarily think redos are an amazing idea, but I'll certainly give them a chance and judge them on their own merits. Some of them come out quite good.
Oh, and interestingly enough, that silent Wizard of Oz movies came on TCM about a week or so ago, and I watched most of it. It was indeed weird but kinda fun too.
There is no lingerie in space…
C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.
I don't hate the new Trek movie, but I do hate the romance between Spock and Uhura, and it is certainly NOT better than TOS.