Yet another remake Page 2

  • Page

    of 8 First / Last

  • kalel 14 Jan 2009 19:18:03 76,450 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    It was shite in a good way though. I watched it recently and it was still very entertaining, unlike a lot of my childhood loved films which are just shit now.
  • jellyhead 14 Jan 2009 19:20:23 24,346 posts
    Seen 4 weeks ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    CrispyXUK wrote:
    It's OK if they remake shit films.
    /Oceans 11
    You're not wrong!
    Are they remaking it then?

    This signature intentionally left blank.

  • Deleted user 14 January 2009 19:21:09
    :D
  • GiarcYekrub 14 Jan 2009 19:23:03 3,150 posts
    Seen 59 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Wolverine and T4 are my must see movies this year and the futher I can get away from JJ Abrams festering pile of remake shit the better
  • ThreeOutsideDown 14 Jan 2009 19:28:57 1,011 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    pistol wrote:
    Yet again, the fookin movie industry struggles to come up with an original idea. Remake, remake, remake...I'm sick of it.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7827965.stm
    you're looking at it all wrong...

    this film is probably going to cost sweet fa to remake. mr chan probably isn't going to be on a huge wage either. they'll slap in some poor unknown sap that will work for peanuts. it should be a quick shoot.

    it's difficult to see how this will fail to make a profit unless they really mess things up. i'd imagine it will be generate a fairly nice return on investment for those financing it.
  • PES_Fanboy 21 Jan 2009 17:46:15 11,522 posts
    Seen 1 month ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    He was forty-fucking-five years old when he made The Karate Kid though.

    (May be an exaggeration)
  • OnlyMe 21 Jan 2009 18:02:01 3,096 posts
    Seen 4 weeks ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    I'm impressed by the way he looks. He still look like in his early thirties! But then he looked like he was in the early teens in his twenties.
  • woodnotes 21 Jan 2009 18:04:45 4,790 posts
    Seen 36 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Wahey - it's only a matter of time until they get to remake The Running Man!
  • Jmek 5 Mar 2009 22:13:48 1,219 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Any Re-Animator fans out there. If so be prepared to be pissed off:

    http://chud.com/articles/articles/18382/1/RE-ANIMATOR-FOR-THE-TWEEN-SET/Page1.html

  • bad09 6 Mar 2009 19:13:51 4,580 posts
    Seen 31 seconds ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Jmek wrote:
    Any Re-Animator fans out there. If so be prepared to be pissed off:

    http://chud.com/articles/articles/18382/1/RE-ANIMATOR-FOR-THE-TWEEN-SET/Page1.html
    FFS! Just make a new one why rebrand it Horror 90210.

    "He’s a teenage Dr. Frankenstein in a modern-day younger world, filled with sometimes terrifying scientific intrigue."

    Why for the love of god why? Why are the movie and TV industry constantly working to alienate me these days? What the hell did I do to them?

    FFS! Just make a new one? Why rebrand it Horror 90210?
  • Rowlsten 28 Apr 2009 09:58:00 674 posts
    Seen 17 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Drop Dead Fred

    Nooooooo!!!!!!!!! Must they! :(
  • Deleted user 28 April 2009 10:00:55
    blizeH wrote:
    Still don't see a problem with remakes at all; if you don't like the idea of them, don't watch them, simple.
    It's a complete waste of the money and talent that could be put to better use funding original, exciting new films as opposed to remakes of ones that weren't that great in the first place.

    I know Hollywood is driven by money and remakes represent a cheaper initial outlay no doubt, and quicker pre-production time or something, but it's still a total waste.
  • ProfessorLesser 28 Apr 2009 10:14:27 19,007 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    It's not really a total waste, is it. The film could perfectly well be very good. Anyone damning remakes just because they're remakes is an idiot. Practically every film in existence is a 'remake' of an already existing story in one form or another anyway.
  • BillMurray 28 Apr 2009 11:37:16 5,858 posts
    Seen 17 seconds ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Not an actual remake but apparently Ridley Scott is considering a Alien prequel/reboot.

    Click.
  • PearOfAnguish 28 Apr 2009 11:42:50 6,575 posts
    Seen 33 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Rowlsten wrote:
    Drop Dead Fred

    Nooooooo!!!!!!!!! Must they! :(
    What the hell? That's a pretty weird choice for a remake.
  • CosmicFuzz 28 Apr 2009 11:43:24 18,809 posts
    Seen 6 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Hmm, if Ridley Scott is involved then I suppose it could actually be really good. I'd rather a prequel than a reboot though, the universe is great as it is imo.
  • pjmaybe 28 Apr 2009 11:44:33 70,678 posts
    Seen 4 years ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    TBH no one's ever going to do a decent Space Marines / Aliens redux, so they might as well go back and do an Alien-esque origin story or reboot.

    Ridley Scott's involvement should at least keep the likes of Paul Anderson etc away from the fucking thing.
  • PearOfAnguish 28 Apr 2009 11:47:49 6,575 posts
    Seen 33 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    BillMurray wrote:
    Not an actual remake but apparently Ridley Scott is considering a Alien prequel/reboot.

    Click.
    His face is melting.
  • Mageme 28 Apr 2009 11:48:14 1,682 posts
    Seen 8 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Rowlsten wrote:
    Drop Dead Fred

    Nooooooo!!!!!!!!! Must they! :(
    Remake needs Phoebe Cates and Rik Mayall with cameo roles. Actually, all remakes should have cameo roles for the original actors/actresses!

    Hmm... Phoebe Cates.
  • Deleted user 28 April 2009 12:00:07
    ProfessorLesser wrote:
    It's not really a total waste, is it. The film could perfectly well be very good. Anyone damning remakes just because they're remakes is an idiot. Practically every film in existence is a 'remake' of an already existing story in one form or another anyway.
    That's a good point about how many films are remakes of an existing story, but it's also deliberately argumentative as that's blatantly not what's being discussed.

    The more relevant point about how it could be great is also correct, but it still doesn't change the fact that there's some absolutely superb original scripts gagging to be filmed, and writers desperate to be given a chance, etc, and cranking out remakes happens at their expense.

    I'm not damning remakes just because they're remakes: I had a very valid point, that remakes get made at the expense of new films and scripts. I can't see how you can argue that point. Even if it's a good remake, it's still a remake and there's still a different, new film that's not been made because the money was piled into the remake instead.
  • pjmaybe 28 Apr 2009 12:01:22 70,678 posts
    Seen 4 years ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Mageme wrote:
    Rowlsten wrote:
    Drop Dead Fred

    Nooooooo!!!!!!!!! Must they! :(
    Remake needs Phoebe Cates and Rik Mayall with cameo roles. Actually, all remakes should have cameo roles for the original actors/actresses!

    Hmm... Phoebe Cates.
    still would
  • iokthemonkey 28 Apr 2009 12:03:05 4,664 posts
    Seen 11 months ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    The only good way to make remakes is to do them exactly the same, shot-for-shot as the originals.

    Except with chimpanzees playing all the roles.

    http://that-figures.blogspot.com/

  • pjmaybe 28 Apr 2009 12:03:24 70,678 posts
    Seen 4 years ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I think this is due a reboot: Reboot
  • ProfessorLesser 28 Apr 2009 12:04:44 19,007 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    MrED209 wrote:
    I'm not damning remakes just because they're remakes: I had a very valid point, that remakes get made at the expense of new films and scripts. I can't see how you can argue that point. Even if it's a good remake, it's still a remake and there's still a different, new film that's not been made because the money was piled into the remake instead.
    Fair enough, but this is just an assumption. It might seem like sense, but you don't actually know it's true.

    Also: so what? If it's a good film (bearing in mind that a good remake can easily fill the criteria of 'different and new') then it was a good idea, regardless of where the script came from.
  • CosmicFuzz 28 Apr 2009 12:08:02 18,809 posts
    Seen 6 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    pjmaybe wrote:
    I think this is due a reboot: Reboot
    WARNING! INCOMING GAME!
  • Deleted user 28 April 2009 12:08:20
    Yeah but you're still looking at it purely from a "will I be entertained in the short term?" point of view as opposed to the "will the film industry be in any way benefitted by this film in the long term?" point of view, which is a clumsy way of trying to say that new films from new scripts have a chance to do new things and break new ground, whereas remakes, by and large, won't.

    I mean I know this is broad brush strokes but I'd prefer to see a really cool new film than one in which I know full well what's going to happen, even if it's all shiny and new and slightly updated.
  • PearOfAnguish 28 Apr 2009 12:08:59 6,575 posts
    Seen 33 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    pjmaybe wrote:
    still would
    Oh yes

    nsfw unless you work in a sex shop
  • Page

    of 8 First / Last

Log in or register to reply