Frankly, I'm surprised there hasn't been a remake of "Silence of the Lambs" yet. It's been 20 years I think.

Shakespeare's Monkey: Good, this time plug in the nail gun. It just looks silly this way.

[geektyrant.com image 600x400]

Yeah. Because cordless nail guns don't exist. Ever. Anywhere.

Fine, maybe you didn't ask for it, but someone did! Incidentally, the person who wrote the film and wants to direct it! Weird, right? Commercial director (and second unit director for The Social Network) Noble Jones reportedly pitched a new take on Bret Easton Ellis's American Psycho (which of course already has already has its own, very fine, cinematic adaptation from Mary Harron, starring Christian Bale in one of his best roles, which hit theaters in 2000) to Lionsgate a few months ago, followed that by turning in a script within the last few weeks, and is now seeing an uptick in interest thanks to the entertainment industry's insidery tracking reports. Thanks, assistants at WME who run these things, thanks a lot.

Am I supposed to pretend that this is English?

Seeing as the story takes place in the late 80s, will the remake take place in the late 90s?

We can hear a social commentary on Nirvana, the adkins diet, and how the internet will destroy modern civilization.

/Don't just stare at it...eat it!

Raping my childhood!

SurfaceTension: Even Shakespeare has adaptations set in modern times. I can see this working.

Listen, you'll have to excuse me. I have a lunch meeting with Uncle Phil at the Four Seasons in 20 minutes.

I'd rather see them extend the series from the (vastly underrated) sequel starring William Shatner.

This would never work. Feeding cats into ATMs is common practice now, and will lack the shock value that it had at the time.

This will only work if they hand the reins over to David Cronenberg.

I'm sure this will be unpopular, but I didn't really like this movie the first time around - not that it was bad. I was a huge Brett Easton Ellis fan and had already read the book before the movie came out. Now while it wasn't my favorite book by him, I still liked it, and I felt like the film didn't do it justice. I think there were aspects of it that were done well, but it didn't really capture the book enough in my opinion. I'm not sure what a re-make will bring to the table other than making it worse. What's the point in turning an adequate film into a crapfest?

coco ebert: gopher321: Frankly, I'm surprised there hasn't been a remake of "Silence of the Lambs" yet. It's been 20 years I think.

Shut up shut up shut up!!! *looks around with paranoia*

So another version that will shy away from the violence of the book?


Rat pushed inside a cheese-filled vagina FTW

SHUT UP, MEG.

/sorry. l love mila and all, but her mouth opens and meg griffin falls out and it just kills it.

I expect this remake to be on par with the straight-to-video American Psycho 2.

SurfaceTension: Even Shakespeare has adaptations set in modern times. I can see this working.

Brett Easton Ellis is not Shakespeare.

That's like saying musicians cover songs by the Beatles, so why not Milli Vanilli?

I can see it happening. Instead of discussing business cards, they will talk about the latest phones.

"This phone is not even out now. It's a prototype given to me by Steve Jobs, himself. 5G, 120GB and titanium shell."
"Good coloring."
"That's 'Obsidian.'"

American Psycho is too recent. How about this one?



/j/k, guys

And the cast will be younger and prettier. So the youth can more readily identify with the story. Which, as noted above, will be PG13 torture-porn.

PillsHere: I'm sure this will be unpopular, but I didn't really like this movie the first time around - not that it was bad. I was a huge Brett Easton Ellis fan and had already read the book before the movie came out. Now while it wasn't my favorite book by him, I still liked it, and I felt like the film didn't do it justice. I think there were aspects of it that were done well, but it didn't really capture the book enough in my opinion. I'm not sure what a re-make will bring to the table other than making it worse. What's the point in turning an adequate film into a crapfest?

I actually came here to say some of the same. I didn't read the book before I saw the movie but after reading the book and then going back to the movie I felt like they did an OK job capturing some of his character elements, but they didn't do a good job with the overall story arc in the movie. It just felt too abbreviated. I would have to go and watch/read it again to get a breakdown of what I thought was wrong, but I felt like the movie sort of missed the point.

phrenicmonkey: And the cast will be younger and prettier. So the youth can more readily identify with the story. Which, as noted above, will be PG13 torture-porn.

Let's see, who's a good young actor who can play the lead... How about Christian Bale?

Anyone who goes to see this should have their genitals mutilated.

Arkanaut: phrenicmonkey: And the cast will be younger and prettier. So the youth can more readily identify with the story. Which, as noted above, will be PG13 torture-porn.

Let's see, who's a good young actor who can play the lead... How about Christian Bale?

Justin Bieber and he plays Dubstep instead of Genesis and has the perfect color iphone case...well until he sees the one Shia LaBeouf has.

If they remake this with the complete rat scene from the book i'll be very happy

d-fens99: American Psycho is too recent. How about this one?

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 308x412]

/j/k, guys

I WILL REPEATEDLY STAB YOU THROUGH THE INTERNET IF HOLLYWOOD EVER GETS AN INKLING TO REMAKE THE BEST MOVIE EVER MADE

darkscout: Shakespeare's Monkey: Good, this time plug in the nail gun. It just looks silly this way.

[geektyrant.com image 600x400]

Yeah. Because cordless nail guns don't exist. Ever. Anywhere.

I was going to point out that it might be a Paslode gas-operated gun(it clearly isn't).

Vacation Bible School: d-fens99: American Psycho is too recent. How about this one?

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 308x412]

/j/k, guys

I WILL REPEATEDLY STAB YOU THROUGH THE INTERNET IF HOLLYWOOD EVER GETS AN INKLING TO REMAKE THE BEST MOVIE EVER MADE

The Rock would make a great giant... right? Sure he'd need lifts.... but...c'mon he could do that eyebrow thing.

Who has the Patrick Bateman dance GIF?

Wouldn't taking it out of the 80s defeat the point of the original books/movie? I'm guessing they'll take away all the ambiguity of the ending too.

LarryDan43:

The Rock would make a great giant... right? Sure he'd need lifts.... but...c'mon he could do that eyebrow thing.

Shakespeare's Monkey 2011-12-09 10:37:38 AM Good, this time plug in the nail gun. It just looks silly this way.
==========================================================

It could be battery powered.

What got me was that, unless he disengaged the safety mechanism, he'd have to press it into her head for it to go off :)

And, as is usually the case with those stupid things, you usually have to angle it at a perfect angle and try a few times before it works.

So yeah, killing someone with a nailgun probably ain't gonna work in real life :)

jake3988: Shakespeare's Monkey 2011-12-09 10:37:38 AM Good, this time plug in the nail gun. It just looks silly this way.
==========================================================

It could be battery powered.

What got me was that, unless he disengaged the safety mechanism, he'd have to press it into her head for it to go off :)

And, as is usually the case with those stupid things, you usually have to angle it at a perfect angle and try a few times before it works.

So yeah, killing someone with a nailgun probably ain't gonna work in real life :)

But you can imagine it...

I hope whoever makes the movie is sort of self-aware and includes a theme of how remakes are a great example of empty materialism. I want to see Bateman have a monologue about how great Green Day's shiatty cover of "The Saints are Coming" is.

AeAe: SurfaceTension: Even Shakespeare has adaptations set in modern times. I can see this working.

Brett Easton Ellis is not Shakespeare.

That's like saying musicians cover songs by the Beatles, so why not Milli Vanilli?

you realize that shakespeare wrote plays that are the equivalent of episodes of King of Queens for his times, right? that his crap is far over valued, and was nothing more than pop culture for the masses?

/just because it was written long ago doesn't make it all that much better than pop culture written today.