If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(io9)   Why movie reboots fail. Reason number 8 is obvioOHGODTHEBEES GETTHEMOFFME   (io9.com) divider line 193
    More: Amusing, movie franchises, Japanese films, Anal-oral sex, giant monsters, Roland Emmerich, Ray Harryhausen, underworlds, Sam Raimi  
•       •       •

9253 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 03 Apr 2013 at 11:42 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



193 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-04-03 10:06:49 AM
They're all cynical cash grabs based on name recognition and the studio suits' idea that despite movies being more easily accessible than ever, no one would watch a movie prior to 1995 so they all have to be remade?
 
2013-04-03 10:12:25 AM
"They mock you for liking the original" should be on there somewhere.

That's mostly movies rebooting TV shows, but it should still be on there.
 
2013-04-03 10:15:52 AM
Rebooting reboots is the new big thing
 
2013-04-03 10:19:54 AM

Mugato: They're all cynical cash grabs based on name recognition and the studio suits' idea that despite movies being more easily accessible than ever, no one would watch a movie prior to 1995 so they all have to be remade?


Pretty much. The only time I've seen a reboot work is when the previous movies in the franchise either drug it straight to the ground (Spider-Man franchise vs. new one), or the original one really did suck (Judge Dredd vs. Dredd).

Planet of the Apes series just went crazy (the original one is still great, but all the sequels are pretty trashy), and the Tim Burton one pretty much guaranteed that any reboot would be better (but Rise was still awesome).

I really can't think of many reboots I actually liked beyond Dredd, Rise of the PotA, and Amazing Spider-Man.
 
2013-04-03 10:23:51 AM
I don't know how I feel about lumping comic book reboots in these lists.
 
2013-04-03 10:28:23 AM
Ohh wait, I also enjoyed the Star Trek reboot. Suck it, haters.
 
2013-04-03 10:28:29 AM

AnotherBluesStringer: I don't know how I feel about lumping comic book reboots in these lists.


I should probably clarify that. Most of the "reboots" aren't a reboot of the original movie, per se, but of the origin story of the character. Sure, it reboots the franchise from a film point of view, but I don't really think any of the comic movies were taking on a previous movie in the reboots, just providing a different take on the origin story. I feel like most of the other examples on this list and others like it draw directly from the film it was rebooting. I just don't think that's the case with the comic movies.
 
2013-04-03 10:30:36 AM

scottydoesntknow: really can't think of many reboots I actually liked beyond Dredd, Rise of the PotA, and Amazing Spider-Man.


It's a short list. Batman Begins, um...I think Robocop might be okay just because it has a good cast but I don't expect it to be as hardcore as the original. Nor as funny.

Then there's the standard The Thing, the Fly and Dawn of the Dead but they were so far removed from the originals they're almost just their own movies.

And if you want to get pedantic The Wizard of Oz and The Ten Commandments were remakes.
 
2013-04-03 10:35:36 AM
Why is the author talking about Watchmen? That was an adaptation from another medium not a reboot. Regarding the Spider-Man films Spider-Man 2 > Spider-Man > The Amazing Spider-Man > Spider-Man 3.
 
2013-04-03 10:38:48 AM
(Cinches onion tightly on belt) People these days can't be bothered to create, they can only remake.  Hollywood reboots a franchise rather than search for the next franchise, it's safe, cheap and they've taught people this is what they want.  Yet, when you look at the big movers on television, The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, Mad Men, they are breaking new ground and people are eating it up.  Is this what we have to look forward at the theater in 20 years, a Game of the Throne reboot and Holo 3D Don Drapers?
 
2013-04-03 10:39:26 AM

Sybarite: Why is the author talking about Watchmen? That was an adaptation from another medium not a reboot. Regarding the Spider-Man films Spider-Man 2 > Spider-Man > The Amazing Spider-Man > Spider-Man 3.


I'd switch Spider-Man with the Amazing Spider-Man, the first one just felt really gimmicky to me. Two was by far the best though. It had the best villian out of all of them. You felt sympathy for him as he wasn't in control of himself and wasn't trying to rule humanity or anything, he just wanted to finish his damn experiment for his dead wife.
 
2013-04-03 11:06:56 AM
was Rise of the Planet of the Apes technically a reboot?  I thought they said it was a prequel... the way the Ape revolution played out in the original timeline until Cornelius and Zira went back in time and changed it up?
 
2013-04-03 11:12:12 AM

AnotherBluesStringer: AnotherBluesStringer: I don't know how I feel about lumping comic book reboots in these lists.

I should probably clarify that. Most of the "reboots" aren't a reboot of the original movie, per se, but of the origin story of the character. Sure, it reboots the franchise from a film point of view, but I don't really think any of the comic movies were taking on a previous movie in the reboots, just providing a different take on the origin story. I feel like most of the other examples on this list and others like it draw directly from the film it was rebooting. I just don't think that's the case with the comic movies.


Yeah, I was thinking the same thing.  I guess their claim that Superman Returns was trying to rip off the Christopher Reeve movies has merit (I only watched it when it came out.  Don't remember enough to validate the claim), but The Amazing Spider-Man was not a reboot of the Toby Maguire movies.
 
2013-04-03 11:24:49 AM
Am I the only one that enjoyed the Star Trek reboot?
 
2013-04-03 11:27:59 AM

Ennuipoet: (Cinches onion tightly on belt) People these days can't be bothered to create, they can only remake.  Hollywood reboots a franchise rather than search for the next franchise, it's safe, cheap and they've taught people this is what they want.  Yet, when you look at the big movers on television, The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, Mad Men, they are breaking new ground and people are eating it up.  Is this what we have to look forward at the theater in 20 years, a Game of the Throne reboot and Holo 3D Don Drapers?


*raises hand quietly* How much for the Holo 3D Don Draper?
 
2013-04-03 11:31:52 AM

SurfaceTension: Am I the only one that enjoyed the Star Trek reboot?


No. Can't wait for the next one.
 
2013-04-03 11:41:42 AM

SurfaceTension: Am I the only one that enjoyed the Star Trek reboot?


Nope. I can't wait for the next one. Of course I am not a huge Trekkie, so not sure how much my opinion counts.
 
2013-04-03 11:45:31 AM

SurfaceTension: Am I the only one that enjoyed the Star Trek reboot?


Mark me down for nope, it was a Trek movie made not for Trekkers but for general audience. It's why your hard core rabid fans rail on it.

Also mark me down for loving the Halloween remakes. I thought Rob did an excellent job with those.
 
2013-04-03 11:52:43 AM

scottydoesntknow: I really can't think of many reboots I actually liked beyond Dredd, Rise of the PotA, and Amazing Spider-Man


Gone in 60 seconds?  Though I personally prefer the original.
 
2013-04-03 11:54:17 AM
Nicolas Cage's The Wicker Man has to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my entire life. I'd sooner swallow a whole bottle of ipecac than watch that filthy piece of trash again.
 
2013-04-03 11:56:17 AM
Hmm, that was actually a very well-thought out and reasoned article, good link, subby!

Batman Begins was simply amazing, and 2009 Star Trek was incredibly awesome, but they weren't reboots of movies, they were reboots of franchises, totally different things.
 
2013-04-03 11:56:22 AM

Saiga410: scottydoesntknow: I really can't think of many reboots I actually liked beyond Dredd, Rise of the PotA, and Amazing Spider-Man

Gone in 60 seconds?  Though I personally prefer the original.


Gone in 60 Seconds had some really nice cars (ohhh, Eleanor), but beyond that it was pretty sub-par. I prefered the original.
 
2013-04-03 11:57:37 AM

Serious Black: Nicolas Cage's The Wicker Man has to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my entire life.


Depends on why your expectations.

If you're looking for an atmospheric, chilling horror/thriller with quality acting and a tight script you're out of luck.


If you want to see a guy in a bear suit sucker punching women, The Wicker Man will not disappoint.
 
2013-04-03 11:59:02 AM

Saiga410: scottydoesntknow: I really can't think of many reboots I actually liked beyond Dredd, Rise of the PotA, and Amazing Spider-Man

Gone in 60 seconds?  Though I personally prefer the original.


Oh good choice, Gone is one of my favourites, never seen the original.

I will say the 2000 Ocean's Eleven was miles better than the original. Have you ever seen the original? Sheesh, it's like they didn't even try to make a good movie.
 
2013-04-03 11:59:19 AM

Snapper Carr: If you want to see a guy in a bear suit sucker punching women, The Wicker Man will not disappoint.


See I went in expecting comedy and I left the theater satisfied
 
2013-04-03 11:59:41 AM

scottydoesntknow: I really can't think of many reboots I actually liked beyond Dredd, Rise of the PotA, and Amazing Spider-Man.


Ocean's Eleven was a very enjoyable watch. So was Ocean's Twelve for that matter. Ocean's Thirteen...meh.
 
2013-04-03 12:00:03 PM

scottydoesntknow: Mugato: They're all cynical cash grabs based on name recognition and the studio suits' idea that despite movies being more easily accessible than ever, no one would watch a movie prior to 1995 so they all have to be remade?

Pretty much. The only time I've seen a reboot work is when the previous movies in the franchise either drug it straight to the ground (Spider-Man franchise vs. new one), or the original one really did suck (Judge Dredd vs. Dredd).

Planet of the Apes series just went crazy (the original one is still great, but all the sequels are pretty trashy), and the Tim Burton one pretty much guaranteed that any reboot would be better (but Rise was still awesome).

I really can't think of many reboots I actually liked beyond Dredd, Rise of the PotA, and Amazing Spider-Man.


The Dark Knight trilogy was pretty good.
 
2013-04-03 12:00:21 PM

sure haven't: I will say the 2000 Ocean's Eleven was miles better than the original. Have you ever seen the original? Sheesh, it's like they didn't even try to make a good movie.


Ooooh good call! That was just pure awesome, one of those movies I could watch any time.

Too bad they farked it all up with Ocean's Twelve, god that was terrible. At least 13 got it somewhat back on track.
 
2013-04-03 12:00:37 PM

sure haven't: I will say the 2000 Ocean's Eleven was miles better than the original. Have you ever seen the original? Sheesh, it's like they didn't even try to make a good movie.


*shakes tiny fist*

Agreed. Tried to watch the original Ocean's Eleven once and was bored out of my mind. Glad they did the reboot.
 
2013-04-03 12:00:42 PM

MyKingdomForYourHorse: SurfaceTension: Am I the only one that enjoyed the Star Trek reboot?

Mark me down for nope, it was a Trek movie made not for Trekkers but for general audience. It's why your hard core rabid fans rail on it.

Also mark me down for loving the Halloween remakes. I thought Rob did an excellent job with those.


I'm a pretty big Trekkie, and I loved it. I thought it was fun and a creative way to have the characters we know and love experience new adventures.

See also: Zachary Quinto. Part of me is sort of hoping that the one that's coming out this year devolves into a Quinto/Cumberbatch slashfic on screen.

/NTTAWWT
 
2013-04-03 12:02:33 PM

Serious Black: Nicolas Cage's The Wicker Man has to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my entire life. I'd sooner swallow a whole bottle of ipecac than watch that filthy piece of trash again.


Best comedy of the decade. Hopefully it led people to finding the original; a great suspenseful horror movie.
 
2013-04-03 12:04:03 PM

HeartBurnKid: The Dark Knight trilogy was pretty good.


Yea, I think I forgot about that one because the prior franchise was just abysmal by the end, the "I want to forget they even made those" kind of abysmal.
 
2013-04-03 12:04:25 PM

sure haven't: will say the 2000 Ocean's Eleven was miles better than the original. Have you ever seen the original? Sheesh, it's like they didn't even try to make a good movie.


The Rat Pack? Yeah, they were just dicking around on that movie. They would do one take of a scene and walk off for a steam. One of the funnier moments in the biopic, they were reading the script and Dino said, "Forget the movie. Let's pull the job".
 
2013-04-03 12:04:27 PM

SurfaceTension: Tried to watch the original Ocean's Eleven once and was bored out of my mind. Glad they did the reboot.


I kept waiting for the big reveal, the big twist... and all I saw were neon footprints or some sh*t lol
 
2013-04-03 12:05:18 PM

scottydoesntknow: Too bad they farked it all up with Ocean's Twelve, god that was terrible. At least 13 got it somewhat back on track.


Yeah 12 was powerful weak. 13 did get it back on track like you said. I haven't heard anything about a 14, although it's scary that the first one was... 13 years ago. F*ck me time goes fast.
 
2013-04-03 12:08:01 PM

scottydoesntknow: HeartBurnKid: The Dark Knight trilogy was pretty good.

Yea, I think I forgot about that one because the prior franchise was just abysmal by the end, the "I want to forget they even made those" kind of abysmal.


When I was young, I liked the original Batman movie with Keaton and Nicholson. Went back to watch it recently and couldn't believe how bad a movie it really is. Wow!

Dark Knight on the other hand, yeah, I will be watching all the movies from now on.
 
2013-04-03 12:08:10 PM

MyKingdomForYourHorse: SurfaceTension: Am I the only one that enjoyed the Star Trek reboot?

Mark me down for nope, it was a Trek movie made not for Trekkers but for general audience. It's why your hard core rabid fans rail on it.

Also mark me down for loving the Halloween remakes. I thought Rob did an excellent job with those.


I would not call myself a hardcore Trekkie (but I am a fan of the franchise), I rather enjoyed the 2009 Star Trek movie. It was an enjoyable couple of hours. Sure there were some plot holes, but who really cares? It was money well spent on good entertainment. That is all I am looking for from any movie.
 
2013-04-03 12:08:28 PM

Snapper Carr: Serious Black: Nicolas Cage's The Wicker Man has to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my entire life.

Depends on why your expectations.

If you're looking for an atmospheric, chilling horror/thriller with quality acting and a tight script you're out of luck.


If you want to see a guy in a bear suit sucker punching women, The Wicker Man will not disappoint.


Glad to see someone gets it. The first one was almost plausible you could have some remote island off the coast of england in the 60s regressing to pagan cults. The remake had some weird bee cult off the pacific coast of america where they apparently have cell phone jammers. It lacks any historical context. And yet, we have nic cage raving and sucker punching chicks. It's so gloriously laughable I really did enjoy it, even though it played out like a hobo's silent hill.
 
2013-04-03 12:09:24 PM
TFA's commentfight is so dumb that it's fun.
 
2013-04-03 12:09:34 PM
I am currently seeking investors for my reboot of Debbie Does Dallas.  My script is WAAAAY better than the original.
 
2013-04-03 12:09:44 PM

sure haven't: scottydoesntknow: Too bad they farked it all up with Ocean's Twelve, god that was terrible. At least 13 got it somewhat back on track.

Yeah 12 was powerful weak. 13 did get it back on track like you said. I haven't heard anything about a 14, although it's scary that the first one was... 13 years ago. F*ck me time goes fast.


My only issue with 14 now (and granted they have zero control over it) is losing Bernie Mac. Sure he didn't play a crucial role like Clooney, Pitt, or Damon, but you lose some of the cool factor by not having him.

/RIP Mac
 
2013-04-03 12:10:54 PM

GalFriday: I am currently seeking investors for my reboot of Debbie Does Dallas.  My script is WAAAAY better than the original.


Take the Nolan route and make it grittier and more realistic. Debbie does Detroit. It would almost be a horror movie.
 
2013-04-03 12:12:12 PM

sure haven't: scottydoesntknow: Too bad they farked it all up with Ocean's Twelve, god that was terrible. At least 13 got it somewhat back on track.

Yeah 12 was powerful weak. 13 did get it back on track like you said. I haven't heard anything about a 14, although it's scary that the first one was... 13 years ago. F*ck me time goes fast.


Interesting. My experience was just the opposite. I really liked 12. Almost more than 11. The only thing is I think it's a little confusing because basically everything they're doing in Europe is nothing more than the "elaborate show" that LeMarque says they have to put on for Toulour.

Ocean's 13 on the other hand, to me that's not a terrible watch, but not one I'm going out of my way to see again.

Any future Ocean's movie is going to suffer from not having Bernie Mac around.
 
2013-04-03 12:12:19 PM

scottydoesntknow: My only issue with 14 now (and granted they have zero control over it) is losing Bernie Mac. Sure he didn't play a crucial role like Clooney, Pitt, or Damon, but you lose some of the cool factor by not having him.


They're really doing a 14? Is it going to be 2 hours of Clooney and Pitt literally beating a dead horse?
 
2013-04-03 12:13:14 PM
I thought the new Conan movie was better than the original. Not saying the first one was bad, but it's unadulterated asskickery. It's prettier now than 30 years ago.
 
2013-04-03 12:15:59 PM

SurfaceTension: My experience was just the opposite. I really liked 12


The only thing I remember about 12 was Julia Roberts playing someone pretending to be Julia Roberts. I think my eyes just glazed over at that point.
 
2013-04-03 12:19:10 PM
ReBOOTS. I misread that as robots.

What's the line between remake and reboot? If it's been 50 years it's a remake, not a reboot. If it's been five years (Hulk) it's a reboot, not a remake.
 
2013-04-03 12:19:26 PM

SurfaceTension: Interesting. My experience was just the opposite. I really liked 12. Almost more than 11. The only thing is I think it's a little confusing because basically everything they're doing in Europe is nothing more than the "elaborate show" that LeMarque says they have to put on for Toulour.


5 words that completely took me out of the movie and caused me to lose all interest.

Julia Roberts playing Julia Roberts
 
2013-04-03 12:21:09 PM

Mugato: They're really doing a 14? Is it going to be 2 hours of Clooney and Pitt literally beating a dead horse?


Nope, this one the heist will be staged at the Warner Bros lot, and will feature the fortunes of a movie executive.

They're going for that whole Momento, Inception crowd.
 
2013-04-03 12:21:21 PM
The new Clash of the Titans was a succes, thanks to the drooling masses of idiots that bought tickets and called it a "good" movie (some still do).

I'll just pick on this one for now.
Liam Neeson sleepwalked through his role.
The movie relied much too heavily on action sequences, which made them feel stale and boring already about half way through.  Let's just examine the "medusa" fight in both old and new films.  Compare the original scene to the new one.
In the original there is an actual feeling of suspense.  It actually puts you on the edge of your seat.  It makes the scene interesting to watch.  The new medusa scene is just ACTION/FIGHT/BLOOD/SOUND/EFFECTS.  For the next battle...repeat formula.  That's just the first example that comes to mind.  I could go on and on.
And in spite of being a horrible movie, somehow the public spent enough of their money on it to warrant a sequel.  jackiechanwtf.jpg
 
2013-04-03 12:23:45 PM
A Goonies reboot with modern fat lazy iPhone crazed kids would be hillariously bad.

Writter made a good point though, parents never let their kids out of eye sight these days.

In my day....

/lawn off it.
 
2013-04-03 12:29:53 PM

ExpressPork: The new Clash of the Titans was a succes, thanks to the drooling masses of idiots that bought tickets and called it a "good" movie (some still do).

I'll just pick on this one for now.
Liam Neeson sleepwalked through his role.
The movie relied much too heavily on action sequences, which made them feel stale and boring already about half way through.  Let's just examine the "medusa" fight in both old and new films.  Compare the original scene to the new one.
In the original there is an actual feeling of suspense.  It actually puts you on the edge of your seat.  It makes the scene interesting to watch.  The new medusa scene is just ACTION/FIGHT/BLOOD/SOUND/EFFECTS.  For the next battle...repeat formula.  That's just the first example that comes to mind.  I could go on and on.
And in spite of being a horrible movie, somehow the public spent enough of their money on it to warrant a sequel.  jackiechanwtf.jpg


And ... Clash of the Titans has Sam "The Black Hole of Acting" Worthington in the lead.
 
2013-04-03 12:34:49 PM

scottydoesntknow: SurfaceTension: Interesting. My experience was just the opposite. I really liked 12. Almost more than 11. The only thing is I think it's a little confusing because basically everything they're doing in Europe is nothing more than the "elaborate show" that LeMarque says they have to put on for Toulour.

5 words that completely took me out of the movie and caused me to lose all interest.

Julia Roberts playing Julia Roberts


This post american dad approved..
 
2013-04-03 12:34:59 PM
Red Dawnmade sense in the '80s

No it didn't.  I mean, it made sense as to why it was made then , but no, that movie never made any sense.
 
2013-04-03 12:35:58 PM

Sybarite: Why is the author talking about Watchmen? That was an adaptation from another medium not a reboot.


i think the author was just trying to bolster the overal point with one of the best examples. watchmen is a great example of a work that only makes sense in a certain time and place.
 
2013-04-03 12:38:15 PM

Somaticasual: This post american dad approved..


Hehehe I was trying to find that picture of them discussing it. That was an awesome episode too.
 
2013-04-03 12:39:09 PM

SurfaceTension: Am I the only one that enjoyed the Star Trek reboot?


No
 
2013-04-03 12:40:43 PM

Snapper Carr: If you want to see a guy in a bear suit sucker punching women, The Wicker Man will not disappoint.


Who doesn't want to see that?
 
2013-04-03 12:40:52 PM
Two things:

As a Star Trek fan, I thought the reboot was great.

I hate Julia Roberts.  She can barely act and she is disturbing to look at.
 
2013-04-03 12:42:02 PM

Valacirca: Red Dawnmade sense in the '80s

No it didn't.  I mean, it made sense as to why it was made then , but no, that movie never made any sense.


The remake of that one quite easily could have killed or stalled the career of Chris Hemsworth, he should thank his lucky stars that its release was delayed. The movie was that bad.
 
2013-04-03 12:45:01 PM
They fail with me because either:

A) I liked the original and don't need to see it again -or-
B) I didn't care for it the first time around
 
2013-04-03 12:46:49 PM

Valacirca: Red Dawnmade sense in the '80s

No it didn't.  I mean, it made sense as to why it was made then , but no, that movie never made any sense.


And it sucked in the '80s too.
 
2013-04-03 12:47:03 PM

Ennuipoet: (Cinches onion tightly on belt) People these days can't be bothered to create, they can only remake.  Hollywood reboots a franchise rather than search for the next franchise, it's safe, cheap and they've taught people this is what they want.  Yet, when you look at the big movers on television, The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, Mad Men, they are breaking new ground and people are eating it up.  Is this what we have to look forward at the theater in 20 years, a Game of the Throne reboot and Holo 3D Don Drapers?


That penis is going to be mighty impressive in Holo 3D.

"It's comin' right for us!"

southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com
 
2013-04-03 12:58:39 PM
1) You Have Less Talent than the Original Cast and Crew

Um, not if the original sucked, or was so lo budget that they couldn't afford big talent. Wrong answer, try again.

Wow, 1 line item in, and your blog already sucks.
 
2013-04-03 12:58:44 PM
The Evil Dead remake/reboot looks all kinds of awesome.
 
2013-04-03 12:59:06 PM

Jack's Smirking Revenge: Snapper Carr: If you want to see a guy in a bear suit sucker punching women, The Wicker Man will not disappoint.

Who doesn't want to see that?


I am going to have to search out this movie.
 
2013-04-03 01:02:55 PM

Mikey1969: 1) You Have Less Talent than the Original Cast and Crew

Um, not if the original sucked, or was so lo budget that they couldn't afford big talent. Wrong answer, try again.

Wow, 1 line item in, and your blog already sucks.


You do realize it says "8 Reasons" and not one. What might apply to some reboots obviously won't apply to others.

/Can't believe I'm defending a Gawker link, but the article wasn't half bad
 
2013-04-03 01:03:26 PM
I'm waiting for the Prometheus reboot.

I hated the first one.
 
2013-04-03 01:06:13 PM

Lee's_Austin: The Evil Dead remake/reboot looks all kinds of awesome.


I have a feeling they're going to lighten up on the tree rape scene.
/regardless, still can't wait to see it in theaters
 
2013-04-03 01:10:39 PM
Total Recall rocked.


I have no idea why they had to call it Total Recall! They could have just had his memories triggered by something else and made a whole new movie.

They could have called it "Borne Identity 2250" because it was closer to the Borne Identity movie then it was to Total Recall. And it had this:

img708.imageshack.us

How did this not make billions and billions of dollars?!
 
2013-04-03 01:12:27 PM

scottydoesntknow: Mikey1969: 1) You Have Less Talent than the Original Cast and Crew

Um, not if the original sucked, or was so lo budget that they couldn't afford big talent. Wrong answer, try again.

Wow, 1 line item in, and your blog already sucks.

You do realize it says "8 Reasons" and not one. What might apply to some reboots obviously won't apply to others.

/Can't believe I'm defending a Gawker link, but the article wasn't half bad


Yeah, but it makes it sound like they are ALL 1/8th of why it doesn't work. '8 Things That Can Cause a Reboot to Fail' makes it sound like it can be any combination of the 8, but '8 Reasons Movie Reboots Fail', with no qualifiers makes it sound like all reboots fail, and it's all set in stone. That's what bothers me about articles like this. I guess it's more in line with the general complaint about the lack of quality in journalism today, and Gawker is a prime example of that, so I guess you're right. Considering what they have to work with, this is pretty good.

/Do I sound bitter?
//I FEEL bitter
 
2013-04-03 01:17:12 PM

Mikey1969: Yeah, but it makes it sound like they are ALL 1/8th of why it doesn't work. '8 Things That Can Cause a Reboot to Fail' makes it sound like it can be any combination of the 8, but '8 Reasons Movie Reboots Fail', with no qualifiers makes it sound like all reboots fail, and it's all set in stone. That's what bothers me about articles like this. I guess it's more in line with the general complaint about the lack of quality in journalism today, and Gawker is a prime example of that, so I guess you're right. Considering what they have to work with, this is pretty good.

/Do I sound bitter?
//I FEEL bitter



You're that picky with the English language? How do you even log onto this website?! My god your stomach must be riddled with ulsters and you must be having chest pains. The blood shooting from your eyes should have been the first clue something was bad wrong.


And one more picture:
img825.imageshack.us

'cause I can
 
2013-04-03 01:18:07 PM

Mikey1969: 1) You Have Less Talent than the Original Cast and Crew

Um, not if the original sucked, or was so lo budget that they couldn't afford big talent. Wrong answer, try again.

Wow, 1 line item in, and your blog already sucks.


i'd say the best example of the point the author was making is The Thing. the original had great actors, effects and an established director. the new one had relative unknown actors, used CGI and was directed by a complete unknown. the contrast in quality between them is stark, although they are essentially the same movie in terms of the plot
 
2013-04-03 01:18:33 PM
5) The Original Was a Product of Its Time

I DO agree with this one. I've used this exact line, and I used The Goonies as my example when discussing the Red Dawn reboot. Author may be a Farker, and if so, he ripped me off 100%. Some movies fit where they fit due to the culture at the time(Also, the Cold War aspect of Red Dawn made it more believable than what I'm hearing about the reboot), and they can't really fit in a newer climate.

Scary how close this is to exactly the argument I used.
 
2013-04-03 01:20:09 PM

Mikey1969: scottydoesntknow: Mikey1969: 1) You Have Less Talent than the Original Cast and Crew

Um, not if the original sucked, or was so lo budget that they couldn't afford big talent. Wrong answer, try again.

Wow, 1 line item in, and your blog already sucks.

You do realize it says "8 Reasons" and not one. What might apply to some reboots obviously won't apply to others.

/Can't believe I'm defending a Gawker link, but the article wasn't half bad

Yeah, but it makes it sound like they are ALL 1/8th of why it doesn't work. '8 Things That Can Cause a Reboot to Fail' makes it sound like it can be any combination of the 8, but '8 Reasons Movie Reboots Fail', with no qualifiers makes it sound like all reboots fail, and it's all set in stone. That's what bothers me about articles like this. I guess it's more in line with the general complaint about the lack of quality in journalism today, and Gawker is a prime example of that, so I guess you're right. Considering what they have to work with, this is pretty good.

/Do I sound bitter?
//I FEEL bitter


You're reading too much into the title. It's '8 Reasons Movie Reboots Fail', not '8 Reasons Movie Reboots Always And Will Forever Fail'.  In other words, these are 8 reasons that movie reboots have been observed to have failed in the past.  I mean, if I made a list of '10 Bizarre Penis Shapes Found In Nature', I am not implying that all animals have all 10 penis shapes.

/man, that duck penis thread really burrowed into my brain
 
2013-04-03 01:21:13 PM

tlchwi02: i'd say the best example of the point the author was making is The Thing. the original had great actors, effects and an established director. the new one had relative unknown actors, used CGI and was directed by a complete unknown. the contrast in quality between them is stark, although they are essentially the same movie in terms of the plot


String me up, tar and feather me if you will...but I liked the what was on technicality a prequel
 
2013-04-03 01:25:32 PM

ExpressPork: The new Clash of the Titans was a succes, thanks to the drooling masses of idiots that bought tickets and called it a "good" movie (some still do).

I'll just pick on this one for now.
Liam Neeson sleepwalked through his role.
The movie relied much too heavily on action sequences, which made them feel stale and boring already about half way through.  Let's just examine the "medusa" fight in both old and new films.  Compare the original scene to the new one.
In the original there is an actual feeling of suspense.  It actually puts you on the edge of your seat.  It makes the scene interesting to watch.  The new medusa scene is just ACTION/FIGHT/BLOOD/SOUND/EFFECTS.  For the next battle...repeat formula.  That's just the first example that comes to mind.  I could go on and on.
And in spite of being a horrible movie, somehow the public spent enough of their money on it to warrant a sequel.  jackiechanwtf.jpg


The medusa was pretty bad-ass though. She was pretty damned hot, which seems to be a new trend with medusi... The rest of the movie blew goats.

I don't know why they used Total Recall as an example. I watched the original first run in the theater, and have grown up with it. It sucked, it was a cartoon-y mess. There, I said it. I haven't read the story in about 10 years, but it seemed like the new version stayed closer to the story than Arnold's version. Planet of the Apes? I was OK with it, it wasn't that bad. The original still holds its ground, but I think there are other reasons that people called it a "failure", and most of those are because the people heard from someone else that it was a failure.

I'm interested in the remake of Evil Dead, but originally I wanted absolutely nothing to do with it. What I've heard though,, is that Sam Raimi signed off on it and gave it his stamp of approval. If the original filmmaker is willing to do something like that, then I'll give it a go...
 
2013-04-03 01:26:47 PM

tlchwi02: Mikey1969: 1) You Have Less Talent than the Original Cast and Crew

Um, not if the original sucked, or was so lo budget that they couldn't afford big talent. Wrong answer, try again.

Wow, 1 line item in, and your blog already sucks.

i'd say the best example of the point the author was making is The Thing. the original had great actors, effects and an established director. the new one had relative unknown actors, used CGI and was directed by a complete unknown. the contrast in quality between them is stark, although they are essentially the same movie in terms of the plot


You do realize that John Carpenter's The Thing is a remake itself, right?  There was an original,  The Thing From Another World.  And Carpenter's version is much better.
 
2013-04-03 01:28:39 PM

PanicMan: Two things:

As a Star Trek fan, I thought the reboot was great.

I hate Julia Roberts.  She can barely act and she is disturbing to look at.


Agreed on both counts. I think she is disturbing to look at because her mouth appears to be upside down.
 
2013-04-03 01:30:44 PM

MyKingdomForYourHorse: String me up, tar and feather me if you will...but I liked the what was on technicality a prequel


see, i thought that not only was it quite bad on its own right (it was barely scary, it slavishly attempted to replicate the original without understanding any of the parts that made that movie brilliant, the cgi was a terrific letdown from the *still* creepy monsters of the first and the acting was nowhere near as awesome as keith david and kurt russel with a sprinkle of insane wilford brimley) but it managed to damage the original by taking that great element of the norwegian campsite and cold open to the movie and remove the mystery. the opening sequence of the norwegians randomly showing up trying to murder a dog, then later finding the wrecked camp, with the suicides, the burnt out and wrecked structures and the grainy video tape the only human record. imagining how the swedes dug the thing up and it killed them all heightens the tension, but knowing how it actually went deflates it
 
2013-04-03 01:32:44 PM

serial_crusher: was Rise of the Planet of the Apes technically a reboot?  I thought they said it was a prequel... the way the Ape revolution played out in the original timeline until Cornelius and Zira went back in time and changed it up?


Well, that's a good question. If we look at POTA as the original reboot, then this is a prequel to that. If you throw away POTA, thenTHIS is the reboot to the series itself, since it is basically starting the series over, just taking up roughly what the original 4th film covered... In other words, it's a sequel to a reboot while being a prequel to the storyline at the same time as it is a remake of a previous movie and a reboot of a previous series.
 
2013-04-03 01:33:20 PM

tlchwi02: Mikey1969: 1) You Have Less Talent than the Original Cast and Crew

Um, not if the original sucked, or was so lo budget that they couldn't afford big talent. Wrong answer, try again.

Wow, 1 line item in, and your blog already sucks.

i'd say the best example of the point the author was making is The Thing. the original had great actors, effects and an established director. the new one had relative unknown actors, used CGI and was directed by a complete unknown. the contrast in quality between them is stark, although they are essentially the same movie in terms of the plot



LMAO!
 
2013-04-03 01:33:34 PM

LeroyBourne: /regardless, still can't wait to see it in theaters


Agreed.  Although, I have to amend my statement.  According to the Wiki page, this is a stand-alone sequel and not a reboot/remake.
 
2013-04-03 01:34:31 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Mikey1969: Yeah, but it makes it sound like they are ALL 1/8th of why it doesn't work. '8 Things That Can Cause a Reboot to Fail' makes it sound like it can be any combination of the 8, but '8 Reasons Movie Reboots Fail', with no qualifiers makes it sound like all reboots fail, and it's all set in stone. That's what bothers me about articles like this. I guess it's more in line with the general complaint about the lack of quality in journalism today, and Gawker is a prime example of that, so I guess you're right. Considering what they have to work with, this is pretty good.

/Do I sound bitter?
//I FEEL bitter


You're that picky with the English language? How do you even log onto this website?! My god your stomach must be riddled with ulsters and you must be having chest pains. The blood shooting from your eyes should have been the first clue something was bad wrong.


And one more picture:
[img825.imageshack.us image 800x1265]

'cause I can


The Irish province?  :-)
 
2013-04-03 01:34:34 PM
The Stealth Hippopotamus:
[img825.imageshack.us image 800x1265]

'cause I can


t1.gstatic.com

you know, i should write parts for them in my screenplay - 'scarlett johannson and natalie portman make out'
 
2013-04-03 01:35:11 PM

HeartBurnKid: /man, that duck penis thread really burrowed into my brain


Counter-clockwise?
 
2013-04-03 01:36:10 PM

tlchwi02: Mikey1969: 1) You Have Less Talent than the Original Cast and Crew

Um, not if the original sucked, or was so lo budget that they couldn't afford big talent. Wrong answer, try again.

Wow, 1 line item in, and your blog already sucks.

i'd say the best example of the point the author was making is The Thing. the original had great actors, effects and an established director. the new one had relative unknown actors, used CGI and was directed by a complete unknown. the contrast in quality between them is stark, although they are essentially the same movie in terms of the plot


I tried to watch the new one, but it lost me... Too much of a scene-by-scene remake, it seemed, and nothing new to bring to the table.
 
2013-04-03 01:37:33 PM

tlchwi02: see, i thought that not only was it quite bad on its own right (it was barely scary, it slavishly attempted to replicate the original without understanding any of the parts that made that movie brilliant, the cgi was a terrific letdown from the *still* creepy monsters of the first and the acting was nowhere near as awesome as keith david and kurt russel with a sprinkle of insane wilford brimley) but it managed to damage the original by taking that great element of the norwegian campsite and cold open to the movie and remove the mystery. the opening sequence of the norwegians randomly showing up trying to murder a dog, then later finding the wrecked camp, with the suicides, the burnt out and wrecked structures and the grainy video tape the only human record. imagining how the swedes dug the thing up and it killed them all heightens the tension, but knowing how it actually went deflates it


Fair enough argument, I will say in its defense that even though we got a mostly complete explanation of the camp we did not however get a full on explanation of the alien, it's still The Thing and its still a mystery
 
2013-04-03 01:43:47 PM

SurfaceTension: Am I the only one that enjoyed the Star Trek reboot?


No. I got the DVD the day it came out and still watch it regularly. I also went to see Hobbit on Imax 3D just to see the Star Trek preview, and I cannot wait for the new one.

Sybarite: Why is the author talking about Watchmen? That was an adaptation from another medium not a reboot.


I think the author was making the point that some movies aren't just the product of their settings, like the 80's, but that the audiences who appreciate them are the ones currently living in that setting. I loved Watchmen, and some of that may have been because I grew up in the 80's and I understood the mindset. I never read the graphic novel until a few months before the movie came out, and I still got what it was doing. But I can understand why not everyone would have understood the dire feelings the movie was trying to evoke, as the Cold War ended nearly twenty years before the movie came out.

I completely agree with the point that some movies are the product of their time. It's why Die Hard is a great movie and the later editions (4 and 5) don't hold up. Die Hard is an 80's movie, and it is a product of the 80's. (And woe unto anyone who decides to remake Die Hard. It is perfect, it needs to remake.)
 
2013-04-03 01:47:59 PM
The Red Dawn reboot was pretty good with the exception of the guy in the Charlie Sheen role, he sucked.
 
2013-04-03 01:49:53 PM

Valacirca: Red Dawnmade sense in the '80s

No it didn't.  I mean, it made sense as to why it was made then , but no, that movie never made any sense.


Sure it did, it could be summed up in one sentence. "Because we live here."
 
2013-04-03 01:50:39 PM

Dr. Whoof: You do realize that John Carpenter's The Thing is a remake itself, right? There was an original, The Thing From Another World. And Carpenter's version is much better.


ehhhhh, its not really a remake. i guess i would say its a reboot of the original short story (or a re-imagining maybe?) The '51 movie and the '82 movie bear almost no resemblence to each other outside of the idea of an alien getting unfrozen. i think of it more like the recent "i am legend." take out a few spoken references and compare it the omega man or last man on earth and they are fundamentally different movies, even though they are all based on the same core concept. same thing with thing from another world and the thing.

/this is getting confusing
 
2013-04-03 01:58:32 PM

serial_crusher: was Rise of the Planet of the Apes technically a reboot?  I thought they said it was a prequel... the way the Ape revolution played out in the original timeline until Cornelius and Zira went back in time and changed it up?


I think Rise is a reboot. Originally, a plague wiped out most non-primate species. People still wanted pets, so apes become our new bestest friends. C & Z take the plague back with them, and the cycle begins anew. But their Caesar has been tempered from his time with the circus guy.

In Rise, modified virus wipes out humanity leaving pockets of people and insmartenated apes running the show.

/for the record, I like both old and new Trek
 
2013-04-03 01:58:52 PM
Movies that need remakes or reboots:
Krull
Flash Gordon
Battle Beyond the Stars
Logan's Run
Time Bandits
Ice Pirates
Space Hunter
Dragonslayer
Buck Rogers
Beast Master
Red Sonja
West World
Andromeda Strain
Dark Star
Short Circuit
War Games
The Rocketeer
Dreamscape
Night of the Comet
Megaforce
 
2013-04-03 02:04:12 PM

Witty_Retort: serial_crusher: was Rise of the Planet of the Apes technically a reboot?  I thought they said it was a prequel... the way the Ape revolution played out in the original timeline until Cornelius and Zira went back in time and changed it up?

I think Rise is a reboot. Originally, a plague wiped out most non-primate species. People still wanted pets, so apes become our new bestest friends. C & Z take the plague back with them, and the cycle begins anew. But their Caesar has been tempered from his time with the circus guy.

In Rise, modified virus wipes out humanity leaving pockets of people and insmartenated apes running the show.

/for the record, I like both old and new Trek


Rise, like many Hollywood movies, can be be summed up by "BAD SCIENTIST!"
 
2013-04-03 02:09:22 PM
You just told me exactly how old you are. That wasn't really my point, I just want to say that I couldn't agree more.

/is approx. the same age
 
2013-04-03 02:11:02 PM

Slaves2Darkness: Movies that need remakes or reboots:
Krull
Flash Gordon
Battle Beyond the Stars
Logan's Run
Time Bandits
Ice Pirates
Space Hunter
Dragonslayer
Buck Rogers
Beast Master
Red Sonja
West World
Andromeda Strain
Dark Star
Short Circuit
War Games
The Rocketeer
Dreamscape
Night of the Comet
Megaforce


Oops. My previous post should have quoted Slaves2Darkness
 
2013-04-03 02:12:53 PM

SpdrJay: I'm waiting for the Prometheus reboot.

I hated the first one.


Holy shiat, you and me both.

Do yourself a favor, read the original draft of the script. You'll both enjoy it and hate everyone in Hollywood for not allowing it to be filmed instead of the abortion they came out with.
 
2013-04-03 02:12:55 PM

Pepperjack: PanicMan: Two things:

As a Star Trek fan, I thought the reboot was great.

I hate Julia Roberts.  She can barely act and she is disturbing to look at.

Agreed on both counts. I think she is disturbing to look at because her mouth appears to be upside down.


Maybe that's it.  I don't know but whatever it is, she creeps me out.
 
2013-04-03 02:22:18 PM

Saiga410: scottydoesntknow: I really can't think of many reboots I actually liked beyond Dredd, Rise of the PotA, and Amazing Spider-Man

Gone in 60 seconds?  Though I personally prefer the original.


Have you watched the original recently? Now, the cars are great, no argument there. However, the directing and acting are just painful to behold. It's unwatchable.
 
2013-04-03 02:27:02 PM

Mikey1969: 5) The Original Was a Product of Its Time

I DO agree with this one. I've used this exact line, and I used The Goonies as my example when discussing the Red Dawn reboot. Author may be a Farker, and if so, he ripped me off 100%. Some movies fit where they fit due to the culture at the time(Also, the Cold War aspect of Red Dawn made it more believable than what I'm hearing about the reboot), and they can't really fit in a newer climate.

Scary how close this is to exactly the argument I used.


Bolded part is so completely true.  I was a kid during the 80's.  We did truly believe in the commie scare of them attacking us and even taking us over.  That doesn't exist any more.  No one in their hearts really believes North Korea or China or whoever is going to attack us.  Heck, most don't believe another 9/11 will ever happen.  While 9/11 is a horrible tragedy, it was nothing on the scale of what we were afraid of in the 1980's (rational or not, the fear existed.)
 
2013-04-03 02:28:56 PM

unlikely: "They mock you for liking the original" should be on there somewhere.

That's mostly movies rebooting TV shows, but it should still be on there.


Yes, yes, yes. I'd much rather my favorite shows from the past be left unsullied in memory than turned into stupid unfunny comedies.

DO NOT TOUCH EMERGENCY!  OR ADAM 12 you dolts!
 
2013-04-03 02:32:57 PM

Valacirca: Red Dawnmade sense in the '80s

No it didn't.  I mean, it made sense as to why it was made then , but no, that movie never made any sense.


What didn't "make sense"? Russia's military might and Cuba's proximity to the US combined to pull off an invasion of the US from the inside out? As plausible as anything else. Even before Iraq and Afghanistan, we had a ton of our forces staged elsewhere, and all you have to do is pick strategic towns that you can take over quickly while mustering your troops to move on to larger areas with military bases and National Guard armories. We didn't have the internet or GPS back then, our communication was still(relatively) slow, so I can see the invasion working at the time. Nowadays, it wouldn't work, and as it is, they spread the believability a little thin, but the movie "made sense" at the time.
 
2013-04-03 02:34:51 PM

stuhayes2010: A Goonies reboot with modern fat lazy iPhone crazed kids would be hillariously bad.

Writter made a good point though, parents never let their kids out of eye sight these days.

In my day....

/lawn off it.


Who would play Chunk? Normal kids are Chunk sized. They'd need to roll in some morbidly obese child on a wal-mart scooter to make the bit work.
 
2013-04-03 02:35:56 PM

Slaves2Darkness: Movies that need remakes or reboots:
Krull
Flash Gordon
Battle Beyond the Stars
Logan's Run
Time Bandits
Ice Pirates
Space Hunter
Dragonslayer
Buck Rogers
Beast Master
Red Sonja
West World
Andromeda Strain
Dark Star
Short Circuit
War Games
The Rocketeer
Dreamscape
Night of the Comet
Megaforce


Sorry, not War Games. It's one of those "product of its time" movies, during the Cold War when tensions were high, and in the early days of computing when systems were more or less wide open, and hacking was in its infancy. A remake would suck, the "hacking" would just be some asshole typing on a keyboard with no discernible goal, and the Cold War tension wouldn't be there. "On the brink of WWIII" doesn't work with no super Power to make the bad guys.
 
2013-04-03 02:36:26 PM

push3r: Slaves2Darkness: Movies that need remakes or reboots:
Krull
Flash Gordon
Battle Beyond the Stars
Logan's Run
Time Bandits
Ice Pirates
Space Hunter
Dragonslayer
Buck Rogers
Beast Master
Red Sonja
West World
Andromeda Strain
Dark Star
Short Circuit
War Games
The Rocketeer
Dreamscape
Night of the Comet
Megaforce

Oops. My previous post should have quoted Slaves2Darkness


It would never happen, because Prince wouldn't give up control, but I'd LOVE to see Purple Rain remade with real actors and a script doctor reworking the dialog. The story itself is outstanding and should be left alone. Ten years ago I would have suggested Jamie Foxx for Prince's role and Wil Smith as Morris Day. Now, I have no idea.
 
2013-04-03 02:41:54 PM
1. Because they're rarely done for the right reasons, which are entertaining an audience and making a piece of great art.

My favourite remakes in recent years are Ocean's Eleven, Man on Fire and The Thomas Crown Affair. All were made by directors that aren't just "director for hire" but are something closer to "auteur". They make the films they want to make and have the money and power to tell studios to shove it.
 
2013-04-03 02:42:52 PM

Mikey1969: Valacirca: Red Dawnmade sense in the '80s

No it didn't.  I mean, it made sense as to why it was made then , but no, that movie never made any sense.

What didn't "make sense"? Russia's military might and Cuba's proximity to the US combined to pull off an invasion of the US from the inside out? As plausible as anything else. Even before Iraq and Afghanistan, we had a ton of our forces staged elsewhere, and all you have to do is pick strategic towns that you can take over quickly while mustering your troops to move on to larger areas with military bases and National Guard armories. We didn't have the internet or GPS back then, our communication was still(relatively) slow, so I can see the invasion working at the time. Nowadays, it wouldn't work, and as it is, they spread the believability a little thin, but the movie "made sense" at the time.


It doesn't matter if it was actually possible. What matters was, people thought it was possible. It was a fear of the time and the movie played on that fear very well.
 
2013-04-03 02:43:29 PM

downstairs: Mikey1969: 5) The Original Was a Product of Its Time

I DO agree with this one. I've used this exact line, and I used The Goonies as my example when discussing the Red Dawn reboot. Author may be a Farker, and if so, he ripped me off 100%. Some movies fit where they fit due to the culture at the time(Also, the Cold War aspect of Red Dawn made it more believable than what I'm hearing about the reboot), and they can't really fit in a newer climate.

Scary how close this is to exactly the argument I used.

Bolded part is so completely true.  I was a kid during the 80's.  We did truly believe in the commie scare of them attacking us and even taking us over.  That doesn't exist any more.  No one in their hearts really believes North Korea or China or whoever is going to attack us.  Heck, most don't believe another 9/11 will ever happen.  While 9/11 is a horrible tragedy, it was nothing on the scale of what we were afraid of in the 1980's (rational or not, the fear existed.)


Yeah, the 80's were 'interesting'... All of our movie bad guys were Russian, we didn't care about hurting feelings, and nobody would admit that anything good could possibly come out of the entire country. We knew nothing about the place, except that they were the automatic bad guys, no matter what. It blew me away when we had a speaker my junior year(Graduated in '88) who told us about a trip he took to Russia. Nobody out of the 2,000 people in my high school had met anyone who had ben to Russia, especially someone who went there by choice, and was not only allowed entry, but was able to leave as well. It did a lot to change my perspective of the USSR as a country, and with glasnost  and the Berlin Wall only a few more years down the road, it became an exciting time to be around.
 
2013-04-03 02:45:59 PM

Witty_Retort: serial_crusher: was Rise of the Planet of the Apes technically a reboot?  I thought they said it was a prequel... the way the Ape revolution played out in the original timeline until Cornelius and Zira went back in time and changed it up?

I think Rise is a reboot. Originally, a plague wiped out most non-primate species. People still wanted pets, so apes become our new bestest friends. C & Z take the plague back with them, and the cycle begins anew. But their Caesar has been tempered from his time with the circus guy.

In Rise, modified virus wipes out humanity leaving pockets of people and insmartenated apes running the show.

/for the record, I like both old and new Trek


Hmm, good point on the different plagues thing.  I just thought I remembered an interview with the director or something saying that.

Abramsverse is a similar problem though.  Relative to Nimoyspock it's a sequel not a reboot.
I liked it.  Was a lot better than Insurrection or Nemesis, that's for sure.
 
2013-04-03 02:46:25 PM

namegoeshere: It doesn't matter if it was actually possible. What matters was, people thought it was possible. It was a fear of the time and the movie played on that fear very well.


I saw it in the theater when it came out, and there wasn't any "fear", but a lot of "what if?". I saw the whole "Bad Russkies" thing throughout my years growing up, but never truly believed that they were these evil monsters just looking for an excuse to blow up the world.
 
2013-04-03 02:52:06 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Total Recall rocked.


I have no idea why they had to call it Total Recall! They could have just had his memories triggered by something else and made a whole new movie.

They could have called it "Borne Identity 2250" because it was closer to the Borne Identity movie then it was to Total Recall. And it had this:

[img708.imageshack.us image 420x300]

How did this not make billions and billions of dollars?!


Well first off, because the male movie-going public aren't (opposed to popular belief), a bunch of cat-calling dumbass stereotypical construction workers with Brooklyn accents that are so ape-like they barely have the power to dress themselves.
Sure those two girls are attractive, but who cares? BUT DUDE HOT GIRLZZZ LOL FO REAL, right?

Second, Total Recall in 1990 was awesome, while Total Recall in 2012 was a just a really turrible movie, plain and simple.
 
2013-04-03 02:56:54 PM

HeartBurnKid: /man, that duck penis thread really burrowed into my brain


You might want to see a physician about that...
 
2013-04-03 02:58:25 PM
No love for Ed Norton's Hulk?

After Ang Lee sharted all over His Greenness, only the Captain of Columbia could save it.

// I am more than slightly bitter he didn't make it to Avengers, but I like Mark Ruffalo, too
 
2013-04-03 03:01:04 PM
I am sure we are probably only a decade out from a remake/reboot of 'The Warriors'.
 
2013-04-03 03:07:38 PM

tinderfitles: I am sure we are probably only a decade out from a remake/reboot of 'The Warriors'.


More like about 5 years maybe. Its already on the docket of shiat that's in write/rewrite in writer meat grinders of Hollywood.
 
2013-04-03 03:10:07 PM

tinderfitles: I am sure we are probably only a decade out from a remake/reboot of 'The Warriors'.


Please, please, please no!

That movie is 100% perfect for its time, and its time only.

The movie is campy (in a good way), but it also brings late-70's NYC to life.
 
2013-04-03 03:12:18 PM

namegoeshere: unlikely: "They mock you for liking the original" should be on there somewhere.

That's mostly movies rebooting TV shows, but it should still be on there.

Yes, yes, yes. I'd much rather my favorite shows from the past be left unsullied in memory than turned into stupid unfunny comedies.

DO NOT TOUCH EMERGENCY!  OR ADAM 12 you dolts!


EMERGENCY!!!  With giant wall crawling maps and radio units that take up an entire Ambulance roof.  shiat you not, one episode revolved around a tree branch knocking the radio antenna off the roof.  So awesome.  It's little period touches like that that make the original series so special.
 
2013-04-03 03:17:32 PM

Slaves2Darkness: Movies that need remakes or reboots:
Krull

Why surrender the cheese factor of the original?
Flash Gordon
The source material (serials from the 30s) isn't strong enough for a feature film
Battle Beyond the Stars
HERESY! One of the most beloved cult classics of all time! Never remake a cult classic (see The Evil Dead)
Logan's Run
Best candidate on your list, but they need (a) a young Jenny Agutter type and (b) a good "Box"
Time Bandits
A classic - I didn't like it, but you won't improve on it
Ice Pirates
S'rsly?
Space Hunter
HERESY again...another perfectly campy classic that needs to be left alone
Dragonslayer
Just watched the original again last week. Doesn't need to be redone as there is plenty of better fantasy out there
Buck Rogers
Yeah, but they will they make it serious or camp it up?
Beast Master
S'rsly?
Red Sonja
Well, now you're just being silly ;-)
West World

You'll never get a better robot on the rampage than Yul Brynner so why try?
Andromeda Strain
They already tried a re-boot and it failed. The original may not be great acting but it's a crackerjack thriller
Dark Star
Reboot what is essentially a student film? If so, re-boot THX 1138 instead
Short Circuit
A reboot won't improve a lousy base story
War Games
Too much a product of the times, i.e. computer hackers, threat of global nuclear war, etc.
The Rocketeer
What was wrong with the original?
Dreamscape
Okay, now THIS could be a good one to re-boot/remake
Night of the Comet
Too much of the humor of the original is dated Valley Girl based
Megaforce
Another camp classic that you would have to decide if you wanted to play it straight or not

No offense intended above...just my two cents and YMMV and probably does...but hands of Battle Beyond the Stars and Spacehunter
 
2013-04-03 03:19:55 PM

sure haven't: Second, Total Recall in 1990 was awesome, while Total Recall in 2012 was a just a really turrible movie, plain and simple.


Sorry, Total Recall was OK when it came out, but it isn't some great masterpiece. I saw it in the theaters in the height of the Schwarzenegger boom, and was not particularly impressed. I thought the 2012 version was perfectly fine, and I believe that it was a more true adaptation of the book, although it's been awhile since I read it. I had no problems with the remake, and felt the original was cartoony in a not-so-perfectly-pulled-off way.
 
2013-04-03 03:21:30 PM

SpdrJay: I'm waiting for the Prometheus reboot.

I hated the first one.


Yeah... I couldn't make sci-fi that bad. The whole series works out like a series of "how not to" when it comes around to building spacecraft or dealing with surface exploration.

/Why transport 20 million tons of ORE?
//Take a 5 million ton refinery and bring back 15 million tons of product.
 
2013-04-03 03:27:26 PM

Slaves2Darkness: Movies that need remakes or reboots:
Krull
Flash Gordon
Battle Beyond the Stars
Logan's Run
Time Bandits
Ice Pirates
Space Hunter
Dragonslayer
Buck Rogers
Beast Master
Red Sonja
West World
Andromeda Strain
Dark Star
Short Circuit
War Games
The Rocketeer
Dreamscape
Night of the Comet
Megaforce


I agree with Krull.  That could be a good movie if done properly.

Dreamscape was already remade, they called it Inception.

A remake of Megaforce done as a comedy would be good...basically a parody of 80s action movies, or a parody of the nostalgia for those movies, anyway.
 
2013-04-03 03:28:40 PM
serial_crusher:

Abramsverse is a similar problem though.  Relative to Nimoyspock it's a sequel not a reboot.
I liked it.  Was a lot better than Insurrection or Nemesis, that's for sure.


I think that was the smartest thing JJ did in new Trek was the alternate-timeline so that ToS, Next Gen etc. still "happened" and all his movies happen in their own pocket.
To everyone who complains that it was just an action movie, Undiscovered Country came out in 1991. It had been almost 20 years since the last adventure of Kirk and Spock. There was a generation who knew only of them threw pop-culture and osmosis. They needed a simple story to re-introduce 7+ characters. If the next one brings a really good story, it could be great. If it is another pop-corner, it will still look good, at least.
 
2013-04-03 03:30:01 PM
I don't know if it counts as a remake or a reboot or something completely different, but the second version of The Producers was better than the first (which was pretty good on its own).
 
2013-04-03 03:31:39 PM

scottydoesntknow: Ohh wait, I also enjoyed the Star Trek reboot. Suck it, haters.


We haters don't care if you like the movie. It was an okay movie but over rated. If any other directors did this movie and did it the same way JJ Abrams made it. Star Trek (2009) will have at least a RT rating of 50% but not more than 70%

Actually they should change the title to Idiocracy  2: Dumb Asses in Space.
 
2013-04-03 03:31:59 PM

BrianGriffin: Slaves2Darkness: 
Ice Pirates
S'rsly?


If they ever reboot Ice Pirates, get rid of the comedic value of the movie. In short, give it the Nolan/Batman treatment.

/yes, I liked the original.
 
2013-04-03 03:33:39 PM

Mugato: They're all cynical cash grabs based on name recognition and the studio suits' idea that despite movies being more easily accessible than ever, no one would watch a movie prior to 1995 so they all have to be remade?


Or better: Hollywood would rather piss their money away on the idea that people will see a "remake" rather than an "original" concept.  Yet they might lose more money on the remake rather than on an original concept.
 
2013-04-03 03:35:38 PM
FTA:  8) You Are Insane

Shoot; wouldn't that cover 88% of Hollywood anyway?
 
2013-04-03 03:37:39 PM

tlchwi02: Mikey1969: 1) You Have Less Talent than the Original Cast and Crew

Um, not if the original sucked, or was so lo budget that they couldn't afford big talent. Wrong answer, try again.

Wow, 1 line item in, and your blog already sucks.

i'd say the best example of the point the author was making is The Thing. the original had great actors, effects and an established director. the new one had relative unknown actors, used CGI and was directed by a complete unknown. the contrast in quality between them is stark, although they are essentially the same movie in terms of the plot


It's a prequel, not a reboot.
 
2013-04-03 03:37:41 PM

scottydoesntknow: Ohh wait, I also enjoyed the Star Trek reboot. Suck it, haters.


Well...can we honestly say it's a reboot?  I did see it (finally) and understood the reasoning behind the story.  I don't know if one could qualify it as a reboot.
 
2013-04-03 03:38:28 PM
You'll never get a better robot on the rampage than Yul Brynner so why try?

Would like a word with you...

images4.wikia.nocookie.netwiki.base22.com

You have 15 seconds to comply.
 
2013-04-03 03:41:17 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Total Recall rocked.


I have no idea why they had to call it Total Recall! They could have just had his memories triggered by something else and made a whole new movie.

They could have called it "Borne Identity 2250" because it was closer to the Borne Identity movie then it was to Total Recall. And it had this:

[img708.imageshack.us image 420x300]

How did this not make billions and billions of dollars?!


Because the idiots who wrote it failed writing class?
 
2013-04-03 03:46:25 PM

wildcardjack: ReBOOTS. I misread that as robots.

What's the line between remake and reboot? If it's been 50 years it's a remake, not a reboot. If it's been five years (Hulk) it's a reboot, not a remake.


Remakes are one shots. Reboots are for franchises.

Star Trek, Dark Knight, Daniel Craig's Bond films are all reboots.

Red Dawn is a remake. Ocean's Eleven was a remake that turned into a franchise.
 
2013-04-03 03:48:41 PM

un4gvn666: SpdrJay: I'm waiting for the Prometheus reboot.

I hated the first one.

Holy shiat, you and me both.

Do yourself a favor, read the original draft of the script. You'll both enjoy it and hate everyone in Hollywood for not allowing it to be filmed instead of the abortion they came out with.


Uh, see the Joss Whedon article/thread on how Hollywood can take a concept and FUBAR it.

Granted, you can have total control over your idea and FUBAR it.  More often than not it's Hollywood's executards that FUBAR it because they need to feel "special".
 
2013-04-03 03:52:22 PM

namegoeshere: stuhayes2010: A Goonies reboot with modern fat lazy iPhone crazed kids would be hillariously bad.

Writter made a good point though, parents never let their kids out of eye sight these days.

In my day....

/lawn off it.

Who would play Chunk? Normal kids are Chunk sized. They'd need to roll in some morbidly obese child on a wal-mart scooter to make the bit work.


I stil see kids walking around by themselves all the time. I think the precious snowflakeness is completely overblown in people's minds.

A Goonies reboot would suck because it's too easy to make kids and teens annoying. For example, Andy would be transformed in the popular biatchy girl that is in every teen movie these days.
 
2013-04-03 03:57:02 PM

MyKingdomForYourHorse: SurfaceTension: Am I the only one that enjoyed the Star Trek reboot?

Mark me down for nope, it was a Trek movie made not for Trekkers but for general audience. It's why your hard core rabid fans rail on it.

Also mark me down for loving the Halloween remakes. I thought Rob did an excellent job with those.


I dunno I am a hard core Trekker but still... I liked 2009 trek, as a movie on its own but I can still acknowledge it just doesn't feel like Star trek it was more like a superhero movie. I am hopeful that into Darkness will veer a little bit more back to Trek but if I had to bet, im' going with no. By contrast nuwho even though it very much  has broadened the  appeal, upped the effects become more flash than substance but it still at its core still feels like Doctor Who. In short Star Trek is a good movie without a soul.
 
2013-04-03 04:00:44 PM

jaybeezey: It's a prequel, not a reboot.


eh, maybe the thing is actually too confusing a case for my arguments. the '82 film is technically a remake of the '51 movie, even though they bear only a superficial resemblence to each other. and then the 2011 film is technically a prequel of the '82 movie, but it ends up apeing the plot of the '82 movie in such a point by point fashion that it feels far more like a remake.

either way, i stand by my original point- the 2011 movie was an attempt to remake the '82 film (prequel framework aside) that makes a good example of creating a remake when you don't have the talent to pull it off to the level of the original
 
2013-04-03 04:00:58 PM

Freschel: scottydoesntknow: Ohh wait, I also enjoyed the Star Trek reboot. Suck it, haters.

We haters don't care if you like the movie. It was an okay movie but over rated. If any other directors did this movie and did it the same way JJ Abrams made it. Star Trek (2009) will have at least a RT rating of 50% but not more than 70%

Actually they should change the title to Idiocracy  2: Dumb Asses in Space.


l.wigflip.com
 
2013-04-03 04:02:21 PM

PanicMan: Two things:

As a Star Trek fan, I thought the reboot was great.

I hate Julia Roberts.  She can barely act and she is disturbing to look at.


Women who act in almost nothing but RomCom movies usually are for some reason.
 
2013-04-03 04:05:10 PM

Xythero: I stil see kids walking around by themselves all the time. I think the precious snowflakeness is completely overblown in people's minds.


You missed my point.

My point was, the Chunk character was obese. That was his schtick. Back in the day, there was maybe one child in a grade who was Chunk sized. Chunk was unique in the story for that reason. He was the fat kid. Today, that character wouldn't work with that actor, because he does not stand out as an obese child. 30% of the third grade looks like him. The child would have to be much larger to be noticeably obese. The wal-mart scooter was obviously hyperbole, as no way could you navigate the maze of caves on a hoveround.
 
2013-04-03 04:05:29 PM

Mikey1969: sure haven't: Second, Total Recall in 1990 was awesome, while Total Recall in 2012 was a just a really turrible movie, plain and simple.

Sorry, Total Recall was OK when it came out, but it isn't some great masterpiece. I saw it in the theaters in the height of the Schwarzenegger boom, and was not particularly impressed. I thought the 2012 version was perfectly fine, and I believe that it was a more true adaptation of the book, although it's been awhile since I read it. I had no problems with the remake, and felt the original was cartoony in a not-so-perfectly-pulled-off way.


Of course the original was cartoony.  That was part of its charm.  It also adds to the ambiguity of the film, in an odd sort of way; notice how it turns into a cheesy action film the second Quaid gets strapped into the chair at Rekall? That lends all the more weight to the theory that the entire movie after that is all a fantasy in Quaid's head.

Think of it this way: it's 23 years later, and we're still talking about the 1990 movie.  Do you think anybody's going to give a crap about the 2012 movie in 2035?
 
2013-04-03 04:07:23 PM

wildcardjack: ReBOOTS. I misread that as robots.

What's the line between remake and reboot? If it's been 50 years it's a remake, not a reboot. If it's been five years (Hulk) it's a reboot, not a remake.


A remake is of a single movie.  A reboot is when there's a series of movies and you start over, possibly with a movie that has no resemblence to the first movie in the series other than the characters and general setting.  IE, Psycho was remade.  James Bond was rebooted.
 
2013-04-03 04:15:40 PM
That was a lot more wirds than needed to say, "Remakes usually suck because they don't fix what was wrong, and they mess up what was right."
 
2013-04-03 04:19:24 PM

BrianGriffin: War Games
Too much a product of the times, i.e. computer hackers, threat of global nuclear war, etc.


Yep, this.  People didn't understand computers and security back then.  It was plausable that a super-smart kid could break into the DoD.

Nowadays, not only is that probably 100% impossible... and everyone, including non-savvy computer users, knows it.

No matter how they'd try to spin it, it would be laughably unrealistic to the majority of viewers.
 
2013-04-03 04:21:23 PM

downstairs: BrianGriffin: War Games
Too much a product of the times, i.e. computer hackers, threat of global nuclear war, etc.

Yep, this.  People didn't understand computers and security back then.  It was plausable that a super-smart kid could break into the DoD.

Nowadays, not only is that probably 100% impossible... and everyone, including non-savvy computer users, knows it.

No matter how they'd try to spin it, it would be laughably unrealistic to the majority of viewers.


Rename the movie "Anonymous." and it might pass,,,
 
2013-04-03 04:39:15 PM

wildcardjack: ReBOOTS. I misread that as robots.

What's the line between remake and reboot? If it's been 50 years it's a remake, not a reboot. If it's been five years (Hulk) it's a reboot, not a remake.


My take is that a remake is intended to tell the same general story of the original, whereas a reboot is looser and doesn't necessarily have to tell the same story, but intends to start a new line of films in a franchise by ignoring established mythology and setting up new actors for the role.

For example, Scarface. The story changed a lot; but it was never intended to create a new franchise, so it's definitely not a reboot, and I would classify it as a remake.

Godzilla, on the other hand, was a reboot precisely because they intended to make sequels. It doesn't matter that the movie failed and they didn't, but it was the intention that made it a reboot.

Casino Royale was a reboot because they intend the Craig Bond to be in a separate literary universe and build on that.
 
2013-04-03 04:40:56 PM

SurfaceTension: Am I the only one that enjoyed the Star Trek reboot?


I liked it a lot, and still pop it in the DVD player every now and again.  It was a good movie.  I just don't like that they erased all of Star Trek history (except Enterprise) to tell their story.  That was arrogant to the 17th power.

I don't buy the "alternate timeline" explanation.  It every time travel episode of Trek ever, they were always desperate to undo whatever damage the time traveler had wrought.  In Trek '09, Nero goes back in time, destroys most of Starfleet, blows up a Federation founding race, and everyone is just sorta like, "meh".  That didn't sit well with me.  On it's own though, it's a good, fun movie.
 
2013-04-03 04:47:30 PM

Alfonso the Great: I thought the new Conan movie was better than the original. Not saying the first one was bad, but it's unadulterated asskickery. It's prettier now than 30 years ago.


The new Conan committed the unforgivable sin of a movie: it was boring.  Boring as all hell.  Jason Momoa theoretically has good screen presence, at least he did in Stargate Atlantis.  But his Conan was just a prop, being placed in scene after scene that he didn't understand or have any control over.  He was passive - a tourist in his own movie.

Was just having this discussion with a co-worker today, because I watched Solomon Kane last night and it was farking awesome.  It was everything the new Conan movie should have been.
 
2013-04-03 04:48:46 PM

scottydoesntknow: Freschel: scottydoesntknow: Ohh wait, I also enjoyed the Star Trek reboot. Suck it, haters.

We haters don't care if you like the movie. It was an okay movie but over rated. If any other directors did this movie and did it the same way JJ Abrams made it. Star Trek (2009) will have at least a RT rating of 50% but not more than 70%

Actually they should change the title to Idiocracy  2: Dumb Asses in Space.

[l.wigflip.com image 400x300]


I'm not butt hurt or a trekkie. As I said before it was an okay movie but over rated IMHO. Out of 5 stars I'll give it a 2.5 stars.

The dumb asses are for Star Fleet for sending their almost entire fleet into an unknown situation without scouting the area first. And Vulcans for not knowing why their world is shaking and not knowing where the epicenter is. Also not seeing the huge ass flying thingy in the sky with so kind of laser coming out from it. I haven't seen this much incompetency since the space battle in "Starship Troopers". Suspension of belief is one thing but this much of stupidity. Pointing out bad parst of the movie is not being butt hurt.
 
2013-04-03 04:49:25 PM
parts not parst
 
2013-04-03 04:53:52 PM

PanicMan: Pepperjack: PanicMan: Two things:

As a Star Trek fan, I thought the reboot was great.

I hate Julia Roberts.  She can barely act and she is disturbing to look at.

Agreed on both counts. I think she is disturbing to look at because her mouth appears to be upside down.

Maybe that's it.  I don't know but whatever it is, she creeps me out.


It is the mouth, but not because it looks upside down.  It's because it looks like it goes about 270 degrees around her head, and that she could unhinge her jaw if necessary.  I have always found Julia Roberts to be a deeply, disturbingly unattractive person.
 
2013-04-03 05:02:26 PM

Witty_Retort: I think that was the smartest thing JJ did in new Trek was the alternate-timeline so that ToS, Next Gen etc. still "happened" and all his movies happen in their own pocket.


I think my only problem with the alternate timeline was that it was acknowledged by the original timeline's Spock. I think I would've preferred that the story had existed on its own terms.

I otherwise like the film despite some obvious plotholes. I seem to recall Fark really loving the movie when it came out, but that opinion has apparently changed.
 
2013-04-03 05:40:27 PM

PanicMan: As a Star Trek fan, I thought the reboot was great.


Are you sure you're a Star Trek fan?  I don't understand.

I like star trek because the show is a morality play in space.  In almost each version of the show the writing is invariably well-done and it's a story-driven show.  The movie was...just...how can anyone call themselves a Star Trek fan and actually like the reboot?  It's not even Star Trek.
 
2013-04-03 05:51:14 PM

FeedTheCollapse: I seem to recall Fark really loving the movie when it came out, but that opinion has apparently changed.


People who liked the film liked the film but people who hated the film really really hated the film. That passion will make you post every time and with threads like this make you drag the carcass out and beat it some more.

So they are over sampled.
 
2013-04-03 05:51:51 PM

namegoeshere: unlikely: "They mock you for liking the original" should be on there somewhere.

That's mostly movies rebooting TV shows, but it should still be on there.

Yes, yes, yes. I'd much rather my favorite shows from the past be left unsullied in memory than turned into stupid unfunny comedies.

DO NOT TOUCH EMERGENCY!  OR ADAM 12 you dolts!


But bring back The Fall Guy
 
2013-04-03 05:54:36 PM

give me doughnuts: That was a lot more wirds than needed to say, "Remakes usually suck because they don't fix what was wrong, and they mess up what was right."


Indubitably
 
2013-04-03 05:56:53 PM

Slaves2Darkness: Movies that need remakes or reboots:
Krull
Flash Gordon
Battle Beyond the Stars
Logan's Run
Time Bandits
Ice Pirates
Space Hunter
Dragonslayer
Buck Rogers
Beast Master
Red Sonja
West World
Andromeda Strain
Dark Star
Short Circuit
War Games
The Rocketeer
Dreamscape
Night of the Comet
Megaforce


Remo Williams
 
2013-04-03 06:01:09 PM

JNowe: Remo Williams


the adventure must continue
 
2013-04-03 06:03:00 PM

extroverted_suicide: SurfaceTension: Am I the only one that enjoyed the Star Trek reboot?

I liked it a lot, and still pop it in the DVD player every now and again.  It was a good movie.  I just don't like that they erased all of Star Trek history (except Enterprise) to tell their story.  That was arrogant to the 17th power.

I don't buy the "alternate timeline" explanation.  It every time travel episode of Trek ever, they were always desperate to undo whatever damage the time traveler had wrought.  In Trek '09, Nero goes back in time, destroys most of Starfleet, blows up a Federation founding race, and everyone is just sorta like, "meh".  That didn't sit well with me.  On it's own though, it's a good, fun movie.


That could be the "final" of the new Trek line. They go back and stop Nero and save the Kelvin. Timeline restored.
 
2013-04-03 06:21:12 PM

Witty_Retort: extroverted_suicide: SurfaceTension: Am I the only one that enjoyed the Star Trek reboot?

I liked it a lot, and still pop it in the DVD player every now and again.  It was a good movie.  I just don't like that they erased all of Star Trek history (except Enterprise) to tell their story.  That was arrogant to the 17th power.

I don't buy the "alternate timeline" explanation.  It every time travel episode of Trek ever, they were always desperate to undo whatever damage the time traveler had wrought.  In Trek '09, Nero goes back in time, destroys most of Starfleet, blows up a Federation founding race, and everyone is just sorta like, "meh".  That didn't sit well with me.  On it's own though, it's a good, fun movie.

That could be the "final" of the new Trek line. They go back and stop Nero and save the Kelvin. Timeline restored.


Into Darkness could be the direction they are going. How cool would it be that, at the end of the 2nd movie, BC's super agent guy has really hurt Star Fleet. In a few years, another ship finds Khan and he actually gets control of it and finds others of his people in stasis and awakens them and 3rd movie is Khan and his genetically modified super soldiers wrecking havoc.
By the end of 3, either Star Fleet or just Kirk decides that this timeline really sucks and spend a movie or 2 getting the McGuffins together to time travel to stop Nero and preemptively collapse the star that will go hyper-nova. (pre-stopping Nero in the prime future)
A final scene where new Kirk sacrifices himself to save his father would be awesome.
/or maybe I'm really over-thinking it
 
2013-04-03 06:26:10 PM

Witty_Retort: /or maybe I'm really over-thinking it


Bob Orci is still a writer on these, so unless it's a pop-up book you're pitching, you're over-thinking it.
 
2013-04-03 06:26:27 PM

Witty_Retort: /or maybe I'm really over-thinking it


I'd love that. That could be the best idea for Star Trek that I ever read.
 
2013-04-03 06:37:22 PM
I love a bunch of the Coen Brothers movies, but they should be ashamed that they ever thought they could top the original of this:

www.movieguide.org

by having the character played by the incredible Alec Guinness done by milquetoast Tom Hanks. Also, Peter Sellers.
/Obi Wan who?
 
2013-04-03 06:41:02 PM
Wow, look at that, almost entirely Sci-Fi/Comic Book movies...listen, people who like that stuff are usually OCD cases who have little else to do but see those movies, you imagine they have a choice?  they are sitting ducks for marketing pros, hand over your money, see the movie, hate it and then give it free advertising by blogging relentlessly about it.

And the best part?  If we do a half assed job on them, you will crave a new re-boot to 'fix it'...only we won't fix it, we will release another botch job, that you will pay to see, then hate, and crave a reboot to 'fix it', which we will botch, which you will see, which you will hate, which you will want fixed, which we will botch, which you will see.............wash rinse repeat until you die.

Like we care.,.
 
2013-04-03 07:38:22 PM

Slaves2Darkness: Movies that need remakes or reboots:
Time Bandits


You bastard. I'll sooner let you do my mom!
 
2013-04-03 08:54:11 PM
I'm holding out for the Max Headroom reboot...
 
2013-04-03 09:49:03 PM
d.ratingmovies.com

Add this to the list of good remakes.
 
2013-04-03 09:58:54 PM

Slaves2Darkness: Movies that need remakes or reboots:
Krull
Flash Gordon
Battle Beyond the Stars
Logan's Run
Time Bandits
Ice Pirates
Space Hunter
Dragonslayer
Buck Rogers
Beast Master
Red Sonja
West World
Andromeda Strain
Dark Star
Short Circuit
War Games
The Rocketeer
Dreamscape
Night of the Comet
Megaforce


Jurassic Park is technically a reboot of West World
 
2013-04-03 10:36:46 PM

Lee's_Austin: The Evil Dead remake/reboot looks all kinds of awesome.




Going to a movie marathon tommorrow night, first showing the originals then the new one.
 
2013-04-03 10:49:15 PM

scottydoesntknow: Ohh wait, I also enjoyed the Star Trek reboot. Suck it, haters.


Star Trek wasn't really a reboot, though. It didn't do any of the things a reboot traditionally does--tell the original story but "grittier" or "more realistic" or whatever. Instead, it told the original story but with a "surprise twist" at the beginning instead of the end. Kind of a "what if" scenario: What if Kirk, instead of being a paragon of morality and heroism, was really a slacker dick? What if Spock, instead of being a conflicted logical/emotional being, was open about his emotions AND his logic, and really didn't like Kirk much? What if Scotty was a goofball nerd?

Next, JJ Abrams will be asking "What if Khan was really a half-human, half-Gorn hybrid whose loyal followers were time-traveling Mongol hordes?" That one should be good.
 
2013-04-03 11:13:10 PM
The one that pisses me off the most is Karate Kid. It was such an unnecessary movie that they were afraid to call it "Kung Fu Kid" or leave out spoilers in the trailer, because they needed every marketing trick they could use to bring people to the theater.
 
2013-04-03 11:23:14 PM

Gyrfalcon: Star Trek wasn't really a reboot, though. It didn't do any of the things a reboot traditionally does--tell the original story but "grittier" or "more realistic" or whatever.


Well that's not really the definition of a "reboot". Although it was "grittier" in that Spock was a total dick who hated Kirk and McCoy was an even more sarcastic prick than  he was in the originals and Uhura was a slut sexualty liberated. So yeah, I think everything was "edgier" in the new Trek film.
 
2013-04-03 11:25:17 PM

Ennuipoet: (Cinches onion tightly on belt) People these days can't be bothered to create, they can only remake.  Hollywood reboots a franchise rather than search for the next franchise, it's safe, cheap and they've taught people this is what they want.  Yet, when you look at the big movers on television, The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, Mad Men, they are breaking new ground and people are eating it up.  Is this what we have to look forward at the theater in 20 years, a Game of the Throne reboot and Holo 3D Don Drapers?


Which days are you talking about?  Remakes, sequels, reboots, rewrites, have been around forever.  Invasion of the Body Snatchers in 1978, West Side Story in 1961, Heck, they made a sequel to King Kong in 1933.  Shakespeare was famous for borrowing from Greek sources; the Ancient Greeks did all the same things -- trilogies, rewrites, borrowing of others' stories, etc. -- in their stage plays.
 
2013-04-03 11:32:28 PM

meanmutton: Which days are you talking about?  Remakes, sequels, reboots, rewrites, have been around forever.  Invasion of the Body Snatchers in 1978, West Side Story in 1961, Heck, they made a sequel to King Kong in 1933.  Shakespeare was famous for borrowing from Greek sources; the Ancient Greeks did all the same things -- trilogies, rewrites, borrowing of others' stories, etc. -- in their stage plays.


No, it wasn't like it is now. Unless you're talking about movies like Dracula or the Universal monster movies in the 50's, 60's and 70's but those were iconic movie characters. That's not the same thing. There hasn't been a Renaissance of cash grab reboots and remakes of random movies from less than 25, 10, sometimes 7 years ago ever.
 
2013-04-04 12:31:09 AM

Henry Holland: I love a bunch of the Coen Brothers movies, but they should be ashamed that they ever thought they could top the original of this:

[www.movieguide.org image 509x755]

by having the character played by the incredible Alec Guinness done by milquetoast Tom Hanks. Also, Peter Sellers.
/Obi Wan who?


I completely agree and I thought it was rather funny seeing Clouseau and Dreyfuss on the same side for once.
 
2013-04-04 01:03:54 AM
It was hard to find the actual points the author was trying to make buried in all of the crying in that article.


aendeuryu: The one that pisses me off the most is Karate Kid. It was such an unnecessary movie that they were afraid to call it "Kung Fu Kid" or leave out spoilers in the trailer, because they needed every marketing trick they could use to bring people to the theater.



The movie itself might be shiat. But I don't care what anyone says. It was some of Jackie Chans best acting.
 
2013-04-04 01:39:14 AM
The comments in the article had a lot of praise for the King Kong remake, which was an abomination. There is probably 90 minutes of decent movie trapped in a bloated 4-hour Peter Jackson CGI wankfest. Sadly the Hobbit seems to be following suit. He needs an editor with a spine to stand up to him and force him to cut half the action sequences out of his films.
 
2013-04-04 02:15:33 AM

Mugato: Gyrfalcon: Star Trek wasn't really a reboot, though. It didn't do any of the things a reboot traditionally does--tell the original story but "grittier" or "more realistic" or whatever.

Well that's not really the definition of a "reboot". Although it was "grittier" in that Spock was a total dick who hated Kirk and McCoy was an even more sarcastic prick than  he was in the originals and Uhura was a slut sexualty liberated. So yeah, I think everything was "edgier" in the new Trek film.


Oh please. These rants against the new ST series are worse than your GENERATIONS rants.

Uhura has a relationship with one man, Spock, and suddenly she's a slut? Just WTF man.
 
2013-04-04 02:44:37 AM

meanmutton: Ennuipoet: (Cinches onion tightly on belt) People these days can't be bothered to create, they can only remake.  Hollywood reboots a franchise rather than search for the next franchise, it's safe, cheap and they've taught people this is what they want.  Yet, when you look at the big movers on television, The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, Mad Men, they are breaking new ground and people are eating it up.  Is this what we have to look forward at the theater in 20 years, a Game of the Throne reboot and Holo 3D Don Drapers?

Which days are you talking about?  Remakes, sequels, reboots, rewrites, have been around forever.  Invasion of the Body Snatchers in 1978, West Side Story in 1961, Heck, they made a sequel to King Kong in 1933.  Shakespeare was famous for borrowing from Greek sources; the Ancient Greeks did all the same things -- trilogies, rewrites, borrowing of others' stories, etc. -- in their stage plays.


The Dawn Patrol came out in 1930, starring Douglas Fairbanks.  The more famous remake, starring Errol Flynn came out in 1938.  The real kicker is that they reused most of the aerial footage from the first one.
 
2013-04-04 05:31:48 AM
OK, but the rest of the film is terrible. The script has holes, it's not very well directed.

Henry Holland: by having the character played by the incredible Alec Guinness done by milquetoast Tom Hanks. Also, Peter Sellers.
/Obi Wan who?


I don't hate on Hanks' performance (although it's not as good). I just thought it was a really unnecessary film. There's 5 Ealing Comedies that cannot be remade, because they are pretty much flawless: The Lavender Hill Mob, The Man in the White Suit, Whisky Galore, Kind Hearts and Coronets and The Ladykillers. They are movies with no fat.
 
2013-04-04 06:03:20 AM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: And one more picture:
img825.imageshack.us

'cause I can


Wow, her plastic surgery is awful.  Bad nose job, and horrible obvious botox or fillers in her upper lip, and there are dents developing in her cheek fillers.  These two could be on a poster for "bad plastic surgery / good plastic surgery" because Kate looks great (although I think only her tits are fake.  She hasn't even had her teeth "fixed").

peterthx: Uhura has a relationship with one man, Spock, and suddenly she's a slut? Just WTF man.


Misogynist logic. A women having sex with someone other than me = slut.   And she not only has sex, she pursues it and enjoys it.  Shameless slapper, doesn't she know that's the man's job?

Also, the assumption is that the orginal Uhura wasn't having sex?  Come on now.  Just because she didn't straddle everything in front of half the crew like the manwhore who ran the ship, doesn't mean she was a nun.  Oh right, good girls don't have sex.  Original Uhura was a good girl, so no sex, obviously.

Gyrfalcon: What if Kirk, instead of being a paragon of morality and heroism, was really a slacker dick?


Weird, I always thought Kirk was a dick.  In his day he was probably fine, but watching it in the 80s and 90s?  The guy came off as a self-aggrandizing sleaze.  I don't really know how to explain it.  He seemed like a caricature of the living embodiment of dumb jock worship.  All bravado and excessive overt displays of masculinity.  He certainly was a poor excuse for a noble man compared to Picard.  There are classy ways to stick your dick in any available moist hole (Captain Jack).  Kirk was not classy.

I don't get how we're supposed to like NuKirk either.  Mostly I sit there hoping Spock will beat the crap out of him.  Happily, we get to Harrison do so in STiD.

Welfare Peanut Butter: See also: Zachary Quinto. Part of me is sort of hoping that the one that's coming out this year devolves into a Quinto/Cumberbatch slashfic on screen.


Will this still apply if it turns out Harrison is Sybok like some people think?  They're only half brothers so it would barely be incest at all.
 
2013-04-04 07:32:31 AM

FeedTheCollapse: Witty_Retort: I think that was the smartest thing JJ did in new Trek was the alternate-timeline so that ToS, Next Gen etc. still "happened" and all his movies happen in their own pocket.

I think my only problem with the alternate timeline was that it was acknowledged by the original timeline's Spock. I think I would've preferred that the story had existed on its own terms.


It was a genius "reboot tactic".  Older fans can still enjoy all of the older shows and movies unscathed; the new movie literally reboots the franchise and separates it from any old baggage, allowing total freedom going forward without treading on precious previous canon.  I'm frankly amazed they pulled it off as well as they did.

I otherwise like the film despite some obvious plotholes. I seem to recall Fark really loving the movie when it came out, but that opinion has apparently changed.

A very vocal, and in my opinion anal retentive minority.  Most people recognize it for the terrific movie that it is.  You don't get 95% on Rotten Tomatoes for sucking ass.
 
2013-04-04 08:47:22 AM
Some movies that could be remade:

WAG THE DOG (1998)
Sphere (1998) (seriously could we have a good adaption of Sphere)
Contact (1997) (Could we have a good version of this movie?)
Starship Troopers (1997) (Could we have a good adaption of this?)
The Postman (1997) (Read the book: A better movie is in there then what Kevin Costner gave us... and that movie wasn't BAD)
Tank Girl (1995)(Can we have a good adaption of this?)
PCU (1994)(The send off of politically correct college culture could be modernized)
The Mask (1994) (Can we have a good adaption made)
The Meteor Man (1993)(This could have been a far better movie)
Freejack (1992)(Interesting concept, could have been done much better)
HERO (1992) (You could make an interesting remake with a twist here)
Tremors (1990)(It could get a reboot and be huge)
She-Devil (1989)
 
2013-04-04 08:56:16 AM

peterthx: Mugato: Gyrfalcon: Star Trek wasn't really a reboot, though. It didn't do any of the things a reboot traditionally does--tell the original story but "grittier" or "more realistic" or whatever.

Well that's not really the definition of a "reboot". Although it was "grittier" in that Spock was a total dick who hated Kirk and McCoy was an even more sarcastic prick than  he was in the originals and Uhura was a slut sexualty liberated. So yeah, I think everything was "edgier" in the new Trek film.

Oh please. These rants against the new ST series are worse than your GENERATIONS rants.

Uhura has a relationship with one man, Spock, and suddenly she's a slut? Just WTF man.


Well I was being whimsical with the last post but what about Generations was I wrong about?
 
2013-04-04 09:18:07 AM
More Remake Ideas:

The Adventures of Baron Munchhausen (1988)
Dead Heat (1988) ((seriously with the zombie craze why has this not been remade already))
Moon over Parador (1988) (Only instead of a Latin American Dictator, I would totally set it in north Korea)
Alien Nation (1988)
Adventures in Babysitting (1987)
The Running Man (1987)(ONLY if its more like King's original story)
Nomads (1986)
The Manhattan Project (1986) (a lot of things that have changed related to nukes could be VERY interesting now as a movie)
The Golden Child (1986)
Real Genius (1985)
Remo Williams (1985)(needs a good adaption)
The Last Starfighter (1984)(though an adaption here would be tough)
The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension! (1984)
Dreamscape (1984)
Dr Detroit (1983)(also... Fran Drescher was in it)
Scanners (1981)(could be huge with a reboot)
 
2013-04-04 09:39:36 AM

karasoth: The Running Man (1987)(ONLY if its more like King's original story)


The main character flies a plane into a highrise. That will go over well.
 
2013-04-04 09:50:02 AM

Mugato: karasoth: The Running Man (1987)(ONLY if its more like King's original story)

The main character flies a plane into a highrise. That will go over well.


Its not to soon anymore, people need to get over it
 
2013-04-04 01:41:49 PM

ExpressPork: PanicMan: As a Star Trek fan, I thought the reboot was great.

Are you sure you're a Star Trek fan?  I don't understand.

I like star trek because the show is a morality play in space.  In almost each version of the show the writing is invariably well-done and it's a story-driven show.  The movie was...just...how can anyone call themselves a Star Trek fan and actually like the reboot?  It's not even Star Trek.


Because what you're describing is a fine 42-44 minute TV show but a damn boring movie.  I give The Motion Picture big props for following very closely to the vision of the show.  It's by far the closest movie to do so.  But my god, I'd rather watch paint dry.  The NOMAD episode did not need to be almost 3 hours long.
 
2013-04-04 01:45:42 PM

Witty_Retort: Witty_Retort: extroverted_suicide: SurfaceTension: Am I the only one that enjoyed the Star Trek reboot?

{clipped}

/or maybe I'm really over-thinking it


I'd watch that.
 
2013-04-04 01:50:53 PM

peterthx: Mugato: Gyrfalcon: Star Trek wasn't really a reboot, though. It didn't do any of the things a reboot traditionally does--tell the original story but "grittier" or "more realistic" or whatever.

Well that's not really the definition of a "reboot". Although it was "grittier" in that Spock was a total dick who hated Kirk and McCoy was an even more sarcastic prick than  he was in the originals and Uhura was a slut sexualty liberated. So yeah, I think everything was "edgier" in the new Trek film.

Oh please. These rants against the new ST series are worse than your GENERATIONS rants.

Uhura has a relationship with one man, Spock, and suddenly she's a slut? Just WTF man.


She cashed in her sexual favors with Spock to get posted on Enterprise.  Since she got something out of it, I guess technically she's a whore, not a slut.
 
2013-04-04 04:58:34 PM

Mugato: Well I was being whimsical with the last post but what about Generations was I wrong about?


Nearly everything. It isn't the strongest of the films, not by a long shot, but it isn't a bad movie by any means. It had balls at least. Data got his emotions. The 1701-D bit the dust in a spectacular way. The cinematography and VFX work are top notch.  It killed Kirk. I find most people who dislike the film hated that fact and are still butthurt about it.

And every chance you get you let us know you hated it. Let it go dude.
 
2013-04-04 05:01:18 PM

extroverted_suicide: She cashed in her sexual favors with Spock to get posted on Enterprise.  Since she got something out of it, I guess technically she's a whore, not a slut.


Hardly. She was supposed to be posted on Enterprise but Spock put her on the Farragut to avoid the appearance of favoritism, and she embarrassed him about that. She deserved to be on the 1701. Whores get stuff they don't deserve, especially if they're named Kardashian or Hilton.
 
2013-04-05 03:07:10 AM

peterthx: Mugato: Well I was being whimsical with the last post but what about Generations was I wrong about?

Nearly everything. It isn't the strongest of the films, not by a long shot, but it isn't a bad movie by any means. It had balls at least. Data got his emotions. The 1701-D bit the dust in a spectacular way. The cinematography and VFX work are top notch.  It killed Kirk. I find most people who dislike the film hated that fact and are still butthurt about it.

And every chance you get you let us know you hated it. Let it go dude.


It's not Kirk's death that riled us it how he died this pissed us off. He died from some lame ass railing death.
 
Displayed 193 of 193 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report