This is topic What movies would you like to see remade? in forum Ask a Geek! at The Geek Culture Forums!.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.geekculture.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=002745

Posted by GrumpySteen (Member # 170) on March 25, 2011, 05:50:
 
I saw a top ten list the other day (which I can't find, so no link) of the top ten movies that are worse than you remember.

I started thinking about them again this morning, though, and I think several of them could be awesome as a remake (which seems to be a popular thing in Hollywood lately)

Firefox
The jet fight scene.
The story is good and today's special effects could give us some pretty awesome fight/flight scenes instead of the painfully obvious blue-screened miniatures of 1982.

Total Recall
Condensed to seven minutes
Better special effects would add to the movie as would a less action-oriented star. Hollywood has been more receptive to the idea of more thoughtful, less action-oriented movies and has seen some big hits, so it's not impossible.

Enemy Mine
Theatrical Trailer
With better effects, this could be such a great movie. The story was good and performances of Dennis Quaid and Louis Gosset Jr. were solid, but the effects, scenery and everything else just destroy what is otherwise a great movie.

So... what films do you think could do with a modern remake?
 
Posted by Ashitaka (Member # 4924) on March 25, 2011, 08:30:
 
what, total recall condensed down to all the important scenes and no mutant T&A, That is all I remmber from total recall ( I was 13 when I saw it)

I think all these movies were too good to be remade.

That is what people don't gt nowadays, so what if CGI can make some scenes look better. CGI doesn't make good sci fi / fantasy. Plot does.

Pick some horrible films to be remade, this time done well.


slipstream has potential ( I like distopian futures)
trailer
"You misslead them about us, so how can we know your not missleading us... about them." IF that line doesn't convince you this movie needs to be remade with decent acting then nothing will.

or better yet remake

spachunter In 3D I never saw it in 3D, just on VHS. 3D is cool again so its perfct timing.

trailer
 
Posted by GrumpySteen (Member # 170) on March 25, 2011, 11:30:
 
I didn't suggest simply adding effects.

Each of the movies I named could benefit from better actors and better scripting. The basic stories are great, but the particular presentation of those stories leave much to be desired.

One good example of what I mean; Nicholson's Joker was great and, like many others, I thought a remake would be lame, but Ledger's Joker was amazing. I'm glad they didn't accept the idea that nobody could top Nicholson's interpretation of the character, even though that was a pretty common line of thought once The Dark Knight was announced.
 
Posted by The Famous Druid (Member # 1769) on March 25, 2011, 17:59:
 
I know I risk a Fatwa from the fans for suggesting this, but I'd like to see the Tarantino remake of Bladerunner.

...or the Ridley Scott remake of Star Wars.
 
Posted by macmcseboy (Member # 1232) on March 25, 2011, 19:59:
 
TFD the LucasArmy is on to you!
 
Posted by TheMoMan (Member # 1659) on March 25, 2011, 22:45:
 
____ There are two I believe should never be remade: "The Great Escape" and "Pretty Woman"
 
Posted by Callipygous (Member # 2071) on March 26, 2011, 12:34:
 
While I know that many of the best Hollywood films are remakes (e.g. Judy Garland's "A Star is Born") I don't think they need any encouragement to rake over their back catalogue more than they do already. On the other hand if a director with some integrity, vision and originality is involved, such as the Coen Brother's "True Grit", I'll probably bite, whatever I think of the original.
 
Posted by quantumfluff (Member # 450) on March 27, 2011, 12:04:
 
quote:
Originally posted by The Famous Druid:
I know I risk a Fatwa from the fans for suggesting this, but I'd like to see the Tarantino remake of Bladerunner.

...or the Ridley Scott remake of Star Wars.

Yes please.
 
Posted by Ashitaka (Member # 4924) on March 28, 2011, 05:43:
 
everythign is a remix part II
 
Posted by Callipygous (Member # 2071) on March 28, 2011, 23:35:
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ashitaka:
everythign is a remix part II

Now I understand your spelling Ash, it's postmodern and ironic! [Wink]

Seriously that is an excellent video essay.
 
Posted by GrumpySteen (Member # 170) on March 29, 2011, 07:09:
 
And here's what not to do when remaking a movie.
 
Posted by Ashitaka (Member # 4924) on March 29, 2011, 07:47:
 
quote:
Originally posted by GrumpySteen:
And here's what not to do when remaking a movie.

the movie is missing a giant mechanical spider.


ps
Refer to Kevin Smith why I said that.
 
Posted by GrumpySteen (Member # 170) on March 29, 2011, 07:50:
 
I know the story and you're entirely correct.
 
Posted by Richard Wolf VI (Member # 4993) on March 29, 2011, 11:50:
 
Robert Rodriguez owes us a Barbarella remake.
 
Posted by Snaggy (Member # 123) on March 30, 2011, 03:52:
 
Obvious: Someone needs to remake the entire Star Wars prequels, with a complete re-write.
 
Posted by Aditu (Member # 2340) on April 02, 2011, 02:52:
 
I often see movies based on books and then whine. I think what I would want is to remake some titles and make them long enough to tell the story properly.
The problem with this is that you can't roll it over a zillion times in a multiplex if it is longer. No it must get shorter! [Razz]
 
Posted by Ashitaka (Member # 4924) on April 02, 2011, 06:25:
 
quote:
Originally posted by Aditu:
I often see movies based on books and then whine. I think what I would want is to remake some titles and make them long enough to tell the story properly.
The problem with this is that you can't roll it over a zillion times in a multiplex if it is longer. No it must get shorter! [Razz]

I agree when taking books to the silver screen, lots is lost on the 2 h maximun that people can sit still nowdays. But, a movie would be unreasonably long if one was "true" to the book.

for an example, and I think I get this quote from the DVD directors (P. Jackson)commentary, THat is, IF they were to have included all the dialog in TLOTR novels, just the dialog, no action scenes or framing shots or beautifuls scenery, just the written dialog spoken at normal pace in TLOTR, is 60 plus hours of talking. No action, just 60 hours of talking.
 
Posted by TheMoMan (Member # 1659) on April 02, 2011, 09:10:
 
____ Seems about right, but is that using all four books (The Hobbit) included?
 
Posted by The Famous Druid (Member # 1769) on April 02, 2011, 09:11:
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ashitaka:
IF they were to have included all the dialog in TLOTR novels, just the dialog, no action scenes or framing shots or beautifuls scenery, just the written dialog spoken at normal pace in TLOTR, is 60 plus hours of talking. No action, just 60 hours of talking.

You could cut 10 hours if you left out the songs.

I was **very** pleased that Jackson left out (almost all of) the songs.
 
Posted by GrumpySteen (Member # 170) on April 02, 2011, 14:34:
 
Conversational speaking speed is about 150 words per minute and a paperback novel has about 400 words per page (this will vary depending on the font size, of course). That gives you a bit less than three minutes of dialog per page (assuming nothing else is described).

Try condensing this 81 second fight scene into 150 words.

If Tolkien and described the battles blow-by-blow, it would have been a 400 book series that nobody would read.

Fortunately, both Tolkien and Peter Jackson knew what they were doing and focused on the strengths of their respective mediums.
 


© 2018 Geek Culture

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.4.0