No prejudice from me, I just refuse to be bought by mediocrity and the rehash of a classic.
Sorry never met a Marillion fan.
But Greenie,
How do you know if will be mediocre or a rehash?
Probably in a minority of one, but I always thought it was an overated comedy in the first place.
Fair point, I think it will be rubbish because:- the actors who played the characters are iconic.I have never seen a remake of a film or TV show that is recognised as better than the original.
How does the iconic status of the previous actors affect the quality of this film? There's a discussion to be had about the bankruptcy of raiding the archives instead of inventing something new, but that does not have a bearing on how good or bad this film will be.
Casino Royale - the original is a complete mess, the remake is a good action film.
For what it's worth, Toby Jones is an inspired piece of casting.
I'm with greenie it's a lazy thing to do imo, and I don't understand why there is a need to do it
It's not about 'need' though is it? People want to see new stuff made, whether that's brand new original material and characters or a rewriting/remake of something familiar. Whether you think there's a need or not, somebody thought they could do something new with this and that people would watch it and,hopefully, enjoy it. It happens all the time, sometimes with success, sometimes not. The examples I listed above are some that I, personally, think worked, but there are countless more - I didn't even start on all the Marvel and DC movies as there are so many. Maybe it'll be good maybe not. Even if it's shit, everyone will say how brilliant the old series was and it'll probably get a whole new generation of fans. I don't see the harm in trying.
Wouldn't it be great to find the next iconic British comedy, with new ideas and characters, instead of trying to bring something old into this decade
Yeah, but writers are continually trying to find that formula and will continue to do so. You can't force comedy genius and making an up to date version of an old classic won't change that. Every now and then a piece of comedy appears and becomes iconic. It's happened over and over again for years and it'll keep happening.
To be honest, I think the issue is that there are a lot of people who look back on DA with such fondness that they fear it'll be ruined. I sympathise with that view, but I just don't see it happening. You'll still love the old show.
I'm with greenie it's a lazy thing to do imo, and I don't understand why there is a need to do it
I know what you are saying, But it's not really lazy and from the film's investors viewpoint there clearly was a need to do it. If, instead, they'd come up with a new concept, no one would ever have heard of it and it would have had to have been really good to have been a success. This way, with careful marketing - which there has already been with the cast list being revealed and now stills being made available - the risks are much less and a profit virtually guaranteed (unless they really cock it up badly). They can come up with a movie that merely needs to be okay in order to make money because so many people will go and see it out of curiosity and no doubt the DVD/Netflix release will make some dosh too. A no brainer really.
I'm with greenie it's a lazy thing to do imo, and I don't understand why there is a need to do it
I know what you are saying, But it's not really lazy and from the film's investors viewpoint there clearly was a need to do it. If, instead, they'd come up with a new concept, no one would ever have heard of it and it would have had to have been really good to have been a success. This way, with careful marketing - which there has already been with the cast list being revealed and now stills being made available - the risks are much less and a profit virtually guaranteed (unless they really cock it up badly). They can come up with a movie that merely needs to be okay in order to make money because so many people will go and see it out of curiosity and no doubt the DVD/Netflix release will make some dosh too. A no brainer really.
Nail on head. In the arts things are supposed to be good to be successful, the lack of understanding on this thread is a worry, like I said earlier it woukd seem most are easily pleased and embrace mediocrity.
The Wizard of Oz (1939) that everyone remembers is a remake of a 1925 movie which, itself, was a re-make of a 1910 movie. Mind you - the first two were silent so I guess the songs didn't come across quite so well!
I don't buy this lazy argument one little bit. I think it's going to be bloody hard work to make a success of it. I don't remember there ever being a film with so many comparisons to the original before anyone has seen so much as one frame of it. Every character and every scene are going to be scrutinised to see wether they are up to par. It's going to be tough work for everyone on that film to ensure that it measures up; especially when you get the feeling that half the public have either written it off or are even willing it to fail. Just imagine how difficult it will be to be anyone one of those actors wrestling with the problem of how to make their role similar enough to the original to invoke the necessary good will from the audience whilst contrasting enough to make their own. That's a nightmare of a task. Lazy, my arse!
One more for Henry's list, The Office (well, up to about series 7).
I don't buy this lazy argument one little bit. I think it's going to be bloody hard work to make a success of it. I don't remember there ever being a film with so many comparisons to the original before anyone has seen so much as one frame of it. Every character and every scene are going to be scrutinised to see wether they are up to par. It's going to be tough work for everyone on that film to ensure that it measures up; especially when you get the feeling that half the public have either written it off or are even willing it to fail. Just imagine how difficult it will be to be anyone one of those actors wrestling with the problem of how to make their role similar enough to the original to invoke the necessary good will from the audience whilst contrasting enough to make their own. That's a nightmare of a task. Lazy, my arse!
One more for Henry's list, The Office (well, up to about series 7).
I'm with greenie it's a lazy thing to do imo, and I don't understand why there is a need to do it
I know what you are saying, But it's not really lazy and from the film's investors viewpoint there clearly was a need to do it. If, instead, they'd come up with a new concept, no one would ever have heard of it and it would have had to have been really good to have been a success. This way, with careful marketing - which there has already been with the cast list being revealed and now stills being made available - the risks are much less and a profit virtually guaranteed (unless they really cock it up badly). They can come up with a movie that merely needs to be okay in order to make money because so many people will go and see it out of curiosity and no doubt the DVD/Netflix release will make some dosh too. A no brainer really.
Nail on head. In the arts things are supposed to be good to be successful, the lack of not agreeing with me on this thread is a worry, like I said earlier it woukd seem most are easily pleased and embrace mediocrity.
Ok, The magnificent seven is better than the seven samurai.
Forbidden Planet is better then the Tempest
West Side Story is better than Romeo and Juliet
Never in a million years. Cant speak fro the others.
Fixed that for you mate...
"easily pleased and embrace mediocrity" - you have no idea whatsoever if this is the case, you have not seen a frame of the film yet, now stop being a WUM, it doesn't suit you... :-D
I'm with greenie it's a lazy thing to do imo, and I don't understand why there is a need to do it
I know what you are saying, But it's not really lazy and from the film's investors viewpoint there clearly was a need to do it. If, instead, they'd come up with a new concept, no one would ever have heard of it and it would have had to have been really good to have been a success. This way, with careful marketing - which there has already been with the cast list being revealed and now stills being made available - the risks are much less and a profit virtually guaranteed (unless they really cock it up badly). They can come up with a movie that merely needs to be okay in order to make money because so many people will go and see it out of curiosity and no doubt the DVD/Netflix release will make some dosh too. A no brainer really.
Nail on head. In the arts things are supposed to be good to be successful, the lack of not agreeing with me on this thread is a worry, like I said earlier it woukd seem most are easily pleased and embrace mediocrity.
Ok, The magnificent seven is better than the seven samurai.
Forbidden Planet is better then the Tempest
West Side Story is better than Romeo and Juliet
Never in a million years. Cant speak fro the others.
Fixed that for you mate...
"easily pleased and embrace mediocrity" - you have no idea whatsoever if this is the case, you have not seen a frame of the film yet, now stop being a WUM, it doesn't suit you... :-D
No WUM here. You still dont get it do you. Its not about seeing the film, its a cheap way to make money out of an iconic series therefore devaluing it. Speaking as a creative person it is to the Film industry what the X-Factor is to music. Imagine if some tit said lets remake Fawlty Towers or OFAH.
But get your kia ora ready and go see it if you feel the need.
I'm with greenie it's a lazy thing to do imo, and I don't understand why there is a need to do it
I know what you are saying, But it's not really lazy and from the film's investors viewpoint there clearly was a need to do it. If, instead, they'd come up with a new concept, no one would ever have heard of it and it would have had to have been really good to have been a success. This way, with careful marketing - which there has already been with the cast list being revealed and now stills being made available - the risks are much less and a profit virtually guaranteed (unless they really cock it up badly). They can come up with a movie that merely needs to be okay in order to make money because so many people will go and see it out of curiosity and no doubt the DVD/Netflix release will make some dosh too. A no brainer really.
Nail on head. In the arts things are supposed to be good to be successful, the lack of not agreeing with me on this thread is a worry, like I said earlier it woukd seem most are easily pleased and embrace mediocrity.
Ok, The magnificent seven is better than the seven samurai.
Forbidden Planet is better then the Tempest
West Side Story is better than Romeo and Juliet
Never in a million years. Cant speak fro the others.
Fixed that for you mate...
"easily pleased and embrace mediocrity" - you have no idea whatsoever if this is the case, you have not seen a frame of the film yet, now stop being a WUM, it doesn't suit you... :-D
No WUM here. You still dont get it do you. Its not about seeing the film, its a cheap way to make money out of an iconic series therefore devaluing it. Speaking as a creative person it is to the Film industry what the X-Factor is to music. Imagine if some tit said lets remake Fawlty Towers or OFAH.
But get your kia ora ready and go see it if you feel the need.
You are Wumming, so stop it, you naughty person.
My all time favourite film is Bedazzled, the Pete and Dud version. I watched the remake, without prejudice, I hadn't made my mind up that I was going to hate it, like you have with Dad's Army, because I like to keep an open mind. It was fine, parts of it followed the original script verbatim, and then changed the punchline, which I found odd, but other than that a perfectly acceptable piece of work in it's own right.
I would be happy for anyone to remake anything as long as it was good, OFAH, Fawlty Towers, Brideshead Revisited or Blackadder. Even more so if it is a completely new script.
Are we to be denied ever seeing a new version of "The Importance of Being Earnest" because Dame Edith Evans is no longer with us to deliver that immortal line?
Comments
Simpsons and the Tracy Ullman show
Softly, Softly and Z Cars
And on another point Only Fools wasn't as good after Grandad left. Same for Cheers when Coach left and the Simpsons with Troy Mclure.
And disagree re OFAH, I thought Uncle Albert added just as much if not more than Grandad.
How do you know if will be mediocre or a rehash?
Probably in a minority of one, but I always thought it was an overated comedy in the first place.
Fair point, I think it will be rubbish because:- the actors who played the characters are iconic. I have never seen a remake of a film or TV show that is recognised as better than the original.
How does the iconic status of the previous actors affect the quality of this film? There's a discussion to be had about the bankruptcy of raiding the archives instead of inventing something new, but that does not have a bearing on how good or bad this film will be.
Casino Royale - the original is a complete mess, the remake is a good action film.
For what it's worth, Toby Jones is an inspired piece of casting.
People want to see new stuff made, whether that's brand new original material and characters or a rewriting/remake of something familiar.
Whether you think there's a need or not, somebody thought they could do something new with this and that people would watch it and,hopefully, enjoy it. It happens all the time, sometimes with success, sometimes not. The examples I listed above are some that I, personally, think worked, but there are countless more - I didn't even start on all the Marvel and DC movies as there are so many.
Maybe it'll be good maybe not. Even if it's shit, everyone will say how brilliant the old series was and it'll probably get a whole new generation of fans.
I don't see the harm in trying.
Forbidden Planet is better then the Tempest
West Side Story is better than Romeo and Juliet
To be honest, I think the issue is that there are a lot of people who look back on DA with such fondness that they fear it'll be ruined. I sympathise with that view, but I just don't see it happening. You'll still love the old show.
If, instead, they'd come up with a new concept, no one would ever have heard of it and it would have had to have been really good to have been a success.
This way, with careful marketing - which there has already been with the cast list being revealed and now stills being made available - the risks are much less and a profit virtually guaranteed (unless they really cock it up badly). They can come up with a movie that merely needs to be okay in order to make money because so many people will go and see it out of curiosity and no doubt the DVD/Netflix release will make some dosh too. A no brainer really.
One more for Henry's list, The Office (well, up to about series 7).
"easily pleased and embrace mediocrity" - you have no idea whatsoever if this is the case, you have not seen a frame of the film yet, now stop being a WUM, it doesn't suit you... :-D
Speaking as a creative person it is to the Film industry what the X-Factor is to music.
Imagine if some tit said lets remake Fawlty Towers or OFAH.
But get your kia ora ready and go see it if you feel the need.
Complete and utter bollocks.
My all time favourite film is Bedazzled, the Pete and Dud version. I watched the remake, without prejudice, I hadn't made my mind up that I was going to hate it, like you have with Dad's Army, because I like to keep an open mind. It was fine, parts of it followed the original script verbatim, and then changed the punchline, which I found odd, but other than that a perfectly acceptable piece of work in it's own right.
I would be happy for anyone to remake anything as long as it was good, OFAH, Fawlty Towers, Brideshead Revisited or Blackadder. Even more so if it is a completely new script.
Are we to be denied ever seeing a new version of "The Importance of Being Earnest" because Dame Edith Evans is no longer with us to deliver that immortal line?