BS: Remaking Classics

Subject: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 28 Jul 04 - 10:20 PM

Soemtime in the next few days, they're releasing a remake of The Manchurian Candidate. A couple of months ago, I watched the movie again on DVD and find it hard to believe they can improve on it (even though I like Denzel Washington a lot.) It remains to be seen if the movie can stand on its own. I don't have high expecations, because I've seen too many remakes that, first of all seemed completely unnecessary, and ended up being bombs.

Why did anyone have to remake Psycho? Or High Noon?

Last night, I was flipping around the channels and came across a remake of Picnic. They had some innocuous tv star playing the William Holden part, and a starlet playing the Kim Novak role.

And then, on the Fox Movie Channel they're showing remakes of other classics... like Laura, with Robert Stack playing the part originally played by Dana Andrews.

And then we could talk about the Sherlock Holmes remakes... some good, some exceedingly limp.

Got any other examples... good or bad?

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 28 Jul 04 - 10:50 PM

The Fox movie channel programs are an exception to this rule, I think. They were made as television versions of popular movies, but intended, like some of the Playhouse 90 and Studio this-and-that programs of the late 50s and into the 60s to be viable good drama. They chose good actors to reproduce the roles that had been portrayed in the movies. I think it was as much an experiement as anything else, but it was one that has provided some interesting material for posterity.

There are a few remakes that were excellent. The Judy Garland version of A Star is Born is as highly respected as the Janet Gaynor original. And a film like Gaslight with Ingrid Bergman and Charles Boyer is a classic but is also a remake. I had occasion recently to see a portion of the original version, a British film, and it looked interesting, but not as charismatic as the Bergman/Boyer/Lansbury version. (Angela was a very convincing naughty girl in that film!)

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Amergin
Date: 28 Jul 04 - 11:11 PM

I want to see the Manchurian Candidate remake....I love the original...and am interested in how they carried the new one.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: freightdawg
Date: 28 Jul 04 - 11:17 PM

Seems to me that one variable might be if the material could stand up to a more modernized version. I think someone a couple of years ago remade "12 Angry Men", a story about one juror who manages to convince his fellow jurors that the accused is innocent. When it was first made it had a great social message, but in the years that followed more "material" came to light to include in the remake. Don't know how the remake went, never saw it, but that's what I'm talking about.

However, to remake a classic just to rip off the title is just plain wrong. Example: the rip off of "Psycho" where every word, every camera angle, everything was just as Hitchcock had done it.

There have been several tellings of the wreck of the Titanic, but the last one was pretty good. Every once in a while a new look at an old story is not necessarily a bad idea, but anyone who undertakes the task had better understand what s/he is doing, lest the result appear to be more of a rip-off than a re-interpretation.

Freightdawg

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: GUEST,peedeecee
Date: 28 Jul 04 - 11:56 PM

The remake of Dial M for Murder was vile.

The NYT review of The Manchurian Candidate says that the remake substitutes special effects for the wit of the original, and also says that this one is a direct fictional shot at the Bush Administration.

I'll wait for the video, I think.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 12:56 AM

Jerry-
Isn't that a bit like saying that nobody should sing, say, Cindy because Pete Seeger sang it? Agreed, most recycled classics are no improvement over the original. I think, though, that each should be judged on its own merits.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: fat B****rd
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 03:20 AM

Get Carter with Sly Stallone !!!!! Bloody sacrilege.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Ellenpoly
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 05:29 AM

I'm also looking forward to seeing the re-make, mostly because I think they've updated it, and put together a damn good cast.

Sometimes I love em (re-makes that it) sometimes they blow it, and sometimes I can't for the life of me figure out why they bothered in the first place.

Starsky and Hutch? Puleese! It was a mediocre TV show in the first place. Examples like this is more about a dearth of creativity these years, and trying to make a buck off of someone else's ideas.

The remakes I've liked? "A Star is Born" with Judy, not the later version with Babs. Also "Prisoner of Zenda", both the Ronald Colman and Stewart Granger versions, (and I would have loved to have seen the original). Also "King Solomon's Mines", with Granger again, not the later version with Richard Chamberlain.

I do agree that different versions of plays and films should and will be re-thought, and re-cast. But sometimes, there is a definitive version (at least for me) that should NOT be f*cked with.

Examples? "A Streetcar Named Desire"
          "The Philadelphia Story" (up for a re-make so I hear..grrr)
          "Gone With The Wind" (why bother? it will never be matched)

..xx..e

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: kendall
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 07:28 AM

Mutiny on the Bounty with Marlon Brando was better than the original with Charles Laughton.
And, the ultimate film of that incident, THE BOUNTY with Anthony Hopkins and Mel Gibson.

Treasure Island with Charlton Heston? It sucked!

I would not see a remake of High Noon, no matter who starred.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: RangerSteve
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 07:54 AM

I have one problem with the remake of Manchurian Candidate - the original was about a US soldier brainwashed by the Chinese during the Korean War - Manchuria is the northernmost province of China.   
The remake involves a soldier brainwashed by Iraqis during the Kuwait business. Manchuria is miles away from Iraq. They should have changed the title.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 08:30 AM

Good examples. No, Dick, I'm not saying that they shouldn't do remakes. I'm saying that remakes of real classics like High Noon or Gone With Thw Wind are not likely to measure up to the originals. I think songs are a totally different medium than a movie. Even recordings that might be considered "Classic" as done by a particular artist are often done in a different style and become "new" classics.
Mack the Knife had a classic status done by Louie Armstrong, Bobby Darin and Ella Fitzgerald.

Some movies have had several reincarnations... The Shop Around The Corner was a wonderful voie that was made into a pretty darned good music, In The Good Old Summertime with Van Johnson and Judy Garland, and then remade again as You've Got Mail, which I didn't see.

There was a wonderful English movie, The Little Kidnappers that came out in the 50's that has never been available on video or DVD. But, there was a remake done, with Charlton Heston as the Father which I got through eBay. I didn't think it was quite as good as the original, but I really enjoyed it.

They remade Lord of the Flies, but I didn't see the remake because they gave it lousy reviews (I don't think that the original was a classic, but I liked it.)

And now they're making King Kong again with Jack Black. No, he's not playing the big ape.

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Don Firth
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 01:23 PM

I hereby go on record as warning anyone who tries to do a remake of Casablanca that I will track them to the ends of the earth and murder them in the slowest and most painful way that my vivid imagination can devise. Then I will dig them up and kill them again.

And this is only one of several movies on my list.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Blackcatter
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 01:36 PM

The remake of MC has some differences they're saying. Supposedly those who have seen the original will be suprised of changes in the plot.

You know why the remake them. It's a cheap ad ploy. The movie already is a "known quantity"

Plus no one has to write a new story.

Plus the story has already been sold to the studio and is probably cheaper to get again

It's the new trend that stems from part 1, part 2, etc.


Most of those made in the last few years are shit. No surprise there.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 01:45 PM

That's a valid point, Stilly. The Hour Of Stars programs that Twentieth Century Fox did for television were not comparable in production costs to the originals. I've only seen two.. Laura was a major disappointment, and the other movie (which I've already forgotten) was one I'd never seen the original of.

Of course, the reverse holds true... many classic tv movies were made into equally good, or better theatrical releases. Marty is the most obvious. They're showing Edge of the City on TCM this month... with Sidney Poitier and John Cassavettes. I originally saw it on television (from what I remember, with the same leads.) I thought they were equally good.

And then, the made Scooby Doo Where are You into a movie.

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: M.Ted
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 02:22 PM

Jonathan Demme was on the "Today Show" and, somewhat sheepishly, said that the movie was made because the script was great--and why wouldn't it have been?--you have to remember that Hollywood is in the business of *making* movies--so they are always looking for a script that can be made into a movie that will sell tickets--and those are not that easy to come by--

I once heard Penelope Spheeris say that the average studio comes upon, say, 5 or 6 great scripts a year--the thing is that they need to make, say, 10 or 12 films a year, so they are always trying to figure out some way to find things that look like they might be able to turn into something that works--hence the remakes, sequels. prequels, vehicles etc--

Oh--"High Society" was a musical remake of "The Philadelphia Story"--a couple great Cole Porter songs, but, as they say, otherwise uninspired. The Kathryn Hepburn character turns out to have been based on Hope Montgomery Scott--a prominent and quirky Main Line society dame--

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: SINSULL
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 02:26 PM

The original "The Haunting" with Julie Christie was terrifying in its lack of special effects. The new one looks like an attempt to use every computer based fright trick invented in the last ten years - the effect? YAWNNNNN

Why did they have to re-do "CArrie"? Unless someone had the TV rights to it and wasn't budging...

Part of the problem with these remakes is the actors. Tom Cruise vs, Clark Gable? Yeah, right.

I hope never to see a remake of High Noon but (I will get mountains of abuse for this) Johnny Depp could carry it off and I would go to see it.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 02:44 PM

Johnny Depp?
Johnny Depp?
Johnny Depp?

Yeah... the original The Haunting of Hill House was scary as Hell, with almost no special effects. Nothing is more frightening than your imagination. The remake was on television and I watched part of it. I've read scarier things on Mudcat.

Now there's another category. If they remade a classic movie, who would you like to see as the leads?

My recommendation is to remake The Treasure Of Sierra Madre with Caroll OConnor in the Humphrey Bogart role, George Clooney in the Tim Holt role, and of course, JOHNNY DEPP in the Walter Houston role. :-)

I happen to think Johnny Depp is a wonderful actor, by the way, but can't imagine him being believable in High Noon.

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: freightdawg
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 03:03 PM

Oh gag...

Johnny Depp as the Gary Cooper character???

Sheesh, I thought things could not get any worse after they put Pierce Brosnan in the James Bond role.

This movie has got to be placed along side "Casablanca" in Don Firth's list, to which I would also add Gregory Peck in "To Kill a Mockingbird." In addition to some movies being classics, there are actors who should not be trifled with either. Could anyone other than Peter O'Toole pull of the triple role of Alonzo, Don Quixote, and Miguel Cervantes? Some people were just born for certain roles.

Alas, just my stuck in the mud opinion,

Freightdawg

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 03:08 PM

Another thread. Freight: Movies what if they remake them I'll break the kneecaps of the producer and director. You picked a couple of good ones. I'd put African Queen and Treasure Of Sierra Madre in there, too.

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: PoppaGator
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 03:24 PM

A recent good example of a very *BAD* remake: The Ladykillers. I usually like Tom Hanks, but not this time, thank you.

The one good thing that might have come out of it is that perhaps some young folks who never knew about the wonderful original may have been inspired to check it out.

The original Alec Guiness "Ladykillers" was one of my father's favorite movies. (We're Americans, by the way, so this British movie was a "foreign film" for us.) It came on TV often enough in the 50s and 60s, and we watched it together several times.

When I rented the DVD recently, I was shocked and amazed to see it in color! Since we had black-and-white TV only back in the days when I saw it so many times, it never occurred to me that the theatrical version would have been in color (and of course I had never seen it in color).

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 03:41 PM

"Tom Cruise vs, Clark Gable?"

Give me Tom Cruise over him any day! Mostly because I don't like the overall 'acting style' in 'old movies' Too campy...

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: GUEST,Blackcatter
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 03:53 PM

Yeah but Cruise can't act at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: SINSULL
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 04:29 PM

Why am I not surprised, Clinton? And heap on the Johnny Depp abuse. But I stand by my man.
SINS

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 05:19 PM

In probably the worst track record for remakes, there were THREE attempts to remake the British TV sitcom "Fawlty Towers" (1975-79) as an American sitcom. They all flopped. See this article: Remade in America from a British regional newspaper.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Kim C
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 05:57 PM

Let's just hope no one decides to remake Conan the Barbarian.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: freightdawg
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 06:29 PM

Hey Sinsull,

Sorry if I came off attacking your man. Didn't mean no disrespect. I'm just saying that certain roles seemed to fit the actor - and I know that a lot of roles were just assignments way back then. But Gary Cooper just looks conflicted when he walks on screen. I think High Noon was a great movie, but it would not have been even remotely as popular if, say, we had John Wayne in the lead role, or Clint Eastwood, or Clark Gable, or Cary Grant. The personna of Gary Cooper just kind of fleshed out the role.

I feel the same about Humphrey Bogart in "Casablanca" and "The African Queen" (most all his movies, come to think about it). And Peter O'Toole in "Man of La Mancha" is just perfect. He is equal parts dead serious and comic goofball. When he charged the windmill you just knew he saw a windmill. And when he saw a virtuous lady Dulcinea in the form of the tramp Aldonza he made us see her too. Ever since I saw that movie every time I see O'Toole I think Cervantes.

Anyway, Sinsull, please, no hard feelings against your fav actor.

"To dream, the impossible dream..."

Freightdawg

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: JennyO
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 10:39 PM

They could make Conan the Librarian - ook ook!

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: 12-stringer
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 10:53 PM

"My recommendation is to remake The Treasure Of Sierra Madre with Caroll OConnor in the Humphrey Bogart role, George Clooney in the Tim Holt role, and of course, JOHNNY DEPP in the Walter Houston role. :-)"

They'd have as easy a time getting Humphrey Bogart to play the Humphrey Bogart role in the remake as they would Carroll O'Connor.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 29 Jul 04 - 11:12 PM

Whoops...

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: M.Ted
Date: 30 Jul 04 - 01:51 PM

Remake of "High Noon" to feature Adam Sandler--"Treasure of Sierra Madre" will star Chris Rock, Jackie Chan, and Jim Carrey--

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 30 Jul 04 - 02:21 PM

Did anyone bother to watch the remake of High Noon with Tom Skerrit? He at least is someone I could imagine being believable in the role.

As for classic movies that have been remade, the original Of Mice And Men with Lon Chaney Jr and Murgess Meredith was A wonderful movie. In 1981, they did a "made for tv" movie with Randy Quaid and Robert Blake. It too was a fine movie. And then, in 1991, they did yet another fine version of the movie with John Malkovich and Gary Senise.
That's an unusual instance where all three versions were fine.

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 30 Jul 04 - 07:52 PM

I didn't think Charlton Heston was that bad as Long John Silver - nearer to what Stevenson had in mind I think. Pleasant looking, but evil - whereas Robert Newton played him as a grotesque. Orson Welles I thought his heart wasn't really in it.

How about Julian Clary in the Joe Pesci role in Goodfellas, or as lee Marvin in Point Blank?

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 30 Jul 04 - 08:19 PM

I notice that my movie book gives the Tom Skerritt High Noon 3 and a half stars. Guess it was fairly decent. Nobody could do tired like Gary Cooper, though. Cooper was good in another beaten down, tired role in The Came To Cordura.

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: C-flat
Date: 31 Jul 04 - 04:41 AM

Whilst I agree that re-makes rarely, if ever, come up to the standard of the original, I suspect that we are all making the mistake of thinking that we are the target audience.
There are millions of people who have never seen any of the great cinematic classics and who probably wouldn't want to see them performed, as they are, by movie stars of the past, without the benefit of modern film-making techniques or without great special effects.
My young daughter would find something like The Wizard Of Oz lame or hokey (to use an Americanism). Granted, modern film making techniques can't substitute good acting but there are some films that could stand a re-make, if only to get them out to a new audience.
I don't want to see "To Kill A Mockingbird" with anyone else playing Atticus Finch, I can't even read the book without seeing Gregory Peck, his performance could never be bettered for me, but does that mean that anyone under 30 is never going to see a film version of the book?
They're not likely to go and sit through a grainy old black and white movie to watch an actor who was a hero to their parents and grandparents, nor would todays kids want to see the original "Around the World in 80 Days", made a year before I was born.
It may seem that there are a lot more re-makes of movies these days, just as it seems that a lot more of the old songs are being re-worked and foisted onto an unsuspecting young market, but equally, it may be that we are all getting old.
Isn't the music of "our" generation better?
Weren't the actors more majestic?
The sports stars more herioc?
The next generation wants its own heroes, whether better or worse.

C-flat.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Jeremiah McCaw
Date: 31 Jul 04 - 06:22 AM

"Why did anyone have to remake Psycho? Or High Noon?"

High Noon? Did you ever see a science fiction film called "Outland" with Sean Connery, Peter Boyle and Frances Sternhagen? I think they did a fine job of translating the story into another genre. "High Noon" remains the classic, of course, but I'm glad it was remade in this fashion. (And Sternhagen was a revelation; superb actor.)

I'd love to see a 'rep' theatre program those as a double bill!


"Got any other examples... good or bad?"

Yup. And again, they're translations of genres.
Akira Kurasawa's "Seven Samurai" became "The Magnificent Seven". His film "The Citadel" supplied all the main elements of the first "Star Wars" film

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: alanabit
Date: 31 Jul 04 - 06:37 AM

My daughter, Merle, aged eight watched James Stewart's "Harvey" again and again. (I will personally do everything that Don Firth threatened to any son of a bitch who messes with that film). She also loved, "To Kill a Mockingbird," as it happened. I think kids can tell the difference between a powerfully acted, scripted and directed piece of work and some vapid junk with a lot of high tech effects. They will have their own heroes for sure and there is some quality around. They will always prefer a good old film to a poor new one though.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 31 Jul 04 - 07:06 AM

Hey, C:

I think you're right, generally speaking about the current new generation. I kid my oldest son that if there isn't a car explosion in the first 15 minutes of the movie, he's walking out. He reads movie reviews carefully and only goes to movies that get one star. Of course, that's an exageration, but there's some truth to it. I sat around a couple of years ago on a Holiday where my nieces husbands and a couple of other men their age were talking about how great the first Matrix movie was (which had just come out.) After expressing wild enthusiasm for it for awhile, one of them said, "Did you understand it?" they all answered, "no." The special effects and fight scenes don't require a plot or understanding what is happening in a movie like The Matrix. They are exactly what the are move-ees.

And, it's not just fifteen year olds (or 22 year olds) who don't like watching black and white movies. I know a lot of people in their fifties and sixties who don't. It's taken a long time for my wife to appreciate movies in black and white. After all, color has been around our whole lifetime, even for old codgers like me. I guess it all depends on why people watch movies. If they're just looking for popcorn movies, they'll enjoy special effects, color, action and the broadest of humor. Whether we like it or not, it's the 3 Stooges who've had the longest lasting effect on comedy. Except now it's the 3 stooges as slackers with dirty mouths and no steady jobs. At least the 3 Stooges had jobs they were constantly getting fired from for incompetence.

And of course, there are new heroes and heroines in the movies that arise with every generation. They aren't lesser (or better.) Harrison Ford, Denzel Washington, Julia Roberts, Tom Hanks, Russel Crowe and a newer generation still finding their way will be the old-timers in another 30 years. Adam Sandler will be the Jerry Lewis of the 90's and early 2,000's. Echhh.

There are still great movies being made. I'll go see just about any movie that has Billy Bob Thornton in it. It's just that "blockbuster" movies rule the world, and you have to look harder for movies with good scripts and good acting.

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Jeanie
Date: 31 Jul 04 - 08:06 AM

Alan - my daughter (when around the same age as Merle) had a similar appreciation of the old film about the Titanic, "A Night to Remember" compared with the then new film "Titanic". I'm sure you're right - children recognize and respond to good acting when they see it. Although she maybe wouldn't want to admit to it now, she fell in love with Kenneth More in that film and was so excited when we came across a display of Kenneth More memorabilia in the foyer at the theatre named after him in Ilford.

I personally see nothing wrong in re-makes - some turn out better and some worse than earlier versions, and some are just different. After all, this is what is happening all the time in live theatre, where it is always interesting to see a different director's "take" on a play, its scenes and characters.

- jeanie

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: HuwG
Date: 01 Aug 04 - 10:33 AM

Some more remakes that should never have been made, in my humble opinion:

"The Italian Job". By all means make another film with minis as the stunt stars, but this film was really an English "feel-good" movie; in 1969, Britain was still feeling a warm glow after the football team had won the world cup three years earlier, and the BMC minis were winning the Monte Carlo and other rallies in spite of all sorts of bias from organising bodies. The high point of the film was Noel Coward, an epitome of Englishness himself, slowly descending the stairs in prison while hundreds of convicts cheer for England, and almost bursting into tears of pride at the bottom.

A US version of this would probably need a ra-ra band, tons of balloons and streamers and cheerleaders. The effect would be cheesy and repellent.


"Mission Impossible". I am not surprised that Greg Morris, one of the stars of the original TV series, stormed off the set, declaring it to be a travesty. It lost all the intellectual curiosity of the original and made it into a cliche-ridden Tom Cruise wank-fest.


"The Jackal". The original "Day of the Jackal" was a tad far-fetched, but at least it had a coherent plot.


You will notice that two out of my three examples are US remakes of British originals. While genres might translate, individual films don't. I have no doubt that if someone tried to remake an american film in a british setting, the effect would be wooden and tedious.

(An odd aside here; "Gorky Park", set in Moscow, had american actors playing the hero and villain, while British actors played the Russian minor parts. The general opinions from the US public was that the British actors were "unbelievable". I assume that to mean that they were unconvincing, rather than superlative.)

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: DougR
Date: 01 Aug 04 - 01:41 PM

Jerry: I'm with you on this one. I am going to see the re-make of Manchurian Candidate, but I don't have great expectations. I don't believe I have ever seen a re-make of a really excellent movie that could hold a candle to the original.

I don't understand Hollywood though. The studios would rather gamble their money on the re-make of a successful film rather than take a chance on an original, and I'm confident there is some excellent new material available. Just about everybody in Hollywood is writing a screenplay. Heck, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that evernone in Phoenix is writing one.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 01 Aug 04 - 09:49 PM

I think the reason Of Mice and Mendoes work so well with different casts is that it wasn't written for any of these actors in mind, it is a stage play that Steinbeck wrote, and many actors can fit into it better than one actor trying to fill the shoes of another in a role that may have been written for that first actor.

We learn a great deal when viewing films, and my kids enjoy the black and white ones. We read To Kill a Mockingbird outloud, and during the time we were reading I noticed it was going to be on tv so taped it. After we finished the book we watched the movie, but only after discussing the fact that a whole book compressed into two hours takes a lot of work. We were sorry to see some characters changed, and the story compressed to one year, but overall, it was a very good film. I wouldn't want to see a remake. That film, made in I think 1960, was conspicuously in black and white. That made it more powerful. I don't go looking for old films based on black and white or color, but I do enjoy a b&w.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 02 Aug 04 - 12:54 AM

Whilst we're on 'The Italian Job' - the Mini car. Why did they have to remodel the Mini car? The new ones look like they've been put on chasis that are slightly too large and have had to be stretched to fit. It's the same look you get when you have a tight top and then the midriff spills out over the waistband, it's hideous.

If they do remake Conan the Barbarian, please can Huge Jackman be the lead?

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Amergin
Date: 02 Aug 04 - 02:15 AM

"Huge Jackman"?? eh LTS....was that a Freudian slip? BG

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 02 Aug 04 - 06:00 AM

No, a Jungian petticoat.

It must have been the thought of Hugh in that leather strap costume....

Talking of which - I wish someone would remake 'Zardoz'.   I think the original is fine, it has Sean Connery in it (in another leather strap costume... slobber slobber, droool), but it could be done again using better technology and strengthening the ending.

For bad remakes - Planet of the Apes. I cannot cope with Helena Bonham Carter's characterless portayal, she's just soooo slapable. And the other female apes who look like Michael Jackson on a bad hair day... no decent solid females at all. Made more annoying by a scientist at the beginning of the film stating that it was the female ape who was most aggressive. Mind you, after all the hype and kerfuffle when it was first released, it did my soul good to see the 2 disc DVD edition in the bargain bin at £6.99!

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: HuwG
Date: 02 Aug 04 - 08:51 AM

I wish somebody would buy the rights off Terry Pratchett, and make "Cohen the Barbarian".


Another pet hate remake of mine: The Man in the Iron Mask. Not that the original (made in 1939!) was good. But this version was awful. They had four musketeers apparently all from different continents, a surfer dude Louis XIV, D'Artagnan played as Inspector Clouseau ...

Richard Lester's earlier The Three Musketeers and subsequent films at least had consistently believable casting. There is more to a good film than big name actors.

I believe that there is nothing inherently wrong in casting e.g. US actors in English or French roles. It is a standard and lovable Brit joke that Tony Curtis once said on screen, in a thick Brooklyn accent, "Yonda is da castle of my faddah" (though this may be urban myth, unless he did indeed say this line in Taras Bulba), but if everyone else sounds roughly the same, things at least hold together. But a French Porthos, an American Athos, an Oxford English Aramis and a hammed D'Artagnan ... the effect is of a bad revue, not a swashbuckling adventure.


One or two remakes I will pass, however grudgingly:

The Mask of Zorro. OK, they laid the cliches on with a trowel in the final fight scene, but I'll allow that the rest of it was OK.

The Last of the Mohicans

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: The Walrus
Date: 02 Aug 04 - 10:25 AM

HewG,

I saw that version of 'The Man in the Iron Mask', it took a while to realise that the King was Leo DeCapprio - Not good acting on his part, more that he was acted off the screen by everyone and everything including the props (that pretty boy just can't act)!

As for films - If anyone gets the chance to see the latest remake of "The Four Feathers" - go and do something interesting like watch paint dry. I have seen most of the screen versions of this story (I think there's a 1920s version, but I've only heard tell of it) and I think it says a lot that every subsequent version, including the 1979(?) Bridges/Seymore/Powell remake (which until the recent remake, I held as bad) 'mined' the 1939 Alexander Korda version for scenes, to the extent that the 1950s 'Storm Over the Nile' had three (yes THREE_ different 'Lord Kitchener's (should that be Lords Kitchener?) in on short sequence.
The 'modern' 4F has set the film a little earlier (1881 'Gordon' not the 1888 'Kitchener'the )) expedition and cuts great chunks out of the story line (we lose all of Harry Faversham's childhood, which is imortant to the plot), the director is trying to make political points (badly and somewhat ham fistedly) and, quite frankly, I've flushed better than this.

Changing to classics, reset as different genres - Did anyone here ever see 'Barb Wire' - a resetting of Casablanca = with the lass from 'Baywatch' (whose name I will probably remember the moment I hit 'send' in the 'Rick' role. It was terrible (IMHO)

This post is too long

Walrus
(picks up soap-box and walks back to re-join audiance)

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: muppett
Date: 02 Aug 04 - 11:32 AM

The remake of the railway children was rubbish and they didn't use the worth valley railway or film it in Yorkshire. Jenny Agutter was in it again though, playing the Mother this time

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Greyeyes
Date: 02 Aug 04 - 02:34 PM

Tony Curtis exclaimed "Yonda is da castle of my faddah" in Son of Ali Baba (1952), apparently he was extremely offended by the ensuing mockery & accused critics of being anti-semitic.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Peace
Date: 03 Aug 04 - 01:31 AM

The single movie I love the most is "From the Horse's Mouth" starring Alec Guinness. I am of the opinion that it will never be done so well as it was by that greatest of actors.

Subject: RE: BS: Remaking Classics
From: Amergin
Date: 03 Aug 04 - 01:34 AM

Tim curry was wonderful as Long John Silver in Muppet Treasure Island...