George Lucas Stole My Childhood: Remake Mania

[AerostarMonk]

You've heard it before. "blank blank insert here my childhood." It's the rallying cry of geeks everywhere whenever an update, remake, or re-imagining happens. From Star Wars to James Bond prequels, reboots and a whole list of other re's have been dominating Hollywood.

This summer we saw the success of Transformers, a reimagining of cartoon from the 80s. And opinions pretty much split down the middle on whether the movie helped or hurt the mythology that was already previously established.

Of course this is nothing compared to the general outcry against the Star Wars prequels. The eponymous figure in the title of this thread has even been called out by his ex-wife for beating a dead horse, so it seems that geeks aren't the only ones upset with some of GL's most recent decisions.

In the past two months more and more movies based on properties beloved from people's childhoods have either started production or being greenlit. Get Smart, Voltron, Speed Racer, Jonny Quest. There's even rumblings of Disney digging up its old Sailor Moon license agreement. And others are just waiting for the studios to say yes. As we speak WETA is waiting for the go-ahead on Evangelion.

Sometimes these reboots and other re's and ups work. Casino Royale, Battlestar Galactica and Batman Begins are fantastic examples of critical and financial success. Other times they drop like a rock. To anyone who watched the new Flash Gordon, I almost feel like I have to apologize.

But what do you think of this trend in movies in television? Do you feel that Hollywood should go back to original ideas and trying to find good scripts? Do you find many of these re's actually entertaining and fun. Or have they actually ruined the original for you in some ways. Have they stolen your childhood?

[Cassini90125]

When a movie or new series is derived from old material, I think it's just Hollywood trying to make a buck, not much more. Some of these reworkings will be fantastic, in which case I will stand and cheer. Others are going to be horrendous, which will not make me happy at all. In general, I welcome the idea of my old favorites getting dusted off and revived for the big screen; it's always nice to see my favorite characters again, and it's interesting to see how much they differ from the original versions. The first Scooby-Doo movie comes to mind here; I enjoyed that one so much I saw it in the theater four times (although I'll admit that the latter three viewing were only $2.50 each). I don't see any of these reworkings as ruining the originals for me, though. The remakes may be a bad experience, and the writers and directors ought to be villified for some of them, but they can never take away my memories.

Did I see a mention of a possible Sailor Moon movie?

Excellent topic, by the way.

[floppynoodleson666]

my favorite remakes so far have been the 90's feature film versions or the Brady Bunch and The Addams Family.
Pretty much any other remake has disappointed me severely. Especially Planet of the Apes.
Actually I have yet to watch the Scooby Doo movies, Batman begins (i think i would like it though), Casino Royale, or the Battlestar Gallactica. Most of those I am happy with not seeing.

[AerostarMonk]

I'm one of the few people who genuinely enjoyed Planet of the Apes. It may not have been nothing like the book, but neither was the original. I'm not going to say that it's the original's fault that it wasn't well-received, due to the fact that people couldn't get over nostalgia, because I know it's not true.

A true adaptation of the book would be great. There are no sentient humans other than the main character and the apes are as advanced if not moreso as Earth humans. It ends pretty much exactly like Burton's version though, although there's an epilogue I won't give away for those who may want to read the book themselves.

As for my take on this trend, while we do get some little gems here and there, I really wish Hollywood would return to original properties. Things like Back to the Future, Ghostbusters, Goonies, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, The Terminator, and a host of other great films wouldn't have ever been made if all the money of the 70s and 80s was being funneled towards big-screen adaptations of I Love Lucy and a remakes of Gone With The Wind and Citizen Kane. A few re's and ups are good every now and then but it shouldn't become a staple of the industry as it seems to be now.

[Medikor]

I have mixed feelings about the redo trend. I absolutely love it when a franchise is given new life with a film that respects the source material. But I really dislike it when we get a botch job and have to suffer through a movie that is an insult to the fan base.

[taranchula]

Well the one thing I do like about the whole remake-reboot trend is that it shows that the studios in their own very minor way are admitting that they have made some mistakes in the past with the way they handled certain franchises (IE Batman, Bond etc...) and therefore are in some cases taking positive steps to not only win back the fan base but also bring in new fans to whatever series they want to resurrect.

[Mr. Marshmallow]

Originally Posted by Cassini90125

Did I see a mention of a possible Sailor Moon movie?

As Monk says this is "old stuff", the choice of words in dug up is pretty accurate. A long ass time ago Disney was planning a live Sailor Moon, the hype around the DIC version of the show during weekday morning cartoons made it pretty big.

I never heard of any progress as far as who the girls would be casted as or how they were going to do Luna or any of the special effects. The only thing I know for sure I heard MANY times was that Geena Davis was contacted to play Queen Beryl. Davis also mentioned she was actually excited to play Queen Beryl.

But like most movies, it died in development hell and just never went anywhere. A rumor floated around about Buffy creator, Joss Whedon coming on as either a writer or director for the Moon movie. As Monk probably well knows about me, I personally don't see much of a problem with this "trend" simply because as much as you hate to hear about it, no one is forcing anyone to go see these movie remakes.

Granted it may be a little insulting to see the toons you love be changed in such a way, but ultimately, it's your choice to go to the theaters and pay the money or not. I don't see these TV remake movies any different then any other movie fad that has come and pass, there are good ones and bad ones.

Spider man brought forth an ass load of comic book movies, Batman Begins brought forth re-launching failed series, and it looks like Transformers may do the same since Voltron, Speed Racer, Get Smart, and (now officially) G.I. Joe is on the way. I just read the director for Joe is "Mummy Returns" "Deep Rising" director Stephen Sommers.

Remakes are just like any other movie genre like if you go see a horror or a comedy movie, there are crap ones and good ones. Some movies DO need to be remade, others don't but prove that they can still kick ass. Charlie and the chocolate factory was a fantastic remake, despite the fact I still love the old one.

The remake was done in such a fresh new way that it was really hard for me not to enjoy this movie. Batman Begins and Casino Royale proved that series can still be useful long after their expiration date and create quality films. But a movie remake is just like any other type of movie like a comic book or novel adapted to film: sadly not everyone is going to do a good job of it.

I'm a firm believer in seeing it before I whine about it, too many people piss and moan about things without giving it a chance. I can see that they wouldn't want to spend the money if they think it will suck, no one is forcing people to go to the theaters to see something they don't want to see.

Me personally though, I won't knock it until I try it, and that's just my view. Even if I see a movie and it turns out being crap, I'm still glad I took the time to see it and judge it truthfully and honestly. By the way, as much as I loved Batman Begins and Casino Royale, don't think I 100% support relaunching.

What annoys me the most out of relaunched movies is that they "erase/ignore" everything in the past films and start ALL over again. I frankly can't stand that, it's like ignoring years of hard work and story effort just to blink it away and say it never happened. I don't think it's necessary always.

Godzilla did that a lot of times with his movies and it can be really annoying sometimes.

[Cassini90125]

Originally Posted by Mr. Marshmallow

What annoys me the most out of relaunched movies is that they "erase/ignore" everything in the past films and start ALL over again. I frankly can't stand that, it's like ignoring years of hard work and story effort just to blink it away and say it never happened. I don't think it's necessary always.

Godzilla did that a lot of times with his movies and it can be really annoying sometimes.

Yeah, that I really don't like that at all. If you're going to do a movie based on a TV show or movie series with history, by the stars don't ignore that history or change the premise. It's part of what makes the original special, part of why it's considered good enough for a big-screen remake to begin with. And they shouldn't play around with character design too much, either. Updating the designs is one thing, but it often goes too far; the characters can become almost unrecognizable, one of the reasons the 1980's Masters Of The Universe movie was so horrid. He-Man simply did not look like He-Man, in my opinion. What if this was done with a hypothetical Foster's movie? Half of the Forum members would be screaming if Mr. Herriman was decked out in a Vegas-style leisure suit instead of his familiar garb or the "1" on Wilt's chest was redesigned. Stars alone know what they'd have Frankie wearing but knowing Hollywood I'd hate it and be screaming for blood. The point is, if you're going to do a remake, build on the old characters and stories, don't ignore them. The fans surely won't.

[Mr. Marshmallow]

Originally Posted by Cassini90125

If you're going to do a movie based on a TV show or movie series with history, by the stars don't ignore that history or change the premise. It's part of what makes the original special, part of why it's considered good enough for a big-screen remake to begin with. And they shouldn't play around with character design too much, either. Updating the designs is one thing, but it often goes too far; the characters can become almost unrecognizable.

The most common reason producers don't continue from where stories leave off is because they have to worry about being constricted into the confines of the original story that was left behind by the last film. Which I can see how that'd be upsetting, but you can't just totally push away so much story so easily.'

Look at Batman's movies. Batman Beings basically is saying "yeah everything from 1989 up to 2004 does not exist anymore", that's BULL CRAP! How can you so carelessly and ignorantly discard so much hard work? Do you know how hard the writers, director, make up artists, and actors probably worked to make those movies only to basically say their story existence is wiped out?

Godzilla however does it WAY too much. After 1995's supposed "Last" Godzilla movie "Godzilla vs. Destroyah", continuity in the movies was completely ignored and for some stupid reason every movie after Destroyah was made to be a direct sequel to the original 1954 Godzilla movie "King of the monsters". Each time a new Godzilla movie was made, ZIP, everything before is ignored.

It's like this: Godzilla 2000 is a direct sequel to King of monsters ZIP! Sorry change that, Godzilla vs. Megagurius is the direct sequel ZIP! Sorry again GOD that is so annoying. The character revamps is also another big issue, I don't mind a tweak here or there but sometimes it's just revolting.

Dr. Doom for example from the FF movie looked JUST like Dr. Doom, he had pretty much the same powers, looked and acted just like the comic book Doom was. They didn't make him an alien from another planet or say he was bitten by a radioactive dung beetle, they kept majority of him in tact.

Leading back to relaunching movies and Batman Begins, this brings me to the new Joker portrayed by Heath Ledger in "The Dark Knight" and how they have already made the Joker a shallow shell of his character's history. Heath Ledger's Joker has the make up come off, as in he's NOT a "super" villain.

He's not the bleach skinned maniac we all know and loved, no, instead he's just another crazy villain who wears make up, that was one of the whole points of the Joker that he DIDN'T wear make up, it was permanent. Revamps usually can only be as good as the way the director envisions them.

Christopher Nolan made a beautiful movie with "Begins", I don't doubt that, but he made a totally stupid envision of the Batman series by making it more "realistic" and changing Scarecrow's gas, Ra's Al Gul, and Batman's gadgets into something more scientifically plausible. Batman is hardly what I call realistic so why bother whizzing on such a great super hero by making him more "real" when he never needed to be more real in the first place?

[AerostarMonk]

Dr. Doom wasn't really intact if you want to go by actual comics. He's more of a weak amalgam of Ultimate Fantastic Four's Victor Van Damme and Marvel-616's Victor Von Doom, and not really the best of either of them. Not to say he's not a good villain for the movie he was in. But he was a very weak representation of the character he was based on.

As for the reboot of the Batman film franchise, it was something that was needed. By the time Burton and Schumacher got done with it, while still representative of various eras in the Batman mythos it wasn't really reflective of the comics today. Something which both the studios and a lot of the fans wanted. You can argue about the changes made, but I think we can agree that changing Gotham back from a Neon-Glo East Coast city of sin to a city with a shiny exterior hiding a seedy and cancerous underbelly in some places better than others was a good direction. Not to mention that this is actually a second reboot in the past 10 years even. Whether people want to admit it or not there was absolutely no relation to Burton and Schumacher's Batmans. So instead of choosing which to go with they decided to start from scratch.

What I will say is that I'm not fond of what I've heard about Nolan. Apparently, like Burton, he also has no interest in Batman in the comics. He wants Batman to be more reminiscent of James Bond. I think they really should stop hiring directors who have no true respect for the sourrce material and only want to put their own spin on things. There's nothing wrong with having different interpretations. By all means that's what these re's are for, but at least respect your source, whether it be a comic, book, movie, song, whatever. Otherwise why bother to re-anything?