True, but the studios are going to be tempted by Dark Knight money, so they will continue making them. Whether or not all of them make the Dark Knight money is pointless as long as 1 does every 5 years or so they'll continue trying to be that 1.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why doesn't Hollywood grow a pair and film original material for a change?
- Thread starter Unspeaked
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
True, but the studios are going to be tempted by Dark Knight money, so they will continue making them. Whether or not all of them make the Dark Knight money is pointless as long as 1 does every 5 years or so they'll continue trying to be that 1.
I don't care about that one though. It was great.
Just because they remake it and cover the entire story, doesn't make it better for me in any way. The original movie was enough of a story to make it a good film.Besides, they made more than one NeverEnding Story.
How about Friday the 13th for christs sake, or Halloween for that matter...you can just keep going with the hollywood remakes. They are doing a remake of the movie "The Taking of Pelham 123", and they put a bunch of a-listers in it.
It's all about money in the end...you're gonna have the ignorant folks say "wow, this movie is so awesome." Then I say..."You know this is a remake right?".."Ok, who cares, that movie was probably from the 70's and it was lame, this is a much better version" (that's something my friends would say even if they had not seen the original)
with this recession and the economic downturn, expect hollywood to continue to go after re-makes, and the get-rich quick schemes because there is not a care in the world for creativity. Those don't make money.
It's all about money in the end...you're gonna have the ignorant folks say "wow, this movie is so awesome." Then I say..."You know this is a remake right?".."Ok, who cares, that movie was probably from the 70's and it was lame, this is a much better version" (that's something my friends would say even if they had not seen the original)
with this recession and the economic downturn, expect hollywood to continue to go after re-makes, and the get-rich quick schemes because there is not a care in the world for creativity. Those don't make money.
Whenever I see a lack of originality in movies I just pop in one of my favorite Wes Anderson films and I'm good to go.
True, but still shows that lack of creativity and willingness to pump out anything for a buck... As you were
True, but still shows that lack of creativity and willingness to pump out anything for a buck... As you were
Actually, Douglas Adams was trying to get a movie version made for a very long time. The first director that was interested was Ivan Reitman, but he wanted to make a version that was heavy on special-effects, light on story, and a star vehicle for some well known American actors. Adams refused to make all the changes he wanted, so Reitman left the project and switched his actors to another story called "Ghostbusters".
Besides, Hitchhiker's isn't a great example to pick on, since Adams prided himself on making every version of the story different (on purpose).
Actually, Douglas Adams was trying to get a movie version made for a very long time. The first director that was interested was Ivan Reitman, but he wanted to make a version that was heavy on special-effects, light on story, and a star vehicle for some well known American actors. Adams refused to make all the changes he wanted, so Reitman left the project and switched his actors to another story called "Ghostbusters".
Besides, Hitchhiker's isn't a great example to pick on, since Adams prided himself on making every version of the story different (on purpose).
And because he has been heavily involved with each of them, including the maddening computer text adventure.
Besides, the quality of an adaptation has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with its superficial fidelity to the original work. Look at Shrek.
I almost never go to remakes simply because I don't want to support monetarily this kind of hack work.
Innovation and original ideas seem to be in animated movies these days. All kinds of movies from Wall-e to Ghost in the Shell (not Hollywood, I know) have just been excellent IMHO (aside from the schlock ending of WAll-e).
I don't see anything wrong with making movies of books though. But the remakes of movies... it seems to be an extension of the ocean of repeats on American TV.
I don't see anything wrong with making movies of books though. But the remakes of movies... it seems to be an extension of the ocean of repeats on American TV.
I might not mind. If he could edit out Hayden Christensen like he did Jaba the Hut, he could be onto something!
Animated features are a fraction of the cost. Less risk, and best of all, there are fewer voices during production. But they are by definition niche. Only Pixar and to a certain extent Dreamworks have managed to produce mainstream hits with animation, and that's by virtue of their incredibly archetypical stories.
I think you're thinking of Episodes 1, 2 and 3 (unless you mean the split second Hayden Christensen shows up on-screen as a ghost at the end of Episode 6).