More Unnecessary Remakes On The Way
Dec 7, 2008 by Niall BrowneAt Screen Rant we’ve pretty much covered every single remake that Hollywood has been planning. It’s not easy but we’ve done our best to keep …
At Screen Rant we’ve pretty much covered every single remake that Hollywood has been planning. It’s not easy but we’ve done our best to keep up. However, this week we almost had “Remake Meltdown” (a dangerous and lethal condition) when we learned that the movie bosses in the City of Angels had another batch of 1980s classics ready to be ruined.
Remakes of action-adventure Romancing the Stone; comedy Arthur and John Carpenter’s They Live are now currently in production.
Continue reading to see how they were, and how they will be?
Romancing the Stone
Then:
A light hearted action adventure in the mould of Indiana Jones; starring Michael Douglas, Kathleen Turner and Danny DeVito. The original film was a pretty decent hit, grossing $76 million back in 1984. It was the first hit film to be directed by Robert Zemeckis.
Now:
Eagle Eye‘s Daniel McDermott will write the script. No other talent is attached at this point, but it’s clearly another example of 20th Century Fox raiding their old properties.
With the Eagle Eye writer onboard – could this be a franchise in the making for Shia La Beouf?
Arthur
Then:
A 1981 smash hit Oscar winning comedy starring Dudley Moore, Liza Minnelli and John Gielgud (who won an Oscar). Moore stared a a drunken millionaire who falls in love with a woman of limited financial means – leaving his fortune hanging in the balance.
Now:
Russell Brand (Forgetting Sarah Marshall) will play the drunken millionaire. Brand is currently meeting with writers to knock out a script for the film that is currently in development at Warner Bros.
John Carpenter’s They Live
Then:
A 1988 cult sci-fi satire starring Roddy Piper as a badass construction worker who unwittingly uncovers an alien invasion plot. The film is a lost Carpenter classic.
Now:
John Carpenter will Executive Produce (read: pick up a check), while Strike Entertainment’s Marc Abraham and Eric Newman will produce the film. The company has a remake/sequel/prequel to Carpenter’s The Thing in the works, and they recently were behind the Dawn of the Dead Remake.
Here at Screen Rant we’ve established the Top 5 Rules for Movie Remakes, and with the possible exception of They Live, none of these pass the test based on what we know so far.
Romancing the Stone and They Live have a special place in my heart and my DVD collection. Has Hollywood really run out of ideas?
This has to stop!
Let the rebellion begin!
Source: Hollywood Reporter
Around the web:
Loading ...
“I came here to kick @ss and chew bubblegum, and I’m all out of bubblegum.”
The problem with remakes is not that the studios make them, it’s that the public goes to SEE them. If people stopped watching them, they wouldn’t make any more of them.
I’m just waiting for the remake of “Weird Science” with Megan Fox as the girl….
Life’s a bitch, and she’s back in heat.
Still dreading the Thing remake, so this is just adding to the gloom. I just hope the fight scene stays brutal.
I doubt the social commentary will remain intact.
LOL,some of the best movie lines EVER are in “They Live.”
If anyone hasn’t seen it, GO RENT IT (except for Daniel F, who doesn’t apprecitate B movies).
Vic
Still waiting for somebody to remake better versions of BAD movies.
They Live actually has a great premise, but was made so cheesy and without acting talent that only people with NO movie expectations could handle it. I would LOVE to see a higher quality remake of it.
THE THING needs to be left alone…..all they can do is make a worse one, as the original Carpenter one was great as is.
Arthur was already spectacular, and several of the acting greats that made it so are DEAD. Leave a classic alone.
Romancing the Stone? Why would a movie, that was just basically “blah….” to begin with, even WARRANT a remake? It’s an Indiana Jones ripoff at best, and at worse, even cheezier than Jones. Spend you money on something ORIGINAL for money’s sake.
@Charles Darwin
They make them because they have built in name recognition, it’s easier to write a script that’s bascially a duplicate of another, and they make money.
Not that I’m defending them, of course!
Vic
Hollywood has nine original ideas and every movie made is a derivation of one of those ideas. The remakes are a generational thing (they think they up the ante by remaking old classics with new special effects and what not)and they will be continue to be made. Hell in twenty years we will be seeing remakes of Pirates of Caribbean, LOTR trilogy, transformers and probably every popular piece of film made for the last fifty years.The older we get the more of these remakes we will see. Hollywood has not short-term memory or long-term memory for that matter.
They Live was awesome but it is also a good enough premise that a remake could be fun.
I am mystified that anyone would want to remake Arthur and remaking RTS is even more puzzling.
Why must hollywood butcher classic movies? Do they just get sick pleasures out of just seeing us cringe at just the thought of remakes that we know are going to be horrible? Let the old live in peace, dont try to ruin these movies, hollywood needs to stop this crap!
I’ve been saying this for a while. I wrote a bit on it a week or so ago on my site. I hate that all the originality has left and is being replaced by the reboot/remake. It is terrible, because the new films can hardly hold a candle to the original. When I was researching my article, I found that Madonna was shopping her remake of Casablanca. With her as the star! Terrible stuff, I hope it never gets made. But it is a money issue. Studios can’t make money off of re-releasing classic properties, but since they dont have to pay for the rights to the property, they can just remake it and hope to rake in more cash on a film they already tried to make money on.
I would be happy with a straight to DVD Punisher franchise, as long as Ray Stevenson and a 35+ million budget returned.
I hope PWZ becomes a cult classic on DVD/Blu-Ray!
Sorry, wrong comment section!
“They Live” was great as a camp film (and that fight sequence is legendary).
A lot of enjoyment comes from the cheese factor, without which, there’s not that much significant to separate it from your run of the mill alien invasion flicks.
It could be the case where making it “better” (in production quality) actually makes it less entertaining.
I predict that remaking “Romancing the Stone” will result in failure all around.
“Momma don’t like tattletales”
Can get that movie very cheaply, and has great commentary, if you can get it.
Agree, jerseycajun, if you make a slick version, it is just another alien movie. That’s probably how it will go too, not seen any good remakes of carpenter’s works.
The very idea of a madonna casablanca just…. Can’t find the words.
Someone remake the 13th warrior, with the same cast but for antonio, and let us actually get to know them this time.
Hey, I liked They Live…
I have “They Live” on DVD and whenever my brothers and I get together we watch that movie along with “The Lost Boys” and “Fright Night”. All B-movies but having great entertainment and replay value.
I liked ‘They Live’. One of my favorite aliens trying to take over the world films, even if it was a little, how should I say: ‘B’ quality. A remake could be good but I doubt it will come at the same level as the original, that being an instant cult classic. I’m looking forward to see what they do with it and hoping they don’t wreck it completely.
‘Romancing The Stone” will be a box office success. It has the type of story line that will bring in young audiences with the name recognition for older crowds. Fill it with a mix of young, hot talent and older established names. Add state of the art special effects of today’s standards and presto:Sure fire success! I MIGHT watch it if I’m stuck on a bus trip and it shows on those little screens they have. And I’m traveling alone. And the headphones are complementary. And its dark outside so there is nothing to see out the window. And I’m not…I could go on for a while!
Why anyone would remake ‘Arthur’ is a mystery to me! Didn’t like the first one.
Now I know we all like to bash remakes of classic movies (myself included). It seems to me everyone is forgetting Carpenters ‘The Thing’ is also a remake! Remember ‘The Thing From Another World’? The 1951 original film was based on a story titled ‘Who Goes There’ (according to IMBd). This is another one I don’t hold much hope for. How do you top an upside down head that sprouts spider legs and skitters away!
Greenknight said Hollywood has only nine original ideas, and he is probably right. If they ever had a tenth, the place would implode!
There’s a simple reason why they’re going to remake Arthur, and that’s Russell Brand.
Over here in the UK he is famous, if often for the wrong reasons. I would argue he is equally loved and loathed – followed by those of us who don’t care.
He can be funny, and is certainly eccentric.
My guess is someone in the US has decided he could be the next big funny brit. I imagine this will be meant as a vehicle for Brand’s character and humour to make it over there, as it was for Moore.
Whether that succeeds or not is another matter. I suspect americans won’t find him as amusing as he himself does.
@David
Check my list of Top 5 Rules for Movie Remakes linked in the article above. John Carpenter’s “The Thing” passes the test.
Vic
I liked “They Live” a lot, but if the guys who remade Dawn of the Dead are doing it then I wouldn’t mind seeing what they could do. DOTD was the best remake of a classic I’ve ever seen.
Wait, which one is Russell Brand again? Is he that retarded moron that hosted the MTV movie awards? If so, that guy needs to be shot. I seriously can’t see how anyone can find him entertaining. The guy has the most annoying way of talking I have ever heard, and his moronic self can’t even stand still while he talks, he keeps bobbing back and forth and crossing his legs over one across the other when he talks like he’s a runway model that needs to pee or something… Man, I hope a stunt goes wrong and a truck runs him over while someone shoots him with a cannon or something…
@Charles Darwin
Didn’t you post in the Punisher: War Zone section about never coming back? What happened? Did you get lost?
Come on wise, charles darwin wannabe is trying to do his part and be generous to help out this website and keep it alive by visiting it. Don’t you know Vic was so scared when he heard he was not coming back that he was shaking in his boots? I mean, I was nervous, I like this site, but when he said he wasn’t coming back, I realized how fragile it is and that it could be over in a heartbeat. We should cherish the time we have and hope Darwin keeps coming back to keep this site alive. I mean, man, he’s so important, we can’t afford for him to not come back and read Vic’s reviews. Who knows what kind of ripple effect that might have on other movie sites…
LOL, be nice, boys. If CD wants to contribute to the site in a civil manner he is more than welcome.
Vic
Actually my first thought was that Charles Darwin came back because he MISSED us!
@Vic
Yeah, sorry Boss.
@Charles Darwin
Sorry Charles, couldn’t help myself.
I think I mentioned this already in Jon’s aforementioned site with regards to remakes/reboots. My theory is that it is ok to remake/reboot a film or film franchise, but what studios should do is release the orginal’s along with the remake/reboots, this, I belive, will help the younger generation(s) understand that the remake that they are watching is not the orginal.
However, since most, if not all, studios consist of Nazi money grabbing buttheads, they won’t, because it will distract from the new finished product that they are trying to market. (insert profanities here).
Well, if it’s not profitable, there’s no logical reason for them to do it. You don’t start and run a business to NOT make money you know…
And you do understand that movie theaters actually have to kind of buy or rent the movies in order to play them right? So they most likely wouldn’t do that unless they think they can make back the money in ticket sales. At least that’s how I think they do it…
But either way, if you’re running a business you’re not going to intentionally do things that you know will not make you any money… That’s just dumb.
I may not like it, but I do understand. But you understand my point. My belief is that if you are doing a remake/reboot,you should at the very least establish some sort of recognition to the orignal.
I once had this awesome idea of starting up a theatre and showing a wide range of older films, long past their orginal release dates. But there is simply no market for something like, espcially with the advances in DVD technology (ie Blue Ray).So i totally know what you are saying, belive me I did the research.