It’s The 80′s Again: Romancing The Stone & Overboard Remakes

Published 5 years ago by

romancing the stone1 Its The 80s Again: Romancing The Stone & Overboard RemakesAlmost exactly a year ago, we brought you news that 20th Century Fox was remaking the Michael Douglas adventure film, Romancing The Stone ,with Eagle Eye’s Daniel McDermott penning the script. Now the film has a director in the form of  The Ugly Truth’s Robert Luketic (insert personal opinion here).

To make matters worse, it also seems like Hollywood is about to remake the 1987 Kurt Russell and Goldie Hawn romantic team-up, Overboard!

It looks like the Romancing The Stone remake will hit the big-screen first, as the producer of the film, Emma Watts, was recently named  President of Production at 20th Century Fox. With Luketic involved, one would imagine that the comedy quota of the remake will be ramped up and the adventure angle will be … er… god knows, really!

In the original RTS, Douglas played a fortune-hunter who becomes involved with Katheleen Turner’s romance novelist in the search for a long-lost jewel (the 80s was, admittedly, a crazy time for movie plots).

overboard Its The 80s Again: Romancing The Stone & Overboard Remakes

Luketic’s The Ugly Truth star Katherine Heigl is also now attached to the Overboard remake. The original film starred Goldie Hawn as an amnesiac millionairess who falls off her yacht only to have Kurt Russell pass her off as his wife (I told you, the 80s: crazy time for movie plots). Heigel is obviously attached in the Goldie Hawn role (although a switch in sexes may make this remake bearable) – could her Ugly Truth co-star Gerard Butler step into Russell’s shoes? Well, he was in the frame to replace Russell in the now defunct Escape From New York Remake

Bill Collage and Adam Cooper are currently working on a script for Overboard that will be produced by Devon Franklin.

I can’t say that I’m excited about any of this. As a child of the 1980′s, I have fond memories of both these films – I was taken to Overboard on my seventh birthday, so I have an emotional attachment to that film. While Romancing The Stone was a fun adventure film that had a charming lead in Michael Douglas and great support from Danny DeVito.

Considering that both these films are from genres that have endless material for originality (sort of), it really does make you wonder: why remake them? Having said that, I don’t know what goes through a Movie Executive’s mind, so I’m sure that there is some fiscal sense to be discerned. Somewhere.

More on Romancing The Stone and Overboard when we get it!

Source: Pajiba

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. How will we ever appreciate the classics if studios keep remaking, rebooting and re-imagining them? Not that I’d really consider Overboard a cinematic treasure, but still. When does it stop? Are there no more writers in Hollywood with noggins full of original ideas? And, if there are writers there still, is this truly the best they can come up with? If they can go on strike demanding more, can the fans?

  2. I think if a movie is less than 40 years old, it shouldn’t be remade. This habit of Hollywood rehashing ideas that are 25 years old is ridiculous. I enjoyed BOTH of these films, but why would I pay money to go see them again just because it’s got new actors in it? These films will FLOP and FLOP HARD. I’d rather they take an obscure film from the 40′s or 50′s if they’re going to remake something. I will probably get heat for this, but I loved Adam Sandler’s remake of Mr. Deeds. I had never even HEARD of Mr. Deeds goes to Town with Gary Cooper until Sandler remade it. I have no hope of Hollywood stopping this trend though, since they seem to be making money off it.

  3. On the casting front this is all just rumor at the moment cos Heigl was in Luketic’s last 2 movies. It has been suggested she has been offered Overboard – but I would imagine she gets offered lots of movies at the moment. Doesn’t mean she will accept. No announcements have been made about that at all. I think she is a wonderful actress but not keen on the idea of remaking either film.

  4. Why do they feel the need to keep remaking things? And of all things Overboard? I think that film only worked because it was made in the 80s. Goldie and Kurt were perfect for it. And Romancing the Stone was perfect as is. I can’t even imagine that one being remade. I don’t want to see anyone else in those roles and how they would do things now.

  5. “Romancing the Stone” was the perfect movie, IMO. To this day, it’s a satisfying, fun, adventure, one I’d hoped nobody would mess with! “Overboard” was cute and Kurt and Goldie were perfect in it. I won’t be as annoyed about it being remade as I will RTS, though. How can you replace Michael Douglas, Kathleen Turner or Danny DeVito? What a great cast and with fabulous chemistry! Really, how lazy are the writers out there anyway? Argh.

  6. If they reboot these esp romancing the stone then they can do multiple sequals. That’s one of the big things in hollywood these days (building off past sucess). They can do romancing the stone and then 2-4 more films with the same actors. They couldn’t do it as just a long lost sequal with all new people playing the parts unless they could talk douglas into remaking his role and passing it to a son or something (prob would have been lame anyway). I don’t know that I’m excited for a new romancing the stone but It will be different. Now on the topic of remaking stuff – I agree that they are remaking things that are too recent (although I must say that the under 30s in america are totally under-cultured for the most part and prob have never heard of either of these movies (culture is more than watching movies, a lot more in fact but I think/hope you understand what I mean). So they are remaking movies that a lot of movie goers won’t be familar with. I wish they would do movies that were older. A movie like call northside 777 would be great for a remake I think (if we have to remake movies) since it is not well known but is amazing; more remakes of movies like that would be great or if Hollywood could put a new spin on old politcal movies like mr smith goes to washington or meet john doe those could be awsome.

  7. side note – I have never seen K. Higel have on screen chemistry with anyone in her romantic coms… I’m not sure who’s fault that is, but I sure don’t believe it when she falls for a guy or whatever… Anyone, got an idea on this? Is she better than I think she is or is there a movie where you really believe that she’s found a match?

  8. OK! EVERYONE! LISTEN TO ME! yes, to Jason. Let’s ALL stop going to the theater! it’s as easy as that. we stop going, stop renting and then we will hit it where it hurts most…their pockets. cuz that’s where they hurt us! i, for one, have only seen one film in the theater per year since 06. and thats all they warrant. films will all come out on dvd anyway and if you buy a projector (their now under $700 now) then you can save money in the long run because each film is what, $12 bucks now minimum? that will be, what, 62 films at the theater (not including concessions, of course) will pay for your projector. and anyway, when you rent or buy, you got to watch it on something anyway, right? Let’s boycott the theater!!

  9. I take strong exception to your offhand comment Niall :

    “In the original RTS, Douglas played a fortune-hunter who becomes involved with Katheleen Turner’s romance novelist in the search for a long-lost jewel (the 80s was, admittedly, a crazy time for movie plots)”

    OKAY **maybe** Jewel Of The Nile** (the sequel) …but not the original film itself.
    As I read on, I get the impression that you are against the possible remakes of Stone and Overboard, and, on cue, the movie-geek net community shows its hypocrisy. (Everyone hates “remakes” of anything but beg for “reboots” to just about anything)

    But how on earth can you, Niall, sit there and type “a crazy time for movie plots” in regards to Romancing The Stone? You say you loved the film in your younger days, but that reads like a cheap shot. An average reader of your post might not have seen the original and then think the first film wasn’t that good on story and character. It’s just the way it comes across.

    Let’s also get off this high horse that “all remakes” are bad, folks. Remake or not, a film is a film, it will stand up on its own or fall down regardless. In the case of Overboard, there isn’t a “name brand” as there is with ‘Romancing The Stone’ (even that’s pushing it, the first film was lightning in a bottle) …so the pitch must have been fairly good. Note that the premise that you mock is a common standby- even last summer’s Proposal was a hit.

    And I loved Kathy Hiegel in 27 Dresses. So there.

    Are you suggesting that the original films can no longer be appreciated? Something happen to them? I’d like to know. In most cases, the redos succeed in making folks check out the original films, and, sometimes like them even more than the remake.

  10. Stop going to the theater? Bite your tongue! Studios could not stay in business if they had to depend on rentals alone. I prefer to have viable studios producing new films on a regular basis, so we go to the movies frequently. There are a lot of good films out right now, and a lot of original ones. I’d just rather they not remake films that aren’t that old and were really good to start with.

  11. This is getting ridiculous. I liked those movies but I would never go to the theater to see either one of them or a remake of either one. It has become so bad in hollywood now, that I bet we will one day see a reboot of The Godfather! Could you imagine that? That would just be insane and disrespectful but don’t be surprised if it happens in the future.

  12. Oh, here’s another one. They reboot Rocky with some other Italian actor! Just to make money off the name.

  13. M-Cat…

    Agreed. Great classic films should never be remade or rebooted. The Godfather (although not my cup of tea) is a classic film and should never be screwed with. Same with Rocky. I mean, look what happened when they remade The Day the Earth Stood Still. I nearly barfed watching that movie. However, a fringe film or one that could really USE a modern retelling is ok. Should they remake The Wizard of Oz? Hell no. But films such as Mr. Deeds that can be remade well without destroying the spirit of the original story is fine.

    I’m just wondering when the remake of Turner and Hooch is coming out….

  14. Turner and Hooch! haha, i can see that happening too.

  15. Yep, probably with either Will Ferrell, Jack Black or Seth Rogen…probably recast Hooch as a chihuahua! :P

  16. “Stop going to the theater? Bite your tongue! Studios could not stay in business if they had to depend on rentals alone. I prefer to have viable studios producing new films on a regular basis, so we go to the movies frequently. There are a lot of good films out right now, and a lot of original ones. I’d just rather they not remake films that aren’t that old and were really good to start with.”

    No, I will not bite my tongue. what i am saying is right. of course they could not stay in business. why should they? they’re time is up. everyone is sick of what they are doing and then when it comes times to rentals, they double, triple and quadruple dip. everyone is sick of this. there are hardly ANY original movies out and even those that are are not good at all. you are why hollywood keeps turning out remakes and reboots and pure crap, because you want to see it. we don’t. we want good stories and original ones at that. who wants to see not only the same movie over and over again but reboots that destroy what the original was about “Star Trek: why is scotty now a jackass? and if its ok to change 43 years of history completely then why should we take any interest in any story?” thats just an example. and look what they did to friday the 13th, they made it a reboot yet put the entire first 1980 movie’s history in the credits! then guess what they left out of the film: suspense! look at the trailer for that movie. all the deaths are in those 2:30 seconds. so why pay to see it? (I did not, i saw it later when someone had it)of course, they are making a suspenseless sequel as well…keep supporting the studios and they will keep delivering the bads…of course, how do we know you don’t work for them? you sure sound like you do…but that is just my belief, i’m sure…

  17. One reason this is getting worse is that the studios don’t have to pay out extra for the rights to these films, (buying scripts, paying off writers etc.) They already own the property so they actually save a lot of money in development,,, this is a major factor in this reboot craze, the studios are saving money and making a profit, even if its only a few mil…

  18. There are plenty of novels, short stories, screenplays, and novelettes out there to make into movies. This is just Hollywood’s lazy, half a**ed way to churn out something that might will probably make money with little to no effort on their part. They obviously do marketing and have decided that if they make this movie, people will see it either in the theater or on dvd. I think the important thing to remember when judging these types of seemingly goof ball decisions by studios is that the movie industry is just that; an industry. And the people at the top are in it to make money, piles of it if possible.

    Stop thinking about it as art as a first consideration and it becomes clear. These films aren’t made for movie buffs. They’re made for the Masses. And the masses bring revenue.

  19. @Crom Crom

    It’s been said that the films made for the masses allow some money to be given to those who make films that are more about art. They finance the “indie” branches of the big studios.


  20. Crom Crom

    these two movies that this thread is about are not being rebooted to make a ton of cash. Even without paying for a new script the cost to reboot the movie in today’s economy is more than it was then. Plus, I can’t see many people going to the theater to see these two movies.

  21. @ Vic-

    I can see that reasoning and do not disagree with it.

    @ M-Cat-

    You’re right. What was I thinking? Movies are made to LOSE a pile of cash. Because that is business smart. *insert sarcasm*

  22. Crom Crom

    I said the cost is more. I didn’t say the movies will lose money. But if putting words in peoples mouths is how you make points then I know it’s worthless talking to you about it. Here’s a tissue.

  23. M-Cat-

    First, I was only joking around with you, man. Jokes sometimes do not translate very well on forums, I’ve found.

    Second, the first sentence of your retort said that these two movies are not being made to make a ton of cash. Now, I’m not the Amazing Kreskin or anything, and my reading comprehension may not be what it used to be but I’m pretty sure that’s what you wrote.

    Nevertheless, please do not take offense to my silly ramblings. I didn’t mean to ruffle your tail feathers.

  24. Crom Crom

    no worries, I’m sorry as well if I offended you. I always get heated.