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

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.

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.

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*

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.

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.

Vic

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.

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…

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….

“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.

@Jason
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.