Author
|
Topic: The Mummy - 2017 Version
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark L Barton
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 621
From: Bristol, South Glos, England
Registered: Mar 2009
|
posted May 23, 2017 09:12 AM
Films are remade to cater for new audiences. Each with a slightly different approach to changes in cultural and social tastes. Look at Batman and Spiderman, both historically and culturally, its the same theme, Dark Knight, Lonely Neighnourhood hero, but each time in the story telling there are changes. My favourite film, The Poseidon Adventure was remade as Poseidon. In the original a sub sea earhquake causes the wave, in the remake a vew member states 'something is not quite right' boom the wave appears, so its been simplified (I mean does anyone know what a subsea earthquake is anyway??) , well we did in teh 70's but not in the noughties) Remakes are either dumbed down or CGI'ed up, but its done to for new audiences to buy cinema tickets and blu rays etc.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Osi Osgood
Film God
Posts: 10204
From: Mountian Home, ID.
Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted May 30, 2017 12:09 PM
Yeah, you might be right about that (being hard) ...
but I'm just wincing at the thought of Tom Cruise doing what he always does, you know, doing more than enuf money shots where he looks almost directly at the screen as if to allow his teeth to "gleem" and sub-consciencly saying,
" Hi it's me, Tom Cruise ... in a mummy film!"
Ohhhhhh, Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing, where are you when we so desperately need you? (sigh ... time to top in a DVD of the classics!)
-------------------- "All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Caruso
Film God
Posts: 4105
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted June 09, 2017 05:20 PM
As an actor, these "remakes" are to showcase these "stars" (more like asteroids), so the audiences of today will see them in the same light as audiences saw the original actors - Of course, there were few remakes back then - No need - Seriously, I wouldn't bother with rehashings of the old films - Half the time it is a waste of film (rare these days), talent (what there is of it) and time (oh, so precious) - No doubt there will be a franchise continuation of GODZILLA, KONG, ALIEN and DC/MARVEL, and others - I wouldn't turn down a part in anything, but there is part of me that would much rather see an original concept (or close to one), and approach theatre for what it is - I'll admit some effects and "moments" in these kind of films have intrigued me for the last decade or so, but I could put all those moments and effects onto one 1600' reel and be done with a quick wrap-around story - One man's take on it, Shorty
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Osi Osgood
Film God
Posts: 10204
From: Mountian Home, ID.
Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted June 10, 2017 12:41 PM
Guy, funny stuff!
Micheal has a point. I wonder if our reactions are more because we HAVE seen the original FIRST. If we hadn't seen the original film first, would we have such a low opinion of the "remake".
I believe old school special effects films are a case of this in reverse order. We see the new KING KONG (Peter jackson) and it looks absolutely fabulous ... but I then watch the 1933 "King Kong" and I am completely bored stiff, as well as not taken in any any way, shape or form by what obviously appears to me as terrible stop motion animation.
I know, I'll probably get some people going at that last comparison, but i think it's valid.
-------------------- "All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "
| IP: Logged
|
|
|