Curse

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 21, 2005, 02:38 PM // 14:38

Hollywood has a habit of doing awful remakes of foreign films and miniseries. The sad thing is: #1. They give it the “Hollywood” treatment stripping everything that was ever special about the original and #2. The people who see them, often, don’t know that there was an original to begin with.

Here are some examples of remakes that really stunk:

Singing Detective – It was a crime to try to make this into a movie. This was originally a BBC miniseries (with Michael Gambon) and one of the best productions of anything I’ve ever seen on television. But the story needs the timespan of a miniseries to build the strength of its many psychological revelations. It’s more powerful as a miniseries.

Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy – Another crime to remake. This was another BBC miniseries. The low budget sets and costumes were perfect for the campy tongue-in-cheek story. A perfect match. Loading it up with CG and special effects really misses the point. Douglas Adams would be turning over in his grave.

The Ladykillers – The original Ealing Studio film starred a young Alec Guinness in one of his signature roles. I’m sorry, but Tom Hanks, as good an actor as he is, can’t occupy a role after Sir Alec Guinness has been there. That’s almost as bad as Ewan McGregor playing an Alec Guinness part ….

La Femme Nikita – The original film was by Luc Besson. Well done film with excellent cinematography and edited with a relentless pace. The actress Anne Parillaud was exceptional – showing a wonderful range and surprising subtlety in her performance. Hollywood remade it as No Way Out with Bridget Fonda and removed everything that was special about the original and turning it into a substandard action film. And, if that wasn’t enough, they made some TV series out of it. That's just adding insult to injury. Is nothing sacred?

The Vanishing – A film from the Netherlands – an instant classic and creepy to the core. Hollywood’s version had Keifer Southerland and changed everything around to accommodate a happy ending. Another film that shouldn’t have been touched at all.

Casablanca – Yep. Barb Wire is a bizarre rendition of Casablanca. I suspect they felt that the basic story would magically transform this character into a sympathetic heroine – but it was more pathetic than sympathetic. Painful to watch. I still want my money back.

Here are some remakes that I actually liked:

Solaris – The original was a 3 hour Russian adaptation of the novel. It’s considered a classic in its confusing exposition and an intellectually stimulating cinematic puzzle which develops a life of its own…. It’s like a David Lynch film, but less entertaining… and really, really tough to sit through. The remake extracted one element of the story and fleshed out a pretty good film - less cerebral but with a greater emotional weight filmed with patience and maturity.

Night of the Living Dead – I thought this was going to be a typical Hollywood ripoff. But the reason they made it is actually quite admirable. You see, George Romero didn’t earn a cent off the original film. He gave up all rights to the studios and was ripped off for all these years. One producer/actor/director wanted to do something about it, so they put together “George Romero’s Night of the Living Dead” just to allow the man to get some residuals off his own series.

LA Takedown – this is very hard to find. It was a made for TV movie directed by Michael Mann. The reason why it never saw DVD release is that the director reshot the same entire story on a big budget and renamed it, Heat. I’ve seen both and Heat is obviously the film he wanted to make all along. LA Takedown happens on a smaller scale but the characters and names are pretty much the same.

Pride and Prejudice- remade as Bridget Jones’ Diary. It worked surprisingly well.

Yojimbo – classic Kurosawa samurai film. Remade almost scene-for-scene as A Fistfull of Dollars with guns instead of swords. Later it was remade as Last Man Standing starring Bruce Willis. There was at least one other remake but I can't recall it. This is just a testimony to how good the basic plot is. Go see the original.

Seven Samurai – Kurosawa’s masterpiece. IMO one of the best films of all time. Remade as the Magnificent Seven which was still a great movie but half as powerful as the original.

Hidden Fortress – many of y’all know this already, but some of y’all don’t. Another Kurosawa film which inspired a remake. This time it’s Star Wars (heard of that one?). A couple of peasants became C3PO and R2D2. The soldier hero of the film was split into Han Solo and Luke Skywalker. The Fortress became the Death Star (no it didn't have the power to destroy a whole village). Swords became blasters. etc. etc. George Lucas doesn’t try to hide it – In fact, he pays homage to Kurosawa as one of the most important directors in his life. Yeah, no kidding.

dreamcrafter · Sep 21, 2005, 04:16 PM // 16:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xue Yi Liang

Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy – Another crime to remake. This was another BBC miniseries. The low budget sets and costumes were perfect for the campy tongue-in-cheek story. A perfect match. Loading it up with CG and special effects really misses the point. Douglas Adams would be turning over in his grave.

Actually, Douglas Adams was involved in the making of the movie and to be quite fair, it's not half bad. The original BBC series was trash of the highest order, though not without charme.

The new HGTTG movie also packs a lot of charme and there isn't that much CG in it. All of the creatures are puppets or people in fancy costumes, just a few of the more outlandish things that happen in the film are CGed.

The plot has allmost nothing to do with the books, the radio show or the bbc series, which is absolutely ok, since no incarnation of the Hitchhiker is exactly the same as the others..

All in all, the movie could have done better, but then again, if you make a movie out of the most hilarious and thought provoking book/radio show/text adventure given to man, it's bound to disapoint..

Share most of your other opinions though and Kurosawa does PWN every Hollwood director, living or dead. Though even he did a "remake" of sorts, "Throne of Blood" beeing a japanese McBeth adaption..

Divinitys Creature · Sep 21, 2005, 06:36 PM // 18:36

I hated the latest incarnation of Hitchhiker's Guide. I hated the book too :\

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 21, 2005, 06:56 PM // 18:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamcrafter

Actually, Douglas Adams was involved in the making of the movie and to be quite fair, it's not half bad. The original BBC series was trash of the highest order, though not without charme.

The new HGTTG movie also packs a lot of charme and there isn't that much CG in it. All of the creatures are puppets or people in fancy costumes, just a few of the more outlandish things that happen in the film are CGed.

The plot has allmost nothing to do with the books, the radio show or the bbc series, which is absolutely ok, since no incarnation of the Hitchhiker is exactly the same as the others..

All in all, the movie could have done better, but then again, if you make a movie out of the most hilarious and thought provoking book/radio show/text adventure given to man, it's bound to disapoint..

Share most of your other opinions though and Kurosawa does PWN every Hollwood director, living or dead. Though even he did a "remake" of sorts, "Throne of Blood" beeing a japanese McBeth adaption..

I confess I didn't see the film - only based my opinion on what I've heard (and a good dose of my personal bias). Maybe I'll give it a look.

The BBC series, viewed in the proper context, conveys as much importance to the events as do the books. As a matter of fact, when reading the books I had pictured it as a low-tech stage production in my mind.

Yep. Kurosawa was quite fond of Shakespeare. In his pseudo-autobiography he regards the classics of Shakespeare, Chekov and others as required reading. Throne of Blood was a very direct adaptation. And let's not forget about Ran which was adapted from King Lear.

Kurosawa never had a problem with the western versions of his films. I think everyone who drew inspiration from his work gave him acknowledgement just as he does for Shakespeare.

EchoSex · Sep 21, 2005, 06:59 PM // 18:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamcrafter

Actually, Douglas Adams was involved in the making of the movie and to be quite fair, it's not half bad. The original BBC series was trash of the highest order, though not without charme.

The new HGTTG movie also packs a lot of charme and there isn't that much CG in it. All of the creatures are puppets or people in fancy costumes, just a few of the more outlandish things that happen in the film are CGed.

The plot has allmost nothing to do with the books, the radio show or the bbc series, which is absolutely ok, since no incarnation of the Hitchhiker is exactly the same as the others..

All in all, the movie could have done better, but then again, if you make a movie out of the most hilarious and thought provoking book/radio show/text adventure given to man, it's bound to disapoint..

Share most of your other opinions though and Kurosawa does PWN every Hollwood director, living or dead. Though even he did a "remake" of sorts, "Throne of Blood" beeing a japanese McBeth adaption..

When you say he was invovled in the film, I hope you mean the mini series.. Douglas is long dead o_O Heart attack.

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 21, 2005, 07:10 PM // 19:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by EchoSex

When you say he was invovled in the film, I hope you mean the mini series.. Douglas is long dead o_O Heart attack.

Actually he was involved in the early Hollywood production before he died unexpectedly. I saw an interview where he mentions it.

That reminds me of Philip K. Dick's excitement over the release of Blade Runner. Initially he dreaded the idea of a movie based on his novella until Ridley Scott showed him some early footage. After the 15 minute reel, the author asked for a second viewing then was astonished and said (paraphrasing), "You managed to capture the tones and the mood of my story! How did you do that?" It was reported that he was very excited about seeing Blade Runner in the theater. Unfortunately he died just before it's release.

Thanas · Sep 21, 2005, 08:28 PM // 20:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Divinitys Creature

I hated the latest incarnation of Hitchhiker's Guide. I hated the book too :\

Hated the book??? What!?! You can hate the film, but not the book. Its pure genius. That book kept me sane during a week of having to revise alone in uni flats during my first year.

....Douglas Adams spent a long time trying to get the film made. He did apparently do a lot of the groundwork for the move from book to film. Sadly he never got to oversee the transition completely...

With regards to the original post I couldn't agree more. Hollywood is currently recycling old material and making lots of sequels (although thats hardly a new trend). I was at an interview where Walter Koenig (aka chekov of startrek) was discussing the topic of where the star-trek franchise would go next and he felt they would attempt to remake the original series. He then went on to explain that Hollywood is attempting to play things safe and thus is recycling old material. This recycling of ideas is not limited to film though. Its also found in the fashion world and the music world, where the 90's was a rehash of the 70's and the 00's the 80's.

The fact of the matter is the commercial giant is growing in size and tends to play things safe in order to please its mixed audiences, thus producing alot of the aforementioned crap. Unfortunately Jo Public is becoming more and more lazy and thus looks to this easily accesible commercial monster for help when it comes to buying the latest CD, item of clothing or when it comes to deciding what film to watch. In order to find original material it takes more dedication. One must actively search for the "good stuff". A lot of this material is hidden in the shadow of the commercial machine, which is more interested in profit than talent. A good example of how low the music market and the consumer has stooped is the "Crazy Frog".

If we want more original material we have to look for it ourselves in less obvious places and not to the large money making organisations like Hollywood.

Divinitys Creature · Sep 22, 2005, 09:34 AM // 09:34

They over-hyped it back in middle school and it became required reading (our teacher liked it). I had read it before but I thought it sucked and then we had to read it as a class at a snail's pace *ewwwwwwwww* It was only mildly amusing back then. It seems like the author just spilled out a stream of consciousness during a hangover or something. Must be funny if you're stoned or something.

dreamcrafter · Sep 22, 2005, 10:16 AM // 10:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xue Yi Liang

I confess I didn't see the film - only based my opinion on what I've heard (and a good dose of my personal bias). Maybe I'll give it a look.

The BBC series, viewed in the proper context, conveys as much importance to the events as do the books. As a matter of fact, when reading the books I had pictured it as a low-tech stage production in my mind.

Yep. Kurosawa was quite fond of Shakespeare. In his pseudo-autobiography he regards the classics of Shakespeare, Chekov and others as required reading. Throne of Blood was a very direct adaptation. And let's not forget about Ran which was adapted from King Lear.

Kurosawa never had a problem with the western versions of his films. I think everyone who drew inspiration from his work gave him acknowledgement just as he does for Shakespeare.

I really enjoy talking about Kurosawa more than talking about Hollywood Remakes. So here we go:

The funny thing about Seven Samurai and Yojimbo (both films that were adapted by hollywood and given a Wild West costume) is, that those films were Kurosawa's nod toward Hollywood Wild West movies, since he was a great fan of them. So he basically made Wild West movies, but swapped all the cowboys for samurais. And Hollywood returned the favor and made Kurosawa movies, but swapped the samurai against cowboys. All those films were (and still are) great classics, but what really makes them stand out is, that they are also a form of communication between movie makers, a kind of giving respect where respect is due.

Old Dood · Sep 22, 2005, 10:31 AM // 10:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xue Yi Liang

I confess I didn't see the film - only based my opinion on what I've heard (and a good dose of my personal bias). Maybe I'll give it a look

F.Y.I. That is exactly what happened with the Right when they judged Micheal Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11.

I personally haven't read the Hitchiker's Guide. You would think I would have by now. That book came out in my era.

I am going to have to sit down and do just that.

Another movie that was made from a great piece of literature is the Lord of the Rings. Now that book I have read more times then I can remember. The movie was definetly not following the book. It had many parts that really annoyed me. For one there were NO Elves in Helm's Deep save one. Legolas! However, I am real glad that all three of those movies were made. It still represents the book very well.

This is why there is nothing that can replace reading books. I have a modest HDTV set-up and still to me a book is the best Hi-Def way to visualize anything.

Thanas · Sep 22, 2005, 12:45 PM // 12:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Divinitys Creature

They over-hyped it back in middle school and it became required reading (our teacher liked it). I had read it before but I thought it sucked and then we had to read it as a class at a snail's pace *ewwwwwwwww* It was only mildly amusing back then. It seems like the author just spilled out a stream of consciousness during a hangover or something. Must be funny if you're stoned or something.

I think its more a cultural thing. Its more British humour I think. However I must say that reading any book in school over an extended period of time can seriusly alter ones opinion of said book.

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 22, 2005, 01:22 PM // 13:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old Warrior Dood

F.Y.I. That is exactly what happened with the Right when they judged Micheal Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11.

C'mon. You should know better than to make gross generalizations like that.
For the record, many people on the left are also offended by Moore's films. (they are not documentaries). If we're gonna start talking about Moore please start a new thread because I have written tons of material and research about that clown.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamcrafter

The funny thing about Seven Samurai and Yojimbo (both films that were adapted by hollywood and given a Wild West costume) is, that those films were Kurosawa's nod toward Hollywood Wild West movies, since he was a great fan of them. So he basically made Wild West movies, but swapped all the cowboys for samurais. And Hollywood returned the favor and made Kurosawa movies, but swapped the samurai against cowboys. All those films were (and still are) great classics, but what really makes them stand out is, that they are also a form of communication between movie makers, a kind of giving respect where respect is due.

Kurosawa was a big fan of the John Ford westerns and a clear inspiration for him.

Sorry for the following technicality-wh*reism: The homage doesn't exactly
reciprocate since the plots of Seven Samurai and Yojimbo were entirely from Kurosawa's writing. While the genre was influential - he didn't use material from any particular western film(s). The opposite wasn't true with these.

I felt like pointing that out because I once saw a book about the "Best Action Films Ever Made" which had a clear bias towards Hollywood productions. It had a whole chapter on the Magnificent Seven. In that chapter it briefly justified the exclusion of Seven Samurai from their list by mentioning exactly what you said - that Kurosawa was inpired by the western genre. I still think Seven Samurai belonged on that list - probably at the top - it's one of Sean Connery's 10 favorite films of all time, for heaven's sake!

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 22, 2005, 01:42 PM // 13:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thanas

I think its more a cultural thing. Its more British humour I think. However I must say that reading any book in school over an extended period of time can seriusly alter ones opinion of said book.

so true

Old Dood · Sep 22, 2005, 02:13 PM // 14:13

[QUOTE=Xue Yi Liang]C'mon. You should know better than to make gross generalizations like that.
For the record, many people on the left are also offended by Moore's films. (they are not documentaries). If we're gonna start talking about Moore please start a new thread because I have written tons of material and research about that clown.QUOTE]

I am not making a genalization. I am making a valid point about people that judge a film without seeing the film. The Right DID make judgments on Moore's film without seeing it...that is a well know fact. I did not say anything about the content of Moore's film...you did that.

dreamcrafter · Sep 22, 2005, 03:13 PM // 15:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xue Yi Liang

C'mon. You should know better than to make gross generalizations like that.
For the record, many people on the left are also offended by Moore's films. (they are not documentaries). If we're gonna start talking about Moore please start a new thread because I have written tons of material and research about that clown.
Kurosawa was a big fan of the John Ford westerns and a clear inspiration for him.

Sorry for the following technicality-wh*reism: The homage doesn't exactly
reciprocate since the plots of Seven Samurai and Yojimbo were entirely from Kurosawa's writing. While the genre was influential - he didn't use material from any particular western film(s). The opposite wasn't true with these.

I felt like pointing that out because I once saw a book about the "Best Action Films Ever Made" which had a clear bias towards Hollywood productions. It had a whole chapter on the Magnificent Seven. In that chapter it briefly justified the exclusion of Seven Samurai from their list by mentioning exactly what you said - that Kurosawa was inpired by the western genre. I still think Seven Samurai belonged on that list - probably at the top - it's one of Sean Connery's 10 favorite films of all time, for heaven's sake!

Damn my poor language skills - that's more or less exactly what I intended to say, Kurosawa was influenced by the whole genre, not a particular film, and his Samurai action movies were a homage to the genre..

So I think we agree on that count.. Anyway, there are few action movies that can match Seven Samurai's battle scenes. The final battle for the village is just great, it's very moody and there's a lot of tension in it. Classic!

Back on topic: there are a few remakes that aren't half bad. The problem is just, that I can't think of any right now....

The worst thing though, is Hollywood taking succesfull european or asian movies and making US versions of them.. The Ring comes to mind as well as a few others.

Or Hollywood inserting americans as heroes in every movie, no matter if it fits or not (The League of extraordinary Gentlemen comes to mind. There was no american in the comics, so they introduced Tom Sawyer.. also this U-Boot film about an american submarine crew capturing the Enigma device from the germans. Well, an Allied sumarine crew did manage to capture the Enigma from a Nazi U-Boot, but it were brits who did this..)

Arturo02 · Sep 22, 2005, 04:08 PM // 16:08

a movie that comes from a book is not an actual remake. A remake is any film that is a new production of a previous film.

Heck it you want to talk remake kings, go IMDB The Jazz Singer. Re-done like 5 times. Or there's Parent Trap, think that one was redone three times.

Synthos · Sep 22, 2005, 04:14 PM // 16:14

War of the Worlds was a pretty good remake from the original. Its even been redone a few times since those original radio brodcasts.

Arturo02 · Sep 22, 2005, 05:38 PM // 17:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synthos

War of the Worlds was a pretty good remake from the original. Its even been redone a few times since those original radio brodcasts.

and the even more original novel

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 23, 2005, 05:56 AM // 05:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old Warrior Dood

I am not making a genalization. I am making a valid point about people that judge a film without seeing the film. The Right DID make judgments on Moore's film without seeing it...that is a well know fact. I did not say anything about the content of Moore's film...you did that.

I'm sure you meant many vocal conservatives (instead of all conservatives) who criticized the film without seeing it. By saying "the right" you're making a generalization. I concede that many vocal critics hadn't seen the film at all but that's not all of them. Believe it or not, I know of some folks from the right who have seen it and were critical.

If I made the statement, "the right is comprised of fundamentalist christians and bigots." I would be making a generalization.

If I made the statement, "the left is comprised of arrogant, cultually elite pseudo-intellectuals who presume to speak for the common person, and are more close-minded to open discourse than to regurgitating slogans (regarding themselves, paradoxically, as open-minded)" I would be making a generalization, too.

And, yes, I took the opportunity to digress into my opinion on Moore whom I despise (not because of his politics but because of his opportunism masked as political activism).

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 23, 2005, 06:06 AM // 06:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamcrafter

DaThe worst thing though, is Hollywood taking succesfull european or asian movies and making US versions of them.. The Ring comes to mind as well as a few others.

Oh yeah I forgot about those.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamcrafter

Or Hollywood inserting americans as heroes in every movie, no matter if it fits or not (The League of extraordinary Gentlemen comes to mind. There was no american in the comics, so they introduced Tom Sawyer.. also this U-Boot film about an american submarine crew capturing the Enigma device from the germans. Well, an Allied sumarine crew did manage to capture the Enigma from a Nazi U-Boot, but it were brits who did this..)

This could be an entire thread unto itself. Don't forget about the films that have a core plot (or subplot) where an American man goes to some foreign country (a soldier, journalist, businessman etc.) and, implicitly, through his daily actions opens the eyes of a foreign people (and usually wins the heart of one very attractive woman) to the power of western "free-thinking". Consider the the following films: Shogun, Heaven and Earth, City of Hope, (I kinda think of Witness qualifies, too, even though it's in the US).... don't get me started.