Next "Big Thing" in the movies:
Gah. Oh, and Feh.
Mine's the one with the Netflix subscription in the pocket.
Variety has confirmed chilling rumours that Universal was planning to remake The Thing - a project described as a "re-imagining" of the classic which first hit the big screen in 1951 and resurfaced in John Carpenter's excellent 1982 adaptation. The rehash is, as were the first two outings for The Thing, based "heavily" on the …
The original black and white film was so damnably good it's difficult to see how anything could be better, but then the John Carpenter remake was just as fantastic. So lets see what happens. Ron Moore is a good choice at least.
If they cock it up though I'll be as pissed as Dr.Blair in the radio room.
As long as they keep Michael Bay away from it, it could be interesting. It is an interesting plot, after all. Although — I don't quite see how you would "better" the Carpenter version. Replace the creature effects with less convincing CG? It did not work for any of the more recent Alien / AvP movies, in fact it made them less intense. I also doubt you could cast a more convincing set of actors.
Well, we've had several years of "super hero" films, followed by several years of "global disaster" films. What's next on the list? Horror films have always been in fashion, so let's try that! Maybe after that we'll move on to ...errr ....romantic comedys? Or what about a good old-fashioned "shooting each other to bits with guns" film? (ever seen "We were soldiers"? Jesus!!); they're always good for revenue.
Originality (and historical accuracy, while we're at it) has never been Hollywood's strong point.
...being to actually pay to watch the damn thing in the first place. I'm not hugely interested in this, and have already bought a copy of Carpenter's Thing on DVD, so I'll just watch that instead.
This does raise the ever-present question of why people who don't like remakes pay to see the damn things in the first place....
Was more of a continuation than a remake of the original 1951 version, hence no digging of ships from ice and so on and visiting the Norwegian base, which links it back to the short-story and so on.
Re-making it (which is what Hollywood seem to be doing) is just a terrible idea, the last decent re-make/re-imagining was probably Cronenberg's The Fly.
You had to go and say his name didn't you! Now he'll be top of the list. The sooner the people in charge of making films realise that the Bay Film Butcher shouldn't be allowed to sell popcorn at a cinema, let alone have anything to do with what's on the screen..
www.lilformers.com has a few things to say about him based on the transformers movie
The IT angle in this article, the classic fight between computer and glass of whiskey...phizt
If only Dave had thought to carry a hip flask in 2001, then there would have been much less hassle
A great film - just happened to have bought the 1982 version on Blu-ray. Full of desperation and paranoia. If any future remake is as bad as the remake of The Haunting (1956) then forget it.
With reference to CGI in the remake of The Haunting the poster said "The special effects will leave you terrified!!", err it's special effects - hardly terrifying. Scare me psychologically.
Alien icon obviously.
Could only be made worse by haveing Ewe Bol direct it and Shia LeBeouf (indiana jones and transformers star) in it.
There is no way you can improve upon the most perfect survival horror movie of all time. Even if ILM do the CG it'll look really shitty compared to the insane animatronics Carpenter used. The end is even ambiguous enough that its still discussed today.
Remake something rubbish like anything Shia LeBeouf has stared in. Make it better, by getting someone else to play his role. I'd actually find a fog horn going off instead of his inane winging a massive improvement.
Also got to agree:
The day the Earth stood still, worst remake to date, I've even watched a Ewe Bol movie and that was more entertaining.
Good point Martin. I'd love to see some of the Asimov books done properly, instead of the shower of excrement that was I, Robot. But I don't think hoi poloi would 'get' Asimov's subtlety.
And is the Rama series ever going to make it to the big screen? I'd heard that Rendezvous With Rama was in the works but the rumour seems to have died a death...
As for a remake of The Thing, I think it's a case of 'don't mess with the classics'. The John Carpenter version scared the crap out of me when I was a kid and is still shocking to me as an adult. It's the dogs at the beginning. Where aliendog is put into the compound and just stares ahead and the other dogdogs look a bit nervous. Scary.
Most stories are re-hashes of something else. Even if this re-make is a close retelling, it doesn't mean that it's going to be garbage. I happen to like how the new BSG series went, so the same could happen with this. It may have a different take on the concept much like Carpenter's version had a different take. Same basic plot, humans find dangerous frozen E.T., but with different motivations, script, acting... and it turned out fine. And yes... the remake of 'The day the earth stood still' sucked. I put that up to poorly written, badly cast and mis-appropriated special effects money.
wait, you're honestly trying to say that Carpenter's version isn't superior in every way to the original? You prefer the "intellectual carrot" to that dude's head getting ripped off, growing legs and scuttling under the table?
About the only thing that was better in the original is the closing line: "Keep looking. Keep watching the skies!"
The Saga of the 7 Suns (Anderson).
Star Wars-esque real contender, from which at least a trilogy could be made, if not more. Plot, characters, scale, all there ready to be movie-scripted/formatted. And only one example of so much more fresh IP ripe for the taking.
You've just got to wonder :rolleyes:
When will they learn. Are these not basically the same fuckwits that re-made War of the Worlds who not only changed the story for the worse but cast that little gobshite cruise as the main character.
It's nearly a step too far but if they try to remake Blade Runner I will burn hollywood down myself.
A sequel might be worth considering. The short story leaves open the question of whether or not they finally managed to kill the alien, as does the John Carpenter remake. The 1954 classic is the only one that doesn't leave the question open. All it takes is a single cell brought back to a research facility not far from a major metropolitan area...
I think I expressed my opinion on that particular piece of bull---- before. Was it the BBC talking about re-imagining something, merlin maybe? Blake 7... whatever it may be - jesus.
You'd have thought nobody had written a new story since the 60s with all the shit remakes going on, and holywood wonders why it's going down the pan, hell nowdays people would be better off reading a dictionary then trying to find something interesting or intelligent out of the sewage works they call holywoods major studios.
Jesus. I think Pans Labrynth may be the last really good film I saw, the Orient has a few good interesting films a while back, but the English speaking world is trapped in remake and romcom hell.
"A sequel might be worth considering. The short story leaves open the question of whether or not they finally managed to kill the alien, as does the John Carpenter remake. The 1954 classic is the only one that doesn't leave the question open. All it takes is a single cell brought back to a research facility not far from a major metropolitan area..."
Heh, funnily enough, a remake was done albeit under the auspices of a video game. The Thing for the PS2 put you in command of a military unit that begins with the Norwegian camp and then comes to the American camp.
It maintained the paranoid atmosphere of the original by allowing your colleagues to become infected. Also your colleagues had a healthy paranoia themselves once the shit hit the fan and they realised what they were getting into. That included lack of trust in you, which you could win back by giving them items.
Link here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(video_game)
There can be only one 'Jed', the Magnificent Malamute who played the parasitized sled-dog in Carpenter's version.
Trying to replace him is like trying to replace Bogey in 'Casablanca'..
[What's that whirring? Aaah! It's the CGI-hordes at Pixar revving up their animation-engines. It'll never work. Die, you bastards! DIE!]
Coat? Mine's the one with the dog-lead in the pocket.
Joel Silver optioned Altered Carbon for a reputed seven figure sum. My guess is that it's still in pre-production hell while they figure out how to make a film where the hero swaps bodies multiple times without confusing the hell out of the rednecks ;-)
Paris, because she's not had experience with multiple bodies, or so she says...
The most ironic thing on this article is that it is slamming the mere idea of a remake/reimagining, while at the same time admitting that the 1982 remake is a classic. Of course, remakes have earned a bad reputation, but it has to do more with idiots leading the remake efforts. Even good directors screw up every now and then, see Tin Burton's "Planet of the Apes".
I find it funny that the War of the Worlds remake was bashed everywhere, mostly because of Tom Cruise... while my real annoyance at that remake would be the idiot kids (especially the Dakota Fanning character!) turning the "lone character" into a fleeing family. Other than that, at least this one tried to be truer to the book. Maybe if Spielberg hadn't rammed in "teh family" it might've fared better...
How exactly? The book wasn't set in America, nor did it follow the misadventures of an annoying family and to top it all off, the book was set in post industrial revolution England.
If I had been the lead in that terrible, terrible Speilberg remake I would have killed the squealing bitch myself and told the mother the Martians did it.
Give War of the Worlds another go but actually set it in the time and place it is meant to be set. The musical version, artwork and all, would be a great place to start for inspiration. The machines and musical score were both very creepy, dark and ominous. But give the job to Peter Jackson of LotR fame. I have no doubt he's a fan, and would produce something to really knock your socks off!
As to a remake of The Thing, I'd be very surprised if someone could beat John Carpenter's fantastic effort in any way. But we'll see.
Well, modern Hollywood remakes aren't always bad. It's not like they go for flashy CGI FX over the tense interpersonal drama every time.
*Thinks about the remake of Flight of the Phoenix*
Well not _every_ time.
*Thinks about remake of The Day The Earth Stood Still*
Well, not always.
*Thinks about t he remake of War of the Worlds*
At least it'll make a change to have a movie that doesn't end with the good guys having to win.
*Thinks about the remake of Ocean's Eleven*
There was a decent reason to remake The Thing the first time (and as EvilGav points out, it works as much as a sequel as a remake): honestly, the original wasn't really very good. The remake, however, can't really be improved on in any significant way. Therefore another remake is 100% guaranteed pure fail.
Let Hollywood go all out and have an all in space war
hell throw in the borg, the bugs from starship troopers
and an asteriod hurtling towards earth.
Get bruce, ben and a space shuttle that defies all the laws of physics back to save the day
Only problem with this is that a screenwriter is probably reading this through the smoky haze of his crack pipe and thinks this is a winning storyline to pitch to the studios
that all of the following remakes were going to be such crap you shouldn't pay to see them:
The Day the Earth Stood Still (Green weenies all over the place)
The War of the Worlds (Tom Cruise? Give me a break. The only thing he ever had going for him was a lot of women like to look at his ass. When it comes to acting, he's even worse that what's her name who did the second Savik part in the Trek Movies.)
The Dukes of Hazard (Bo, Luke, and Uncle Jesse weren't scruffy)
I Robot (The machines were neither evil nor benevolent, therefore Hollywood can't handle it)
I didn't pay to see any of these, and frankly, I don't even plan to waste time watching them if they come on the tv. Crap, complete crap. Crap so bad you don't have to watch it to know its crap.
I'm SICK of remakes done badly, if it's 50 years old, then maybe. But not when the JC's remake is still lovingly cherished. I know.. let's remake Titanic in to a BETTER film instead : "oh no, it's far too soon..." Shut up Uni Exec!!
FFS. Hate H a t e H A T E!!!
ANYONE who has not seen the movie, remake or not, has no opinion on the quality of the movie.
Before you start slating it just because it's a remake or who is in it or who directs it or one of th emany other myriad reasons you have for being a whiny wingebag WATCH THE MOVIE FIRST.
when it comes to movies, they are here to entertain (generally) you need to suspend your prejudices and enjoy the film for what it is.
personally, i happened to find TDTESS a decent film, certainly not one of the worst i've ever seen ... not great, but not bad ... it did it's job, it entertained. yes, i preferred the original, but that does not automatically make this a bad film.
anyway, enough of that ... time for someone to make a film from a Dan Simmons novel !
Well, they can't do any worse than Kurt Russell, I guess.
Oh, who am I kidding? Tom Cruise as R. J. McReady!
Mine's the one with the revolver in the pocket -- don't worry, it's only got one round in it. Oh, and don't mind it if you hear a loud bang from the street outside in the next minute or two, it'll just be me going.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019