Wizard of oz and other remakes

[Beast]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

My gawd.... NO! Remakes and reboots are for films that were originally bad or had low budgets and couldnt be made right. Star Wars is one of a handful of films that you simply cannot remake. No freegin way. Its like Remaking Wizard of Oz, The Godfather, or Lawrence of Arabia, or some other clsssic epic. You just cant do it. Its like beating up Mother Theresa.... you CANT DO IT!!!!

And, even though you'd have the originals, you would have still ruined it for future generations since the only versions they'd likely be exposed to are the new ones which would be hopelessly "Hollywood-ish". There is just NO way this couild ever be acceptable to me. Just the thought of a Star Wars reboot caused a sick feeling in my gut.... no way.... just no way.

They are just fine the way they are. A few effects cleaned up here and there is fine. Lets leave it at that. Noone they could possibly cast right now could ever be Leis, Luke, Solo, etc, etc.

You do realize that Wizard of Oz was a remake of earlier films, right?

Frankly, I wouldn't object to a new Wizard of Oz film. One more in keeping with the original book.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Beast

You do realize that Wizard of Oz was a remake of earlier films, right?

Frankly, I wouldn't object to a new Wizard of Oz film. One more in keeping with the original book.

What earlier films? You mean "flims" as in plural? Even so - those must have not been too good or we wouldnt have the classic Wizard of Oz that we have now.

I did say that remaking older films that are really bad or executed poorly is one thing but you dont touch well-loved, well-made classics. If you do, then why not just remake every movie every 10 years to "update" them? That would mean Lord of the Rings is due to be remade then.... how ridiculous does that sound?

James Cameron said correctly that movies should be a product of their time and hes totally against screwing around with redoing films just to "modernize" them. I agree 100%.

[Beast]

Sure we would. It's not like remakes is a new thing. Just they're more common now adays.

And Lord of the Rings was already a remake. Since they adapted the books already once before in animation.

James Cameron has his opinions, and he's entitled to them. But his opinion isn't the only one that matters.

[blonde_devil]

there were a few Oz movies - mostly black and white, silent ones. check out wikipedia and they will give you info(i thought one or two were included on the bluray release too).

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Beast

Sure we would. It's not like remakes is a new thing. Just they're more common now adays.

And Lord of the Rings was already a remake. Since they adapted the books already once before in animation.

James Cameron has his opinions, and he's entitled to them. But his opinion isn't the only one that matters.

Well, LOTR cant really be called a remake. Animated stuff, or TV series stuff cant be counted, IMO. BBC did an LOTR series a while back but I dont count that either.

No, remakes arent a new thing but Like I said it only works when the original(film being remade) was bad for some reason or had a good story but effects and budgets crippled it. Im down with this and wouldnt mind seeing more of it.

Its the established classics that I doubt may people want remade. Just leave them be and come up with an original idea instead! I know... thats hard to do.

[Beast]

They're just as valid as any other adaption of the source material.

And no, remakes of good movies can be just as good. If not better than the original.

And the reason it's hard to do, is because there's no such thing as an original idea.

[nametag]

Originally Posted by Jay444

I mean, take Independence Day (ID4) as an example. It is a pretty horrendous movie. But, if it had another run through in the script department it could be an amazingly kick ass movie. Cut a few needless characters. Drop a stereotype or two. Figure out something more plausible than uploading a virus from a Laptop to stop the Aliens (Actually, Georoge Lucas simplified the end of ID4 in TPM. Screw the laptop, just have the ship glide in, fire a missle, blow up the mother ship and drop the shields on the battleships on Earth, problem solved). So much could be done right. That is what I would do in Hollywood, take the missed opportunities/bombs and make them good.

ID4 is not a very good example since it's essentially a 90s version of the alien invasion movie which has been done countless times before, and has been done numerous times since (War of the Worlds, Cloverfield and Battle: LA being recent examples). Those problems you're talking about are part of what gives ID4 it's own 'spin' on that story. However, replacing Bill Pullman with someone who could actually act wouldn't be completely beyond the pale...

[ObiTrentKenobi]

All opinions are respected.

Yeah, I've watched The Clone Wars series. I've probably seen 80% of the episodes. It's gotten much better since that wreck Clone Wars movie. I even have the cartoon network series on DVD. I admit that I like the new animated series much more over the old one.

Understand please, that I was hypothetically thinking that Lucas would still be involved with a remake - not some other director who could easily butcher it or "hollywood-ize" it, which would be a disaster.

I think the right cast could be found; and it could be kept very close to the original intent of Lucas.

I just imagine an expanded awesome-sauce Hoth battle in HD! Tighter edited and more epic Death Star attack in ANH in HD!

I'll just keep dreaming....

[ObiTrentKenobi]

Originally Posted by Beast

You do realize that Wizard of Oz was a remake of earlier films, right?

Frankly, I wouldn't object to a new Wizard of Oz film. One more in keeping with the original book.

Tin Man was a great series BTW! Everyone should see it if they arleady haven't.

Anyway, back on topic... Star Wars, Star Wars, Star Wars.

WHAT IF a remake ended up being better than the original? WHAT IF??? I'm a crazy @ss Star Wars die-hard fan, but I'd be very much up for the idea - life will go on with 2 versions. Future generations would be inclined to look into the original. IF anything, what if the original became forgotten? a remake would rekindle the interest in the original.

it could go both ways

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

What earlier films? You mean "flims" as in plural? Even so - those must have not been too good or we wouldnt have the classic Wizard of Oz that we have now.

I did say that remaking older films that are really bad or executed poorly is one thing but you dont touch well-loved, well-made classics. If you do, then why not just remake every movie every 10 years to "update" them? That would mean Lord of the Rings is due to be remade then.... how ridiculous does that sound?

James Cameron said correctly that movies should be a product of their time and hes totally against screwing around with redoing films just to "modernize" them. I agree 100%.

Hmmm...you sure do have a lot of remakes in your collection. And I would say most people would agree that the original Dracula, Dawn of the Dead, The Fly and The Omen are well-loved classics.

Apparently James Cameron said that before he directed True Lies...which is a remake.

[SpaceDog]

Originally Posted by ObiTrentKenobi

All opinions are respected.

Yeah, I've watched The Clone Wars series. I've probably seen 80% of the episodes. It's gotten much better since that wreck Clone Wars movie. I even have the cartoon network series on DVD. I admit that I like the new animated series much more over the old one.

Understand please, that I was hypothetically thinking that Lucas would still be involved with a remake - not some other director who could easily butcher it or "hollywood-ize" it, which would be a disaster.

I think the right cast could be found; and it could be kept very close to the original intent of Lucas.

I just imagine an expanded awesome-sauce Hoth battle in HD! Tighter edited and more epic Death Star attack in ANH in HD!

I'll just keep dreaming....

Do you mean 3D? Because film is already > HD.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by Beast

Frankly, I wouldn't object to a new Wizard of Oz film. One more in keeping with the original book.

Sorry, Chocolate Factory Syndrome: You could probably set out to do one closer to the events of the book--and, like a certain Disney Film That Shall Remain Nameless, get it horribly wrong--but you couldn't get closer to the SPIRIT of Baum's text than screenwriter Noel Langley got in the MGM version:
Not too many non-book fans know that two of the Emerald City characters Frank Morgan played were straight out of Baum's books, and Morgan nailed them word-perfectly.
(Hey, Langley went on to write the Alastair Sim "Scrooge", how much more proof of genius do you need?)

I still haven't the faintest clue what the OP was free-associating about, which's probably why his post was pulled--
But the reason we're getting a flood of "other" Oz movies (besides every other studio wanting to beat Universal's inevitable "Wicked" movie to the punch) MIGHT have something to do with Baum's book going into safe, exploitable Public Domain a year ago.
As for the rest of what he was talking about....your freakin' guess, folks.

[The Mad Kiwi]

Originally Posted by Beast

Frankly, I wouldn't object to a new Wizard of Oz film. One more in keeping with the original book.

Actually John Boorman was working on a CG adaptation of the novel, and some gorgeous concept art was released along with an animation test (some of these won't allow for IMG tags, so I'm just linking to all of them):

Dorothy Gale and Toto
Munchkinland
The Scarecrow
The Scarecrow 2
Dorothy and the Scarecrow
Nick Chopper, the Tin Man
Nick Chopper, the Tin Man 2
The Cowardly Lion
The Yellow Brick Road (and Poppy Field?)
The Emerald City
The Emerald City 2
The Castle of the Wicked Witch of the West

The animation test has disappeared, though.

I've heard nothing on this project for over a year or so, so I'm guessing it either fell off the face of the earth, or the production is just keeping a low profile. Considering how much info keeps getting released on Dorothy of Oz (a CG sequel due next year that's based on a book Baum's grandson wrote), I'm more inclined to think Boorman's has been scrapped. Shame. A lot of his ideas were really fascinating (having Toto gain speech ability in Oz, having Dorothy cope with the death of her parents while building a relationship with Henry and Em, more backstory for the other characters, etc.).

[Pirate King]

The Ten Commandments
Ben-Hur
True Grit
Heaven Can Wait
Scarface
The Thing
3:10 to Yuma
All remakes and all very good films.

However...also have
The Pink Panther
Planet of the Apes
The Stepford Wives
All the Kings Men
Psycho (1998)
Not so good remakes....

I suppose it depends on the film.

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by Pirate King

The Ten Commandments
Ben-Hur
True Grit
Heaven Can Wait
Scarface
The Thing
3:10 to Yuma
All remakes and all very good films.

However...also have
The Pink Panther
Planet of the Apes
The Stepford Wives
All the Kings Men
Psycho (1998)
Not so good remakes....

I suppose it depends on the film.

And, of course, that applies to any movie, not just remakes.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by The Mad Kiwi

Actually John Boorman was working on a CG adaptation of the novel,
I've heard nothing on this project for over a year or so, so I'm guessing it either fell off the face of the earth, or the production is just keeping a low profile. Considering how much info keeps getting released on Dorothy of Oz (a CG sequel due next year that's based on a book Baum's grandson wrote), I'm more inclined to think Boorman's has been scrapped. Shame. A lot of his ideas were really fascinating (having Toto gain speech ability in Oz, having Dorothy cope with the death of her parents while building a relationship with Henry and Em, more backstory for the other characters, etc.).

IOW, like his aborted versions of LOTR and Narnia, Boorman went off a cliff with loopy/indulgent "new interpretations", the purists howled, and the project was mercifully let to rot.

Although in this case, think we're seeing more a king-of-the-mountain game of big competing projects squeezing out little competing ones, and Disney and Universal are standing at the top.

[ObiTrentKenobi]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

What earlier films? You mean "flims" as in plural? Even so - those must have not been too good or we wouldnt have the classic Wizard of Oz that we have now.

I did say that remaking older films that are really bad or executed poorly is one thing but you dont touch well-loved, well-made classics. If you do, then why not just remake every movie every 10 years to "update" them? That would mean Lord of the Rings is due to be remade then.... how ridiculous does that sound?

James Cameron said correctly that movies should be a product of their time and hes totally against screwing around with redoing films just to "modernize" them. I agree 100%.

Well guess what... Mr. Cameron lied to you. He tweaked Titanic; not just converted it to 3D to "modernize" it and cash in, but he also made changes to the ending of the film. He changed the starfield Rose gazes at in the night sky to be the accurate one.

A small accuracy detail, but a change none the less.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

Hmmm...you sure do have a lot of remakes in your collection. And I would say most people would agree that the original Dracula, Dawn of the Dead, The Fly and The Omen are well-loved classics.

Apparently James Cameron said that before he directed True Lies...which is a remake.

The original Dracula or any of the others were hardly loved-classics. They were crap. The George Romero zombie films are comedies and lets be realistic here...they were terrible films. Fun? Yes. But bad.

The original Fly is a horrendously terrible, cheesefest. A remake was required of this film since it was a great idea but a poorly executed film. Same with The Thing - the original was a cheesefest. The Carpenter version craps all over it. The Omen was one of the free blu-tray choices from way back when they used to give you 5 free ones when you bought a player. Remember?

I thought I clearly stated that remaking a film that had a great concept but was poorly made or just plain ancient is an OK thing. Its actually a great idea. However, many of the remakes now are films that truly are classics and perfect as is. Sure, maybe a few effects shots are a little dodgy but thats it.

There is a difference between remaking something that desperately needs it and reaching too far.

When will they remake 2001? Lawrence of Arabia? Citizen Kane? The Godfather? I mean - c'mon...anything is fair game, right?

[sycro]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Citizen Kane?

The movie is great, but it would be an abysmal failure in today's market, so no need to worry.

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

The original Dracula or any of the others were hardly loved-classics. They were crap. The George Romero zombie films are comedies and lets be realistic here...they were terrible films. Fun? Yes. But bad.

Just because that's your opinion, doesn't make it true for everyone else.

Originally Posted by s2mikey

I thought I clearly stated that remaking a film that had a great concept but was poorly made or just plain ancient is an OK thing.

Based on whose opinion? For every movie you think was poorly made, there's someone else out there that disagrees with you.

Originally Posted by s2mikey

When will they remake 2001? Lawrence of Arabia? Citizen Kane? The Godfather? I mean - c'mon...anything is fair game, right?

Well, all of those would fall under your definition of "ancient" so sure.