Dan Aykroyd gives blessing for Female Blues Brothers movie

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Rzzzz

Is nothing sacred in Hollywood ?

Yes.

Originally Posted by Arawn

What is a soul going for these days?

Make me an offer. One owner, low miles, financing available.

Originally Posted by Samus Aran

Why not just pull an Ocean's 8? Female leads, bring back Aykroyd, maybe give Jim Belushi a role since he couldn't be in 2000.

Isn't that pretty much what Aykroyd was describing? New characters set in the same fictional space following the same familiar formula and conventions?

That sounds a lot like Ocean's 8, no?

Originally Posted by terp_fan99

Why don't they just make good, original movies with all female casts instead of doing these things that make people mad?

I dunno, seeing as how anything anybody does anywhere is pretty much guaranteed to make somebody mad I don't really care for the idea of giving knee-jerk internet whingers veto power over, well, anything.

Originally Posted by terp_fan99

I'm a dude and I'm a big fan of Pitch Perfect and Bridesmaids. I guess I don't see why remaking older movies with different genders is a thing right now.

It's not. Talking about remaking older movies with different genders is barely a thing. Making them is not.

[CelluloidPal]

Originally Posted by shinobipopcorn

I actually don't like Steel Magnolias...

But I'm open to male versions of female led movies, assuming they make sense like my caveat with The Blues Brothers remains in place. It has to make sense. 9 to 5 remade with men would work if it was in a women dominated field where men aren't typically promoted (like childcare or cheerleading or something). Zootopia or GI Jane wouldn't.

I'm calling B.S. on that. It doesn't have to be a "dominated" field for it to work. It called creative screenwriting and it doesn't even have to be a remake. A solid original script can be done. You can have a sexist and racist female boss or group without it having to prove some kind of point. One poster brought up a gender swapped version of the recent film, Revenge. Are you saying if it's well done, it wouldn't matter to you.

[kylor]

Remake Sex And The City but with an all-male cast. Let's even out the bulls**t.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by CelluloidPal

It just reeks of outright laziness, pure and simple. I guess creating original works with different cast is too much work when you can ride the coat tails of someone else's IP.

I don't know about you but I'm very glad Steven Moffat took the lazy route and rode the coat tails of someone else's IP because his Doctor Who and Sherlock Holmes stuff has been pretty awesome.

I'm also glad Universal is still cranking out Bond movies and Disney has revived Star Wars. Sure, that too reeks of outright laziness, I guess but the movies are pretty fun so...

There are countless examples of people riding somebody else's coattails and producing awesome entertainment.

Though I'm not sure what any of this has to do with Dan Aykroyd and The Blues Brothers.

Ohhhhh, wait, are you talking about the fact that he and Belushi performed all those songs they didn't write?

I dunno, I kind of liked that.

[Shingster]

Originally Posted by shinobipopcorn

I've never seen those movies, but if the story can be helmed by a woman, what's the problem? People using other people's scripts has been around since the dawn of media. Look how many times Batman and Superman have been reshot. There's a lot of sexism here that needs to disappear.

But the property has to be one where the gender-flip makes sense. How many famous modern-day, iconic (in a mainstream sense) female blues artists are out there to star in this film? Loads of wonderful female blues artists over the years, but the vast majority are only known to serious blues fans. Soul Sisters is certainly a much more suitable property but then you've moved away from Blues Brothers and into "why bother linking it to the BB original" territory.

This was also the problem with Ghostbusters, it was a "lightning in a bottle" franchise created by a bunch of men with a very masculine world view, and Hollywood thought a female-centric remake aimed primarily at women was going to be well received with no backlash at all? Anyone with half a brain could see that coming!

Loads of properties from the 70s and 80s you can reboot and replace men with women, but you've got to apply common sense, and it seems nobody in Hollywood is really doing that. Something like Roadhouse for instance could work with a badass female lead because the fanbase isn't so rabid and it doesn't have that big, big iconic status, plus it's a property that's ripe for gender flippery because the original was basically a western-reworking with machismo ramped up to 11 that didn't take itself too seriously and a talented scriptwriter could easily subvert that.

[Bolty]

Who has been waiting for any kind of a Blues Brothers movie?
I saw it one time and that was plenty. Sequels and reboots? Seriously?

[qb2333]

Originally Posted by kylor

Remake Sex And The City but with an all-male cast. Let's even out the bulls**t.

[Show spoiler]

[Mystic]

This movie will be quickly forgotten after it bombs at the box office.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by kylor

Remake Sex And The City but with an all-male cast. Let's even out the bulls**t.

YES! And, Id also like a Thelma and Lousie remake with two guys instead as the main characters. The movie can be called Dave and Todd. Or whatever.

Un. Believe. Able.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

YES! And, Id also like a Thelma and Lousie remake with two guys instead as the main characters. The movie can be called Dave and Todd. Or whatever.

Un. Believe. Able.

Whoa, a road trip movie but with two guys???

That might be just crazy enough to work!

[kylor]

Originally Posted by octagon

Whoa, a road trip movie but with two guys???

That might be just crazy enough to work!

It worked for Dumb & Dumber (1994)

[Region_unlocked]

The people getting all worked up about this are seriously overestimating Dan Aykroyd's credibility. If everything he's teased over the years came true there'd be like 8 Ghostbusters movies with the original cast. So maybe take all this with a grain of salt. Not that an all-female Blues Brothers would automatically be a bad thing. The first movie is still fantastic, always will be, and the legacy of the franchise is already tarnished. I say let em take a crack at it. If it's good, cool. If it's bad, we put it in the "we don't talk about that" bin with 2000.

[octagon]

Heh, true. The interview in this story happened while he was hawking his vodka. The guy's a huckster, no doubt about it. He's always pitching something.

And good for him.

[kylor]

I don't trust Dan Aykroyd. He pushed so much for a Ghostbusters film, and look what happened. Ghostbusters (2016) was a god damn disaster. I honestly don't know how the original Ghostbusters cast wasn't embarrassed by their cameos in it, it must've been the paycheck. The only sane person was Rick Moranis for having the common sense to leave Ghostbusters in 1989 where it belonged and not join that SNL skit of a movie. Harold Ramis wouldn't of allowed that crap to hit the cinema fan.

[Dr. Pavel]

Originally Posted by kylor

Remake Sex And The City but with an all-male cast. Let's even out the bulls**t.

entourage

[CelluloidPal]

Originally Posted by octagon

I don't know about you but I'm very glad Steven Moffat took the lazy route and rode the coat tails of someone else's IP because his Doctor Who and Sherlock Holmes stuff has been pretty awesome.

I'm also glad Universal is still cranking out Bond movies and Disney has revived Star Wars. Sure, that too reeks of outright laziness, I guess but the movies are pretty fun so...

There are countless examples of people riding somebody else's coattails and producing awesome entertainment.

Though I'm not sure what any of this has to do with Dan Aykroyd and The Blues Brothers.

Ohhhhh, wait, are you talking about the fact that he and Belushi performed all those songs they didn't write?

I dunno, I kind of liked that.

You know damn well that there's a difference between a creative adaptation of someone's work and taking said work to hop on a "trendy" bandwagon and coming off as a hack and that's not a guarantee for even half decent entertainment.

BTW, Universal is not making Bond films and Disney running the Star Wars brand into the ground to turn an easy dollar isn't anything worth writing home about and from what I've read here, the quality of those new Star Wars movies aren't exactly stellar to say the least.

Originally Posted by Shingster

But the property has to be one where the gender-flip makes sense. How many famous modern-day, iconic (in a mainstream sense) female blues artists are out there to star in this film? Loads of wonderful female blues artists over the years, but the vast majority are only known to serious blues fans. Soul Sisters is certainly a much more suitable property but then you've moved away from Blues Brothers and into "why bother linking it to the BB original" territory.

This was also the problem with Ghostbusters, it was a "lightning in a bottle" franchise created by a bunch of men with a very masculine world view, and Hollywood thought a female-centric remake aimed primarily at women was going to be well received with no backlash at all? Anyone with half a brain could see that coming!

Loads of properties from the 70s and 80s you can reboot and replace men with women, but you've got to apply common sense, and it seems nobody in Hollywood is really doing that. Something like Roadhouse for instance could work with a badass female lead because the fanbase isn't so rabid and it doesn't have that big, big iconic status, plus it's a property that's ripe for gender flippery because the original was basically a western-reworking with machismo ramped up to 11 that didn't take itself too seriously and a talented scriptwriter could easily subvert that.

Funny that you brought up Road House. It was going to be remade a few years ago with Ronda Rousey in the Dalton role to be directed by Nick Cassevettes. That didn't go very well because the fan base for the original film isn't as small as you think and has in fact has become an iconic cult film, in part, because the filmmakers did take this seriously and became what it was. Remaking that film and try to subvert it was an uphill battle that no one was going to win.

[traths]

Hollywood has officially run out of ideas.

[Shingster]

Originally Posted by CelluloidPal

Funny that you brought up Road House. It was going to be remade a few years ago with Ronda Rousey in the Dalton role to be directed by Nick Cassevettes. That didn't go very well because the fan base for the original film isn't as small as you think and has in fact has become an iconic cult film, in part, because the filmmakers did take this seriously and became what it was. Remaking that film and try to subvert it was an uphill battle that no one was going to win.

I know exactly how big the fanbase is, because I love the film and have loved it since the day it came out, and yes there was backlash about the Rousey remake but most of it came down to the fact that Ronda couldn't act for shit (especially back then) and of course the fact that the original is such a man's film. I'll admit, I was one of them, I was originally convinced the property was too much a celebration of machismo that you could never remake it, but with the current environment of tough women in film I have since changed my mind and with the right talent behind it (you always need the right talent) you could definitely do a female-led spin-off/reboot/sequel in the modern day perhaps looking at this sort of tough-feminism era we live in.

There was no huge backlash on social media and youtube like you got with Ghostbuster because guess what: Roadhouse is a cult classic, but it's nowhere near as popular as Ghostbuster, hence the reason the backlash would never be so big, which was my original point. I also hope you're not trying to suggest that fan backlash was the reason the Ronda Roadhouse project hit a brick wall, because it suffered from production delays and then Rousey got KTFO'd and her image took a nosedive overnight (which was pretty frigging ridiculous imo, but that's what happened). I don't think for one second that they were trying to subvert the original but make a pretty vanilla and ultimately boring remake, but I believe that any remake of Roadhouse needs to have its tongue in its cheek a little. Like I say: The right approach, the right talent. The right approach, the right talent.

Oh and I said "Roadhouse didn't take itself too seriously. Do you not understand the difference between that and someone saying the film didn't take itself seriously at all? I would never claim that the film wasn't seriously made, but it's very clear that they took a cavalier "anything goes" attitude to the script and characters, it's clearly intended to be a fun genre flick.

[CelluloidPal]

Originally Posted by Shingster

I know exactly how big the franchise is, because I love the film and have loved it since the day it came out, and yes there was backlash about the Rousey remake but most of it came down to the fact that Ronda couldn't act for shit (especially back then) and of course the fact that the original is such a man's film. I'll admit, I was one of them, I was originally convinced the property was too much a celebration of machismo that you could never remake it, but with the current environment of tough women in film I have since changed my mind and - with the right talent behind (you [i]always need the right talent[/b]) - you could definitely do a female-led spin-off/reboot/sequel in the modern day perhaps looking at this sort of tough-feminism era we live in.

There was no huge backlash on social media and youtube like you got with Ghostbuster because guess what: Roadhous is a cult classic, but it's nowhere near as popular as Ghostbuster, hence the reason the backlash would never be so big, which was my original point. I also hope you're not trying to suggest that fan backlash was the reason the Ronda Roadhouss project hit a brick wall, because it suffered from production delays and then Rousey got KTFO'd and her stock as a kisckass fighter took a nosedive overnight (which was pretty frigging ridiculous imo, but that's what happened). I don't think for one second that they were trying to subvert the original but make a pretty vanilla and ultimately boring remake, but I believe that any remake of Roadhouse needs to have its tongue in its cheek a little.

I never did nor did I intend to. Another thing is that you have to be more than tough. You have to have a personality, a sense of humor, charisma and not some wannabe macho soulless machine because it seems like these tough kick-ass women in these movies nowadays always super serious, joyless and have zero personality, which makes it difficult to root for and as for this "current enviroment" of tough women, it might be new for you but not for anyone who knows the action genre or movies in general.
It wasn't the issue of a female led one but the issue is when it's used as some social political platform instead of entertainment and rub it in the audience's faces.
As for the right approach, right talent, I agree with you but this is Hollywood we're talking about here.

[CelluloidPal]

Originally Posted by Shingster

I know exactly how big the fanbase is, because I love the film and have loved it since the day it came out, and yes there was backlash about the Rousey remake but most of it came down to the fact that Ronda couldn't act for shit (especially back then) and of course the fact that the original is such a man's film. I'll admit, I was one of them, I was originally convinced the property was too much a celebration of machismo that you could never remake it, but with the current environment of tough women in film I have since changed my mind and with the right talent behind it (you always need the right talent) you could definitely do a female-led spin-off/reboot/sequel in the modern day perhaps looking at this sort of tough-feminism era we live in.

There was no huge backlash on social media and youtube like you got with Ghostbuster because guess what: Roadhouse is a cult classic, but it's nowhere near as popular as Ghostbuster, hence the reason the backlash would never be so big, which was my original point. I also hope you're not trying to suggest that fan backlash was the reason the Ronda Roadhouse project hit a brick wall, because it suffered from production delays and then Rousey got KTFO'd and her image took a nosedive overnight (which was pretty frigging ridiculous imo, but that's what happened). I don't think for one second that they were trying to subvert the original but make a pretty vanilla and ultimately boring remake, but I believe that any remake of Roadhouse needs to have its tongue in its cheek a little. Like I say: The right approach, the right talent. The right approach, the right talent.

Oh and I said "Roadhouse didn't take itself too seriously. Do you not understand the difference between that and someone saying the film didn't take itself seriously at all? I would never claim that the film wasn't seriously made, but it's very clear that they took a cavalier "anything goes" attitude to the script and characters, it's clearly intended to be a fun genre flick.

No disagreement there but I think I didn't word my response correctly and misinterpreted what you meant there. I thought you meant that the filmmakers didn't take itself seriously at all when it was made. My mistake.