Videodrome - nothing is sacred :(

[hc666]

In 2009, it was announced that Universal Pictures had obtained the rights to produce a remake of the movie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videodrome

Can anyone make an original movie anymore and leave the classics alone?

Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!

[thedarkangel1975]

First off take Wikipedia as a grain of salt for information. Two just avoid the movie if it looks bad. I have said this a thousand times, they always remake stuff. The Wizard of nOz is a remake and that is deemed a classic. And three be happy, The Jays are in first place and their best start since they won the world series. .

[SDon1969]

Seems like 50% of movies nowadays are remakes, very few new ideas out there.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ght=videodrome

[Pondosinatra]

Awesome! I hope it stars some rap star and has a kickin hip-hop soundtrack. For real yo!

[Jennifer Lawrence Fan]

Just when you thought it was dead, it's back!

Adam Berg to Direct Universal's Videodrome Remake

The film first announced for a remake some time ago, Deadline now reports that Universal Pictures has hired commercials director Adam Berg to direct the big-screen remake of David Cronenberg's 1983 masterpiece Videodrome.

The original, a commentary on the growing saturation of new media, starred James Woods as the head of Civic TV Channel 83 who makes his station relevant by programming "Videodrome," a series that depicts torture and murder, transfixing viewers.

When the project was first announced, it was said that the tale will be modernized, focusing on nanotechnology and play out as a large-scale sci-fi action thriller.

Ehren Kruger, the screenwriter behind the two most recent Transformers films, will write the script and produce with partner Daniel Bobker. Rene Malo is attached to executive produce.

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=93925

Come on, let's hear that whining and complaining that is sweet music to my ears.

[EricJ]

The original, a commentary on the growing saturation of new media, starred James Woods as the head of Civic TV Channel 83 who makes his station relevant by programming "Videodrome," a series that depicts torture and murder, transfixing viewers.

Of course, back then, in 1983, there was new media saturation to satirize.
Such primeval things as pirate cable and UHF stations existed back then. I'd wager that today, Channel 83, "The Channel You Take to Bed With You", has since been bought out for a CW affiliate.

When the project was first announced, it was said that the tale will be modernized, focusing on nanotechnology and play out as a large-scale sci-fi action thriller.

Okay, now they're just clueless. Not just Total Recall sentimental-clueless, we're up in Rollerball-clueless territory:
We're not supposed to know whether the "New Flesh conspiracy" was real or not--Like most 80's Cronenberg, we could've been watching Woods' psychotic-delusional breakdown and thinking there twarn't no REAL abdominally-insertable VHS-tapes going on.

(And since when was anything Cronenberg directed ever "large-scale"?)

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by EricJ

Of course, back then, in 1983, there was new media saturation to satirize.
Such primeval things as pirate cable and UHF stations existed back then. I'd wager that today, Channel 83, "The Channel You Take to Bed With You", has since been bought out for a CW affiliate.



Okay, now they're just clueless. Not just Total Recall sentimental-clueless, we're up in Rollerball-clueless territory:
We're not supposed to know whether the "New Flesh conspiracy" was real or not--Like most 80's Cronenberg, we could've been watching Woods' psychotic-delusional breakdown and thinking there twarn't no REAL abdominally-insertable VHS-tapes going on.

(And since when was anything Cronenberg directed ever "large-scale"?)

Pretty much nail on the head here. What's even the point on calling in Videodrome if it isn't going to be Videodrome. It should just be an original title, it'd have a better chance at the box office that way.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by EricJ

Of course, back then, in 1983, there was new media saturation to satirize.
Such primeval things as pirate cable and UHF stations existed back then. I'd wager that today, Channel 83, "The Channel You Take to Bed With You", has since been bought out for a CW affiliate.

And media saturation isn't a relevant topic now???

Forget taking Channel 83 to bed.

Your kids can watch it in the backseat of your minivan. You can watch it on a plane. You can take it to the bathroom with you. Hell, you can take it into the bathroom on a plane.

Obviously, this can totally suck - it is a movie, after all - but it doesn't have to. Sure, things were different in the 80s but if you think about, the 'too much sex, too much violence, you can't turn this stuff off, it's everywhere, it's taking over' concerns really weren't all that different from today.

This is one of those cyclical things that every generation has to get out of its system and as it happens current technology trends are pretty good fit.

[darry]

I think it could work if it wasn't written by the same idiot that brought us the last two transformers movies. I'm guessing it'll just be a movie condemning the moral consequences of technology in society without any clue as to what it has to say about it.

[Jennifer Lawrence Fan]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Pretty much nail on the head here. What's even the point on calling in Videodrome if it isn't going to be Videodrome. It should just be an original title, it'd have a better chance at the box office that way.

Yes cause the people were like let's go see this. Wait its a remake? F**k that! I hate you Hollywood come up with some creative ideas you limp D**k hacks!


Oh, wait that's just the internet.

[Cinemach]

I'm not patently against remakes/reboots (though those and superhero films are all the majors trade in these days), but there's smart approaches and idiotic ones. This looks to be squarely of the latter. A film on this topic can totally be made about right now without having to 'remake' or 'reboot' Videodrome, which was such a product of its time and its director. You can be just about positive that this will be some degree of terrible, at least a pale imitation of its original: look at the newly minted Total Recall or any other number of recent remakes for that score.

Hell, given the description they'll probably throw a superhero into it. We know Cronenberg will love that.

Then again, is this really a surprise? This is the studio that greenlit $200+ mil for an alien invasion by sea movie based on a boardgame.

[Drewbee87]

I love remakes, well some of them. And I don't think they ruin the original at all, because you still have the originals. lol It's not like they destroy all evidence of the original before releasing a remake.

[HelmutNewton]

"When the project was first announced, it was said that the tale will be modernized, focusing on nanotechnology and play out as a large-scale sci-fi action thriller."

It's sad when the movie hasn't even been written yet, and yet you know it's gonna be terrible...

[Snicket]

Originally Posted by Michael Bay Fan

Yes cause the people were like let's go see this. Wait its a remake? F**k that! I hate you Hollywood come up with some creative ideas you limp D**k hacks!


Oh, wait that's just the internet.

No need to be condescending to others. You posted the news and you predicted how people would react. So then why act like that? Is it too far reached to think people care about what they watch and are passionate about it? Especially on a website for movie fans?

You can intelligently disagree without showing contempt to other members.

[Tony208]

I get all the other remakes, but Videodrome? Makes no sense to me.

[Snicket]

Originally Posted by Tony208

I get all the other remakes, but Videodrome? Makes no sense to me.

I agree although it doesn't make me feel strongly one way or the other. It just seems like the idea is way too smart for a modern Hollywood film to really get right.

Not to mention the zero demand for this to happen make it increasingly questionable.

[Jennifer Lawrence Fan]

Originally Posted by Tony208

I get all the other remakes, but Videodrome? Makes no sense to me.

Cause its one of the only left they haven't "raped" yet according to alot of people.

Nothing brings in new money like old movies.

[csdot]

NONONONONONNO
there are some horror films that can be remade and while i may feel them unnecessary i can still accept them. Cronenbergs own remake of The Fly is a masterpiece but you know what, THE ORIGINAL ISN'T. Videodrome is work of art. this is like repainting a classic painting and hanging it at a musem. Videodrome has Croenenbergs heart and soul in it, theres nobody else who can make that movie.

[Kaiju]

Such a bad ****ing idea.

[csdot]

Originally Posted by Michael Bay Fan

Yes cause the people were like let's go see this. Wait its a remake? F**k that! I hate you Hollywood come up with some creative ideas you limp D**k hacks!


Oh, wait that's just the internet.

no because Videodrome isnt a popular enough film to cash in on a remake in the first place, so making it an original movie would still attract the same audience who arent familiar with the original and not piss off the diehard fans. Videodrome isnt at the same level as The Thing or Evil Dead or Totall Recalll or any of these other remakes, there isnt a market for it like that.