#36431 - 03/14/10 05:42 PM
Re: Film Industry turns into a broken record
[Re: Vlad]
|
Nemesis
senior member
Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 2029
Loc: US
|
Often though, an older film (the original, which was probably directly based off of a novel) has become irrelevant to the current generation. Out-dated technology, direction, dialogue, much of it doesn't fit in with the world as we know it today. Phonographs? How many know what the hell those are? Having to dial an operator to have them ring your neighbor's phone (think "Lassie").
So in remakes, sometimes it's needed to make it interesting enough to watch. Just imagine, if they did a remake of '1984'. Not based on the first movie, but the novel. Can you imagine how much more creepier and disturbing they could make it nowadays? A remake would bring '1984' back into the consciousness of the general public, and might prevent some of the current do-gooders from wanting to install cameras at intersections, and blithely allow the government to tap into our online activity, because it would make them think twice before giving up our rights for "the common good" when they see how easily it could be abused.
Was Bram Stoker's 'Dracula' better than the 'Dracula' made in black & white? All depends, doesn't it? It was less campy, had better acting (Keanu Reeves being the exception), and drew the audience into the movie. But some still have an affectation for the original, and think any remakes pale by comparison.
It's a matter of perspective. Some remakes are horrible, and should never have been made. Those are the ones which rely solely on the success of the original to help boost ticket sales. However, sometimes the new version is better, blows your mind, and makes you see things from different perspectives, which can never be a bad thing. At least not in my book. 
_________________________
Nothing is sacred.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#36433 - 03/14/10 05:58 PM
Re: Film Industry turns into a broken record
[Re: Nemesis]
|
Vlad
stranger
Registered: 03/09/10
Posts: 21
Loc: Virginia
|
If I came off as being overly critical of remakes, then I should make myself more clear. I agree with you that film remakes offer a lot of potential in being able to place the story within the current cultural context of the viewer. In my opinion, however, the more this occurs, the further away the film goes from the source material.
An excellent example of this is I Am Legend by Richard Matheson. It was made into the film The Last Man on Earth starring Vincent Price. This film was remade into Omega Man starring Charlton Heston. More recently, we have I am Legend starring Will Smith. Each is a product of the times it was released, but the one closest to Matheson's original story is Last Man on Earth, which coincidentally was released only 10 years after the novel. Each of these "reimaginings", in my opinion, heavily changed and diluted the original story.
Perhaps I am biased in that case, as I was a fan of Matheson's story before I watched any of the films.
This, in my opinion, is the only issue I have with remakes. I truly believe that, yes, films can be remade to fit into the culture and times of the day. However, the cost of that seems to be a loss of some of the original essence of the film. A good film maker is one who can accomplish the goal of remaking a film for modern audiences while retaining the vital aspects of the initial source of inspiration.
Edited by Vlad (03/14/10 05:58 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#36436 - 03/14/10 06:42 PM
Re: Film Industry turns into a broken record
[Re: Vlad]
|
Fist
active member
Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1007
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
|
In the particular case of "Full Metal Jacket" and "A Clockwork Orange", the brilliant Stanley Kubrick died.
Biggest obstacle to a good Hollywood movie is Hollywood it's self. The current business model and investor climate in Hollywood pretty much ensures that you will not another Kubrick, Lucas, Spielberg, Cameron, Scorsese or Romero anytime soon. Look at these icons of the film industry. They all got there big breaks around the same time when Hollywood was a very different place.
Still, good independent films do come around now and again but unless you have a local art haus you are unlikely to see them. The entertainment business model is pretty much a relic and not in step with customer demand. In short, the art/media consumer is not will to pay what the studios are demanding.
A movie will have to be pretty damn good to get most folks to shell out $40+ for their family to see a movie in the theater when they can see it at home on RedBox or Netflix for a dollar or less.
Hollywood has a broken business model. It stifles creativity, innovation, and plot, and instead emphasizes formula, name recognition, and marketing hype. I don't see this going away until BitTorrent completely breaks the backs of the studios. In the meanwhile, look forward to "Beverly Hills Chihuahua 3" and the latest feature of Eddie Murphy in drag, coming soon to a googleplex near you!
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#36499 - 03/15/10 10:07 PM
Re: Film Industry turns into a broken record
[Re: exadust]
|
ta2zz
veteran member
Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 1413
Loc: Connecticut
|
I'm not going to get into the economic side of the conversation because it is the result of bad leadership during the bush era.
You’re not? So this must all be brought on why, simply because people who choose what is made into a movie just all have bad taste lately? Is this what your trying to get at?
So you really think Bush or any of his actions still to this day makes people act like cheap ass third world citizens when it comes to spending money on inferior product?
What few original films that are released aren't worth the time or money.
You say they are not worth your money yet claim you are not going to discuss the economic side of this matter?
But at the same time consumer demand probably does factor in Hollywood's recent decline.
Theater attendance is up as it usually is when there is a recession. So now were talking about supply and demand without mention of economics. Interesting to say the least and here I thought we were talking about the reason for the poor quality of current movies being released.
And when all film goes internet available only I wonder how that will effect Hollywood? Negatively or positively?
I cannot see how to progress in this conversation without talking about economics. If no money is changing hands I assure you the quality decline we see now is only the beginning. I assure you a big screen TV is not a movie theater and watching something on your computer will never rival theater technology. Unless of course serious advancements are made but then I would expect theaters would also advance their tech.
Now if all consumers continue down the third world path they are on being happy with inferiority as long as it’s a deal, then I fear the theater would be lost.
~T~
_________________________
We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams. ~Arthur William Edgar O'Shaughnessy
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#36590 - 03/16/10 04:59 PM
Re: Film Industry turns into a broken record
[Re: Fist]
|
XiaoGui17
member
Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 310
Loc: Austin, TX
|
“The film made it easy for readers of the book to misunderstand what it was about, and the misunderstanding will pursue me till I die.”
Anthony Burgess, in Flame Into Being, on A Clockwork Orange
I’d honestly rather filmmakers leave books alone altogether unless they can really improve upon the original or make it more relevant. Kubrick's version of A Clockwork Orange is, to me, not a fine film but a grave example of how films kill books.
The side effects of Alex’s aversion therapy (negative reactions to Beethoven as well as violence) imply that the most lofty, refined aspects of human culture (high art) and the most vile, debased manifestations of human nature (cruel violence) both derive from what makes us human in the first place—free will. Just as science gives us penicillin and atom bombs, one cannot exist without the other.***
In the book, after his deprogramming, Alex chooses, of his own free will, to reform himself. And therein lies the theme of A Clockwork Orange. Not only is free will is an inherent good in and of itself, it is also the best means to moral good. We need not choose between freedom and morality; men can, and do, freely choose to do the right thing.
But the American release of the book, and Kubrick’s film, cut out the final chapter and Alex’s atonement. Instead, it ends with Alex returning to his old violent life.
Apparently, an American publisher advised Burgess that the “happy ending” was too idealistic for cynical Americans (as though Burgess had intended his gritty work to be a sanitized romance).
By cutting the end, the publisher implied that free will inevitably leads to evil—that good must be compelled. It would be more respectful to wipe his ass with the pages of Burgess’s manuscript. At least he wouldn’t have published the complete thematic opposite of his intention in his name.
A Clockwork Orange will sadly be remembered as a sobering account of the harsh consequences of freedom, instead of a reasoned narrative highlighting free will as an ultimate good by both deontological and consequential standards.
***A reference to this same relationship, if not A Clockwork Orange itself, was made in the 1995 film Harrison Bergeron. John Klaxon, head of an egalitarian dystopia that suppresses human thought, concluded that sacrificing art was worth preventing cruelty. To underscore the relationship, he played footage of graphic violence and atrocities with Beethoven as the soundtrack. Not only was this very similar to the media used for Alex’s conditioning, it was also thematically identical
Edited by XiaoGui17 (03/16/10 05:00 PM)
_________________________
'Tis only daylight that makes us sin.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: fakepropht, Nemesis, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Mercury_Templar, Woland, Bacchae, Morgan, Diavolo, Asmedious, Fist
|
|
