I believe there's a current misconception that movie remakes and reboots are a somewhat new concept Hollywood implemented because they're out of ideas.
The truth is remakes are as old as movie making itself.
If I mention The Wizard of Oz, surely the first thing that comes to anyone's mind is the 1939 movie with Judy Garland. Of course it would be. It's a great movie. It's known around the world. It's one of those movies that's almost mandatory viewing.
But what about the 1910 silent movie The Wonderful Wizard of Oz? How many people know that exists?
There's also the 1925 silent movie The Wizard of Oz starring none other than Oliver Hardy of Laurel and Hardy. By the way, it also stars actress Mary Carr who later acted with Laurel and Hardy in their 1931 movie One Good Turn as well as their 1932 movie Pack Up Your Troubles - the latter was my first review for this blog. So, technically the famous version of The Wizard of Oz is a remake.
Incidentally, 1910 also saw the release of a horror movie called Frankenstein. That was just a little over 20 years before Boris Karloff made his iconic version of the monster in 1931's Frankenstein.
And speaking of the 1931 movie Frankenstein, a series of sequels followed that movie - Bride of Frankenstein, Son of Frankenstein, The Ghost of Frankenstein, Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman, House of Frankenstein, and Frankenstein Saves Christmas.
(O.k., I made that last title up.)
But House of Frankenstein spawned a sequel of its own called House of Dracula. And there was also the comedy Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein which starred Boris Karloff.
So, sequels (or money makers, or cash grabs...call them what you will) are as old as the industry.
A remake or reboot doesn't necessarily mean the original is lacking. I doubt that's always, if not often, the reason movies get the remake/ reboot treatment. Rather, it's merely a retelling of a story. Remakes and reboots take nothing away from original movies. They're still there, and they're still loved and watched. Plus, there's enough movie fans out there curious enough to see new versions of old classics to make reboots profitably worth it.
There are some rare instances were remakes are better than the original movies, and leave the originals in a pile of forgotten films. Audiences remember the 1980 comedy Airplane! more than the 1957 movie Zero Hour! which it's based on.
So, there's a few titles I'd like to see rebooted, or remade, or just given a sequel.
And I'll start with that Laurel and Hardy movie I just mentioned.
Anyways, it dawned on me it's loosely based on Laurel and Hardy's 1933 movie Sons of the Desert.
My hunch was confirmed when a clip from that movie appeared in Diary. Otherwise, the movie was terrible, and I don't want to talk about it anymore.
As I said, Pack Up Your Troubles was my first entry on this blog. I included it because, aside from being Laurel and Hardy's second feature length film, it also includes subject matter that's rather dramatic for a typical slapstick Laurel and Hardy movie.
I don't think a straight up comedy remake of this movie would sit well with modern audiences as it involves an orphan girl whose father is killed during World War I, and whose mother has abandoned her prior to her father's death.
Rather, I think a movie such as this could easily inspire similar stories if it hasn't already. In the movie, Stan and Ollie take it upon themselves to search for the girl's grandparents by asking every person they can find with the last name "Smith" (one of the most common names in the history of last names) to inquire if the girl's father "Eddie Smith" is their son.
I think the story line is very unique and something worth exploring for a modern drama, especially with the dawn of the internet. Maybe a comedy would work. I mean, it worked back then. I leave that up for producers to decide.
That doesn't make the movie bad. There's just so much more material to re-imagine.
Ende, who published the book in 1979, hated the movie. He had some harsh words to say about it. For instance, regarding the Sphinx gates Atreyu must pass through in the film, Ende commented that, "The Sphinxes are quite one of the biggest embarrassments of the film. They are full-bosomed strippers who sit there in the desert."
He also said The NeverEnding Story was "disgusting," and accused producers of ruining his story just for the money.
Ende said they didn't understand the central themes of his book.
Meanwhile, the film's director, Wolfgang Peterson, said the rights to the story are in some sort of litigation limbo, the end of which isn't on the horizon.
So, based on that, I doubt a remake will happen anytime in the foreseeable future...if ever.
As Peterson told Entertainment Weekly, "It is my understanding that some films you should just leave alone, and that's how I feel about this film."
I respect that mentality.
Of course I have a "but," otherwise I wouldn't be blogging about this.
Where the movie leaves off with Atreyu finding the Childlike Empress is actually the middle of the book.
Though it's a great, entertaining and enjoyable film, a remake which includes more elements and characters from the book has a lot of potential for success.
For instance, in the book, Atreyu first meets Falcor the Luck Dragon after rescuing him from the web of a giant spider named Ygramul the Many.
Also in the book, Bastion fails to give the Childlike Empress her new name. So, she has to search for "the Old Man of Wandering Mountain" to choose her new name. Well, on second thought, maybe that part wouldn't sit well with audiences.
Anyways, a remake could certainly be made in two or three parts similar to Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy.
I think a remake could be fantastic, and introduce audiences and fans to a lot of new characters and story elements offered in the book.
I know there's a NeverEnding Story II and, as I just learned only few years ago, a NeverEnding Story III. Let's just pretend those don't exist - especially part 3.
In the meantime, I suppose the best way to be introduced to everything The NeverEnding Story has to offer is to read the book in some cozy corner.
The 1984 film starring Drew Barrymore, Heather Locklear, Martin Sheen, George C. Scott and even Art Carney is a movie about a young girl who can ignite fires with the power of her mind. It's kind of like King's story Carrie but in Firestarter, all the girl, Charlie McGhee (Drew Barrymore), can do is start fires.
It's a decent but underrated film. It didn't initially perform particularly well either.
I particularly like George C. Scott who makes a great antagonist in this story.
But in the wake of a Stephen King renaissance with many of his book to movie adaptations, and remakes of previous King films, Firestarter could be a great modern showcase of special effects. There's plenty of room to recreate and popularize a not-so-well known King character like Charlie McGhee.
A retelling could make a very compelling and intense movie for modern audiences. And with special effects more special now, there's promise for a great and memorable film. As long as there's good writers on-board, of course.
Based on the attraction at Disneyland and Walt Disney World, I had a lot of expectation that The Haunted Mansion would be a great movie, especially after the success of The Pirates of the Caribbean, also based on a Disney attraction.
The visuals from the Haunted Mansion ride, and the on-screen possibilities surrounding what the ride features is immense.
There has been a lot of talk about director Guillermo del Toro making a new Haunted Mansion movie completely separate from the 2003 film. With his love and appreciation for the ride, and for Disney, along with his masterful talent, a reboot possibility has "fantastic" written all over it.
The 2003 movie was an absolute showcase of terrible movie making.
As talented and funny as Eddie Murphy is, casting him was completely out of place. And the entire experience really cheapened the historic Disney ride, turning the ever popular scenes from the attraction into laughable gimmicks on the screen.
The writing was bad. The casting was poor. The movie was a disgrace to the classic ride developed by Walt Disney himself. It deserves treatment from someone who can and will show it the appreciation and respect it deserves - Guillermo del Toro!
I'd love to explore the story before the story - the origin of Mogwais and if there's any Chinese lore behind them.
As they multiply in water, are there any liquids or substances that would make them do something else? Or if they ate specific things after midnight, would they morph into something different than a gremlin? What about Mr. Wing's grandson who surreptitiously sold the Mogwai to Billy's dad in the beginning of part one? Let's bring him back.
In Gremlins 2, Gizmo gets wet after a malfunctioning water fountain shoots water far into the air, landing on Billy Peltzer's drawing on his work desk.
The water, looking like it mixed with paint from the picture, runs off the easel and splatters on Gizmo's head. The Mogwai's that pop out of Gizmo are rather unique and "colorful" in personality.
So, how would other substances effect the offspring of a wet Mogwai?
There's a lot of possibilities to make a prequel film.
There is an upcoming animated program called Gremlins: Secrets of the Mogwai scheduled to debut on HBO Max. According to various sources online, it's supposed to be set in 1920s Shanghai, China. I'm game!
While the movie is classic and entertaining, it's also a bit slow in its pacing. I'll add it's also pretty accurate.
Escape From Alcatraz is a movie that really deserves a remake. The true story is very captivating and amazing.
The question of whether former Alcatraz inmates Frank Morris (played by Eastwood in the original movie), and brothers John and Clarence Anglin actually made it through the frigid waters of the San Francisco Bay on their makeshift rafts is one the most compelling mysteries in prison break history. And it's a unique part of San Francisco's history.
I believe new evidence has surfaced (no pun intended) since the movie's release that the escapees very possibly survived. These stories could certainly be included in a remake, making a new movie much more fascinating and engaging.
As of 2009, the case remains open as the FBI handed over the case to the U.S. Marshall's Service.
I certainly believe a modern adaptation of Escape From Alcatraz would work well with modern audiences.
The new series Creepshow on Shudder starts off well with its first story Gray Matter, based on a short story by Stephen King in his book Night Shift. The segment starred Adrienne Barbeau who also starred in the story The Crate in the original movie.
The second story in the show, By the Silver Water of Lake Champlain was written by Stephen King's son, Joe Hill.
Hill, by the way, played Billy in the opening and closing parts of the original 1982 movie. Otherwise, there's not much else I remember from watching the Shudder series.
I found the series more dull than scary. And often segments would start off captivating and end like a deflated balloon.
New cringy Creepshow stories for the big screen, from the masters of macabre storytelling, is something horror fans have wanted for a long time.
With its $44 million budget, The Black Cauldron was the most expensive animated movie ever made at the time. But it grossed $21.3 million domestically, and was a big financial loss for Disney.
The Black Cauldron earned the nickname, "the film that almost killed Disney." Even The Care Bears Movie did better financially at the box office the same year. So, I can see why Disney executives might be apprehensive to make a live-action version of this movie, if its has ever even been considered.
Maybe their initial mistake was making it animated. After all, their other animated movies are so different in style and tone. It is no doubt the darkest animated Disney movie to date. A live action platform, and better writing of course, may help redeem Disney for their mistake that is The Black Cauldron. It's a story that deserves a second chance as a reboot.
But I'm interested in a new story that shows where these blobs come from. How would they fair attacking a modern society. What does their planet look like? Is it just covered in blob families?
The 1958 movie ended *spoiler* with the U.S. Air Force carrying the blob to the frozen wasteland of the artic, where they drop it down so it'll remain there indefinitely. Freezing renders them immobile. The words "the end" appear and morph into a question mark. That's sequel material right there.
Should a modern version of The Blob be made, it could certainly draw audience's attention by making it a direct sequel to the 1958 movie. I think that might make it more appealing than just having another remake like the 1998 movie.
Since it's never establish what the blob is or where it came from, other than falling from the sky in a meteor, there's plenty of room for exploration.
Clue is based on the board game of the same name, which was developed in 1944,and launched in 1949.
While the movie Clue is enjoyable overall, and has a great cast including Christopher Lloyd, Tim Curry, Eileen Brennan, Madeline Kahn, and Martin Mull, it still could use a writing uplift.
As a teenager, I found this movie hilarious. As an adult, for some reason, it's just not as funny. I don't know why. I mean, it still has moments that make me laugh. Otherwise, it just seems to lack a little something. To me, the multiple endings make Clue come across as disjointed.
Whatever the case might be, I think a remake or reboot would suite the movie nicely.
And while recent murder mystery movies such as Knives Out which did really well upon its release, and 2017's Murder on the Orient Express didn't do so badly, this may be a good time to see a remake of Clue. Murder mysteries never seem to go out of style.
No comments:
Post a Comment