Dr. Alan Grant Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 I can understand all of those except for the Gene Wilder dislike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Chest Rockwell Posted February 19 Moderators Share Posted February 19 9 minutes ago, Loki said: My first question when someone decides to reboot, remake or revisit primary source material is - is there a need for this? I think this is a bad wayv to look at things. What is the definition of a 'need' when it comes to an artistic endeavour? The better question for the creator is do they have something to say. Do they have some new idea they want to communicate to the audience, or something old they want to communicate in a new way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted February 19 Paid Members Share Posted February 19 Reminds me of a few years ago when reports were doing the rounds about a Scarface remake and people were losing their shit over "another fucking remake" and "why not make something original" until it was pointed out that Scarface was a remake itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaitoRyo Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 19 minutes ago, WeeAl said: I Don't like Tim Burton, Johnny Depp, Willy Wonka, musicals or Gene Wilder. By fuck have I come to the wrong thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Chest Rockwell said: I think this is a bad wayv to look at things. What is the definition of a 'need' when it comes to an artistic endeavour? The better question for the creator is do they have something to say. Do they have some new idea they want to communicate to the audience, or something old they want to communicate in a new way. Having some new idea they want to communicate, or unique artistic perspective would come under a genuine "need".  So often the need is purely monetary, or that the director liked the original and fancies a crack.  Perhaps Burton managed that with his version of Wonka, but for me he added very little and in some respects has diluted the wonder of the book and the original film. Edited February 19 by Loki Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members gmoney Posted February 19 Paid Members Share Posted February 19 The bloom was off the rose with Burton way before Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Sleepy Hollow and his shit remake of Planet of the Apes were both before that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBacon Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 4 minutes ago, Loki said: So often the need is purely monetary, Oh undoubtedly, but then you could say that about a large majority of films couldn't you? My feeling on remakes, reboots or whatever you want to call them always remains the same. I don't have to watch them if I don't want to, and if they're shit it will never sully my love for the original. Mad I know. One day they'll remake BTTF. It will be absolutely shit. I'll watch it, I'll moan for 5 minutes and then I'll get on with my life, and still love the originals. My youngest also loved the Burton Wonka film and even begged us to cut her hair like his character in the film. Little idiot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted February 19 Paid Members Share Posted February 19 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Loki said: Perhaps Burton managed that with his version of Wonka, but for me he added very little and in some respects has diluted the wonder of the book and the original film. Do you think anybody who watched the remake really thought "I don't like the book/original as much now!"? I just have never understood that line of thinking. I've not seen either of them but when I see a bad remake or reboot of something it makes me appreciate the original even more and quite often brings that original attention it might not have had in the first place from a wider and newer audience. 4 minutes ago, gmoney said: The bloom was off the rose with Burton way before Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Sleepy Hollow and his shit remake of Planet of the Apes were both before that.  Sleepy Hollow would have been a really good film if it wasn't for Depp. Even by his standards an awful and misjudged performance. Stop playing it for laughs you twat. Edited February 19 by Devon Malcolm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted February 19 Paid Members Share Posted February 19 18 minutes ago, Chest Rockwell said: I think this is a bad wayv to look at things. What is the definition of a 'need' when it comes to an artistic endeavour? The better question for the creator is do they have something to say. Do they have some new idea they want to communicate to the audience, or something old they want to communicate in a new way. I agree with this, even though in many ways it contradicts my earlier criticism of Tim Burton approaching every film assuming the audience just want to see Tim Burton's take on the story. I don't get as hung up on adaptations and remakes as some people (though prequels and origin stories I find entirely unnecessary and counter-productive in 99% of cases), as remakes are almost as old as Hollywood and some of the best films ever made are remakes, but I remember at the time there was a lot of talk that Burton hadn't even seen the Gene Wilder film, so was coming in completely blind. At the time, I thought that was a positive and that it meant he would be bringing a fresh take to the table, now I find it a bit daft (if it's even true) to go into a creative endeavour without familiarising yourself with an extremely well-liked previous take on the same story. In terms of need, the impetus for the Tim Burton version from what I remember was that Roald Dahl didn't like the Gene Wilder version, so there was years of work with the Dahl estate going into trying to make a new film that was a more faithful adaptation. But I don't think it manages that at all, particularly given the aforementioned crowbarred in "his dad was a dentist" closing act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted February 19 Paid Members Share Posted February 19 1 minute ago, BomberPat said: In terms of need, the impetus for the Tim Burton version from what I remember was that Roald Dahl didn't like the Gene Wilder version If there's one thing that the history of film adaptations of literature has taught us it's that the original novelist never gets it right when giving their opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members LaGoosh Posted February 19 Paid Members Share Posted February 19 7 minutes ago, Devon Malcolm said: If there's one thing that the history of film adaptations of literature has taught us it's that the original novelist never gets it right when giving their opinion. And it's usually even worse when they are involved in the production of the film adaption itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Devon Malcolm said: Do you think anybody who watched the remake really thought "I don't like the book/original as much now!"? I just have never understood that line of thinking. I doubt it, and that's certainly not what I said.  It's more in terms of diluting the audience and impact of those earlier versions.  You mentioned Scarface earlier - the original film is excellent but undoubtedly obscured by the remake.  If you go onto a streaming service now and search for Wonka you'll probably get the various Burton films coming up.  Perhaps less people will end up watching the earlier one. Even original artists do this with their own work - churn out so many sequels, new novels, etc that it can obscure the originality of their earlier work.  There is a strong momentum in Hollywood, publishing, videogames, that emphasises existing IP over  new, and it can be quite stifling creatively. It often ends up killing the cash cow too - look at how Disney have creatively bankrupt the Star Wars franchise quite quickly by churning out so many films and tv series in short order. Edit: I thought of another example - the Disney "live action" versions of animated movies.  Even on their own service they promote those over the original animated versions.  It's IP churn.   Edited February 19 by Loki Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Hannibal Scorch Posted February 19 Paid Members Share Posted February 19 1 hour ago, Loki said: Edit: I thought of another example - the Disney "live action" versions of animated movies.  Even on their own service they promote those over the original animated versions.  It's IP churn. Ironically one of the best of those was Tim Burton's Dumbo which was more a continuation than a remake/re-do. And no Depp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 hour ago, Hannibal Scorch said: And no Depp This may be key! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBacon Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 Bottoms Incredibly funny, with a final act that I really wasn't expecting. I also wasn't expecting Marshawn Lynch to be so funny. How To Have Sex I've decided my children will never be going on holidays with their mates. Brilliant film though, and it's so good to see natural film making done well. Mulholland Drive Watched this ill on the sofa and might as well have done 10 tabs of acid. I couldn't make head nor tail of it, and the way Lynch shoots didn't help as I thought I was inside my own dream (Naomi Watts often appears in my dreams naked on another woman) Great film, but one I probably shouldn't have watched ill and feverish. Past Lives Cannot accurately state just how much I loved this, I thought it was absolutely beautiful. Just a really wonderful film of an incredibly simple tale told well. That's it. 14yo loved it as well, and we both loved the score which was gorgeous. Also rewatched Adaptation, Four Weddings and a Funeral and I Love You, Man, which I all really enjoyed. The latter I think is one of the funniest comedies of the last 20 years, and has huge likeability. SLAPPA DA BYAAAAAS.  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.