Can you imagine anyone other than Arnold Schwarzenegger in the title role of John Matrix? Can you imagine anyone other than Arnie saying "Let off some steam, Bennett"? Put quite simply, it's impossible to remake this movie and replace Schwarzenegger. Why would you want to?! It makes no sense to remake Commando. The filmmakers achieved the perfect tone of pure cartoonish absurdity, and it cannot be replicated.
Plus, what's the logic in remaking a straightforward action star vehicle?! It's a hackneyed story and it's a cheesy movie. While they're at it, why not remake Cobra or First Blood or even Die Hard? These movies are perfect in their current form...
Worst of all, let's try to imagine what would happen if Commando was remade. My brain hurts as I think about how much this would absolutely rape the legacy of the original. Knowing Hollywood, this remake would have:
- A bland WWE Wrestler in the title role. The Rock? John Cena? Some wrestler looking to make a living in films?
- A side-kick character in the form of Shia LeDouche or Zac Efron. I'll bet this side-kick encounters Matrix during an act of violence, attaches himself to Matrix, and Matrix tells him to go away, but the kid proves his worth somehow...
- "Relevance" to today's society. Chances are locations would be changed to the Middle East, and Matrix would be a veteran of the Gulf War or the Iraq War or something
- A PG-13 rating. It's only logical. And it's insulting. Can you imagine Commando as a PG-13? I can't. And don't want to
- A piece of eye candy in the lead female role. Megan Fox or someone similar. Matrix and her would be a couple by the end of the film's proceedings
- The daughter killing the main villain to make a "How cute, the little girl saved her daddy!" outcome
- Matrix's daughter as 16-year-old who hates her father for "teenage girl" reasons in the beginning of the movie that will have no explanation. "You never understand me, dad!" and by the end of the film will be like... "You're a great dad afterall!"
- Lines/ideas copied from the movie Taken
- Bennett as a "misunderstood anti-villain" who feels betrayed by Matrix
- Slow-mo shots (Bullet time?) of shots being fired as an excrutiating rap tune flows from the speakers like diarrhea. None of the bullets hit a thing
- A backstory which reveals that Matrix's wife has been either killed/mutilated/crippled/barbecued by bears/a bomb/rouge rhinos/Disease of the Week, and the daughter will blame Matrix for her death/incapacity/whatever until the end where it is revealed that mother's death was orchestrated by Bennett/a corrupt government official because she was working at a shadowy government entity and stumbled upon the secret recipe for their delicious apple cobbler.
I defy you to say I'm wrong.
There we have it. Shit on a stick which costs little, would require little effort, but would make a healthy profit because of the box office value of the chosen stars.
Fuck that shit.
And FUCK YOU, HOLLYWOOD!
UPDATE: Commando remake is officially happening. David Ayer is writing & directing it, and it's going to be a more realistic take on the story. What the FUCK?!
Straight off the bat, I understand that a well-made, thrilling shark movie in this day and age would be fantastic. I'd love to see shark attacks rendered using today's filmmaking technology. Look at some of the stuff in Deep Blue Sea. CGI was crappy, but those mechanical sharks were amazingly realistic. All these years on, we could be looking at the most thrilling shark attacks in cinematic history.
But... Why Jaws? Why use the story of Jaws as a basis for the ultimate contemporary shark movie? Why not sit down and come up with a better concept? The thought of people reinventing the roles of Chief Brody, Matt Hooper and Quint is cringe-worthy. Those roles were owned by Roy Scheider, Richard Dreyfuss and Robert Shaw. It's especially painful to think of the substitutes. Tracey Morgan is being rumoured for the role of Matt Hooper. Ouch...
More importantly, because of the nature of this cinematic climate and the desires of audiences, the focus would be purely on shark action as opposed to character development. Meaning a higher body count and more blood. Or maybe it'd be a PG-13, meaning a lot of shark attacks but very non-graphic ones. Even worse!
You can't make a terrific shark movie in this cinematic climate. So don't even try. Fuck you, Hollywood.
If it ain't broken, don't try to fix it. How is that so hard for Hollywood to grasp?
The creator of television's Glee has began negotiations to direct the remake of The Rocky Horror Picture Show. But...WHY?! Why on Earth remake the cult phenomenon? It's especially baffling seeing as the original is still showing in cinemas. Imagine the original and the remake in cinemas at the same time...
Of course, Hollywood loves the money prospect. Maybe they hope that they'll be able to trick fans into thinking a screening of the remake is a screening of the original... Makes me sick. You cannot replace Tim Curry. You cannot create covers of the brilliant songs. This is an atrocious idea.
I could understand it if someone wanted to produce another version of the comic book series, but a remake of this remarkable interpretation? Fuck no!
First of all, in this day and age, hardly any filmmakers would have the skill replicate the atmosphere of the film... The grainy visuals, the hardcore violence, and so on. In this contemporary filmmaking climate, everything would look crisp and sterile. Half the magic is lost.
Secondly, how can you replace Brandon Lee? His work here is pitch-perfect.
And lastly, WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO REMAKE IT? There's nothing wrong with this version that a remake could improve. And that's the bottom line - if it ain't broken, don't fix it. If a film ended up being a wasted opportunity which squandered a terrific premise, then sure, remake the thing and make a lot of changes. If you cannot imagine a better version of the original movie, a remake is unnecessary...
Bottom line is, this is a financial decision, not an artistic one. Fuck you, Hollywood.
UPDATE: Looks like the remake might have been cancelled. Thank the fuck Christ.
A remake of Total Recall?!? A remake of one of the most awesome, entertaining science fiction movies of the '90s? Why in hell would you want to try?
And don't give me the "the original will still be there, no-one's forcing you to watch it" shit. It doesn't matter if I watch it or not, the insult is still there. The insult that someone tried to improve upon/replicate perfection.
The special effects here basically haven't dated. Oh sure, a few things look shonky, but it's all part of the charm. Plus, it looks far more realistic than the crisp CGI stuff they'd apply to this movie.
Worst of all, placing another actor in Arnie's role is unthinkable. In this Hollywood climate, there is no-one worthy to take this role. The Rock? Fuck no. John Cena? Fuck no. Sam Worthington? Good actor, but fuck no. There is no actor part of this generation who exudes the same authority and presence as Arnold Schwarzenegger.
You cannot remake Total Recall. Fuck you, Hollywood.
There is absolutely no reason to remake Romancing the Stone. None at all. It's an adventurous movie with a certain flavour that would be impossible to replicate. You cannot replace Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner in these roles.
The Dirty Dozen is a classic action/war movie, filled with a classic cast of badass names, and brimming with macho-ness. It's a fun, enjoyable boy's war movie, and a favourite for many I don't doubt.
So... Why remake it?! WHY?! Didn't you hear me, I said WHY?!?!
Oh sure, the technical aspects of this movie are dated and the action scenes don't deliver that visceral punch of something like Saving Private Ryan. But that sort of thing matters not in the long run, because the focus is on the narrative and the characters. Hollywood today would make it a 100-minute action movie, rather than the 160-minute epic of the original.
I appreciate that one would like to see this story brought to life with modern cinematic techniques. I would too. But why a remake? The premise is very malleable. Stallone's The Expendables uses the basic men-on-a-mission premise invented by this movie. The titular troupe of Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds was inspired by The Dirty Dozen. Point is, you can make a story similar to The Dirty Dozen, but not a remake. Change things. Invent new characters. Reinvent the whole movie. That would be acceptable. A remake of the same name which simply does away with the depth of the original? No. Just no. Fuck you, Hollywood.
A Cliffhanger remake? Really? Really?! Really?!? Really?!?!
First they plan to remake an Arnold Schwarzenegger star vehicle (Commando) and now they want to remake one of the most essential Sylvester Stallone movies in history? For goodness sake, why not just conceive of another action film set in the snow? Why remake this awesome movie? What's the fucking logic?
When it comes to a Cliffhanger remake, it'd be impossible to
1) Replace Stallone (Those WWE Wrestlers suck at acting, and they're the only ones with the requisite physique. Except maybe Jason Statham...)
2) Replicate the grittiness of the action. It'd all be fucking green screen work and digital effects, rather than real stunts and real helicopters and real sets.
3) Make it as violent. Chances are this'd just be a PG-13 star vehicle.
With this in mind, it'd just be some indistinguishable actioner no-one would remember or care about 5 minutes after they watch it. Fuck you, Hollywood.
UPDATE: Oh fuck, they're "rebooting" Cliffhanger like J.J. Abrams did with Star Trek. Are they fucking serious?!?! What, they're going to do Gabe's origins in the first movie, then remake Cliffhanger for the second? Fuck that bullshit. Adding insult to injury, PG-13 purveyor Neal Moritz (xXx, Fast and the Furious) is producing it. This means Vin Diesel may take the role of Gabe Walker. Fucking... What the fucking fuck?
As with many other items on this list, I can understand the appeal of a film like this being brought to life with modern filmmaking technology. Slicker action, better from a technical standpoint, and so on. What I can't understand, however, is why you would want to make a straight-up remake of this movie because it's absolutely fine the way it is.
As with all the other items on this list, the idea is motivated by money, not an artistic spark. You can't replace Kurt Russell as Snake Plissken, and you can't replicate the type of magic this film is infused with. It's pure '80s magic, and in this day and age it'd be some indistinguishable PG-13 action-fest. Maybe it'd actually be a good, entertaining R-rated actioner, but with Hollywood behind this remake, good things cannot come of it.
The long and short of my ramble? If someone was to use just the basic premise and create a whole new storyline brought to life by a talented action director, then bring it on. I wouldn't be complaining. But chances are we're looking at a lifeless Hollywood-ised version. Yawn. Boring. Fuck you, Hollywood.
UPDATE: The studio has dropped it. Maybe the project has died...
Of course... A remake of this classic film with a focus on visual effects and bird action rather than character development. Hitchcock's original was amazingly chilling and filled with iconic imagery that makes you unnerved. It's these subtleties that Hollywood have completely forgotten about. The focus is now on big budgets and blockbusters.
Maybe I should give the filmmakers the benefit of the doubt, and I'm being too presumptuous. But think about it... When was the last time you saw a thriller as subtly chilling and patient as Hitchcock's original The Birds? And even if the filmmakers of the remake did elect a route similar to the original, then it'd be twice as useless because the original has already done it.
There is no sense in remaking The Birds, and it sickens me that Hollywood would try. Fuck you, Hollywood.
I don't understand it. The Coen Brothers want to remake this John Wayne Western classic. It poses a number of questions. First, how the hell do you replace Duke Fucking Wayne as Rooster Cogburn? Let's not forget, the Duke got himself an Oscar for this role. Second, WHY REMAKE THIS MOVIE? It does not make any sense at all.
And fuck you, Hollywood.
UPDATE: Remake was released in December 2010. I've seen it and it wassss... okay. Felt too gutless. Didn't do enough interesting stuff with the material.
In 2009, I was overjoyed when word reached the press that the Rosemary's Baby remake was scrapped. Good. Awesome. Time to get on with life.
But now, word has reached the press that the remake idea has been revived and Michael Bay is directing it. Oh lordy, do I even need to tell you how utterly wrong and fucked up that is? These days, Michael can't stay still for 5 minutes without throwing in a pointless action scene drowned in digital effects. What the fuck is he doing to do with this premise? Give the old people karate powers? Have the devil baby go on a killing spree? Have a huge shootout between the devil baby and its mother? I cringe at the thought.
In the past, Bay's Platinum Dunes have fucked up more than they've succeeded. To think that they will now tackle one of the greatest horror films of all time... It's just insulting.
A remake of Battle Royale? Wait a minute, that kind of sounds familiar because...well...it's already been done, just not by name. The Condemned, anyone? The Tournament? Fuck sake, those movies are examples of how remakes should be done: by utilising the basic concept and just running with the best ideas.
The thought of a straight-up Hollywood remake is sickening. It will be filled with actors in their late 20s trying to pass themselves off as teens, and the focus will be on the action rather than emotion or characters.
Battle Royale is brilliant the way it is. A remake is unnecessary. Fuck you, Hollywood.
I suppose we all shouldn't be too shocked. Hollywood is out of original ideas for horror movies (though a lot of filmmakers outside the Hollywood system have no trouble coming up with something original...), so they've been remaking horror movie after horror movie. So why not remake one of the greatest classic horror movies in history?
Well, because it's a fucking bad decision.
The original Poltergeist is a good fucking movie. It's a carnival ride of a fright flick, with well-drawn characters, good scare moments and a lot of atmosphere. In short, it cannot be dramatically improved, so this is once again a case of aiming a remake towards gullible viewers who can't be bothered checking out the original. The scam has worked every other time...
Oh HELL no. Highlander is not a perfect film, or even a great film, but it's perfectly serviceable in that cheesy '80s action movie sort of way. That type of magic is lightning in a bottle. You cannot replicate this sort of magic.
Maybe I shouldn't be too shocked. After all, how many quality foreign horror movies haven't been remade by Hollywood? However, this doesn't mean it's a good idea. Far from it.
This is a classic example of "It's not broken, so don't try to fix it". Martyrs is thinking man's torture porn, but it's doubtful the intelligence will survive the conversion to a Hollywood movie. Plus, watching this movie is at times gruelling. It's a good movie, yeah, but you won't want to watch it again. So why would we want to watch an identical Hollywood retread?
This has been a long time coming. I'm pretty sure Hollywood has wanted to remake this for at least a decade. All I can say is, I fucking hope that the planned remake keeps getting delayed and is eventually scrapped. For fuck's sake, they already remade Seven Samurai. It was called The Magnificent Seven and it was magnificent.
Of course, Hollywood loves the idea of creating a samurai film like this, and filling it head to toe with CGI and slow-motion action scenes, etc. To consider this approach while bearing in mind the reserved nature of the original film...is just appalling.
Hollywood can go ahead and make a samurai movie with the aforementioned approach. But they just shouldn't remake this samurai movie because it doesn't need to be remade.