Nov. 4, 2005, 5:02 a.m. CST
Nov. 4, 2005, 5:04 a.m. CST
by Darth Bodie
Nov. 4, 2005, 5:27 a.m. CST
Same title, different movie. As if that hasn't happened before. They probably use the WILD BUNCH title for legal reasons. Like, maybe they have to renew some copyright or some shit.
Nov. 4, 2005, 5:29 a.m. CST
He's inspired so many films that have borrwed so much from his work. If they all swiped the names, there would be a lot of disappointment. Why would David Ayer want to tie himself down with comparisons to the original when he's changing so much? I hope he changes his mind else I may pay someone to bring me the head of David Ayer. (I do like Training Day though. As for U571, it seemed pointless to rewrite history)
Nov. 4, 2005, 5:41 a.m. CST
Those execs are a 'bunch of pricks' if ever the term needed applying. Jees', who are you going to get to replace any one member of the cast..? Impossible. I just texted my brother to tell him this news because it's his favourite movie of all-time. He is f*ckin' outraged to say the least. This MUST be stopped a la 'Evil Dead Remake'. Is nothing sacred..?
Nov. 4, 2005, 5:45 a.m. CST
But I don't want it turned into a remake! Enough remakes already! Do something different, even if it's comepletely wierd and far fetched.
Nov. 4, 2005, 6:10 a.m. CST
You hypocrites! The one remake is stupid, the other a brillant idea, right! WTF! Both are stupid ideas, lets face it!
Nov. 4, 2005, 6:11 a.m. CST
by Gungan Slayer
Im sick and tired of Hollywood sitting on their asses and just throwing out crappy sequels, prequels and remakes. What's the matter, ran out of ideas? Than get the hell outta there! There's plenty of guys like me, filled with plenty of great ideas and imagination that are just dying to take your spot. I'm not going to go on my remake rant right now cause its just not worth it anymore (plus I have to go to work now, lol) no one in Hollywood listens or cares, which is a damn shame.
Nov. 4, 2005, 6:14 a.m. CST
Why WHY WHY? We don't need this remake yet they're still foisting this fucker on us! It's one thing remaking something that wasn't very good or well regarded in the first place (Oceans 11) but reamking something that still stands up today? Tossers... I can't believe with all this new digital technology open to us, independent film crying out for a new saviour and the vast amount of people out there trying to make movies that Hollywood is so creatively bankrupt that they're remaking unabashed classics rather than finding these new voices and giving them a chance, especially in the realms of commercial filmmaking - an area which needs a good quality kick up the arse. You want to save the film industry and get people back into cinemas? Give us something we haven't seen before! Rant over. Peace.
Nov. 4, 2005, 6:23 a.m. CST
which borrowed it
Nov. 4, 2005, 6:27 a.m. CST
Hey, it's always better to have a truly original and new film, BUT for something like King Kong, you can't really reproduce the impact that the film had in 1933 without remaking it. Hell, remakes have been around for ages. Hitchcock remade his own films time after time. Does anyone wish he hadn't remade the The Man Who Knew Too Much? As for Peckinpah, part of the charm of his films were their rough edges - they matched the man. That "barely got made" feel to his films. There aren't any universal rules and that's true of remakes. Judge each as they come along but I'll agree, there's a glut of remakes at the moment and most of them are a pile of shit.
Nov. 4, 2005, 7:44 a.m. CST
by Lone Fox
I jest, of course.
Nov. 4, 2005, 7:51 a.m. CST
did i mention NO?
Nov. 4, 2005, 7:52 a.m. CST
Or not as the case might be nearer release; if the plot is so different I don't think we need to care. If they have the same characters and try and come close to the relationships depicted onscreen then they're going to fail miserably and we can all have a laugh. I mean you'd think they'd just go and watch the buildup to the bloody climax, with Holden looking at that whore and seeing everything that had passed him by; Oates's almost nonchalant acceptance of his and their fate and finally Borgnine's just f'ing brilliant laugh at the end after the general is blown away to see that it's a waste of time trying a remake. That film is pure magic; almost incontestibly (if that's even a word) my favourite film.
Nov. 4, 2005, 7:55 a.m. CST
A CLOCKWORK ORANGE. if anyone in Whoreywood so much as breathes it's possibility, my droogs and I going to kill them and their entire family. (note to crumbling government forces -- the Ludovico technique doesn't work on me. i'm immune.)
Nov. 4, 2005, 8:26 a.m. CST
Nov. 4, 2005, 8:59 a.m. CST
all a screenwriter has to do is find a classic film, write an almost identical plots and characters, set it somewhere else in a different time...that
Nov. 4, 2005, 9:13 a.m. CST
First, "Don't Look Now" - and now this. They'll do ANYthing, anything to make a $. Turd-snorters.
Nov. 4, 2005, 9:30 a.m. CST
Even coke commercials will be "retold" and "reimagined" in the future. Our kids are in for a world of shit. JUST LIKE US! Go Giant Monkey Movie Go!!! GO !!! GOOOOO!!!!!!!
Nov. 4, 2005, 9:58 a.m. CST
by Judge Doom
The good, the bad and the ugly should be remade! Hugh Jackman as the man of no name, John Leguizamo as Tuco, Robert Patrick as Sentenza!!!
Nov. 4, 2005, 10 a.m. CST
hollywood is predictable theyll get luiz guzman as a modern day nasty mexican general and fill the cast with 20 or 30 somethings to make it "hip" like "four brothers"
Nov. 4, 2005, 10:08 a.m. CST
Primo, it will allow him to plagiarize the source material freely without worrying about legal consequences. Secundo, it will bring in cash, due to the status of the real film and the unfortunate interest that its remake will provoke. And therein lies the problem: the way to fight remakes and cause their extinction is not to attack them, but simply to ignore them and never watch them, not to mention actually paying to watch them. But try explaining it to the bubblegum-chewing amoebas that go to see "The Fog 2005" because "omygod it like totally has Tom in it".
Nov. 4, 2005, 10:11 a.m. CST
by Chief Redcock
OF ALL THE STUPID... I HATE THIS BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!! FUCKING MORONS!!!!!!!!!! FUCKING MORONS!!!!!!!!!!
Nov. 4, 2005, 10:46 a.m. CST
by R.C. the "Wise"
"John! Get in here and tell me what we've got lined up for future consideration." Hey sir. I got an original story filled with intrigue, addicting dialogue, unique locals and a surprising ending. "Meh! What else you got John?" Uuuuhh...I'ya...I got a couple scripts in the back but there all just crappy adaptations of shitty books and remakes of classic films. "SNIFF! SNIFF! SNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIFF! *cough* *cough* *cough* Whoa! I said goddamn! *cough* SNIFF! Now that's what I'm talkin about. Bring in those scripts. I choose one of the gems!" Yes sir.
Nov. 4, 2005, 10:57 a.m. CST
by Film Whisperer
"There are certain movies that are ripe to remake, like WILLY WONKA which wasn't exactly true to the book it was based on. There are certain types of movies that shouldn't be touched, that are perfect for more than just their story, characters and actors, but shot in the perfect time. " Yeah...I can think of one: KING KONG.
Nov. 4, 2005, 10:58 a.m. CST
We complain about remakes but they either make money at the box office or enough to get the money back. You can bitch all you want but the reamkes wont go away til we ignore them, something people seem incapable of doing.
Nov. 4, 2005, 11:09 a.m. CST
Nov. 4, 2005, 11:29 a.m. CST
The viagra fueled sex scenes.
Nov. 4, 2005, 11:30 a.m. CST
Ya Im sure there are a lot of people pissed off about the King Kong remake. But then again most of those people will see it so they have nothing to complain about
Nov. 4, 2005, 11:34 a.m. CST
Nov. 4, 2005, 11:37 a.m. CST
Fools... FOOLS. FOOLS!!!!!! I will punish them. I will ignore it in theaters, skip it on DVD, pay for a pirated copy and then use it as a coaster.
Nov. 4, 2005, 11:41 a.m. CST
Or torrentspy.com. As long as you don't fund the remakers.
Nov. 4, 2005, 11:51 a.m. CST
Do they wander into Best Buy on Tuesday, picking up newly released/restored catalog titles and go "Ooo, this is a good movie, and it's been an X amount of years, let's remake it." Meanwhile, earlier that day, they ran over some screenwriter in the parking lot, who has the next "Usual Suspects" in hand, with their SUV while juggling their video iPod with their Vanilla Latte.... GODDAMN F*CKERS !!! So when is Wizard Of Oz remake coming out? How about Godfather? Scarface? Gone With The Wind??
Nov. 4, 2005, 11:58 a.m. CST
lets hope it never happens
Nov. 4, 2005, 12:03 p.m. CST
... and all that, but at least there's 72 years difference between the original and the new one, plus, and most importantly, it's a labor of love for the director (since he was 9 years old) who's got talent, a lot of good ideas and a great production crew behind him. It's not just the studio trying for a cash grab, plugging in some hack director behind it. After Lord Of The Rings, PJ had the movie business on their knees and could have chosen any project he wanted, and he wanted Kong. If anything, KK is a risk in that it's got 207 million (or whatever) at stake/to recoup.
Nov. 4, 2005, 12:09 p.m. CST
Dude, he'll be all over this stinkfest.
Nov. 4, 2005, 12:10 p.m. CST
Owen Wilson, Vince Vaughn, Topher Grace, Jake Gyllenhaal, Mathew Lillard, Pacey from Dawson's Creek, with Casey Affleck & Scotty Caan as T.C. and Coffer. (and Jerry Mathers as the Beaver).
Nov. 4, 2005, 12:14 p.m. CST
which is that Quint & Co. are basically admitting that there are two types of movies: classics that are perfect and timeless and everything else. For some reason they've on the one hand pegged "Kong" as a perfect timeless classic while at the same time thanking the drooling nerd gods that there's a remake. So which is it, guys?--perfect or flawed?
Nov. 4, 2005, 12:16 p.m. CST
I am neither classic nor perfect. Like Kong I am flawed.
Nov. 4, 2005, 12:16 p.m. CST
Wasn't this movie made a few years ago and called "Once Upon A Time In Mexico"?
Nov. 4, 2005, 12:57 p.m. CST
I'm sure there was a report (maybe in Empire) aaaages ago, that Rodriguez enjoyed working with Dafoe, Depp et al on Mexico so much that they were going to get back together to remake The Wild Bunch. Did I hallucinate that? Anyway, remakes, love 'em! What I really need are two versions, at LEAST two versions, of every movie. Only then, when I've given Hollywood all my money to see the same thing twice, will I be ableto die a happy man. What would've happened if God was a Hollywood producer? I know exactly, he'd make one guy, who may look a bit like John Malkovich, and then think "Hmm, this guy seems to be working out okay. I know, I'll make some more of him." Then we'd be living in the Malkovich-Malkovich world from that movie, Being John something. In an ideal world, one of the little Malkoviches would stand up, probably on a really big mountain or hill, and shout, "God! You lazy son of a whore! I'm sick of living with Malkoviches all over the place! Make me some wemmins, motherfucker!" But God wouldn't listen and in the end all the little shiny heads lay down and died and with no Malko-children the human race died out. The End.
Nov. 4, 2005, 1:43 p.m. CST
Let it be a ripoff instead of a remake, why taint the title with your assholey modern-day, probably "Traffic/Syriana" lookin' bullshit. Who wants to bet Denzel winds up in this?
Nov. 4, 2005, 1:50 p.m. CST
Let me guess: - The new "Wild bunch" will all be under 25, but led by a "grizzled" George Clooney. - will have a hollywood happy ending where they gallop off into the sunset with the Mexican prostitues played by Cameron Diaz and Jennifer Beil
Nov. 4, 2005, 1:51 p.m. CST
by Citizen Arcane
But why stop there? You might as well do it right. Starring, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sylvester Stallone, Bruce Willis, Harrison Ford, Mickey Rourke and Christopher Walken. FUCK YEAH!
Nov. 4, 2005, 2:01 p.m. CST
Unless they're just using a great title to make a different movie. Otherwise, it doesn't make much sense. Anybody who's seen the original will stay away from the remake like it's the plague. And what do younger, mainstream audiences care about Westerns?
Nov. 4, 2005, 2:03 p.m. CST
Nov. 4, 2005, 2:06 p.m. CST
by Moe Ron
This is Extreme Prejudice, which itself was kind of a remake of Wild Bunch. Look at the final huge battle in Prejudice, it's almost a shot for shot remake of the damn Wild Bunch finale. So, screw this Training Day guy, and just bring in Walter Hill for karmic purposes. I'm sure somebody else has stated this above me, but I can't be bothered with reading words and shit.
Nov. 4, 2005, 2:07 p.m. CST
There really needs to be something done about this, because I really think they ARE starting to consider everything fair game. How about remaking Lawrence of Arabia? The Godfather? Cuckoo's Nest? Why the eff not? It's the next logical step for them, and here's why. Hollywood is just about finished right now. They've spent the last 25 years developing this system whereby they only need to create enough curiousity through pumping millions into P&A to get asses in the seats and make a killing in one or two weekends. And I actually think they're geniuses for getting it down to such a science that the quality of the movie itself doesn't matter anymore. Things, however, started to get bad. In the last few years, they couldn't count on the same numbers, cause people would catch onto a turkey quicker, so DVD came in and saved the day for their inane shitfests they call movies. 'Cept now, NEITHER of those things are working. Their system, whereby you only need to drum up enough interest in a movie to fool people for one or two weeks is now failing miserably. The audiences have finally caught on. The studios are sort of exactly where they were when Easy Rider came out. Except this time, even if an Easy Rider comes out and cleans up, it's not going to change anything. They're clinging to a sinking ship. They'd likely look at it today and go, "Ohhhh, no... we tried making GOOD movies for a while, but we KNOW this system of corporate synergy, name-recognition through endless sequels and movies based on tv shows, craptastic FX, bankable 'stars', and remakes of great films WILL ALWAYS WORK. It HAS TO ALWAYS WORK or WE'LL LOSE OUR FRIGGING JOBS!" So, don't look for them, no matter what, to go changing this system anytime soon. Not unless entire companies start getting dragged under, and I SWEAR, they will blame it on some movie that is actually not that bad, rather than the tons of shit that reeks. Just sit back and watch the movie industry eat itself from the outside in until there's ABSOLUTELY NOTHING LEFT. But, I still think there should be something done to save movies like The Godfather from being remade with some fucking insane cast like Ed Norton, Mark Ruffalo, Brad Pitt, etc.... Someone like Spielberg could get protection from a Jaws remake, but Scorsese for Taxi Driver? They're going to start losing their minds soon if ticket sales continue to decline, and then they'll push whomever the fucking artist is that made the original right out of the way on their way up the stairs to remake heaven. Money talks in ANY business. Like I said, the original saving grace, DVD, is starting to become a joke too. If I don't give a shit about Herbie while it's in theaters, why the hell would I care to spend, let's say, $14 at Wal-Mart on discount for a copy of that turd to sit on my shelf? And you know the sales of back catalog titles, the GOOD movies, will start to peeter out soon too, as people catch up with their VHS or laserdisc collections. Lastly, I just want to say that I think it's ridiculous that they're STILL pointing to opening weekends of $20 million like it's some kind of triumph, when, through their own idiocy over the last 25 years, they've made it common knowledge what movies cost to make, and a $20 million dollar opening on a movie that everyone knows cost upwards of 120 to make and release is pathetic. Nobody cares about the movies anymore, let alone the bullshit box office figures from the previous weekend. Ahhh well... cinema was fun while it lasted. Hopefully, they won't go too far in attempting to rebuild the pyramids, but my personal feeling is that it's going to get much, much worse.
Nov. 4, 2005, 2:14 p.m. CST
directed by a troubled genius whose last decade should have buried his reputation, but didn't. so much of peckinpah's subsequent work relies so heavily on tropes employed here -- the slo-mo violence, honor among drunken thieves in mexico, &c., &freakin'c. -- that they begin their laughable history here. how critics esteem a film that came out after _bonnie and clyde_ and just before _night of the living dead_ -- both of which are far more advanced in their examination of the violent undercurrents informing american culture than ernest borgnine tossing lit dynamite at a cowhand pinching a loaf -- remains a mystery to me. flame on, fanboys.
Nov. 4, 2005, 2:27 p.m. CST
by Charlie & Tex
It had to be said - it perfectly reflects our feelings about another fucking unnecssary remake. Jesus Christ!
Nov. 4, 2005, 2:33 p.m. CST
by Orbots Commander
Nov. 4, 2005, 3:02 p.m. CST
by Citizen Arcane
The state of Hollywood now only reflects the state of corporate America in general. Of course Hollywood has always been a business, as have all corporations in America. But only recently did we reach an almost violent turn towards optimizing the bottom line and nothing else. Employees are cattle, easily replaced or downsized and everyone's a lot more cynical about simply streamlining and profiteering as much as possible. It's much worse than it was in the 80's. The 80's were about greed but the 00's are about fucking over everyone you can and applying as many bullshit business saavy paradygms as possible to make the next quarter margins. This translates into the movie industry as only investing in safe, established properties. In non marketing larva jargon it means it only makes sense to invest into a film that is going to have a built in audience. Remakes, sequels, prequels, remakes, re-imaginings, remakes, remakes and fucking remakes. If it doesn't hit in the theater, fuck it, re-market it for DVD. DVD is cheaper to produce anyway. Tara Reid won't come back for American Pie 7, fuck it, use someone else. Tt's still a brand name and it has to make bank at least on DVD. Greenlight. You want a movie as revikutionary as the original Star Wars? We're not spending money on that. Fantasic Four 2 if a sure thing. It's not going to end until something bursts.
Nov. 4, 2005, 3:04 p.m. CST
by Citizen Arcane
Nov. 4, 2005, 3:05 p.m. CST
by Doom II
Otherwise Hollywood execs, take that idea and shove it into your uncreative asses for a Wild Bunch/ shitty idea/coffee enema.........
Nov. 4, 2005, 3:53 p.m. CST
Nov. 4, 2005, 4:09 p.m. CST
I imagine Kurasawa fans were foaming at the mouth when they heard Seven Samuri was going to be remade as an American western. Of course, The Magnifacent Seven is a fantastic movie. A new Wild Bunch might turn out the same way. I'm always fascinated by taking old stories and putting them in new settings. it doesn't always work, but when it clicks, it can be a classic.
Nov. 4, 2005, 4:10 p.m. CST
Why don't porn producers remake all that Debbie Does Dishes stuff, anyway? You would've thought that they, being the scummiest scum of all the scum of the world, would be enthusiastic about something that brings so much profit to their Hollywood equivalents. And you can probably get the "rights" to most of those, uh, "classics" for fifty dollars and a Mars bar.
Nov. 4, 2005, 4:13 p.m. CST
Nov. 4, 2005, 4:33 p.m. CST
by Joey Cusack
Scarface and Wizard of Oz were both remakes. And the Godfather is already being "reimagined" as a videogame.
Nov. 4, 2005, 5:14 p.m. CST
by simulated stereo
with Tom Waits as Bennie.
Nov. 4, 2005, 5:15 p.m. CST
by Evil Chicken
Re-imaginings creep me out, man.
Nov. 4, 2005, 5:46 p.m. CST
Only in the hands of Quentin Tarantino or Robert Rodriguez will this be worth watching.
Nov. 4, 2005, 7:23 p.m. CST
by Film Whisperer
I don't think KONG should be remade and I stand by that. The first was perfect, regardless of how many years its been. (Hey, its been some 65 years since CITIZEN KANE -- let's do that!) and it still holds up. Did the PSYCHO remake justify iteself because it'd been some 30 years and was directed by an auteur like Gus Van Sant? No, I won't be paying to see it. But I will see it. I have a free pass to see a week before the release, so PJ won't be recouping a dime from me.
Nov. 4, 2005, 7:43 p.m. CST
Call it something else
Nov. 4, 2005, 7:53 p.m. CST
I can't remember the details but it was reported elsewhere a few months ago. A nazi pig (or: "a remake supporter") "wrote" a script and someone already accepted it and started the motions. . . it was described on UGB.
Nov. 4, 2005, 7:54 p.m. CST
Not "Godfather" - actually, that too - but "Scarface".
Nov. 4, 2005, 8:01 p.m. CST
Remakes aren't inherently bad. The Bogart Maltese Falcon was a remake. It's all about the talent involved. Look at Kubrick. Almost every movie (if not every movie) he made was a book adaptation. You can't compare a poorly adapted movie to a well adapted movie like you're doing with remakes. Like, "Well, there you go. DREAMCATCHER sucked, but you claim to love THE SHINING. You hypocrite!" I think the original '33 Kong is brilliant and still inspirational to this day. If the remake had been done by James Cameron or Spielberg I would have been interested in it and not crying for blood. Peter Jackson's love for the original and his desire to do it justice with the best team he can assemble and with a huge budget at his disposal is the reason why I'm not up in arms about him remaking the movie. Comparing Peter Jackson remaking King Kong to the studio hiring a director who has done one indie movie to remake The Wild Bunch which is scripted like a completely different movie is apples and oranges, guys.
Nov. 4, 2005, 8:16 p.m. CST
by Thirteen 13
Those 3 turds are screaming for a remake and a different director.
Nov. 4, 2005, 8:16 p.m. CST
The Way of the Gun?
Nov. 4, 2005, 8:21 p.m. CST
by Moe Ron
And for those of you just now finding out that Hollywood sucks, where have you been? Are you the same ones outraged over a proposed Castlevania movie, like it was some holy grail property to begin with. It better be true to the storyline of the game. What? Quint's right, Hollywood used to do new versions of movies every couple of years. As usual, I just wish they would call it anything but the Wild Bunch, just as with the Dawn of the Dead remake. And to someone who said no to a Clockwork Orange remake, well, the movie wasn't exactly ultra faithful to the book, so even with that there's room to reinterpret it.
Nov. 4, 2005, 9:02 p.m. CST
by white owl
With the combined budget of the original trilogy. And to keep up the spirits of thge crew remaking these films, their fun time can include shooting paintball guns at Hayden Christenson's dangling corpse from 50 to 150 yards away.
Nov. 4, 2005, 9:22 p.m. CST
"Here you are with a handful of holes, a thumb up your ass and a big grin to pass the day! WHO THE HELL IS THEY?!!!" Warner Brothers execs, no doubt.
Nov. 4, 2005, 10:38 p.m. CST
by Van Damned
I've been lookin' fer them; thought I might shove 'em up some WB bee-hind. I agree with Quint; any jagoff can call thier movie anything from "Alphaville" to "Zardoz". It takes someone who has something to say and wants to say it within the original's context to say it properly, not because they thought an updated version of "Mandingo" would bring the kids in (you know I sayin' the kids are the real stusio targets here, right?). In the end, we all lose.
Nov. 4, 2005, 10:44 p.m. CST
Nov. 4, 2005, 10:46 p.m. CST
Man bitten by Austrailian wild dog goes berserk on the full moon.
Nov. 4, 2005, 11:05 p.m. CST
The Sci Fi Channel will pump that one out any Saturday night now.
Nov. 4, 2005, 11:41 p.m. CST
Somebody mentioned A Clockwork Orange 're-imagining'. Fortunately that will never happen because Hollywood is terrified of NC-17 ratings and there is no way a film made in this modern puritannical age will get away with what Kubrick did and pull off an "R". Leonardo DiCaprio as Alex....eeek!
Nov. 5, 2005, 1:27 a.m. CST
A dollar's worth of steel holes to be exact, I do ineedy believe, yes, sir. I shall help you with the shoving, if you so desire, then we can go run some whores in Hondo, in tandem. That means one behind the other.
Nov. 5, 2005, 1:28 a.m. CST
by Capt. Spaulding
While it's true that a remake is not inherintly evil, it's USUALLY ill-advised. Yes, "The Maltese Falcon" Karloff's "Frankenstein" and Scorsese's "Cape Fear" were all good reamkes, and they worked. But, lest we forget Van Sant's "Psycho" De Laurentis' "King Kong" or (godforbid) Matthew Broderick's "Godzilla." As for this specific remake, I don't think it will work, not just because the original was a classic, but because everything on that film, from the cast to the script, the editing, the direction, to its timing and impact on the American public (one can argue that slow-motion violence had been seen before and things of that nature, but lets not get into semantics) was perfect. It's the same reason you can't remake "Casablanca," "Star Wars" or "La Dolce Vita." As for King Kong, I've always felt that it was a great story that could stand to be remade with an enormous budget by a director who cared about it. I remember telling my wife this several years ago as we got on the ride at Universal (are they going to put it back up?). Not to say the original isn't a classic, but rather, a remake with today's technology could do things with the story that the orginal filmmaker's couldn't.
Nov. 5, 2005, 1:34 a.m. CST
Same story as "Four Brothers" was. The Duke, Dino Holloman and Anderson just did it better.
Nov. 5, 2005, 2:01 a.m. CST
I'd actually be more interested in studios re-releasing classic films in theaters rather than remaking them. Wouldn't that be cheaper? I never got to see many cinematic classics in theaters, and would prefer seeing them put on a big screen rather than seeing some schmuck's changing things. A Kong remake wasn't needed, and passion for the material isn't as important as ability. Hell, even ability fails some times, look at Van Sant and Psycho. I'm actually of the same wave length as several others here, I'd be interested if it were Tarantino, and only Tarantino. And if they called it something else.
Nov. 5, 2005, 5:06 a.m. CST
Uwe Boll's love for the original. Paul W. S. Anderson's love for the original. David Goyer's love for the original. Stephen Sommers's love for the original.
Nov. 5, 2005, 6:03 a.m. CST
by TheGinger Twit
that'd be cool
Nov. 5, 2005, 6:08 a.m. CST
...anyone agrees with me say 'I'.
Nov. 5, 2005, 7:02 a.m. CST
by J. Pantsickle
I watched the Wild Bunch a couple of times on the western channel this last week, and during a viewing I actually asked myself what I would do if I had the opportunity to remake it, and then I realized that there was no reason at all for it to ever be remade, and now this revelation. Jesus Whatever Christ. For these slimy bastards- the studio heads and the investors and such -when has it ever been about anything so noble and benificent as anything like artistic vision, or even good sense? They'll do anything and have always done anything for our cash, and it will never be any different than it always has been. Since the start they have and will always rely on formulas, and they'll always adapt good source material in real bad ways, and there will always be weak remakes and misguided reinventions and sacreligious reimaginings. The vast majority of material that has come out of Hollywood for the hundred odd years of its history has been real awful garbage at worst, and mildly entertaining garbage at best. It's always been that way, and it'll always be that exactly that way. It is a shit deal that some of our most cherished and beloved works get butchered and fucked with and raped in the process, but after all this time we shouldn't expect anything less. No amount of bitching on our part is going to make them stop, or cause them to care, or put brains and good taste into their heads and take the dollar signs out. We really do just have to deal with their dumb shit, and enjoy the ocassional masterpieces and the scarce bits of awesome that they do manage to present us with from time to time. That, or somehow we band together and devise a way to fucking kill all of them just as hard as we can and then take over the business, but unfortunately I'd have to assume it would prove to be just too difficult to do that.
Nov. 5, 2005, 11:28 a.m. CST
talent cannot necessarily save a doomed concept
Nov. 5, 2005, 11:32 a.m. CST
and to the post above yes they are remaking BRING ME THE HEAD OF ALFREDO GARCIA but frankly my dear that mumbling Benicio Del Torro is no fucking Warren Oates dude
Nov. 5, 2005, 11:36 a.m. CST
hollywood boggles the mind they spend tens of millions on shiite and then complain people dont go to the movies - they fucking get what they deserve these executives
Nov. 5, 2005, 12:09 p.m. CST
NO WAY should they remake The Wild Bunch. It's a film that has and will stand the test of time. That would be like remaking Psycho! Oh wait...
Nov. 5, 2005, 2:05 p.m. CST
by Doom II
It's a simple lesson class. ALl you have to do is STOP SEEING THE MOVIES! When a remake comes out, don't go see it out of "curiosity". Bewitched, Starsky & Hutch, Brady Bunch, Fog, Getaway, etc etc.....Rent it 6 months down the road and if you like it, BURN it. Don't pay for it ANYWHERE at ANY stage of release! Let these movies die soon. Go support indie filmmakers. Hollywood is morally and creatively BANKRUPT. It's official.
Nov. 5, 2005, 3:36 p.m. CST
by J. Pantsickle
I just finished up a session with my spirit contact from the next world, Susanna Zenith Broderick, during which I inquired about future Hollywood productions and such. Susanna was actually incredibly informed on the subject, being a huge movie buff himself, and this is some of what he told me would come to pass... The summer of 2017 will see a massive, action-packed remake of "In Cold Blood" from Twentieth Century Fox. Based on the 1967 movie starring Robert Blake, which itself was based on Truman Capote's groundbreaking 1965 non-fiction novel, this re-imagining takes place on Mars in the year 2399, and begins with the Clutters, a large family of wealthy landowners that are involved in the terraformation effort of the planet, and are living happily on a successful lichen ranch in Cydonia. In this update, a young space pirate named Richard "Dick" Hickock is spending time in an orbiting space-prison. He happens to be sharing a cell with a man that tells him that he used to work on the Clutter's ranch, and that he's heard that Zagnon Clutter, the patriarch of the Clutter dynasty, is in possession of a legendary treasure map that is rumored to lead to hundreds of millions of space-dollars worth of space-diamonds that are buried somewhere in the hell that is the forbidden zone of Mars. Hickock enlists the help of a band of space-pirates lead by a friend of his named Perry Smith, who's a psychotic half-cyborg assassin. Smith and his group of outlaws bust Hickock out of prison, and together they head to Mars to steal the treasure map from the Clutter family, which they accomplish, but in the process end up brutally murdering, raping and eating the entire family, which consists of Zagnon Clutter and his wife Kazeeza, their eight daughters, four sons and an adorable genetically engineered pet monkey. As they set out to find the space-diamonds, the motley crew of space-criminals are unaware that they're being tracked by the sole surviving member of the Clutter family; a space-cowboy with a troubled past, a man that
Nov. 6, 2005, 4:56 a.m. CST
...then remake his worst film: the PG-rated "The Killer Elite". Here's an example of a good concept but flawed execution. I thought someone castrated Peckinpah when I first saw this movie. A movie about double-crossing spies, ninjas, bombs, and machineguns HAS to be R-rated, otherwise it'll look like an A-Team episode - which it does. Suggestions: When James Caan's character gets injured in the beginning, make the injuries so severe that he has to be bionic! And have the ninjas use Predator camouflage like the ninja in Metal Gear Solid. And throw a couple whores in there for good measure. Others that should be remade: Logan's Run Battle Beyond The Stars Masters of the Universe The Last Man on Earth Omega Man The Black Hole Laserblast Captain America V the miniseries Supergirl Flash Gordon - though the original does have an enjoyable cheesiness. Carnival of Souls - Not really, but it just pisses me off to see her blink during the final shot! So basically any bad or mediocre movie that has potential. But leave my Wild Bunch alone, dammit!
Nov. 6, 2005, 8:57 a.m. CST
those are 2 peckinpah films that could use improvement
Nov. 6, 2005, 10:45 a.m. CST
Mathematically impossible. (not to mention that you can't have a woman behave like Susan George's character these days. it encourages 'debate'. and that's something people would rather not be bothered with.)
Nov. 6, 2005, 11 a.m. CST
Reminds me of a story: I was in the grocery store one day and saw some toliet paper with dinosaurs on it after I had viewed this low budget tuna called "Dinosaur Island." Instantly, I knew where Fred Ray got his idea for his abortion while sitting on his porcelin throne. Apparently, he used the bidet to inject a few action scenes; what little action scenes there were. I don't know. Even Roger Corman's company, New Concorde is ripping off old movies that star a giant Tyranosaurus Rex ranpaging through L.A.("Godzilla") and a veiled remake of "The Giant Claw." Is there no shame in Hollywood? Apparently not.
Nov. 6, 2005, 7:50 p.m. CST
Nov. 7, 2005, 10:39 a.m. CST
How about we all not see this remake but of course that wont happen since r emakes make money becuase the people who whine about them actually go and see them.
Jan. 11, 2007, 10:44 p.m. CST
The remake is a shitty idea.