Whyy??!
February 28, 2005 4:12 PM Subscribe
Sequels, prequels and remakes, oh my... First Bugs, now Lamar. Having just heard that there will be a new Revenge of the Nerds movie next year, I really wasn't prepared for the coming onslaught.
Yes, when I left the cave, after my 20 year escape from the human race, the light did burn my eyes.
posted by hellbient at 4:33 PM on February 28, 2005
posted by hellbient at 4:33 PM on February 28, 2005
I can't believe that this list leaves off Romero's Land of the Dead.
posted by casu marzu at 4:34 PM on February 28, 2005
posted by casu marzu at 4:34 PM on February 28, 2005
Even more troubling:
- a remake of Frankenheimer's Seconds.
- or redoing Hitchcock's The 39 Steps.
Though reversing and reducing Guess Who's Coming to Dinner to just Guess Who is probably the worst offender of all.
posted by grabbingsand at 4:39 PM on February 28, 2005
- a remake of Frankenheimer's Seconds.
- or redoing Hitchcock's The 39 Steps.
Though reversing and reducing Guess Who's Coming to Dinner to just Guess Who is probably the worst offender of all.
posted by grabbingsand at 4:39 PM on February 28, 2005
SIGH.
posted by fire&wings at 4:59 PM on February 28, 2005
posted by fire&wings at 4:59 PM on February 28, 2005
When I was young, I thought that Lamar song was the coolest thing I had ever heard. I was nine, so please forgive me.
posted by swordfishtrombones at 5:00 PM on February 28, 2005
posted by swordfishtrombones at 5:00 PM on February 28, 2005
Doesn't this say something about America being unable to examine itself?
Again, it's not the '70's anymore, with 'All the President's Men' and 'The China Syndrome' and whatever, but COME ON. What's with the endless fetishization and debunking of the past?
The original 'Stepford Wives' had some trenchant social obsevation/examination going on, but many of the 'social' films of the '70's have been or are going to be remade as comedies.
What's going on here?
posted by vhsiv at 5:10 PM on February 28, 2005
Again, it's not the '70's anymore, with 'All the President's Men' and 'The China Syndrome' and whatever, but COME ON. What's with the endless fetishization and debunking of the past?
The original 'Stepford Wives' had some trenchant social obsevation/examination going on, but many of the 'social' films of the '70's have been or are going to be remade as comedies.
What's going on here?
posted by vhsiv at 5:10 PM on February 28, 2005
Besides the hunt for a fast buck with a vaguely nostalgic title.
posted by vhsiv at 5:12 PM on February 28, 2005
posted by vhsiv at 5:12 PM on February 28, 2005
"we've got bush!" ah, the memories of childhood.
And a President who some managed to live through NONE of it.
No memories of Vietnam. No memories of Watergate. No Civil Rights movement. All these remakes are obviously for the Kool-Aid drinkers born during the past 20 years.
posted by vhsiv at 5:17 PM on February 28, 2005
And a President who some managed to live through NONE of it.
No memories of Vietnam. No memories of Watergate. No Civil Rights movement. All these remakes are obviously for the Kool-Aid drinkers born during the past 20 years.
posted by vhsiv at 5:17 PM on February 28, 2005
Not to mention a remake of The Pink Panther starring Steve Martin.
But a movie version of Sweeney Todd could be cool if done right, which, of course, it won't be.
posted by kenko at 5:18 PM on February 28, 2005
But a movie version of Sweeney Todd could be cool if done right, which, of course, it won't be.
posted by kenko at 5:18 PM on February 28, 2005
i sure hope they film the new 'revenge of the nerds' in tucson like the last one.
perhaps they can get my buddy Toby Radloff to promote it on mtv like he did with 'revenge of the nerds ii: nerds in paradise.'
oh, and by the way, what the fuck's a frush?
posted by Hat Maui at 5:29 PM on February 28, 2005
perhaps they can get my buddy Toby Radloff to promote it on mtv like he did with 'revenge of the nerds ii: nerds in paradise.'
oh, and by the way, what the fuck's a frush?
posted by Hat Maui at 5:29 PM on February 28, 2005
Even more troubling:
Is that even possible? How can they take such a perfect classic of a nerd movie and remake it?! Didn't you get the message of the original? We're all nerds!
*sniff*
It was perfect.
posted by graventy at 5:34 PM on February 28, 2005
Is that even possible? How can they take such a perfect classic of a nerd movie and remake it?! Didn't you get the message of the original? We're all nerds!
*sniff*
It was perfect.
posted by graventy at 5:34 PM on February 28, 2005
A Herbie remake. There really is no God. I wonder if he'll be a "new" or "old" beetle?
posted by drmarcj at 5:36 PM on February 28, 2005
posted by drmarcj at 5:36 PM on February 28, 2005
drmarcj, my understanding is that Herbie in the new movie will be a classic Bug. Which is odd, since this means that Volkswagen is passing up a perfect marketing opportunity. It actually confuses me somewhat.
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:17 PM on February 28, 2005
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:17 PM on February 28, 2005
I can't believe that this list leaves off Romero's Land of the Dead
I can't belive that they are not filming that in Pittsburgh. It's just not right. Everyone knows that Romero's zombies live here. I see them everytime I go to the J.C. Pennys at the Monroeville Mall.
posted by octothorpe at 6:25 PM on February 28, 2005
I can't belive that they are not filming that in Pittsburgh. It's just not right. Everyone knows that Romero's zombies live here. I see them everytime I go to the J.C. Pennys at the Monroeville Mall.
posted by octothorpe at 6:25 PM on February 28, 2005
I can't belive...
octothorpe's a zombie!
nice Romerian slip...
posted by hellbient at 6:33 PM on February 28, 2005
octothorpe's a zombie!
nice Romerian slip...
posted by hellbient at 6:33 PM on February 28, 2005
OMG. A pal just sent me information about an in-the-can and possibly direct-to-video sequel to 2001's 'Dungeons & Dragons'.
My first question: Did the first film actually make any money?
Apparently, no:
Business Data for Dungeons & Dragons
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0190374/business
Budget
$35,000,000 (estimated)
Opening Weekend
$7,237,422 (USA) (10 December 2000) (2,078 Screens)
£405,669 (UK) (18 February 2001) (140 Screens)
Gross
$15,185,241 (USA) (28 January 2001)
That's $20M in the red for us mortals. The sequel has a $15-20M budget, and not even C-list stars direct from the WB.
Part of me has to wonder if this, like the planned 'Catwoman' sequel is just vaporware destined for the Chinese bootleg market, just like 'The Forgotten'. Someone's exploiting these turkeys for tax-loopholes - that's the only possible answer.
posted by vhsiv at 7:26 PM on February 28, 2005
My first question: Did the first film actually make any money?
Apparently, no:
Business Data for Dungeons & Dragons
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0190374/business
Budget
$35,000,000 (estimated)
Opening Weekend
$7,237,422 (USA) (10 December 2000) (2,078 Screens)
£405,669 (UK) (18 February 2001) (140 Screens)
Gross
$15,185,241 (USA) (28 January 2001)
That's $20M in the red for us mortals. The sequel has a $15-20M budget, and not even C-list stars direct from the WB.
Part of me has to wonder if this, like the planned 'Catwoman' sequel is just vaporware destined for the Chinese bootleg market, just like 'The Forgotten'. Someone's exploiting these turkeys for tax-loopholes - that's the only possible answer.
posted by vhsiv at 7:26 PM on February 28, 2005
Gratuitous self-link here: If anyone has $20M to burn, I've got an original story for you, over here. Guaranteed topicality, people will talk about it for months afterward.
Apologies, in advance, if this is entirely off-color.
posted by vhsiv at 7:54 PM on February 28, 2005
Apologies, in advance, if this is entirely off-color.
posted by vhsiv at 7:54 PM on February 28, 2005
Herbie remake. There really is no God.
It's not a remake. It's another sequel. It's been a while since the last one, but a new Herbie movie is not in itself that strange of an idea.
posted by bingo at 7:56 PM on February 28, 2005
It's not a remake. It's another sequel. It's been a while since the last one, but a new Herbie movie is not in itself that strange of an idea.
posted by bingo at 7:56 PM on February 28, 2005
UM, is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that most of the posts in this thread are from people who obviously know nothing about how Hollywood works?
Example:
That's $20M in the red for us mortals. The sequel has a $15-20M budget, and not even C-list stars direct from the WB.
It is next to impossible to make a movie today that doesn't make money. The figures cited were just for the American box office. When you factor in rentals, DVD sales, cable TV, and overseas sales, the movie made money. Also, Hollywood is famous for its creative accounting. According to their books almost none of the movies released in a given year make any money. This was the basis of a lawsuit by Art Buchewald a number of years ago.
People always complain about sequela and remakes as if they're a recent thing. The truth is Hollywood used to, in its first fifty years, make a lot more of them. At that time there were no outlets for old movies, no TV, VCR, etc. It made perfect sense to reuse good plots. There were after all three versions of The Maltese Falcon.
posted by berek at 3:00 AM on March 1, 2005
Example:
That's $20M in the red for us mortals. The sequel has a $15-20M budget, and not even C-list stars direct from the WB.
It is next to impossible to make a movie today that doesn't make money. The figures cited were just for the American box office. When you factor in rentals, DVD sales, cable TV, and overseas sales, the movie made money. Also, Hollywood is famous for its creative accounting. According to their books almost none of the movies released in a given year make any money. This was the basis of a lawsuit by Art Buchewald a number of years ago.
People always complain about sequela and remakes as if they're a recent thing. The truth is Hollywood used to, in its first fifty years, make a lot more of them. At that time there were no outlets for old movies, no TV, VCR, etc. It made perfect sense to reuse good plots. There were after all three versions of The Maltese Falcon.
posted by berek at 3:00 AM on March 1, 2005
O.k. - further research reveals that Dungeons & Dragons did actually make some $$, possibly, probably, but the variance reported on BoxOffice Mojo.com is broader than that reported at IMDb.com. Mojo also reports a higher production budget.
IMDB reported no foreign returns, though these days it's pretty well known that many of the really big returns come from Europe and Asia, despite the bootlegging. Mojo reported higher foreign returns for D&D than it made domestically, but they also report a higher budget than IMDb did. Six one way, half a dozen the other.
Frankie Muniz is apparently set for life. But none of this reflects the general LACK OF EFFORT on the part of the 'creators'.
posted by vhsiv at 4:10 AM on March 1, 2005
IMDB reported no foreign returns, though these days it's pretty well known that many of the really big returns come from Europe and Asia, despite the bootlegging. Mojo reported higher foreign returns for D&D than it made domestically, but they also report a higher budget than IMDb did. Six one way, half a dozen the other.
Frankie Muniz is apparently set for life. But none of this reflects the general LACK OF EFFORT on the part of the 'creators'.
posted by vhsiv at 4:10 AM on March 1, 2005
Yeah, berek's right. Hollywood has always done stuff like this. Witness franchises like Lethal Weapon, Death Wish, Dirty Harry, Alien, Beverly Hills Cop, Police Academy, Rocky, Rambo, etc (not to mention Revenge of the Nerds itself...)
Doesn't this say something about America being unable to examine itself?
...
Besides the hunt for a fast buck with a vaguely nostalgic title.
vhsiv
Er...no, that pretty much nails the reason. Amazingly, not everything in the universe is political or has to do with grand cultural shifts. Hollywood likes sequels, and always has, because it's an easy way to generate money. You already have name recognition going in, which is why, say, a James Bond movie is always a safe bet simply from the name.
posted by Sangermaine at 8:10 AM on March 1, 2005
Doesn't this say something about America being unable to examine itself?
...
Besides the hunt for a fast buck with a vaguely nostalgic title.
vhsiv
Er...no, that pretty much nails the reason. Amazingly, not everything in the universe is political or has to do with grand cultural shifts. Hollywood likes sequels, and always has, because it's an easy way to generate money. You already have name recognition going in, which is why, say, a James Bond movie is always a safe bet simply from the name.
posted by Sangermaine at 8:10 AM on March 1, 2005
I forgive you, swordfishtrombones, cause I still think that Lamar song is one of the coolest things ever.
Re-making Seconds is just wrong, though.
posted by runtina at 10:06 AM on March 1, 2005
Re-making Seconds is just wrong, though.
posted by runtina at 10:06 AM on March 1, 2005
The Love Bug remake is already done, sort of. It was a Disney channel project and starred Bruce Campbell, if you can believe that.
As for a remake of Seconds, I am very, very afraid. I'm not a fan of the new Manchurian Candidate and I'd frankly just like to see those films left alone.
Then again, aren't we due for another * Body Snatchers or another Blob? What's the statute of limitations on remakes anyway? How late can they go?
I say give it two or three more years and we'll be seeing the new Something about Mary or American Pie, just as soon as those movies' stars get to be old enough for cameo roles only.
posted by codger at 10:08 AM on March 14, 2005
As for a remake of Seconds, I am very, very afraid. I'm not a fan of the new Manchurian Candidate and I'd frankly just like to see those films left alone.
Then again, aren't we due for another * Body Snatchers or another Blob? What's the statute of limitations on remakes anyway? How late can they go?
I say give it two or three more years and we'll be seeing the new Something about Mary or American Pie, just as soon as those movies' stars get to be old enough for cameo roles only.
posted by codger at 10:08 AM on March 14, 2005
« Older A gilded tomorrow | One Long Walk Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
When you left the cave, after your 20 year escape from the human race, did the light burn your eyes?
posted by eyeballkid at 4:26 PM on February 28, 2005