Remakes, sequels and adaptations.

[Batutta]

I just read about the umpteenth remake, a film based on the tv show Kung Fu, and started thinking about the death of originality in Hollywood. It seems like every announcement about a new project these days is of a remake, a sequel or an adaptation of a book. We're even starting to get remakes of remakes. There was a bit in the film The Yes Men, where the men pretend to be McDonald's executives pushing a new concept of recycling fecal matter back into hamburgers, and am starting to feel like this is what the film industry is doing, selling shit back to us.

[adaml]

It's all about selling you shi* that they know you'll pay for, and what better proof than if you've already paid for it before?

[Knoxworth]

Well the good news is that if they remake Kung Fu, there is a good possibility that Quentin Tarantino will buy himself the spot as director.

[capitalP]

There's a great article about this subject here http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/movies/2007/09/05/2007-09-05_a_warning_to_hollywood_about_buying_thre.html

It kind of makes you think. But Hollywood won't do anything about it until the remakes stop making money, as long as people are lined up at the box office the execs don't give a damn about originality... sad but true. We need to start a revolution... who's with me? :kali:

[Sad Max]

Heard yesterday that there is a remake planned, of The Day the Earth Stood Still.

Talk about pointless...

[Phil Maker]

They're doing a remake of A Clockwork Orange starring Johnny Depp. I love Johnny Depp but that's just blasphemy!

[Sad Max]

Well...A Clockwork Orange *is* an adaptation from another medium...

[Herman Witkam]

Well...A Clockwork Orange *is* an adaptation from another medium...

Well, yes.... but brilliantly realised, I think we can all agree. Of course you can always say you're not remaking the film, but creating another adaption of the book, like Soderbergh with Solaris :D

[Sad Max]

I appreciated Soderburgh's Solaris, as much as I liked Tarkofsky's. For their differences, as much as for anything else.

[mjjason]

They're doing a remake of A Clockwork Orange starring Johnny Depp. I love Johnny Depp but that's just blasphemy!

That is one of the worst ideas I have ever heard.

[Sad Max]

The adaptation-from-another-medium is not an "idea," it's a fact.

The original work was a novel, by Anthony Burgess.

[mjjason]

The adaptation-from-another-medium is not an "idea," it's a fact.

The original work was a novel, by Anthony Burgess.

I know, I love Anthony Burgess' book. I just think Kubrick filmed it perfectly and there is no need to do it again. The idea of someone shooting another film is what I find pathetic. Its like the Psycho film that came out a few years back. You just have to ask why?

[Herman Witkam]

I appreciated Soderburgh's Solaris, as much as I liked Tarkofsky's. For their differences, as much as for anything else.

Soderbergh's Solaris was a watchable film to me, but isn't on the same level as Tarkovsky's film (which next to Kubrick's 2001 may arguably be one of the best sci-fi pictures ever). I think Soderbergh far too much concentrated the plot on the dead wife (but hey, that's his interpretation of Lem's novel, and Tarkovsky also used only part of it). Soderbergh's film had some over-acting in it, by that Snow guy (who turns Snaut into Snow anyway?), and Soderbergh seemed to be too busy with showing off 'cool CGI' (Tarkovsky's FX are by far superior), missing the point that Tarkovsky makes excellently clear: We humans do not search for strange worlds and alien lifeforms out there; We look for another earth.

[Sad Max]

You just have to ask why?

Why?

$$$