The Hot Blog

On MY blog I posted the 5 rules for movie remakes. I generally hate the idea of remakes, but there are IMHO 5 conditions under which it's ok to do so. :-)

Vic

well, along these lines, i've just discovered that there is a remake in the works for "near dark." i noted my displeasure to the person who told me.

and of course, part of the problem is the people with money do not want to remake the flops and make them better. to their mind, a flop will always be a flop (not everything can turn into "nightwind"). no, they want to remake hits. which just leads to disappointment to those who loved the original

I go back and forth on remakes. I usually get a slight twinge of excitement when hearing that a much-loved (but actually crappy) film from my childhood is going to get the update, but they generally disappoint (or flat-out infuriate). Stupidly, I still hold hope for the remakes of CAPRICORN ONE, WESTWORLD and LOGAN'S RUN, becuase the originals' 1970's television-production levels now make campy what I once took seriously. Of course, I was equally as hopeful for POSEIDON, THE AMITYVILLE HORROR, PLANET OF THE APES and THE FOG.
That being said, I still can't believe that Universal hasn't greenlit a new EARTHQUAKE. To think what could be with Sensurround today. . .

Corporate structures are whacky. Especially in terms of art and the way art is turned into commerce. They keep cranking out the remakes no matter how this seems to aggrevate a portion of the movie-going audience. Nevertheless; I am all about the remakes for one reason: They lead to an appreciation of the original work as well as the truly orginal and genuine ideas we discover each year.

That's part of the point, is that every time a movie gets remade it gets people to buy/rent the old one, so they get an added value for their marketing.

well, bmcintire, you'll get your wish on one of those movies. they are planning a re-make of "logan's run."

I feel like a remake of something like "Logans Run" could be cool but films like "Straw Dogs" and "The Birds" simply have NO reason to be remade.

"well, along these lines, i've just discovered that there is a remake in the works for "near dark." i noted my displeasure to the person who told me.

and of course, part of the problem is the people with money do not want to remake the flops and make them better. to their mind, a flop will always be a flop (not everything can turn into "nightwind"). no, they want to remake hits. which just leads to disappointment to those who loved the original."

Except Near Dark wasn't a hit when it came out. While the film has enjoyed a cult following since its 1987 release, its $3.4M gross didn't even cover its $5M budget, not including what little P&A DeLaurentiis put into the release.

"The Hidden" did three times the business the same year. Where is the remake of "The Hidden?"

dudes. hollywood has been churning out remakes for as long as it has been making movies. this is not a new phenomenon.

Yes, but I believe they are making more remakes now than they ever have before.

I think the reason there are so many more remakes now is that over a hundred years into the medium of film, people have stopped coming up with original ideas. So, a screenwriter will write something semi-original, but close enough in spirit to a past movie and the studio will say, "hey, that old movie is in our catalog, why don't we just slap that original title on this new flick and we'll have name recognition."

Of course, it probably doesn't happen exactly that way, but I think that's a big part of it. Instead of making something similar in spirit, studios are opting to make films that have that name recognition.

I always wondered, though, if someone who had no idea who directed which one and didn't know which one came out first, etc, saw Psycho and the Gus Van Sant remake version, which one would they think is the better film? I think the remake is absolutely terrible because I think Vince Vaughn is playing the part as a stereotype of a homosexual, but I wonder what someone who was completely objective would think.

might seem that way, but check out this list and you'll see that it's pretty spread out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_film_remakes_A-M

I looked at a random letter (L) on that list and counted 39 titles, of which 17 were/will be made in the 2000s, or 44%.

Just when I thought the movie was gonna get past the border checkpoint and into land of undiscovered greatness, I just read they're gonna redo Susanne Bier's 2004 Danish film "Brothers," with Maguire and Gyllenhaal. Poo I say. Poo!

After The Wedding is also being remade in English.

Since they are apparently not going to release the DVD of Liz Taylor and Richard Burton in Joseph Losey's "Boom!", which is such a camp treat that John Waters often claims it is his favorite movie, I suggest they remake it under the title "The Milk Train" and star Meryl Streep (or Glenn Close) opposite Brad Pit.

hell, they announced a remake of "the orphanage" maybe a day after it screened

I would like to see a double feature where John Waters remakes a David Lynch film and vice versa.

jeffmcm, you should also count the ten remakes that are in the right column (all of which pre-date 2000) which would bring the total to 49 and the % down to roughly 34 that were done/are planned for 2000. that's still kinda high, but also considering there are more movies to remake as time goes on...well, you dig. my underlying point is that it's always happened and is not a recent phenomenon. our grandparents were also saying that Hollywood has run out of ideas.

Which classic movies are off-limits in terms of remake? Will we ever see a remake of Star Wars? Gone With the Wind? E.T.?

I used to think movies like Psycho were off-limits, but we know what happened to that one.

I saw the trailer for the "American" version of "Funny Games," now is that a "remake" when it's the same writer/director? The trailer was so-so (pitch black death comedy is tough to pull off) but it reminded me I still need to see the original.

Petaluma, you should definitely check out the original although the remake looks to be something like a shot for shot redo. But, remember George Sluizer did a remake of his own film, "The Vanishing" in 1993 with Kiefer Sutherland and Jeff Bridges that paled in comparison to his own previous version. And I saw the remake before I saw the original, so it wasn't a matter of the remake coming second and all the surprises being ruined for me.

I was really looking forward to the remake of Funny Games, simply because with Michael Haneke at the helm I figured it would be different from most other remakes, something more subversive. But, it really saddens me that it seems to be almost an exact remake and what is the point of that? I mean, he already made the movie once, why make it a second time in English?

Noah; nice TV column last week, but the "semi-original thought" thing is hokey. We are a 100 years into this medium. Yet... we still get new and different stories almost every month. There's still great stories out there being told on film. Which your argument totally overlooks. Nevertheless; remakes are what they are and it's not like you have bands ceasing to do cover versions of songs. People like retelling stories. They always have. They always will. Place your mythology and religion shenanigans here.

I agree, IO, that there are new and different great stories being told on film. I mean, that's why I love movies so much. I think the studios are more to blame for the regurgitation of ideas than the filmmakers is really more of what my point was. I'm not one of those people who thinks that nobody makes good movies anymore, as I tend to prefer modern film because I think it should be easier to learn from past mistakes when it comes to making movies these days.

And yes, cover versions of songs are accepted and revivals of classic plays occur on Broadway all the time to the point where the Tonys even have an award for best revival. I do think that with the technology of film, though, you could always just get the DVD of the original so there is less of a point to a remake of a good film.

There's an Australian movie called "Lucky Miles" I caught this summer visiting my girlfriend. It's one of the year's best. A lot of American critics are going to fall in love. And I'll bet dollars to donuts the American remake will be here inside of three years and set outside of El Paso instead of outside of Perth. Mark... my... words...

(weird, the exact second I typed "dollars to donuts" somebody on ER just said it)

For what it is worth: Caught a midnight screening of Resident Evil: Extinction in a Houston megaplex a few hours ago. And while the crowd was respectable, it was far from a sell-out. On the other hand, on another screen, Across the Universe was posted as a sellout as early as 11:30 pm.

Notice you've got The Thing in your list. The remake was actually closer to the original John W. Campbell short story.
This also seems to be the case with Last Man Standing which seems closer to Yojimbo than Fistful of Dollars.

Doug R: That might be because Last Man Standing was an authorized remake, while Fistful of Dollars required Kurosawa to contact his lawyers. No kidding.

And, of course, all three movies are indebted to Dashiell Hammett's Red Harvest.

You may have heard that Tom Hanks is to produce a movie of Ben Macintyre's biography of the real-life WWII double agent Eddie Chapman for New Line. I have just finished it and it's absolutely terrific. You should all get a copy, even jeffmcm (if he has finished colouring in his current book). Here's the New York Times review:

Lies: A Spy Plays Two Sides

AGENT ZIGZAG A True Story of Nazi Espionage, Love, and Betrayal

By Ben Macintyre

By WILLIAM GRIMES
Published: September 12, 2007

On the moonlit night of Jan. 29, 1943, a mighty blast awakened residents near the De Havilland aircraft factory on the outskirts of London. As dawn broke, workers returning to the plant, which produced the speedy, efficient Mosquito bomber, shook their heads as they surveyed a scene of awesome devastation. Yet all was not as it appeared. In fact, none of it was. The entire event was staged, all for the benefit of the amazing Agent Zigzag.

Agent Zigzag, known to friends, lovers and the police as Eddie Chapman, was by any measure Britain’s most unlikely intelligence asset. He was a longtime criminal turned double agent who, in the course of his career as a spy, would flit back and forth between Britain and Germany, occupied France and occupied Norway on one top-secret mission after another. His incredible wartime adventures, recounted in Ben Macintyre’s rollicking, spellbinding “Agent Zigzag,” blend the spy-versus-spy machinations of John le Carré with the high farce of Evelyn Waugh.

Eddie Chapman was a handsome, amoral charmer with a Ronald Colman mustache, a taste for sharp suits and an insatiable appetite for danger. A career robbing safes and cash registers, punctuated by spells in prison, took an abrupt turn in 1941. After completing a three-year prison term on the Isle of Jersey, he emerged to find himself, like the rest of the islanders, living under Nazi rule. In a rude series of events he was whisked away to a prison in occupied France, where he was recruited as a German spy. On his first mission to Britain he immediately offered his services to his native country.

Britain and Germany, each mistakenly convinced that the other had a highly efficient spy network, were desperate to acquire agents. Mr. Chapman, sniffing an opportunity, jumped for it. Mr. Macintyre, a writer at large for The Times of London, paints a detailed picture, supported by newly opened MI5 files on espionage training in the Third Reich and Britain’s desperate scramble to throw the enemy off course through a campaign of disinformation.

In this fevered atmosphere Mr. Chapman flourished like an exotic flower. He was heedless of danger and cool under pressure. A born liar, he could withstand hours of interrogation without breaking a sweat. He became fluent in French and German, polished his already considerable skills as an explosives expert, learned how to write with invisible ink and quickly mastered the art of extracting large wads of cash from his German and British handlers.

Both sides were unsure what they had gotten themselves into. “It is not easy to judge the workings of Chapman’s mind,” one British spy handler reported. That was an understatement. On his first mission to Germany Mr. Chapman obtained two explosive devices disguised as lumps of coal, which, he informed German intelligence, he intended to place in the bunkers of the merchant ship he had used for transport to neutral Portugal. (Because the British had broken German codes early in the war, they could monitor all intelligence traffic relating to Mr. Chapman.)

Had Mr. Chapman turned into a triple agent? As monitors held their breath in London, Mr. Chapman returned to the ship and turned over the bombs to the captain, assuming, rightly, that this new bit of German technology would fascinate the boys back home.

Mr. Chapman was feckless and erratic but, in his own way, dependable. “Slowly at first, and with great care, Chapman began to build up a stock of secrets that would be of supreme interest to British intelligence,” Mr. Macintyre writes.

His German credentials guaranteed by the successful De Havilland ruse in Britain, Mr. Chapman enjoyed enormous prestige in the Third Reich, where he assumed the status of a superspy. When he proposed that he be rewarded with a ringside seat at one of the great Nazi Party rallies, all the better to gaze upon Hitler, his drunken, aristocratic German handler promised to make it happen. Mr. Chapman suggested to the British that he take advantage of the situation to assassinate Hitler. The offer was rejected without explanation.

“MI5’s files are suspiciously silent on the subject,” Mr. Macintyre writes.

As the war progressed, demands from both sides escalated. The Germans, convinced that the British had developed a submarine-finding bomb, dispatched Mr. Chapman to get the plans. British intelligence was more than happy to send back some artful fakes. For the British Mr. Chapman supplied information on the V-1 rocket and transmitted false data to Germany about where the V-1s were falling. For stellar work throughout the war, the Germans awarded him the Iron Cross; he is the only British citizen to be granted one.

No task was too dangerous, or ridiculous, for Zigzag. “What Chapman seemed to want was another breathless episode in the unfolding drama of his own life,” Mr. Macintyre writes.

After D-Day, with desperation mounting, the Germans sent Mr. Chapman on an absurdly ambitious mission to turn the tide of the war, but not without giving him a party first. Nursing a colossal hangover and clutching a suitcase filled with photographic equipment, Zigzag parachuted over Cambridgeshire and promptly vomited the remains of his banquet on his overalls. From a farmer’s telephone he rang up headquarters in London and announced: “It’s Eddie. I’m back, with a new task.”

Zigzag, despite his many talents, did not fit into the peacetime plans of MI5. His involvement in rigged dog races toward the end of the war certainly dampened enthusiasm for a continued role with British intelligence. Wisely, MI5 paid him off, wiped his legal slate clean and waved farewell. Agent Zigzag was no more. Mission accomplished.

You may have heard that Tom Hanks is to produce a movie of Ben Macintyre's biography of the real-life WWII double agent Eddie Chapman for New Line. I have just finished it and it's absolutely terrific. You should all get a copy, even jeffmcm (if he has finished colouring in his current book). Here's the New York Times review:

Lies: A Spy Plays Two Sides

AGENT ZIGZAG A True Story of Nazi Espionage, Love, and Betrayal

By Ben Macintyre

By WILLIAM GRIMES
Published: September 12, 2007

On the moonlit night of Jan. 29, 1943, a mighty blast awakened residents near the De Havilland aircraft factory on the outskirts of London. As dawn broke, workers returning to the plant, which produced the speedy, efficient Mosquito bomber, shook their heads as they surveyed a scene of awesome devastation. Yet all was not as it appeared. In fact, none of it was. The entire event was staged, all for the benefit of the amazing Agent Zigzag.

Agent Zigzag, known to friends, lovers and the police as Eddie Chapman, was by any measure Britain’s most unlikely intelligence asset. He was a longtime criminal turned double agent who, in the course of his career as a spy, would flit back and forth between Britain and Germany, occupied France and occupied Norway on one top-secret mission after another. His incredible wartime adventures, recounted in Ben Macintyre’s rollicking, spellbinding “Agent Zigzag,” blend the spy-versus-spy machinations of John le Carré with the high farce of Evelyn Waugh.

Eddie Chapman was a handsome, amoral charmer with a Ronald Colman mustache, a taste for sharp suits and an insatiable appetite for danger. A career robbing safes and cash registers, punctuated by spells in prison, took an abrupt turn in 1941. After completing a three-year prison term on the Isle of Jersey, he emerged to find himself, like the rest of the islanders, living under Nazi rule. In a rude series of events he was whisked away to a prison in occupied France, where he was recruited as a German spy. On his first mission to Britain he immediately offered his services to his native country.

Britain and Germany, each mistakenly convinced that the other had a highly efficient spy network, were desperate to acquire agents. Mr. Chapman, sniffing an opportunity, jumped for it. Mr. Macintyre, a writer at large for The Times of London, paints a detailed picture, supported by newly opened MI5 files on espionage training in the Third Reich and Britain’s desperate scramble to throw the enemy off course through a campaign of disinformation.

In this fevered atmosphere Mr. Chapman flourished like an exotic flower. He was heedless of danger and cool under pressure. A born liar, he could withstand hours of interrogation without breaking a sweat. He became fluent in French and German, polished his already considerable skills as an explosives expert, learned how to write with invisible ink and quickly mastered the art of extracting large wads of cash from his German and British handlers.

Both sides were unsure what they had gotten themselves into. “It is not easy to judge the workings of Chapman’s mind,” one British spy handler reported. That was an understatement. On his first mission to Germany Mr. Chapman obtained two explosive devices disguised as lumps of coal, which, he informed German intelligence, he intended to place in the bunkers of the merchant ship he had used for transport to neutral Portugal. (Because the British had broken German codes early in the war, they could monitor all intelligence traffic relating to Mr. Chapman.)

Had Mr. Chapman turned into a triple agent? As monitors held their breath in London, Mr. Chapman returned to the ship and turned over the bombs to the captain, assuming, rightly, that this new bit of German technology would fascinate the boys back home.

Mr. Chapman was feckless and erratic but, in his own way, dependable. “Slowly at first, and with great care, Chapman began to build up a stock of secrets that would be of supreme interest to British intelligence,” Mr. Macintyre writes.

His German credentials guaranteed by the successful De Havilland ruse in Britain, Mr. Chapman enjoyed enormous prestige in the Third Reich, where he assumed the status of a superspy. When he proposed that he be rewarded with a ringside seat at one of the great Nazi Party rallies, all the better to gaze upon Hitler, his drunken, aristocratic German handler promised to make it happen. Mr. Chapman suggested to the British that he take advantage of the situation to assassinate Hitler. The offer was rejected without explanation.

“MI5’s files are suspiciously silent on the subject,” Mr. Macintyre writes.

As the war progressed, demands from both sides escalated. The Germans, convinced that the British had developed a submarine-finding bomb, dispatched Mr. Chapman to get the plans. British intelligence was more than happy to send back some artful fakes. For the British Mr. Chapman supplied information on the V-1 rocket and transmitted false data to Germany about where the V-1s were falling. For stellar work throughout the war, the Germans awarded him the Iron Cross; he is the only British citizen to be granted one.

No task was too dangerous, or ridiculous, for Zigzag. “What Chapman seemed to want was another breathless episode in the unfolding drama of his own life,” Mr. Macintyre writes.

After D-Day, with desperation mounting, the Germans sent Mr. Chapman on an absurdly ambitious mission to turn the tide of the war, but not without giving him a party first. Nursing a colossal hangover and clutching a suitcase filled with photographic equipment, Zigzag parachuted over Cambridgeshire and promptly vomited the remains of his banquet on his overalls. From a farmer’s telephone he rang up headquarters in London and announced: “It’s Eddie. I’m back, with a new task.”

Zigzag, despite his many talents, did not fit into the peacetime plans of MI5. His involvement in rigged dog races toward the end of the war certainly dampened enthusiasm for a continued role with British intelligence. Wisely, MI5 paid him off, wiped his legal slate clean and waved farewell. Agent Zigzag was no more. Mission accomplished.

Apologies for the double post.

Feel free to apologize for all the other crap you've posted in the past, Sinclair.

Feel free to apologize for all the other crap you've posted in the past, Sinclair.

And a link to that story would have sufficed.

I do not post crap, though sometimes, like I am doing right now, I reply to a piece of it.

While we're on the subject of crap -- Southland Tales trailer, anyone? Looks like a bad version of a bad Gilliam movie. Feel free to attack me about the Gilliam remark, but please, back up the positive Southland comments, if possible.

Aris, you nailed it.

it looked like a dumbed down version of a Gilliam flick. I'll still see it, just because i enjoy watching a good misfire, especially one with the baggage this movie has.

i keep thinking they should have paid attention to the Fountain's release. November?

I think it should be underlined that everyone was on their best blogging behavior until Ian Sinclair showed up.
Unfortunately I have trouble reading long books because of my rigorous masturbation schedule, Ian. Or if you prefer, rigourous.

Meanwhile, Southland Tales - if J. Hoberman calls it a masterpiece, I'll give it a chance in theaters.

So what're you guys listening to...last time we dropped music names, it was strangely similar.

I'm LOVING the new Josh Ritter...frigging brilliant! The first 3 songs are golden (much like the first 3 on his previous album) and I've really warmed to the rest of the album.

Ike Reilly Assasination, anyone? Anyone? Possibly the best, hard working, signer/songwriter driven band working right now. Kind of like a dirtier Springsteen. I'm seeing him tonight in SF (Ike, not Bruce). I reccommend the newer album "We Belong to the Staggering Evening."

I also just downloa...errr...bought the yet to be released Allison Krauss/Robert Plant album and it's fucking amazing. Who woulda thought to put those 2 together? T-Bone Burnett produced it too...it's simply great. Eerie, soft, Americana songs with some great covers thrown in. In fact, it could be all covers, not sure. Great album though.

Listening to Howard Blake's haunting score for Ridley Scott's THE DUELLISTS and the new Ian Hunter CD "Shrunken Heads."

A quick google revealed that the video of the first single off the Ian Hunter CD is just out. Check it out. Great song.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki620ZxtlMU

The new Josh Ritter is excellent (though the bonus cd isn't much of anything). I don't like any of the songs on the album as much as I did the first few on Animal Years, but the whole album is definitely among the best of the year.

I'm also enjoying The White Stripes' Icky Thump, which is a nice return-to-form for them, though I fear they'll never be as good as Elephant again (and I hope Jack makes some more music with The Raconteurs, as that album was amazing).

And, just for fun, I was listening to some Breeders, for old time's sake. :)

Ian Hunter, Sinclair? Who are you fooling? We all know you listen to Noel Coward exclusively.

Collide does a great cover of "White Rabbit" during the closing credits of Resident Evil: Extinction.

I'm not sure the Broadway revival/movie remake holds up, as there is no way the original stage production can be experienced as a comparison.

The problem with most remakes is that they are not done out of respect for the material or the desire to find a new angle, but merely the opportunity to exploit a well-known title. This is the principle reason why most remakes are of films from the 70s and 80s--that's as far back as the awareness of most studio execs goes; a blessing, as it will spare us the dreaded remakes of CASABLANCA, CITIZEN KANE, et al.

Finally -- agreement!!! From my favorite writer's (Jonathan Carroll) blog:

A few years ago, a really terrific independent film called THE TAO OF STEVE came and went with little fanfare. . . . It is smart, funny, and so incisive about genuine matters of the heart that you don't know whether to grin or be embarrassed. The story is about a slacker who lives with a bunch of other slackers, all of them aimlessly frisbeeing through their days. Then our boy meets a terrific woman and because he's finally found something that matters in his life, he works hard to get out of his 'pass the bong life' and amount to something so he can be worthy of her. If this plot sounds familiar, it's because the flavor- of- the- moment film KNOCKED UP has an almost identical storyline. What I don't understand though is STEVE is a much better movie than KNOCKED UP in just about every way. Yet one film is loved by both audience and critics, makes a ton of money from the moment it appears, Oscar nominations... while the other disappears with only a few traces. I keep thinking about the woman who both wrote and directed STEVE and how she must feel about this matter.

Maybe she feels her script should have been funnier, her lead far more charasmatic, and her supporting cast up to the task of supporting the strong leads rather than being bland background fodder.

Hey Cadavra, I saw you at the Egyptian screening last night but you seemed to be mobbed so I didn't say hello. The movie was lots of fun though and I hope to see it in its full glory - from a conversation I overheard you having - on DVD.

Hey, I LOVED "Tao of Steve" and I own the DVD. Donal Logue is one of my favorite actors as well. But "Tao of Steve" is totally different than "Knocked Up." I can't even begin to go over how different. I admire Carroll for bringing up such a great film, but the two are cinematic apples and oranges.

i LOVE apples and oranges!

Joe; Across the Universe selling out? INCONCEIVABLE! Now... if you want to listen to the music. Go listen to some Colbie Callat, Grace Potter and the Nocturnals, and follow that all up with a little JUSTICE! Yep... all over the map. All over the freakin map.

The new Josh Ritter is good but just not in the same league as his last album. He added too much distortion to the vocals, which is inexcusable for a singer as good as he is. ("Still Beating" on the new one is very nice, though.)

My favorite album of the year so far is Stephen Kellogg & The Sixers' "Glassjaw Boxer." Just gorgeous, again and again.

The new Iron & Wine disc has some good parts, and the most recent Joe Purdy album would be awesome if I could buy it instead of just streaming it from his website.

IO-Colbie Callat? Are you a chick? That frigging "hit" is inane bullshit.

I just watched the DVD of "Death Proof" and dammit, I love that movie. I LOVE it. I think it's perfect. I'm not sure the new cut adds anything except for making the experience longer which works for me.

The DVD extras are also plentiful on the surface, but rather weak on the ole player. There's a fun little thing about Tarantino's editor, Sally Menke and an AMAZING long take of the smoking HOT Mary Elizabeth Winstead singing "Baby, it's You" a-capella. Who is that girl? She's hot as hell and has an amazing voice.

I find the Tarantino/Menke relationship fascinating. So often a director will be likea hyperactive kid and their favorite editor is the calm, rational one bringing them down to earth. It seems to be the same with Scorsese & Schoonmaker and Spielberg & Kahn.

I should have clarified the point of my post - I just wanted somebody else to show me I'm not crazy for think "Knocked Up" is one of the most overrated comedies in a while. I chuckled a few times, but found much of it boring and not that funny. I loved "Virgin" but thought "Knocked Up" was long, huge misfire. But I seemed to be a lone island.

I should have clarified the point of my post - I just wanted somebody else to show me I'm not crazy for thinking "Knocked Up" is one of the most overrated comedies in a while. I chuckled a few times, but found much of it boring and not that funny. I loved "Virgin" but thought "Knocked Up" was long, huge misfire. But I seemed to be a lone island.

I don't think it's a four-star masterpiece like so many do, if for no other reason than because Katherine Heigl's character is fairly underwritten, but I enjoyed it quite a bit anyway.

i've heard about a proposed casablanca remake for years now. i'm hoping The Good German is as close as we ever get, as well as proof that it's a pointless exercise.

I remember years back we had a great conversation about the films that would never be remade.

I picked Gone With the Wind. I remember someone picking Wizard of Oz, Citizen Kane, Doctor Strangelove. My favorite was the guy who picked Psycho. I think it was like a year later that they announced the remake.

Was Wizard of Oz already remade as The Wiz? Or doesn't that count?

IO, Justice's album [cross] is A-M-A-Z-I-N-G, isn't it? One of my top 5 of the year so far for sure.

i don't think you can call The Wiz a remake. It's like calling "Love Don't Cost a Thing" a remake of "Can't Buy Me Love", or "Soul Plane" a remake of "Airplane"

i just saw that they are remaking "the day the earth stood still" with keanu reeves as the lead. i think i just threw up in my mouth a little

Camel; CROSS does indeed kick all sorts of ass. Petulma; did you miss the whole "all over the map" line in that post? If you dont want to wiggle your toes, then it's not on me brah.

You have it right, ManWithNoName.

Sounds like I liked it more than you, but the weak sister overall. Both 40YOV and Superbad kill it.

40YOV at least had a lot of heart, but Knocked Up has the most heart of any Apatow film. I may be alone in all of this... but this has never stopped me before!

It's not my toes that need wiggling, Io...it's my nose...or whatever rhymy crap that broad is on about...

Fine, it's a "Reimagining" of The Wizard of Oz.

Like MY FAIR LADY is a "reimagining" of PYGMALION?

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: