[barmar]

 billw55, on 2014-October-16, 09:02, said:

Ken, I also tend to not like films with pointless violence. Even movies that are otherwise well regarded critically, such as Pulp Fiction.

Is the violence in that film really pointless? It's a movie about violent people.

[Oof Arted]

 y66, on 2014-October-15, 12:43, said:

That was such a good remake of The Seven Samurai.

Oh yes I do agree the Kurosawa was a Classic although in Black & White

[kenberg]

Huh! I have twice posted thoughts here, and they do not show up. If this shows up, I may edit it. Eventually.

OK, it snuck in.

Bill had mentioned Schindler's List and it brought Sophie's Choice to mind. SC is another excellent film that I do not want to see again.

We shall see if this disappears. I seem to have offended the Gods of the Internet.
Maybe that could be a movie title. Or a movie plot.
Or maybe I have seen it.

[blackshoe]

 kenberg, on 2014-October-16, 17:31, said:

Huh! I have twice posted thoughts here, and they do not show up. If this shows up, I may edit it. Eventually.

OK, it snuck in.

Bill had mentioned Schindler's List and it brought Sophie's Choice to mind. SC is another excellent film that I do not want to see again.

We shall see if this disappears. I seem to have offended the Gods of the Internet.
Maybe that could be a movie title. Or a movie plot.
Or maybe I have seen it.

Or you might be living it.

[barmar]

 kenberg, on 2014-October-16, 17:31, said:

Huh! I have twice posted thoughts here, and they do not show up. If this shows up, I may edit it. Eventually.

I see several posts from you in the thread: #2, #10, #14, #25, #35, #37.

[kenberg]

 barmar, on 2014-October-17, 09:16, said:

I see several posts from you in the thread: #2, #10, #14, #25, #35, #37.

Right. Thanks.

I found Bill's Post #40 of interest,and it was directed to me, so I responded. It didn't take. I tried again and it didn't take. My Firefox had been acting a little weird, and I think it was either that or it was me.

As I recall, besides mentioning Sophie's Choice, the main elements were that I agreed about Schindler's List and that I had not seen A Clockwork Orange. Back around then I had read several novels by Anthony Burgess (and I liked them since I read several) but I don't think I got to Orange. His novels are all pretty violent, but I remember them as being good. Just about any author has a repetitive style, at some point I usually feel it is time to move on to someone else and I think with Burgess this happened before I got to Orange.

Anyway, thanks for checking back.

[kenberg]

I just pushed RECORD for a re-make of Harvey. I would not so much say that I am opposed to remakining it as I am surprised. The part seems to be perfect for the James Stewart style. But I'll give the remake a try.

Quote

My mother said to me
"Elwood"
She called me Elwood
"In this world you have to be oh so smart or oh so nice"
For thirty years I tried smart.
I recommend nice

Or something like that, it's been a while.

[jjbrr]

Sandlot

[barmar]

 kenberg, on 2014-October-20, 19:56, said:

I just pushed RECORD for a re-make of Harvey. I would not so much say that I am opposed to remakining it as I am surprised. The part seems to be perfect for the James Stewart style. But I'll give the remake a try.

I remember this remake coming out, although I'm not sure I saw it. Then I IMDb'ed it, to see who was in it. And that reminded me that I haven't seen Harry Anderson in anything for a while. He's apparently mostly dropped out of Hollywood for the past dozen years -- his only appearance was in a 2008 episode of "Third Rock From the Sun" where several "Night Court" cast members appeared. But he's also in a new movie coming out this year.

[Fluffy]

I saw a letter from Stanley Kubrick threatening another director to death because he was planning on making an Odissey in Space sequel, and Stanley found he couldn't stop he legally. Not a remake though.

I am with Cyberyeti, the only films I don't want a remake are those who suck in first place, Beowulf (christopher lambert) or Zoo Warriors (Chinnese film) come to mind.

[jjbrr]

 Fluffy, on 2014-October-21, 15:36, said:

I saw a letter from Stanley Kubrick threatening another director to death because he was planning on making an Odissey in Space sequel, and Stanley found he couldn't stop he legally. Not a remake though.

I am with Cyberyeti, the only films I don't want a remake are those who suck in first place, Beowulf (christopher lambert) or Zoo Warriors (Chinnese film) come to mind.

hwæt?

[GreenMan]

 Fluffy, on 2014-October-21, 15:36, said:

I am with Cyberyeti, the only films I don't want a remake are those who suck in first place, Beowulf (christopher lambert) or Zoo Warriors (Chinnese film) come to mind.

Sometimes a movie's suckage is a good reason for a remake. Example from TV is Battlestar Galactica, which was pretty bad the first time around and remarkably powerful the second.

Most movies don't get remade because they're addressing some common theme in a way slightly (or not at all) different from what came before, and it's just as easy to start fresh with your own wrinkle, especially since you don't have to negotiate a license to use the previous characters or what have you.

I read somewhere that the Spider-Man movies are getting remade just so the rights to the franchise don't revert back to Marvel from Sony.

[mike777]

to be fair there are three basic themes in literature and movies, these themes are very well known.


btw your comments about marvel are just legally and logically wrong in every sense of the word.


The theme about Casablanca..the story is common....the art is where we movie lovers marvel.


For example take Star Wars. The theme is common...the story is common yet we marvel at Star Wars 1970's...and worry about star wars 2015. The majesty is in the art the wonder of art.

[GreenMan]

 mike777, on 2014-October-21, 22:55, said:

btw your comments about marvel are just legally and logically wrong in every sense of the word.

The movie rights contracts for Marvel comic-book characters revert back to Disney/Marvel if X years go by without a movie being made. It's already happened with the Punisher, for instance. Word is that Sony/Columbia hasn't been happy with the box office for the last two Spider-Man films, and no wonder since that ground was still so recently trodden, but they'll keep at it because they're still making money and even the smaller paydays are better than just letting the rights expire.

[Winstonm]

I think the worst remake I've seen is The Day the Earth Stood Still.

[Cyberyeti]

 GreenMan, on 2014-October-21, 22:41, said:

Sometimes a movie's suckage is a good reason for a remake. Example from TV is Battlestar Galactica, which was pretty bad the first time around and remarkably powerful the second.

If they butcher a good book or TV series that's one thing, that could be remade, I was talking about original material that just wasn't very good.

[blackshoe]

 mike777, on 2014-October-21, 22:55, said:

btw your comments about marvel are just legally and logically wrong in every sense of the word.

His comment was that he had read something somewhere. How is that legally and logically wrong?

[kenberg]

 barmar, on 2014-October-21, 15:23, said:

I remember this remake coming out, although I'm not sure I saw it. Then I IMDb'ed it, to see who was in it. And that reminded me that I haven't seen Harry Anderson in anything for a while. He's apparently mostly dropped out of Hollywood for the past dozen years -- his only appearance was in a 2008 episode of "Third Rock From the Sun" where several "Night Court" cast members appeared. But he's also in a new movie coming out this year.

I just watched this remake of Harvey and it is a good illustration of one of the points of view. Harvey, the original with James Stewart, was a lot of fun. I think that Stewart was in the original stage version as well. You couold, if you wanted to be a little harsh, say that Harvey was a corny movie and Stewart a corny actor. Maybe true, but it was fun. The remake just didn't work. I asked Becky if she thought she would have liked it if she had seen only this remade version, and she thinks no. I agree. The original had the right role matched with the right person and it's hard to improve on that. I can easily understand not much liking the whole idea of Harvey, but if you go with the idea, then in this case you go with the original.

[Winstonm]

 kenberg, on 2014-October-22, 20:08, said:

I just watched this remake of Harvey and it is a good illustration of one of the points of view. Harvey, the original with James Stewart, was a lot of fun. I think that Stewart was in the original stage version as well. You couold, if you wanted to be a little harsh, say that Harvey was a corny movie and Stewart a corny actor. Maybe true, but it was fun. The remake just didn't work. I asked Becky if she thought she would have liked it if she had seen only this remade version, and she thinks no. I agree. The original had the right role matched with the right person and it's hard to improve on that. I can easily understand not much liking the whole idea of Harvey, but if you go with the idea, then in this case you go with the original.

To my way of thinking, the marriage of role to a specific actor/actress is what makes a movie near-perfect. I can't imagine different actors improving a makeover of Lawrence of Arabia, for example. It is not so much the quality of the movie (I, too, liked the original Harvey) but (IMO) the pairing of script with the right actors that makes for special moments.

[jdeegan]

 Winstonm, on 2014-October-22, 20:42, said:

To my way of thinking, the marriage of role to a specific actor/actress is what makes a movie near-perfect. I can't imagine different actors improving a makeover of Lawrence of Arabia, for example. It is not so much the quality of the movie (I, too, liked the original Harvey) but (IMO) the pairing of script with the right actors that makes for special moments.

"When God made you a fool, he gave you a fool's face" That's about as good as it gets. Don't "Play it again Sam".