- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Looks like articles are also stuck on repeat.
Zing!
My crazy idea for Hollywood is instead of remaking and rebooting classic movies how about they remake or reboot flops or movies that had bad cgi and or bad characters and give them the respect and love they deserve?
“You don’t remake Ghostbusters, which is a perfect comedy film, with all-time great comedic actors doing career-defining performances. That’s not the movie you want to remake. You remake the movie that you CAN do better. You don’t remake something that’s utterly perfect.” ~ Rich Evans, star of The Ellen Show and Never Been Kissed
I seriously would pay to see a good treatment of the Highlander lore
The genAI is getting really close to producing feature-length films. And when that happens, there will be like 1 dude or a very small team creating banger movies. Smaller studios can take risks and write better stories.
There’s gonna be a period when artists will make good AI films, creating original movies. Artists who can’t get their project greenlit via normal means because studios only want maximum returns with sequels and reboots.
Getting those movies seen by people will be the hard part because of all the crap that will also be made with AI by non-artists. Hopefully, the cream will rise to the top.
Movies are so expensive I don’t want to gamble. I already know I’ll like 28 Years Later, and despite the last two flops, I’ll probably like the new JP. Not a huge Superman fan, but the trailer looks great.
Sorry ngl you sound like you have shit taste in movies and are the problem when it comes to shit movies still somehow making money lol
Just watched Jurassic World Rebirth today. It has pretty decent action, a bit different in tone from recent ones, predictable in some ways, but overall okay.
To be fair, I watched it because I have an AMC movie pass. I probably would’ve skipped it if I didn’t have that.
I still haven’t finished Dominion because that was so awful. I fell asleep twice in that one. Rebirth to me was far better than that.
There’s a bit of a difference between a re-packaged cash grab and the continuation of a series, or modern recontextualizing of a story.
We remake Batman like every 10-20 years because we’ve been writing Batman stories since the second world war. Batman is more of a legendary folk hero, an archetype to build stories around, like Paul Bunyan was to early settlers (And the indigenous people’s Glooscap, upon whom he was based.)
And then there’s concepts that keep inspiring more stories that can’t be contained in one film. Alex Garland is an incredibly talented writer of original films, he wrote 28 Days Later and returned to write 28 Years, which is a sequel and not a remake.
Always has been.
Even early movies were remakes of other media like books and plays into the newfangled moving pictures format. Many in the next couple of decades were serials and sequels of successful movies, because familiarity is like free advertising.
We are continuing the same trends that have always existed.
We are continuing the same trends that have always existed.
Well said. Heck, for most Western countries, theater begins with the Greeks and even they were doing that with their gods and heros. The Bible has four different books about Jesus and sometimes even the same story is slightly different between the authors. The stories of English legends like King Arthur and Robbin Hood have been told and retold so many times that we can figure out when certain characters or traits that are common today were introduced.
Yep. There was a “The Mark of Zorro” in 1920 with Douglas Fairbanks AND in 1940 with Tyrone Power.
There were versions of “The Count of Monte Cristo” in 1908, 1913, 1918, 1922, 1929, 1934, 1942, 1943, 1946, 1953, 1954, 1958, 1961, 1968, 1975, 1982, 1986, 1986, 1986 (yes, three versions in 86), 2002, and 2024… not counting the TV versions.
How can you put those two titles in the same category? One is a beloved horror series fans have been dying for, the other is corporate trash no one asked for or wants. These two are not the same.
Because it makes them the most money, either in actuality or just in their heads. Not like they’re doing it because there’s some guy that just thinks Jurassic Park is so cool.
And why do they make the most money? Because people love to go see them. It’s always Hollywood this and Hollywood that, never audiences this and audiences that.
Bingo.
Answer- because we keep going to see this slop and don’t go out to see actually original movies.
“Sinners” did pretty well.
They just wanna make more money.
It’s been this way for decades, if fans are just realizing it that says more about them.
