Remaking the Warriors???

Dr. Giganto · 05-03-2005, 01:30 PM

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0423512/

Apparently its gonna be doen by MTV. All I can say is "DEAR GOD NO!!!!!!!"

Joseph T. Cool · 05-03-2005, 01:51 PM

I have heard that Tony Scott is directing and it's going to be an updated take on the movie and not a traditional remake.

They said expect a lot of martial arts and "Matrix" style combat, whatever that means.

Why are so many remakes happening lately? Can't Holywood come up with any original ideas anymore?

Sheesh!

AudioSavior · 05-03-2005, 01:55 PM

Most movies come from books or are remakes.

Joseph T. Cool · 05-03-2005, 02:05 PM

No, I disagree. Any film can be inspired by books or other movies. There have been some original ideas in cinema. What I am referring to is a blatant copy of something.

Only in the late 90's until now has this "boom" of re-makes from the 70's to Late 80's TV shows and movies happened.

I don't mind re-hashing ideas like the new "Bewitched" movie where they tweak the characters and try something new.

But just to make a movie to make a quick buck and not trying to make a good script is not right. There have been many such examples.

Jackie Pies · 05-03-2005, 03:39 PM

i agree w/ spidey, i work at a subrun movie theater and all the new movies are remakes, sequels, etc. it pisses me off when they just churn crap out.
if they remake/ redo whatever the warriors i'll be pissed. i loved that movie and i can't wait to play the game.

AudioSavior · 05-03-2005, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spidey

No, I disagree. Any film can be inspired by books or other movies. There have been some original ideas in cinema. What I am referring to is a blatant copy of something.

Only in the late 90's until now has this "boom" of re-makes from the 70's to Late 80's TV shows and movies happened.

I don't mind re-hashing ideas like the new "Bewitched" movie where they tweak the characters and try something new.

But just to make a movie to make a quick buck and not trying to make a good script is not right. There have been many such examples.

So you only like it if it is on your terms then is what you are saying lol. They been doing remakes forever. Scareface was even a remake.

A blatant copy of something of something is simply a remake. Saying it a blatant copy of something when it is meant to be is twisting things. You make it sound like they are trying to fool us.

I am sure of the internet was round when Scareface came out, some 70 yr old man would be on the iternet complaining about how they need to stop making remakes. No one has a problem with things until something they don't like comes along and then it needs to stop...

Joseph T. Cool · 05-03-2005, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kal-El

So you only like it if it is on your terms then is what you are saying lol. They been doing remakes forever. Scareface was even a remake.

A blatant copy of something of something is simply a remake. Saying it a blatant copy of something when it is meant to be is twisting things. You make it sound like they are trying to fool us.

I am sure of the internet was round when Scareface came out, some 70 yr old man would be on the iternet complaining about how they need to stop making remakes. No one has a problem with things until something they don't like comes along and then it needs to stop...

What I mean Kal is when a movie is re-done there needs to be a fresh take on the matter. Why re-do something that has already been done successfully? Is there more to say when you are just repeating what was done before with new actors? No I don't think so. It's just Holywood trying to captilize on the old tv show craze.

Re-makes that copy plots word for word should be avoided all together. Whether you think I am twisting words or not this is my core point. Movies that copy characters but try to improve upon the original plot and make the script more interesting I have no problem with. You understand? If not sorry I can't explain it better.

I am only calling for new and interesting ideas. Not re-telling a successful story. If you want to see the same story that was told in a movie 10 years ago today, I am sure you can get the same satisfaction from seeing a play.

I don't feel this is a complaint just a call for people to be more creative.

Which would you rather see in 2010...."Back to the Future" starring Frankie Muniz from "Malcom in the Middle" or a fresh and new story that gives actors a chance to show off their talents and introduce new stories to an audience?

Get my point?

AudioSavior · 05-03-2005, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spidey

What I mean Kal is when a movie is re-done there needs to be a fresh take on the matter. Why re-do something that has already been done successfully? Is there more to say when you are just repeating what was done before with new actors? No I don't think so. It's just Holywood trying to captilize on the old tv show craze.

Re-makes that copy plots word for word should be avoided all together. Whether you think I am twisting words or not this is my core point. Movies that copy characters but try to improve upon the original plot and make the script more interesting I have no problem with. You understand? If not sorry I can't explain it better.

I am only calling for new and interesting ideas. Not re-telling a successful story. If you want to see the same story that was told in a movie 10 years ago today, I am sure you can get the same satisfaction from seeing a play.

I don't feel this is a complaint just a call for people to be more creative.

Which would you rather see in 2010...."Back to the Future" starring Frankie Muniz from "Malcom in the Middle" or a fresh and new story that gives actors a chance to show off their talents and introduce new stories to an audience?

Get my point?

Ok but what movies are you talking bout? Most remakes I see don't follow the same story and change the charaters a bit. There was a Spider-man movie. There was a Batman Movie. You change that and people complain. You can't please anyone these days with anything that is done. If something was sucsesful, why not do it again because chances are newer a generation aren't going to see the older version. And you said the magic word, "successful". Imagine if they hadn't of remade Scareface?

Joseph T. Cool · 05-03-2005, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kal-El

Ok but what movies are you talking bout? Most remakes I see don't follow the same story and change the charaters a bit. There was a Spider-man movie. There was a Batman Movie. You change that and people complain. You can't please anyone these days with anything that is done. If something was sucsesful, why not do it again because chances are newer a generation aren't going to see the older version. And you said the magic word, "successful". Imagine if they hadn't of remade Scareface?

In specifics I am referring to Movies such as
"Dukes of Hazzard"
"XXX: State of the Union" (Which is basically xXx with Ice Cube)
"Mod Squad"
"S.W.A.T."
"Miss Congeliality 2"
"The Ring 2"

None of these movies offer any thing to the plate in regards to originality or storytelling. It's true some had new elements but not enough to warrant spending money to make a movie. In fact 5 of the movies I just listed bombed at the box office because the public is sick of this.

I see your points and you make some valid ones. I hope you see mine. I am trying to take each movie on a wait and see basis. I just wish if they are going to cram sequels and re-makes down our throats to take the time to make a decent picture.

Look how much fun re-makes can be if you do it right. I enjoyed Starsky & Hutch because it didn't take the source material seriously. Betwitched looks funny and i'm sure Charlie and the Chocolate Factory will be fun as well.

Back on topic about "The Warriors", I am intrigued to see what they have in mind but my instincts have my stomach turning.

AudioSavior · 05-03-2005, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spidey

In specifics I am referring to Movies such as
"Dukes of Hazzard"
"XXX: State of the Union" (Which is basically xXx with Ice Cube)
"Mod Squad"
"S.W.A.T."
"Miss Congeliality 2"
"The Ring 2"

None of these movies offer any thing to the plate in regards to originality or storytelling. It's true some had new elements but not enough to warrant spending money to make a movie. In fact 5 of the movies I just listed bombed at the box office because the public is sick of this.

I see your points and you make some valid ones. I hope you see mine. I am trying to take each movie on a wait and see basis. I just wish if they are going to cram sequels and re-makes down our throats to take the time to make a decent picture.

Look how much fun re-makes can be if you do it right. I enjoyed Starsky & Hutch because it didn't take the source material seriously. Betwitched looks funny and i'm sure Charlie and the Chocolate Factory will be fun as well.

Back on topic about "The Warriors", I am intrigued to see what they have in mind but my instincts have my stomach turning.

Again, all your post boils down to is personal preference. If you don't like it, you don't think it should have been remade. I happened to like S.W.A.T. and I bet Dukes of Hazzard" does well. XXX is just doing the James Bond thing and getting someone new for part 2. The others are part 2's and well that isn't going to change. Sometimes it can work out. We would have missed out on a lot of good movies if they didn't make a part 2.