Five Films That Should Never, Ever Be Remade

[shanto1138]

Five Films That Should Never, Ever Be Remade

We live in the age of the movie remake, but here are five films that should have "hands-off" written all over them.

Read Full Article

 

[Albino Boo]

Other than that, I agree with Lethal Weapon, but a Big Trouble In Little China movie with The Rock as the lead? How the fuck do people not want to see that?

Largely because the Rock is a terrible actor and incapable of the self parody that Kurt Russell did in the original. Now a remake of Tootsie with the Rock in the lead, that I would pay to see.

 

[Rhykker]

Jurassic World and Mad Max are out. People have actually gone and seen the films, not to mention it's been stated several times outright that the movies are actual sequels...why are people still calling them reboots? Why?

I think the term "reboot" is being used to signify, "this franchise has been dead for so long that this is bringing it back," rather than, "this is erasing the past and starting over." Whether that is the proper use of the term is another issue, but I believe that's what people mean.

 

[SecondPrize]

Other than that, I agree with Lethal Weapon, but a Big Trouble In Little China movie with The Rock as the lead? How the fuck do people not want to see that?

Largely because the Rock is a terrible actor and incapable of the self parody that Kurt Russell did in the original. Now a remake of Tootsie with the Rock in the lead, that I would pay to see.

Now you've gone and made me want a thing which will never exist. To answer Leatherman, in my case it's because we already have a perfectly fine Big Trouble in Little China. If I feel the need to watch some Big Trouble in Little China, I'm already covered.

 

[Zontar]

Jurassic World and Mad Max are out. People have actually gone and seen the films, not to mention it's been stated several times outright that the movies are actual sequels...why are people still calling them reboots? Why?

In Jurassic World's case, I think it has to do with the fact that it's pretending the second and third movies never happened, or if they did ignoring them completely.

As for Mad Max, it's because it actually is a reboot and not a sequel, and the production staff was not ambiguous about it being the case.

 

[Darks63]

Other than that, I agree with Lethal Weapon, but a Big Trouble In Little China movie with The Rock as the lead? How the fuck do people not want to see that?

Largely because the Rock is a terrible actor and incapable of the self parody that Kurt Russell did in the original. Now a remake of Tootsie with the Rock in the lead, that I would pay to see.

Well the Rock already does have some experience wearing dresses in movies.

OT: I agree about the Big trouble remake it was a product of its time and now it is likely to be regarded as mildly racist in the least. A remake would have to either skate some of the stuff from the original or take it out completely.

 

[SilverStuddedSquirre]

Jurassic World and Mad Max are out. People have actually gone and seen the films, not to mention it's been stated several times outright that the movies are actual sequels...why are people still calling them reboots? Why?

I think the term "reboot" is being used to signify, "this franchise has been dead for so long that this is bringing it back," rather than, "this is erasing the past and starting over." Whether that is the proper use of the term is another issue, but I believe that's what people mean.

I think you have it Sir. The Internet managed to entirely re-purpose the word "Meme" so why not Re-boot? I have to agree with you on Little China though, it's not going to turn out well. I like Dwayne Jhonson he's capable of the roll, but you just can't make a "B" movie these days.....unless maybe you are Robert Rodriguez.

Hey! Maybe we can get him on board - though likely he would say to leave it alone.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Why does it always have to be reboots nowadays? At the very least, can't Dwayne Johnson star in a movie about an ordinary man caught up in wacky adventures centered around Nordic mythology or something? Spiritual sequels can still be a thing without needing to swipe the names and ideas of the originals!

 

[ccggenius12]

I realize that this is typecasting, but I'd be completely fine with the Big Trouble in Little China remake if they'd cast Bruce Campbell instead of The Rock. I mean, that genre is pretty much his wheelhouse at this point, and I think we could get a fun movie that does nothing but homage the original while continuously referencing Campbell's acting history. Of course, maybe I just really want to see them pit Bruce against James Hong... dude's still alive, and still rocks the role.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Some of them have been remade as different movies. Lethal Weapon is a cop buddy movie where the partners are opposites aka Bad Boys and Rush Hour. Strangers on a train has been remade, well the story has, but under other names. But movies like Big Trouble in Little China is very specific and shouldnt be touched. Especially as they may miss it up as Kurt Russel isnt the hero - he is the side kick. His japanese friend was the hero. An if they have The Rock kicking ass then they lost the point. Plus, you cant just make cheesy movies - you make the best movie you can and it just ends up cheesy. No director intend for that to happen.

 

[MetalDooley]

I actually didn't mind the 2011 version of The Thing.Was it as good as the original?God no but at least they tried something a bit different by positioning it as a prequel rather than a straight up remake

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

In Big Trouble, you had they guy who could throw lightning, the guy who could fly and was king with a sword, and a guy who took forever to self inflate before blowing up...

He confuses me as much today when I first saw it.

 

[shanto1138]

I actually didn't mind the 2011 version of The Thing.Was it as good as the original?God no but at least they tried something a bit different by positioning it as a prequel rather than a straight up remake

What bugged me about that "prequel" was that it followed the exact same beats of Carpenter's original and played out more like a straight remake. Interestingly enough, Carpenter always considered his version to be a sequel to Howard Hawks' "The Thing from Another World".

 

[gorfias]

What bugged me about that "prequel" was that t followed the exact same beats of Carpenter's original and played out more like a straight remake. Interestingly enough, Carpenter always considered his version to be a sequel to Howard Hawks' "The Thing from Another World".

It was much closer to "Who Goes There", the short story on which The Thing is based. They just didn't have the tech in Hawks day. He still did a bloody good job with what he had.

I haven't seen the "pre-quel" (does that mean they all die?) but it was one of the strongest arguments I'd ever read about the case against too much CGI: Carpenter had to work on composition to get his practical effects shot just right. With CGI they could be lazy and film any old way so that often, the framing and composition of the shots failed to have an impact on the audience. I'll still check it out one day. Carpenter's is one of my all time favorite horror movies. Be nice to see what they at least tried to do with the concept.

If they make Big Trouble, I nominate Tom Cruise for the lead.