Universal Plans "Edgy" Weird Science Remake
- Thread starter Earnest Cavalli
- Start date
I never liked Wierd Science--even back in the day. It always made me uncomfortable.
One creepy thing was the extreme and literal objectification of Kelly Lebrock. The sex slave with little agency...the leering...all too creepy. Then there was the other side, that these were underage boys having sex with an adult woman...super creepy.
But I have to say, there were a number of really creepy movies back in the 80s. Zapped, Porky's, Wierd Science...so much sexism.
One creepy thing was the extreme and literal objectification of Kelly Lebrock. The sex slave with little agency...the leering...all too creepy. Then there was the other side, that these were underage boys having sex with an adult woman...super creepy.
But I have to say, there were a number of really creepy movies back in the 80s. Zapped, Porky's, Wierd Science...so much sexism.
I was -3 years old when that movie came out and my brother had either just been born or was about to be. It was shown on Comedy Central about a decade ago and I watched bits and pieces. Like most 80s movies, it didn't appeal to me in the slightest. Also, I've seen Ferris Bueller. It's very much overrated. I'm pretty sure nothing from John Hughes is going to appeal to me.
As part of the new generation, I have to say I'm worried. Not being alive when this came out doesn't mean it wasn't an important part of my childhood. That being said, the new movie won't affect the quality of the old so it doesn't really matter.Adam Jensen said:
Boo. Not a fan of the idea at all. What I loved about Weird Science was it's 80's-ness, It'll lose it's charm.
Showing people as sexual doesn't equal sexism, and, as far as I know, they never actually had sex with Lisa. I personally wouldn't have minded if they had, it's a movie for fucks sake, but we all have different sensibilities. Weird Science kind of requires that you sit back and just accept the craziness without question, so it's understandable that it gets this kind of reaction from lots of people.trooper6 said:
You kinda missed the point of her character if that's all you took away from it. Sex slave with little agency? She represented EXTREME agency! She was the manic pixie dream girl type - the one there to push the protagonists into manning up, being comfortable in their own skin, enjoying life, etc. The fact they created her because they were horny and desperate is just subtext, and instead of creating a sex slave they instead create something else - a life coach, or something. And the boys were respectful of that. Instead of being all "We created you! Now get on your knees and smile like a doughnut!" they respected her autonomy. They even refused to create a second girl, knowing that the jocks probably WOULD treat her as a sex slave. The "literal objectification" is a bait and switch. They create this beautiful, sexy "object", only to quickly discover she's NOT an object at all. Yes she's still sexy as hell, but she does her own thing. You could argue her devotion and attitude towards her creators seems kind of slave-ish, but I get the impression she's fond of the kids, finds them non-threatening, and enjoys being the "older woman" teaching them about life. It seems like she'd be capable of walking away if she wanted to.trooper6 said:
And as far as I can recall she doesn't have sex with either of the boys, though I think she kisses one. Again, she does so with complete agency and because she wants to - not because she has to. There's nothing sexual about it (at least not on her end), she's just showing her affection in a cheeky way. Give the kid something for his spank bank. You could argue it's creepy because he's a minor and all, but he's more than old enough to enjoy a quick kiss from a beautiful woman.
Oh God I hope not. You need to be able to ACT to be a convincing Lisa. Plus, Megan Fox has ZERO warmth - another necessity for Lisa.Abandon4093 said:
Anyway, I'm kinda thinking a "remake" of this COULD work... if they took it in the complete other direction (it would also probably cease being a comedy at that point). What I mean is, let's say they actually DO make a sex slave, which they keep secret in their basement and do indeed have sex with, until one (or both) start to have second thoughts. Then you can explore all the questions of whether or not she's a person or a sex toy that happens to look like a person, whether or not what they're doing constitutes rape, what rights the boys would have as her "creator", and the rights of artificial intelligence, explore how she might react when exposed to the larger community (like reflexively try to suck some stranger off in a restaurant), and Stockholme syndrome - she might resist and have an identity crisis when they decide it isn't ethical to treat her this way. There's quite a bit you could go into, though it might be hard to make the audience sympathetic towards a couple of creepy rapists so maybe not the best direction for a comedy.
There's a movie called Deadgirl [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0896534/] that kinda has some similar themes. Two guys find a naked, mentally handicapped girl strapped to a table inside a derelict, abandoned hospital, so they decide to make her their own secret sex slave. Then it turns out she's not a retard, but a zombie.
Obligation to post the How it should of ended version-
Great it won't supried me if this ends up like 2006 Miami Vice (which I hated).
Great it won't supried me if this ends up like 2006 Miami Vice (which I hated).
Bah! I hate edgy remakes. I esp. hate it when they take something that was originally light hearted and whimsical and remake it to be dark and/or edgy. ¬___¬
The three things the original Weird Science depended on: the acting abilities of its principals, brilliant and hilarious writing, and Kelly LeBrock both being amazing as the character and willing to get naked on camera (even if just from the back that shower scene is a hell of a thing). Without these things I don't see how a remake can possibly work.
Particularly, can anybody even think of a prominent leading lady-type actress under the age of 30 who can consistently tell effective jokes and is willing to be topless/as unclothed as Kelly LeBrock was in Weird Science on camera? Frankly, I'm stumped on that one. How do you make an edgier Weird Science without at least as compelling and naked a Lisa as in the original?
Particularly, can anybody even think of a prominent leading lady-type actress under the age of 30 who can consistently tell effective jokes and is willing to be topless/as unclothed as Kelly LeBrock was in Weird Science on camera? Frankly, I'm stumped on that one. How do you make an edgier Weird Science without at least as compelling and naked a Lisa as in the original?
After thinking about this, I might be willing to let this slide if they have the mutant bandits from the new Mad Max remake crash the party in this Weird Science remake.