Remake


This film is so ripe for a remake, its got a great book and a unique post-apocalyptic premise to base its script off of, I hope somebody picks it up.

reply

I agree, but if they do I would hope them to keep it faithful to the book. It's a great story that doesn't need "adaptation" or "simplification" for the big screen.

----------------------------------------
But you already knew that, right?

reply

I haven't read the book so I don't know how good an adaption it was, but I do remember the BBC TV miniseries being a pretty good show: that said, it must have been fifteen or twenty years ago, so I'm not sure if it would stand up today.

reply

That would be pretty cool. They could do the triffids with all the latest special effects and stuff. Who would direct though? Burton? Gilliam?

reply

Burton would do better i think. Burton i think of as more a strange creature director and Gilliam as a strange person director.

reply

When I saw this movie I commented to my wife that it was ripe for the picking as a remake with the advances in special effects over the past 40 years. I would hope that the special effects would not dwarf the acting and plot - this unfortunately has been the case in many "blockbusters" eg. "Star Bores". And please make it English (like the book) NOT American!

reply

It's a great story that doesn't need "adaptation" or "simplification" for the big screen.


Every book needs to adapted to the big screen unless the book is so visual its prose reads like a screenplay, i.e. The Maltese Falcon.

The Day Of The Triffids is hardly visual or cinematic: for instance, just consider how you'd incorporate all the background information about the Triffids from chapter 2 into the movie? Changes would have to be made!

Personally, I think this is the sort of book that resists adaptation: the story isn't particularly fast-paced and it's quite philosophical; it's characters trying to rebuild society after a catastrophe. The most fascinating element are still the Triffids, but that alone couldn't make a movie stand on its own. It'd be a great hook to sell the script to the producers, but it also strikes me as the sort of story that works fine on paper but then fails in pictures.

reply

this is one film they should remake and Peter Jackson is the man for the job

reply

[deleted]

well...i'm glad to see this "remake" topic...i've been thinking so long that this story is literary begging to become one of the best science-fiction movies.
The story predispose for stunning special effects.And yes the movie should stick to the novel and be English. I'd like to see the meteorite rain and London centre full of desperate blind people...One thing is for sure...main personages should be formed very carefully...

reply

if this movie is ever "updated" or remade i hope to everything it's based on the book. i have never seen the movie, i look for it everywhere i go, but the book is absolutely one of my favorite books ever. i get the feeling this is one of those crapped 60s horror flicks, where the book is so much more than horror or sci-fi, it's scary because it can happen. in the movie, from what i read here, the triffids come down with the meteors. one of the best parts of the book is that triffids were already here. that man helped them prosper. that's one of the scariest ideas in the book. and that should stay

reply

THIS WAS A FUN MOVIE WHEN IT WAS FIRST MADE. WITH THE CURRENT ADVANCES IN SPECIAL EFFECTS IT WOULD BE A GREAT REMAKE!

reply

On the subject of a remake, before i seen the day of the triffids and after i read the book i saw 28 days later.
Now if anyone's ever seen it, do they not think it's spookily like day of the triffids with infected zombie humans instead of man eating plants?

reply

Ok...I have a proposition for you.

1. I'm English.
2. Movies I love...executives that make slosh like "I Robot" I don't.
3. I'm young, fresh, and full of good ideas.
4. I'm a film director/writer and I want to make this movie.

;-) No kidding. If I made this, I promise faithfully not to screw it up. There are a number of 'pet-projects' of mine...including Riddley Walker and...a certain conspiracy story...but as this movie is on tonight...I've been thinking about it...and damm do I want to remake it.

I would most certainly make it dark, very forboding, and I'd slip in a lot of political undertones about the nature of our society..etc etc. but not obvious ones. I'd definately make it set in England. No Americans not included in the original plot. I promise. And no Americans playing English. ;-) (just trying to right the balance after Bridget Jones ) I hate it when movies spell everything out to the audience...I think some things should be left to ourselves to understand.

That to say...I haven't even seen the damm film yet...but I'm going on reputation alone here...mostly by my parents, who said that it's the most terrifying thing they had ever seen at the cinema at that time.

What do you think?

Now...the question is...how the hell does a girl like me get the option on this damm book!

x

Kim

http://www.kimberleydayle.com
...listen to my songs...

reply

How can you talk about not screwing up a remake of the movie if you have not even seen it?! Why on earth would you totally mess up the project with a lot of politcal overtones?? Before you take on a project I suggest you do a reasonable amount of research. Also, not quite sure why you describe the film as "damn" I don't think it is a candidate for hell.

reply

Sorry...I seem to have hit a nerve. I was only protesting that on reputation alone I would make it.

However, I've now seen it, and to be honest...I worry because it seems that the 'oh so original' Mr Danny Boyle has completely ripped this film off at the beginning, even to the point of showing a bus tipped over and the same locations! So...it occurred to me that it might not be possible after all.

By the way, political under (I said under) tones happen to be...well...my 'thing' in films, although I'm a true believer in subletly. Horror for horror's sake is all very well, but if you look at the 'cinema greats' you will notice that most of them say at least something about society, political or social comments.

That aside, research is something which I pride myself greatly. For instance, the last film I did, was a small short, from a script which I had wanted to make for a long time. It was only 15mins long, but took me a year to make, because I wanted to make everything as scientifically correct as possible. It was about artificial intelligence in a nuclear bomb and it's communication with a radio DJ in New York minutes before its explosion, and it's attempts to justify itself before annihilating the world. Heavy stuff, and I was aware that not properly researched, it could be a disaster. So, in the process of my research, I visited many many radio stations, listened to as many as I could to learn their jargon. I also got in contact with a number of people involved in A.I, and got their individual comments, advice and suggestions on the nature of the beast. I also took a trip to New York myself, and bought hundreds of authentic items in which to fill the radio station set.

Some call it overkill, considering the average short takes about 3 months to make from pre-to-post. Mine took a year, and I'm proud of that fact. Obsessing, the ups and downs, the feeling when you look through the camera lens and see something you have only up until that point imagined, it's incredible. I wholeheartily reccommend it!

As for the film, I've been informed by a certain friend of mine that Hammer Studios is selling off the rights to some of their older films. Films like Quatermass has always interested me, and I suppose that that film, as well as Triffids would certainly be interesting to do with todays effects.

Anyway...just my 2c.

Kim



http://www.kimberleydayle.com
...listen to my songs...

reply

[deleted]

"I'm going on reputation alone here...mostly by my parents, who said that it's the most terrifying thing they had ever seen at the cinema at that time"

maybe you should get your parents to remake it for you then.

reply

umm...you might want to read my later posting..which was after I had seen it.

Eyes are useful...so use them please.

www.wildernessofbeasts.blogspot.com
THE FUNNIEST FILMMAKING BLOG...

reply

[deleted]

Yeah, but your original posting was BEFORE you saw it. what do you do, scroll through famous titles then decide you want to direct it declaring that "[you] promise faithfully not to screw it up". That's just moronic.

reply

Special effects are even more advanced now 17 years later!

reply

the BBC did remake it (again) i'm pretty sure since this thread was started

reply

I saw the movie recently and didn't know about the miniseries. The 2009 version has low rating and I doubt the 1981 version is available anywhere.

reply

[deleted]

I'm a young, ambitious filmmaker myself and making Day of the Triffids into a movie has long been a dream of mine. The fact is, both adaptations leave something to be desired, the film adaptation is a complete hack job of a brilliant novel and the BBC version just doesn't have a big enough budget to fully realize the story.
If I make the film, I want to film it in the UK and New Zealand and will try and get Weta (the FX company that did Lord of the Rings) onboard to design and create the Triffids. I'm still sort of brainstorming about how I will go through with the project (if it gets made, that is). It will be very faithful to the novel, though I will have to change and add a few things to make the film successful, namely moving the story to modern times and adding in a scene showing the Triffids' origin. I still have not figured out how I am going to have the Triffids created, to deviate from the book or not. An early idea was to have them created as weapons by the Germans or Japanese to use against the Allied Forces and I've also considered tying their creation in with the War on Terror, but I likely will use the original Cold War-related concept. The story, however, will have to be moved to modern times for audiences to take the story seriously. One of my favorite aspects of the book is how graphic and frightening an account of the apocalpypse it is, I plan to translate that to screen, with chaotic scenes of the blind rioting (filmed with handheld cameras to make it more jarring) and horrifying scenes of dead, fly covered bodies lying in the streets. And the film will also pack quite a few scares as well via the Triffids and their lashing stingers. If I am able to realize my vision, this could be very good film.
If the film were to made today, the best bet to adapt the book faitfully would certainly be Peter Jackson.

reply

None of you are making it, so be quiet.

I think Danny Boyle did a good job on 28 Days Later. The writer (I don't remember his name) is obviously a big fan of Triffids and the genre; I don't see what's wrong with what they did. They acknowledge several sources of influence - they didn't steal anything. I think of it as a tribute to the book.

I didn't like the Triffids film at all; I consider 28 Days Later to be the closest representation of it in terms of story, direction, cinematography and so on, even though it's not meant to be affiliated with it in any way. I would love to see a remake, and so far my choices would have to be either Boyle or Tim Burton or maybe even Shyamalan! He would do a killer job on it in my opinon.

One of the main things I think 28 Days Later lacked (apart from the obvious) was London. That is, it didn't play a big role. I loved the London parts of Triffids; all the sneaking around kidnapping each other, all the while looking out for Triffids. In the book, the Triffids were subordinate characters practically all of the way through, and I think this was also the case with the infected in 28 Days Later. I loved it how Bill and Josella had so much to worry about that they often forgot about the Triffids, and would be brutally reminded of them often!

"Good Afternoon!" (Various)

reply

"None of you are making it, so be quiet."
What makes you so sure, a lot of us here are young filmmakers. I didn't say I wanted to make it now, I'm too young and inexperianced, I want to make the film when I'm older and more experianced with directing movies. Though by then it may very have already been made by somebody. I just want a more faithful to the book film to be made. It just plain needs to be made, in fact.
And as I said, Peter Jackson would probably be the best choice to direct the movie if it were to be made now.

reply

[deleted]

I second David Lynch!

reply

Lynch can't really do an epic science fiction film, look at what happened to Dune. Peter Jackson is probably our best bet.

reply

[deleted]

"28 Days Later" pretty much borrowed/ripped off everything from better movies like "Rabid", "The Stand" to "The Quiet Earth", but it never really touched on the whole idea of killer plants or most of the human race being rendered blind, so I don't see it being a problem. And although I don't think 28DL was a bad movie it certainly wasn't worth anywhere near the hype the press heaped on it, a movie isn't "ground breaking" when it doesn't have an original idea of it's own, but that's just a pet peev of mine.
As for the other Wyndam books I don't know, I've never read any of his others, but he seems like a great author and I wouldn't mind seeing them made too!

P.S.
Just a thought, why don't insane, supposedly completely out of control infected people ever attack each other? Do they carry like contaminated union membership cards or something?
"Damn your a member? I guess I'll have to rip the throat out of the next guy"


Heck, I might as well promote my website - http://www.andybob.com

reply

28 days didnt hav the plants, but the first scene where Jim wakes up in the hospital and walks thro a deserted london is clearly influenced by the beginning of the triffids. A remake would need to do these scenes carefully to avoid comparison.

I agree, it does need to be remade, the story is great but the films are out dated. I hav been working on a script for this for a while now, no doubt someone will beat me to it cos its taking a long time, but its a fun project!

reply

[deleted]

I dont think people are talking about remaking the film, but wanting to make a better version of the book. Now that special effects and the need for a 'happy' ending have evolved, there is room for for a more true version of the book to be made. That is the point people are trying to make. Look at how many tmes a Christmas Carol has been remade, if its a good story, its timeless

reply