MovieChat Forums > Fantastic Voyage (1966) Discussion > This movie really should be remade... wh...

This movie really should be remade... who would be a good cast?

posted 20 years ago by Perkunas
63 replies | jump to latest

With our more indepth knowledge of the human anatomy and the inner wonders and workings of the human body, combined with the nearly infinite possibilities afforded by the advances in special fx, CGI, et al, I think that Fantastic Voyage would be a PRIME candidate for a remake.

I mean, how many old and crummy 70's TV shows can they redo into movies? And for cryin' out loud, we're getting a movie of Fat Albert??? They're talking about a big-screen version of "F Troop"???? They are remaking movies that just came out in the late 70's or 80's... come on, folks, let's take a look at some of the promising SciFi flicks of the 1960's and imagine the possibilities!

Of course, if they were to remake it, I'm sure that Hollywood would probably ruin it anyway. The effects would be great but they'd put in somebody like Reese Witherspoon or (shudder) Jennifer Lopez to play the role of Cora Peterson. Vin Diesel would be Grant... or maybe Keanu Reeves. (Major shudder)

Who do you think would be a good cast?

[–] goethe_couple 20 years ago

I agree. This movie should be remade.

[–] Seller7862 10 years ago

It was remade. Look up "innerspace" on IMDB.

[–] larryman 20 years ago

"With our more indepth knowledge of the human anatomy and the inner wonders and workings of the human body, combined with the nearly infinite possibilities afforded by the advances in special fx, CGI, et al, I think that Fantastic Voyage would be a PRIME candidate for a remake."

But DO NOT change the body style of the Proteus minisub. It would benifit only by adding external manipulator arms. Internally, replace some of the larger mechanical dial guages with digital style. Replace forward chart tabel & chart pigeon holes with a seated 'external manipulator arms' control station, and a sonar display. And add an onboard speech-interactive computer system, but with 'NO' virtual personality.

Perhaps equip retractable support legs with small electric track-drive modules to allow amphibious movement; if applicable to the plot.

But mostly retain the same original Proteus design & white color!

Also, keep scuba suits white or bright colors. NO DARK SUITS!

And this time have the plot address the issue of reducing the ship's MASS, as well as it's size. A microscopic submarine in your body is one thing, but it would be something else if it retains it's original 'weight' while microscopic and inside your body. IE: reducing only the space between atoms is not enough!

As for casting:
Start with a Raquel Welch clone. And maybe toss in a few male twits to clutter up the scenes, so you become anxious for the next Raquel scene.

[–] jescci 20 years ago

The so-called science upon which the movie is based is MST3000 absurd. Movie was watchable only on a "Wouldn't It Be Cool If ..." basis - and because of Raquel, of course. Today's better working knowledge of anatomy and biology would only highten the need to suspend disbelief. Then again, if you tell me there's a Raquel clone cast, I'm there.

Do you know that guy?
No. But he's a dick.

[–] dpcole7 11 years ago

Suspension of disbelief is needed only by those who have an understanding of reality as relevant to the movie.

The 1966 version played loose with facts... almost 50 years later and given how many reality shows require less mental acuity to understand than, say, "The Beverly Hillbillies"... most Americans don't care about the STEM fields anymore. They all want to be basketball players or actors. Can't imagine why...

[–] fictionalman 20 years ago

I agree with Larry man that this film should be remade. I saw it again after a clip from it was recently used in a current TV commercial. It was an ad for GE Health Services. It showed a surgeon fantasizing he was in the film.
I agree about updating the ship’s control panels. Don't change the shape of the ship!!!If they choose to copy the original screenplay they will run into a plot problem if they use the outdated "wireless" as their only form of communication.

[–] NukeyShay 20 years ago

And this time have the plot address the issue of reducing the ship's MASS, as well as it's size. A microscopic submarine in your body is one thing, but it would be something else if it retains it's original 'weight' while microscopic and inside your body. IE: reducing only the space between atoms is not enough!

Reducing mass would introduce another problem...
Asimov: "You might reduce sombody's mass to that of a fly, but they would then have the brainpower of a fly."

His solution for his rewrite was that Planck's Constant would be reduced along with the physical object...which would mean that at an infintly small mass, you could theoretically have infinite speed (sounds much more attractive than putting armies into bottlecaps, right?).

As for a sequel, if it's going to be done...leave hard science at the door please. I'd rather see something along the lines of Innerspace than a film adaptation of A Brief History Of Time at the cinema.

[–] Eddie C. 20 years ago

I have a problem with the whole idea of putting armies in bottlecaps being the "killer app"
idea that sells miniaturization to the military. Considering how Asimov describes how tremors
invisible to the naked eye rattle the "Proteus" like a storm-tossed sea, I sincerely doubt that
a bottle-cap army could be moved without killing the soldiers. But what about minituarizing
a dozen ICBM warheads to the size of a bottlecap? Then you're talking about a potential first-strike
weapon.

As far as "hard science" goes, I don't believe that a movie that challenges the audience to think would also necessarily bore it to tears. Used properly, "hard science" can make a film like "Fantastic Voyage" MORE exciting than simply a variation of "XXX: State of the Union."

Eddie Cunningham

[–] WindyCaliGirl 18 years ago

I believe the miniaturization of ICMB warheads to be unworkable as the process can't miniaturize fissionable materials (that's why the Proteus needed a microscopic fission particle to power itself.) Warheads with microscopic fission particles would not be able to reach critical mass to explode. There goes your potential first-strike weapon.

[–] stargatemd 17 years ago

Why a Raquel Welch clone? That lady is still sexy enough to put the younger actresses to shame in a wetsuit.

[–] moviewiz-4 20 years ago

I agree but "Osmosis Jones" has taken over unless you can make an all live action human parts such as the blood, cells, virus, dirts, bones etc.

[–] Mad-eye_Remo_Raven 20 years ago

Grant - Matt Damon
Cora Peterson - Tara Reid
Dr. Michaels - Harrison Ford
Dr. Peter Duvall - Micheal Ironside
Capt. Bill Owens - James Marsden

Velma: Let's get jinky with it.

[–] Jetfire59 20 years ago

Grant: David James Elliot
Cora: Angie Harmon
Dr. Michaels: Patrick Stewart
Dr. Duvall: Adrian Paul
Capt. Owens: Kurt Russell
Gen. Carter: Sam Waterston
Col. Reid: Morgan Freeman

And replace the old Proteus with an updated version of the Voyager from the animated series. Or at least have recognizable drawings of the Voyager on a drawing board in a few scenes.

"Sticks and stones may break my bones, but I KNOW they'll break yours."

[–] sawyertom 19 years ago

Jetfire, I like your cast best. The only thing I would change would be possibly Angie Harmon. I might lean towards a Diane Lane, a Rebecca deMornay, that Arquette chick on Medium, or that Barbara Alyn Woods from One Tree Hill or something. They seem to have a sexy earthiness to them that seems cool undr pressure as a nurse.

[–] statman122 18 years ago

I like your suggestions, except for Cora; only Charleze Theron could pull that one off!

[–] statman122 18 years ago

I think the really tough call would be who would play Donald Pleasanse part? He was one of the great unheralded actors of all time. His is the character I'd be watching the closest, just waiting to critisize

[–] joseph-116 18 years ago

You have got to consider that in updating it for a modern day audience, one doesn't have to stick slavishly to mirroring the original. For example, since the film was made, women have achieved far more important roles in the field of medicine and science. I therefore propose a feminist revisionist version of the film, and the cast would be as follows:

Grant - Denise Richards
Cora Peterson - Angelina Jolie
Dr. Michaels - Monica Belluci
Dr. Petra Duvall - Jenna Jameson
Capt. Billie Owens - Keira Knightley

:-)

"The Force and a fully-charged light-sabre will get you a lot further than the Force on its own."

[–] seashellz 20 years ago

Either Paris Hilton or Jessica Simpson as Dr. Cora Peterson-and this time she get EATEN by the antibodies;
(Unless these antibodies prefer meat with brains, in which case they would both be spit back out;)

[–] Marina-Pratt 19 years ago

Antibodies are not cells. They are molecules of immunoglobulin. The thing that attacked Raquel was a phagocyte.

-- Your friendly neighborhood medical consultant

[–] statman122 18 years ago

well that explains it! a fag-o-cyte would NEVER eat a woman! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[–] madmike007 20 years ago

I'm watching it right now on FXM. Raquel just got attacked by the antibodies!
What a great movie!

[–] madmike007 20 years ago

I'm watching it right now on FXM. Raquel just got attacked by the antibodies!
What a great movie!

[–] MocosYJeuvos 20 years ago

Grant - Jason Mewes

Cora Peterson - Jamie Presley ORRRR... the Jennifer Lopez hand-puppet from that episode of South Park

Dr. Michaels - Nick Nolte

Dr. Peter Duvall - Gary Busey

Capt. Bill Owens - Chris "Corky" Burke

And for the ship: convert a short-bus or a spaceship from an old Funkadelic tour.

[–] MrLondon 19 years ago

u r funny