My Dr.Phibes Remake Plan

[deleted]

Yes, I agree, that's a good idea, but NO. Like, others have said, don't remake something that is perfect. Crispin? You know what? I just love him, specially in Willard, and he's a great actor, but him for DR PHIBES?! it just wouldn't work. Maybe something like Shelby Carpenter in Laura and the great Nicholas Van Ryn in Dragonwyck? (Great role for him!)(But I'm not saying he should remake these films, just that he'd be better suited for them) But not Dr Phibes. Anyway, people should stop remaking Vincent roles. First it was House on Haunted Hill, then House of Wax, what's next? Theatre of Blood? (that would be atrocious!)

"I'm not kind, I'm vicious. It's the secret of my charm"- Waldo Lydecker

Smoke always starts curling out from my ears whenever some dingbat suggests remaking a really good film, like this one.

Granted, hooolywood seems to be pretty short on ideas these days, and tries to make up for it with gee-whiz computer graphics, which were very nice the first time, but we now realize they don't replace good screenplay and top-notch interpretation. And the cinema-going public encourages them to keep doing it by mindlessly forking money over.

There were some exceptions mentioned earlier, which I can more or less agree with, but with a film such as Phibes, it could never be anything but an insult.

Sorry, but your "remake" idea sounds terrible. You've successfully lost every aspect of the original that made it what it is. And turned it into a derivative straight to DVD horror vehicle.

So you probably stand a good chance of getting it made.

My question is simply this - if you really have to remake it, why not stick to the original story?

You have a neat idea for a movie, but I'd hardly call it a Phibes remake or tribute. Phibes was an anti-hero who was seeking retribution against people he felt had wronged him and his wife. I don't see that same basis to your story.

Some criticisms...

1. Why oh why do we have to have a group of scared twentysomethings or teenagers "stranded" in some kind of mysterious locale to be picked off one by one? That has been done to a fault already, and it seems we get 10-20 movies a year with that premise. The Ruins is the most recent, and it won't be the last. Do us a favor and don't add to it. You could still have your Phibes/Vulnaria duo make camp at an abandoned film lot - and that has a certain appeal to it, especially if this person has a lot of links to the past, and seriously hates the future. I wouldn't bring the killing home to the lot though, nor would I have the duo act as the main killers. Make it more of a psychological thriller by showing how these two manipulate depraved people into doing their killing for them, kind of a Dracula/Renfield type relationship. As an alternate or complementary approach, your Phibes has a desire for body parts, and some of the depraved lunatics could simply people people motivated to be parts collectors.

2. Thora Birch: Tough Bitch. Why?
Is there a reason that our "modern" society can't accept a woman in a role unless she goes in like a man? Might as well have Michelle Rodriguez in there if you do that, and we know what a success it will be then. You'd be better off putting a woman in there who ends up developing a survival characteristic that goes against her grain, yet gets her through the ordeal while guaranteeing sleepless nights for her through the end of her life. Think of Jamie Lee Curtis or Linda Hamilton in their respective heydays (Halloween, Terminator I), not Milla Jovovich (Ultraviolet). The "tough bitch shows everyone feminism is alive and well" is just bad cinema.
If you really want to make an impact, don't fall for the PC cliche of showing that women don't need men for anything other than life support systems for a penis, and instead demonstrate that a normal woman may have the feral quality necessary to survive and yet still be a woman at the end of the show. Even better, try a movie with a suburbanite man developing some traits to survive in the absence of white picket fences, Volvos, and expanses of useless green sod.
Its a tough sell, but it just might work.

3. Going back to point #1 for a minute... Personally, I think your whole "body parts" concept just goes a bit too far. Its a tad too much Barker/Cronenberg for me, and I think it will serve to alienate your audience from your Phibes character. Alchemists were the original scientists, not murderous butchers. Their primary concerns were anatomy, mutability of elements, and immortality. The direction I would take it is that your Phibes has some kind of Benjamin Franklin "Leyden Jar" kind of gimmick he designed out of his alchemy texts, and he's putting people into life and death situations to generate stark numbing fear prior to their death (or escape) in order to collect their life force in this jar. He's only going after people who have either wronged him personally, or wronged society (mmm... politicians... warmongers... bankers... people who have sucked the very life out of our nation... hmmm).
Now if you think about this, it almost seems a natural progression for Anton Phibes, as it involves revenge as well as a rejuvenating life force.

If you incorporate these concepts, I think that you'll have a more enjoyable movie, one thats less formulaic, and more worthy of being compared to Dr. Phibes.

My opinion on your plot: very VERY interesting, but not Phibes-esque enough for me to call it a Phibes film. I love silent films and medieval alchemy, and those two together with an intelligent anti-hero / supervillain would be a very appealing film if done correctly. The attaching of Phibes to that would most likely taint the enjoyment though, because I know that it's not the same.

Although someone mentioned that at the end of Dr. Phibes Rises Again, he lives "happily ever after" (something I will just have to use as fact as I have not seen the film in years, I much prefer the first one over the second), I wouldn't mind a recycling of the Phibes cosmos. It would be rather refreshing if someone took one of those numerous Phibes-sequel screenplays that started to fly around Hollywood after the second film and to tweak it a bit to start an entirely new series of films. I don't think you can directly connect the 1970s films with a new series because of the aforementioned "happily ever after" paradox, and also the lack of Vincent Price.

The Theology and Music motif must stay. That is a part of what Dr. Phibes was all about. Also the 1920s must stay, that is another part of the series that made it so endearing. It was not only a horror film, it wasn't one of those nasty "teen sitcom" horror films where it was in present day. It was a costume drama, a sampling of the times, a horror film, and a love story all rolled into one. The theology motif made Phibes well-educated character. The music motif also created a well-educated character, but with the flair for creativity. He must be the Protagonist again (another thing that must be kept in the film... the way the credits are done!!! :P)

I suppose you COULD start with a nitty-gritty prequel expanding the Phibes pre-story and the death of his wife. I would see that, but it would have to be handled verrrry delicately to make it a good movie. I think it would be too "romantic tragedy" for my liking.

I don't know, these are just a few ideas to throw around. A reworking of the Phibes series would be rather refreshing and I would love to see it done as long as it was just as implicatively violent, classy, quirky, and intelligent as the original films.