A thought just hit me: 'WarGames' would be a good option for a remake. Considering how far technology has progressed since 1983 (e.g., the Internet, laptops, amazing computer graphics), the possibilities seem almost limitless for a remake. The only question now is which actors/actresses would be right to play the title roles? Sorry if this topic has already been discussed.
shareI kind of agree but more about that later.
For now, I'd like to discuss the sentiment represented above by comments such as "this movie doesn't need a remake" and "insult to the original" and the like.
I'm honestly baffled by these sorts of comments. How, exactly, would a remake harm the original? The post that can satisfactorily answer this question would be awarded post of the year, no doubt.
Do you really think that when they produce a remake, they send a platoon of jackbooted thugs door-to-door and confiscate all DVD copies of WarGames? I don't even...
This came up during True Grit and the Arthur remakes too. Let's go thru it step by step. When the remake turns out to be an effective film, as in the case of True Grit, the original remains untouched. When the remake turns out to be a poor cinematic experience, as in the case of Arthur, the original also remains untouched <gasp!>. It's true, I checked my copy of Arthur from 1981 after seeing the remake. It's still funny as 5hit. So again, I ask: what possible effect can a remake have on the original? Please, explain it to me.
Do you think they're sequels or something? And the continued story kind of spoils the original chapter? If that's the case, then I'm afraid that #1 it's not a sequel and #2 you may be 'tarded and probably shouldn't watch movies. But even so, sequels don't really change anything about the originals either. Not really. OK, so George Lucas is the exception. Yes, he went back to the original films, changed them, removed the original releases from distribution replacing them with the special editions, essentially forcing those special editions down our throats. OK, I'll give you that one. But he's the exception that proves the rule. BUT. EVEN. THEN. if you happen to have the original VHS copy of A New Hope, it remains unmolested.
Is it purely a psychological effect? For instance, let's say the remake is poor and contains ineffective performances, FX, score, acting, etc. do you allow those bad memories to affect you when you go back and watch the original? This is the only scenario I can conjure that comes close to the periphery of sense. If this is, in fact, your position, I must again rebuke you for having a comically brittle emotional state of mind. Perhaps you, too, should not watch films. Try radio. That might be your thing. Less pictures that way, fewer visuals to clutter the mind, hmm?
Try and be more like me. I can watch RoboCop (2014) followed by RoboCop (1987) and I can assure you that neither film has an impact upon the other. In fact, I can watch and enjoy both <GASP!> Is this a concept you can wrap your head around? Perhaps not but trust me, it's nice. I can also walk AND chew gum at the same time. That comes in handy too. For when I have a desire to chew gum. And walk somewhere.
Anyway, far as remaking WarGames goes, yes, the story would obviously need to be changed. Do you judge this as an impossible task? Then you are probably a bad judge too. Man, you're taking a beating in this post! Sorry 'bout that. No one wants to hear how bad they are at stuff all the time. I'm sorry. I'll make it up to you.
I'll bet you have many positive things going for you. Your job, for instance? I'll bet you're doing well at your job! Sure, sure! The job is going well, no doubt about it. You're on the fast track at your job, I'm quite certain of it, by gum! Yep, that's the one area in your life about which you're not uncertain. You may not be able to watch films without becoming confused, you may not ever be able to act as an emergency replacement for Judge Judy, but your job is nailed down, by cracky! Nailed down like the plywood that you nail down to the floor beams followed by the carpet padding. Yep, the job is squared away. So bully for you!
A remake set in 1983, maybe.
No way a remake set in modern times would work, the environment is completely different. They would have to basically rewrite the entire movie, and once you're at that point, might as well just make a new movie.
Very true....in order to "remake it/reboot it" they would have to change the entire scenario.....Wargames is very much an 80s Cold War movie, when we were still very much worried about us and the Soviets blowing the planet up 200 times over with our vast nuclear arsenals... It would be like trying to "reboot" the Day After or Hunt for Red October....
shareYep I agree, WarGames was very much of its time, if it was to be remade it would have to be set in the early 80s.
shareI'm watching this movie now. It is so entirely a product of the time that I agree it couldn't be remade. Firstly, who is the enemy? At that time, fortunately the entire free world was in agreement. Now you'd have a hard time finding a politically correct enemy. Secondly the concept of MAD was still somewhat of a new concept to the general population. The cold war and the concept of nuclear war breaking out was at the top of our collective conscious. The movie operated on that underlying fear. In fact the opening sequence, with the officers being confronted with actually turning the keys was incredibly intense.
As others have mentioned hacking hadn't really been invented yet. Meaning the public didn't really know about it so the concept was interesting for a movie.
And finally, Ally Sheedy was really cute. Okay that has nothing to do with a remake but I felt it had to be said.
Earth? I've never heard of it.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
This film (barely) seemed plausible in 1983. With today's technology, it would be a farce.
share[deleted]
As someone already mentioned a remake set in the early 80's would be ok but one set in our time period would be a lot darker. The cold war is over so you would have to have the main character hacking into the CIA/FBI etc and instead of a WW3 scenario you would have to come up with something else, most likely terrorism and it would be less naive like the original.
Could still be a good story but I wouldn't want it to be called WarGames.
Sometimes a movie or tv show plot is so stupid that only the stupid can understand it.
[deleted]