Why are they doing this ?
ook why why why? why ruin a good movie by making a remake? its bad enough they changed characters and took out characters... NO MORE leave the classics alone who's idea it ever was you really really suck...
shareook why why why? why ruin a good movie by making a remake? its bad enough they changed characters and took out characters... NO MORE leave the classics alone who's idea it ever was you really really suck...
shareUh, because they want to make money?
Is that such a hard thing for people to grasp? Even if it doesn't sell to the public some sucker at Channel 7 Australia OBVIOUSLY bought the rights to the thing. And the first was hardly a 'good movie'. It was dull, to say the least. But that's only a matter of opinion :D.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Agreed on the money and to also give actors with no career prospects (C. Thomas Howell for example) a cahnce to further throw themselves into career obscurity.
"I outrank you." Brad Chase
"And I'm such a slut for authority." Alan Shore
OMG I so agree about CTH did you see how bad the 'War of the Worlds' he did sucked. And whats up with this one...
http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hp&cf=prev&id=1808665506
~Teresa~
Harry Potter~ViggOrli~LOTR~Legolas~Aragorn~Fan
ACTUALLY HE WAS PRETTY GOOD IN THIS.HE'S BEEN TURNING UP ALOT AGAIN IN SMALL PARTS IN BIGGER FILMS.GOOD FOR HIM.
shareThe Original was made in the 70's during the disater film time. For a movie made during that time it was a good movie. I did not enjoy this movie at all, it took away from the original, and altho I have not read the book the movie is based on I am sure the book is better then both movies.
shareactually if they wanted money, they would have created a decent remake. But alas... according to the studio brief here on imdb, ratings sank for the "expensive" remake. I'm guessing they may lose money on this one.
---------------------------------
Books are meant to be read, if not, they'll die and so will we!
Such a turkey, I was actually longing for "The Morning After!!"
share[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
The original Psycho was made at a time when movies were routinely made in color. Alfred Hitchcock purposely chose to make it in black and white for the artistic aspects, and color might have been too gory for the mainstream movie audiences of the time.
share[deleted]
you are the biggest loser. If you like this movie please do society a favor and just kill yourself because you offer nothing of purpose to anyone.
share[deleted]
Because they are too lazy to come up with some new interesting ideas and they knew that the original was a sucess, so they probley figured why not?
share[deleted]
I guess they are trying to jump on the remake bandwagon to lure the younger generation. They've had a lot of success doing this with the horror movies. Why they would do it for TV, though, is beyond me. Personally I think the remake bandwagon is disrespectful to the originals, because they are NEVER as good. Oh well...the almighty dollar rules all.
shareHollywood has run out of stories that is why there have been nothing but remakes this year. These are the films of 2005:
5% - New Ideas
60% - REMAKES [War of the Worlds, House of Wax, The Amityville Horror, The Fog, Flight of the Phoenix, etc.]
25% - Prequels, Sequels, etc. [Batman Begins, Star Wars Episode 3, Ocean's 12, Catwoman, etc.]
10% - Based on a TV series, Comic Book, etc. [The Dukes of Hazzard, Bewitched, The Honeymooners, Fantastic 4, etc.]
[deleted]
Okay, I am of the younger generation and for the record I am not a fan of black and white movies. That having been said, the original Poseidon Adventure was amazing. Gene Hackman was brilliant. This remake was pathetic and I agree that the jumping back and fourth from the rescue team to the people on the boat completely killed the suspense. Hollywood does remakes because they believe they are a proven commodity and guaranteed to make money. There are a ton of original scripts out there but Hollywood is too afraid to take a chance on anything. Cowards.
shareI'm not one to say that all remakes are bad. For example, I rather liked the newer version of War of the Worlds, which to be fair has been remade at least four times in some fashion (two movies, a musical, a radio play... two radio plays, actually.). I'm looking forward to the King Kong remake, if just because I have a feeling that it's in the hands of a talented group of people who love the material and are looking to add to it, not milk it.
I also think some remakes are trash, and invariably will be compared to what came before. Just because you can remake something doesn't mean that it's a good idea to do so. I think this version of The Posedion Adventure is a good example. It's a story that, at its core, shoulnd't be that hard to remake. But it suffered because it felt like they had taken the original, run it though a shredder and remixed all the chunks, then filled in the blanks.
I also doubt that it's that Hollywood is running out of ideas. There are probebly thousands, if not tens of thousands, of rejects screenplays in Hollywood every year. Only a tiny fraction will ever be written. What is more likely is that the people with the money don't want to take risks since they lose their shirts when they do. So they take an idea that has a track record or built in fan base and run with it. It doesn't always work, but frankly how many completely original pictures come out of Hollywood as shlock? A lot...
[deleted]
The remake was LAME. What an injustice to all that made the first movie great (or just really good).
I read the book and I saw that they mixed a lot of the book into the new movie, which would have been OK had the original done the same. But this time it was just stupid. Rather than two Shelby children they have the whole family like in the book, and Mr. "Clarke" is having an affair with the massage therapist which is totally dumb. Then the girl falls in love with the crew member whereas in the novel she was raped. It was just all confusing. And the captain is named after the author?
And a bomb???! Sorry but that is next to impossible... the reason they gave was "It threw off the balance." Ummm sorry but no.
I was so repulsed at the remake that it gave me some comfort in hoping that most of the original cast of the 1972 movie were dead and didn't have to have their honor shamed by the remake, then I come on here and find out that for the most part they're all still alive. lol I wonder what Shelley Winters thought of her new counterpart.
wbelac88, You might want to consider editing your post and putting the word SPOILERS prominently at the beginning of it because not everyone will have seen the remake yet and it is different in some ways, as you mentioned, from the original movie and from the book.
I agree with your opinion that this remake was a disaster--a major disappointment. Did anyone feel anything for any of the characters during any part of the movie? The acting just wasn't convincing. I barely cared when someone died (and I'm the sensitive type) and could care less that anyone survived. To this day, when I watch the original, I weep because of the emotional portrayals and situations in the film. I think the script and director are more to blame for the failure of this remake than the actors. There were some fine actors on board but even they couldn't rescue this mess.
Maybe I'm a masochist, but I'm going to wait a while and watch my taped copy of the remake again and see if my opinion improves a second time around. Perhaps my memories of the original Poseidon Adventure got in the way of giving a fair evaluation.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed for next year's theater release Poseidon to be worthy of the name.
Yeah it was sad when Mama Rosen died... well, in the first one at least.
share