Let's remake all the movies from 1984...
my vote is Ghostbusters...whos got something better in the year..1984
share[deleted]
That sounds good to me. A decent remake is rare; one that outdoes the original is unheard of. Get a brain, Hollywood - there are eight million stories in the naked city. Tell those, and draw on all the fictional worlds you can create. Making films and TV shows over is almost always due to plain laziness.
shareA decent remake is rare; one that outdoes the original is unheard of.
the thing
3:10 to yuma
the fly
ransom
scarface
all remakes.. all far better than their predecessors.
not trying to justify THIS remake.. just saying that what you said just isn't true.. share
no this thread is about re-making films from 1984.
Sixteen Candles would be great. Lindsey Lohan could pull off highschool i think
Ha! Even if this were the '80s, when they cast 35-year-olds to play highschoolers, Lindsay Lohan couldn't pull that off. First off, she'd have to be sober, secondly she'd have to learn how to act, AND she looks like she's close to 40! Blech! That would be horrible.
Why don't they just re-release all the movies from 1984 in the theaters? That'd be fun, and there would be no butchering of classic 80s films.
again, people..listen
remaking films of 1984..
How about Beverly Hills Cop with Denzel Washington
[deleted]
You definitely forgot Canada's own Avril Lavigne, September 27
shareI would love to see a BH cop remake but DENZEL? are you crazy?? He's probably the same age as Eddie you need someone younger in a remake. and Denzel isn't much of a comedy type actor.
"I'm not crazy M'Lynn, I've just been in a very bad mood for forty years"
"Why don't they just re-release all the movies from 1984 in the theaters? That'd be fun, and there would be no butchering of classic 80s films. "
Now THAT would be a great idea! I would go watch! All the movies i couldn't see in the theaters because i was either too young to go alone or didn't have enough money for... DEF! Ghostbusters, The Thing, Christine, Gremlins (wait, i think i did see that one in theaters.. at least the sequel), Footloose, Dirty Dancing (saw that one in german theaters subbed: bleh), Rooftops, Terminator, Neverending Story, Masters of the Universe, Hellraiser!... or a few i have seen in theaters but wouldn't mind seeing'm again there: The Black Cauldron, Willow, Robocop, Spaceballs...
Looking back the 80's (and some early 90's) had the coolest movies for kids/teens growing up :-D
Recently i finally saw my fav movie of all times on the big screen - Der Himmel Ueber Berlin/Wings of Desire (1987) , which also had a crappy remake in the 90's with Nicholas Cage ffs! - even though i've seen it about a hundred times and can't get enough off. Nothing compares to the big screen experience imo
"Power to the people who punish bad cinema!!" - Cecil B. Demented for president!!
With digital cinema expanding the way it has been the last few years, and Blu-Ray quality approaching cinema quality - Why not just let the theatres play DVDs? I'd love to do that, but its really quite difficult for cinema chains to advertise.
When they re-make Ferris Bueller's Day Off... it will be a sad day for the industry.
www.atlascinemas.net
"With digital cinema expanding the way it has been the last few years, and Blu-Ray quality approaching cinema quality - Why not just let the theatres play DVDs? I'd love to do that, but its really quite difficult for cinema chains to advertise.
"
You can't be serious.
First of all, what do you think the law actually is? Do you think you need a permission from anyone to play something? (Answer: No, you don't. Unless you have consented to being governed by a system that forbids you to, but that's your choice).
Second of all, approaching cinema quality? Not really. What resolution do you think movie theaters are capable of? I know that film doesn't have a "specific resolution", but there is an 'amount of details' that can be approximated with a resolution that gets closest to the same amount.
Blu-Ray has a resolution of 1920x1080. DVD resolution (which you are suggesting, completely destroying your own idea about the Blu-Ray, so why even mention it?) is only 704x480. Would completely disintegrate the point of watching a movie in a theater, if it's going to be a lousy DVD version!
Besides, there's also the framerate to think about. The movie screen needs to be something like 72 fps instead of the typical 29.9 (or something) fps that DVDs require. It's because of how films are projected to show smooth image and fluid motion - by showing the same image multiple times, and so on.
What would be the point of watching an MPEG2-compressed huge-pixels-lores film on a big screen? Even 1920x1080 would not be enough for the movie to actually look the same, though there is the 2K version of 'digital cinema' that comes close to that.
It's hard to find the exact number - I heard Toy Story, Antz, Shrek, etc. were rendered to a resolution like 3800 x something, and some people say the actual resolution would be closer to 5000 x something, and then there's the "4k-6k" explanations, which would put it to 4096×2160 and higher.
If I were to pay to watch a movie on big screen in a cinema theater, I would definitely expect it to be the real resolution, not some lowered one. It just wouldn't be the same - resolution is the most important thing, when you want to watch a movie on a big screen and look good (though the rest of the quality issues are important, too). The big resolution + big screen is the only real thing that would make it actually worthwhile. Otherwise it's just a glorified regular monitor, and I can get that with better quality at home. I mean, it wouldn't be much different from simply watching your own monitor from a really close distance, except that your monitor would look better, because you can see the pixels directly, without so much air inbetween, and other people possibly bothering you, etc.
The only way it would be worthwhile - and mind you, I think it's a great idea, and would definitely want to see those good old 80's movies on big screen, and often wondered why there aren't theaters that play ALSO older movies, and not ONLY new ones (I mean, what's the point? Why do people love NOVELTY so much over QUALITY? I already wondered this in the BBS era, when people got 'credits' in certain BBSes for uploading something NEW, rather than uploading something GOOD (even if the BBS didn't have it before)). Would be a great business idea, especially nowadays - people would gather to those movies in huge crowds, but then the big corporations wouldn't be able to offer the movie-themed meals etc. so your kids can be poisoned with fast food easier, etc.) - ..
..ok, this got a bit long, so I will start the previous sentence over again.
The only way it would be worthwhile, is if it was shown exactly the way it was shown originally, in the 80's - OR with equivalent resolution and picture and sound quality (or better).
A DVD certainly wouldn't cut it!
The
Funny you mention "35-year-olds to play highschoolers" in the 80s when Kevin Bacon was 25 when he made Footloose and this Kenny Wormold guy was 26
shareThats what I've always said! If everybody's feeling retro and wanting to see 80's movies in the theatre, just re-release them! I guess what keeps the world spinning in Hollywood though is to rip off of them instead.
"Eventually, they catch everybody." - Snake Plissken
"Why don't they just re-release all the movies from 1984 in the theaters? That'd be fun, and there would be no butchering of classic 80s films."
That's what I love about living in LA. Every summer there are tons of outdoor movie screenings. I just saw Weird Science and The Breakfast Club the other weekend. Awesome! I love watching movies from the 80s again, esp on the big screen b/c I was too young to see them in the theater or drive-in when they originally came out.
I wish they'd stay away from remaking any 80's movies esp John Hughes movies. Those movies helped define that time period, that generation. You can't recreate the same feel. You can't go back. I love the 80's, I listen to 80's music all day at work but I don't want current music to try to emulate it. It's not the same.
Do not touch Sixteen Candles...I hit hard.
shareLeave my movie ALONE. I would be crushed if they remade 16 candles its perfect the way it is.
Especially don't put some crap Lohan in it.
"I'm not crazy M'Lynn, I've just been in a very bad mood for forty years"
All of the King Kong movies were better than the orginal. The sad part is that every one of them is boring for the first half of the movie until they get to the island.
sharei don't know man... i just looove the charm of the original stop-motion b
&w... then again, i'm a sucker for the early years of cinema. nonetheless, i much prefer the original (only king kong i have on dvd) over every other king kong movie after that, even over the polished otherwise welldone Jackson remake... just a personal taste
"Power to the people who punish bad cinema!!" - Cecil B. Demented for president!!
Scarface?????? Are you out of your *beep* mind? No one should ever remake that masterpiece.
shareI believe the point was that the DePalma/Stone/Pacino Scarface was a remake of the 1932 Howard Hawks film - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0023427/
shareno dummy. they said scarface was a remake.
share[deleted]
Actually, you are proving the argument you were trying to disprove. Rare does not mean non-existent. It means infrequent compared to the norm. What you did is called the exception proving the rule. The reason you could name those films so quickly is that they are the exception rather than the rule. It is easy to remember the rare feat b/c the mundane is ... mundane.
Actually you do need to justify as all of the remakes you mentioned SUCKED! I can give you more examples of crappy remakes:
True Grit
Cheaper by the Dozen
The Parent Trap
Yours Mine and Ours
The Pink Panther
There are others but I'm sure you won't agree. It is time for Hollywood writers to quit scratching their balls and actually start writing original scripts again.
The True Grit remake kicked *beep* a$$! That movie was amazing.
Beautiful is better than terrific...better than Dutch apple pie.
the thing
3:10 to yuma
the fly
ransom
scarface
those remakes succeeded because they were about artistic vision. a remake of footloose has one obvious motivating factor. money. bank on the nostalgia of those who saw the first movie and disguise it as some sort of update for a new generation who can also relate to it for some reason, despite them never having lived in the times which inspired the original. but i'm sure the spin machine will be able to weave a convincing lie. like how this generation has had to put up with the oppression of the bush administration or some harebrained nonsense like that.
[deleted]
Just to point out on this note ,while the essential parts of the story "who goes there" has been used in The Thing From Another World ,Carpenters The Thing is actually far closer to the original source material ,so not really a remake ,but a version closer to the story .
Don't scare me....i poop easily
Actually a decent remake IS rare. The poster didn't say there were no good remakes, just that they were rare.
shareThe Thing wasn't a remake, it was a prequel.
"I don't need a warrant, this land belongs to Seeley Booth."
The Thing remake is awful compared to the original.
shareSo true!!! Leave my high school movie alone.....make up your own damn new one for the new generation!!!! I know no story is "new", but you don't have to remake EVERY movie from the 80s, or 70s, or 60s. About 1% end up decent....JMO
share[deleted]
Maybe not all remakes, but Footloose doesn't need a remake. Just watch the original!
share
The Wizard of Oz was a remake, that is considered a classic. The Thing from 1982 was sort of a remake of Thing of Another world. Both movies took elements from the book, Who goes there. Ocean's 11 is a remake and better than the original. So before you say all are ruined think before you post. That is just a few examples.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2604794/
How about no remakes on ANY movie. They get ruined every time they are remade.
I have to disagree. The new version of 3:10 to Yuma is my all-time favorite movie. The new Karate Kid is pretty dang good. share
I agree cause Footloose sucks now.
share