Futurama   Planet Express Employee Lounge
The Futurama Message Board

Design and Support by Can't get enough Futurama
Help Search Futurama chat Login Register

PEEL - The Futurama Message Board    It's got a TV!    The Last Sequel and Remake Discussion Thread Part II « previous next »
Author Topic: The Last Sequel and Remake Discussion Thread Part II  (Read 9566 times)
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 [8] Print
Farnsworth38

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #280 on: 08-06-2016 00:14 »

I've just seen the trailer for the Swallows and Amazons remake, and I'm going to babble on about it even though no one else here is likely to have the slightest interest in it.

First the good points. This time John Walker is the right age and looks and sounds credible as Nancy Blackett's opposite number, which was certainly not the case in the original. Titty, apart from being renamed Tatty, seems in character, as does Roger. I'll reserve judgement on Susan for the moment: she looks like Miss Practicality, but I thought she came across as slightly too reserved. Moving on to the Amazons, Nancy seems to have been allowed to have attitude this time. In the original her most rebellious moments were omitted, and she never stopped being middle-class, even when in pirate mode. The casting was good, but I suspect the direction was less so. If the clip I've seen is representative, her true character will be on display this time. Peggy also seems in character as the subordinate sister.

Now the more debatable aspects. The film has diverged from the book, not just by omission, but by adding a completely new plot line for the adult characters. Uncle Jim/Captain Flint has been completely re-modelled, as has his interaction with the children. The purist in me wants to object, but the realist is admitting that the film probably had to go down that path if it was to have any appeal to a modern audience. It can be argued that the plot is consistent with the style of the meta-fiction books in the series, so it isn't a total hatchet job. Whether it will be enough to make the film a success is not clear at this point, but short of moving events to a more recent decade and giving Nancy dyed hair and piercings, it was probably the best they could do.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #281 on: 08-06-2016 00:19 »

Very interesting!
Farnsworth38

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #282 on: 10-14-2016 14:19 »

On the 20th Fox will be broadcasting their TV reworking of The Rocky Horror Picture Show. I've got mixed feelings based on the trailers and leaks I've seen, with some characters as good as (Brad, Janet) or potentially better than (Magenta, Eddie) the originals. Columbia appears to be more punk than usual: I'd need to see more to make a judgement on whether that's good or not. What I've seen of Riff Raff has been disappointing: just not sufficiently over the top. Haven't seen Rocky so can't comment, and I'd need to see more of Frank to decide if the casting was inspired or a mistake. I can't fault Science Fiction - Double Feature which incorporates the opening credits, or Damn It, Janet which is appropriately quirky. The brief glimpses of what follows suggest that it may go off the boil after a good start, but Fox may be keeping their powder dry and holding back the best stuff.
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #283 on: 10-17-2016 20:10 »

What I've seen of Riff Raff has been disappointing: just not sufficiently over the top.

There will never be another Richard O'Brien.
JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #284 on: 10-19-2016 22:02 »
« Last Edit on: 10-19-2016 22:07 »

The whole thing looks ill-conceived, just down to the basic premise of remaking it. Almost the entire point and appeal of the original RHPS movie that made it relevant in its time was that it was shot as and felt like a spot-on homage to classic cult horror and sci-fi B-movies, which includes some of the mediocre acting and awkward staging. This new version, from the ads, appears to have absolutely no awareness of or intention to replicate that aspect of it, which leaves you with just an absurdly over-the-top and super-sexualized, yet lavishly produced and polished, musical with no context to anchor it. I'm sure kids today will love it, but the idea leaves a terrible taste in my mouth.
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #285 on: 10-20-2016 13:35 »

Wow, Josh. When did you become an angry, embittered, cynic who believes that the only intrinsic value in remakes is their ability to shit money for the producer?
Tachyon

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #286 on: 10-20-2016 15:41 »


Ever since he reached the grizzled old age of twenty-five?

Farnsworth38

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #287 on: 10-20-2016 20:56 »

They have said it is more a tribute than a remake, as evidenced by the inclusion of aspects of the fandom. In fact, the more clips I've seen, the more it comes across as a celebration of the cult status rather than the original film itself.
JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #288 on: 10-22-2016 21:28 »

I can appreciate that, but it doesn't really change the point I was making about how it's supposed to be an homage to cult horror and sci-fi B-movies and otherwise loses almost all of its fun and relevance.

Wow, Josh. When did you become an angry, embittered, cynic who believes that the only intrinsic value in remakes is their ability to shit money for the producer?

I know, I'm so against-the-grain. shifty
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 [8] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines | some icons from famfamfam
Legal Notice & Disclaimer: "Futurama" TM and copyright FOX, its related entities and the Curiosity Company. All rights reserved. Any reproduction, duplication or distribution of these materials in any form is expressly prohibited. As a fan site, this Futurama forum, its operators, and any content on the site relating to "Futurama" are not explicitely authorized by Fox or the Curiosity Company.
Page created in 0.078 seconds with 17 queries.