It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Sorry, I only know of Tromeo &Juliet.
Hey, if it's worth doing, it's worth OVERdoing.
avatar
Breja: and substitute my own!
Ironically enough, all things considered, guess what else they're planning to remake?

avatar
drealmer7: The most appalling, atrocious, sacriligous, puke-in-my-mouth inducing EVER has recently been announced. They are remaking

ROCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW
That is MESSED UP!

(Actually, I already knew about this. But it seemed like the perfect place to drop in another Mythbusters quote.)
Post edited May 19, 2016 by TwoHandedSword
avatar
Breja: and substitute my own!
avatar
TwoHandedSword: Ironically enough, all things considered, guess what else they're planning to remake?
What's ironicall about mythbusters (I never watched it, so maybe that's why I don't get it)?

EDIT: Ok, having googled it I see it was also used on that program. But actually it's a quote from a crappy 1984 movie The Dungeonmaster. Doesn't look like anyone's remaking this one...

avatar
Breja: [snip]
Oh, and they're remaking the Witchfinder General too (I wonder if anyone else here even knows that one), because if there is one thing the world need is to see Vincent Price roles recast.
avatar
blakstar: Incidentally, did you know that Witchfinder General was retitled "The Conqueror Worm" in the U.S. in order to form some vague attachment to Edgar Allan Poe?
Actually it was called that in Poland too (well, the translation of that).

avatar
drealmer7: on a positive note, here are some remakes that I have liked:
Well, I don't detest all remakes or reboots or whatever. I especially don't usually have problems with multiple adaptations of the same source. I love the new "Lion in Winter" with Patrick Stewart and Glenn Close. I love Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet, but it does not prevent me from enjoying Zefirelli's version too. But there is a big difference between remakes (or "re-adaptations") done by such talented casts and directors, and something like Time After Time, where they replaced a superb cast with sexy, bland nobodys.

It's something I hate in general about todays american TV series- it always feels like they cast the same five people. I knwo it's different actors, but they all look the same to me, because they are all the same type of "young and atractive". They don't even look like actors, they look like models from a shampoo commercial.
Post edited May 19, 2016 by Breja
avatar
drealmer7: on a positive note, here are some remakes that I have liked:

Solaris - kind of re-envisioned, done a bit simpler and not as great as the original, but still pretty excellent and holds its own
Its completely different, new is like teaspoon and original like bottom of the ocean!...
avatar
Breja: *snip*
But there is a big difference between remakes (or "re-adaptations") done by such talented casts and directors, and something like Time After Time, where they replaced a superb cast with sexy, bland nobodys.
*snip*
I knwo it's different actors, but they all look the same to me, because they are all the same type of "young and atractive". They don't even look like actors, they look like models from a shampoo commercial.
Wow, you really seem to be troubled by their good looks than anything else. (I understand it is not the only thing troubling you though)
avatar
Breja: A sequel to Romeo and Juliet.
Romeo and Juliet and Zombies!
avatar
Hunter65536: Wow, you really seem to be troubled by their good looks than anything else. (I understand it is not the only thing troubling you though)
No, they're looks are just... symptomatic? I guess? What I mean is, there is this type of very bland actors right now, that seems to be popular. Actors like David Warner and Malcolm MacDowell just radiate personality, They have presence and certain uniqueness. These guys in the TV series on the other hand, are completely indistinguishable from the cast of almost any new american TV show, whether it's Arrow, Shannara, Killjoys, Lucifer, Sleepy Hollow... it's all the same kind of bland "pretty people", almost always with all the acting talent of a block of concrete. I don't mind whether they are good looking, but that is pretty much their only characterisitc I can name, and it feel like it's the only reason they get the roles they get.
Post edited May 19, 2016 by Breja
New adapatations is absolutely something different. Shakespeare or any literature being put to film can be re-envisioned and adapted MANY times without it doing the source material injustice (and in fact, many times, doing it justice.) Shakespeare has been being done over and over and over for hundreds of years, there is no "original" adaptation and so "remaking" is less of an issue. A sequel to Romeo and Juliet is just stupid conceptually. They can make it over and over asmany times as they want, as long as the creators and people involved are "making it their own" whether through a re-envisioned way or simply through representing the source as True as they can.
http://www.denofgeek.com/uk/tv/new-us-tv-2016/40781/25-upcoming-us-tv-shows-sci-fi-fantasy-horror-thrillers

Christ, I forgot about Lethal Weapon. Or more likely I just refused to remember about it. How is this even legal? Oh, and Westworld too. Yeah, why not. At this point that's barely worth a mention.

Are we taking bets on how long until we get a Godfather remake TV show?
how very postmodern of you.
avatar
Breja: *snip*
But there is a big difference between remakes (or "re-adaptations") done by such talented casts and directors, and something like Time After Time, where they replaced a superb cast with sexy, bland nobodys.
*snip*
I knwo it's different actors, but they all look the same to me, because they are all the same type of "young and atractive". They don't even look like actors, they look like models from a shampoo commercial.
avatar
Hunter65536: Wow, you really seem to be troubled by their good looks than anything else. (I understand it is not the only thing troubling you though)
This issue is significant to me because I can't get into the story if I don't believe the actor is what he or she is playing. Example being any time Tom Cruise played anything besides a smart ass pretty boy. If I see a baseball player or soldier in a movie, but the actor looks like a model who got an acting job, then I say meh to the story.
avatar
Nipoti: Romeo and Juliet and Zombies!
Romeo and Juliet and Zombies and Pirates!
avatar
Nipoti: Romeo and Juliet and Zombies!
avatar
Lin545: Romeo and Juliet and Zombies and Pirates!
Wouldn't it be better with Space Pirates instead? :-P
avatar
blotunga: Go ahead [to lazy to read OP). Some people believe the earth is flat and the "round earth theory" is a major global conspiracy . Go figure...
Erm, shouldn`t that be "major Flat-al conspiracy"?
Saying global, makes it sound sort of, ya know....spherical.
avatar
Falci: I'd like to add this:

"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." - Phillip K. Dick
Yep.... and that's the sticking point for the theory of relativity!

If you leave earth in a spaceship traveling at the speed of light, time for the rest of the universe 'relatively speaking' stands still. Ok so time on Earth appears to stand still.... now supposing back on earth they launch a spaceship that travels twice as fast as the one you are in, and it catches up to you.... how do you explain that a planet frozen in time can do that? because reality is reality despite relativity, that's why.

Or perhaps the faster spaceship is going backwards in time relative to you... or is it forwards in time relative to you?? scratches head?? lol