acroyear: (pirate)
Joe's Ancient Jottings ([personal profile] acroyear) wrote2006-03-14 04:57 pm
Entry tags:

*sigh* - yet another 70s tv show becomes a "hit movie" (that will also no doubt suck)

In the great tradition of (popular) 60s and 70s tv shows becoming (really shitty) movies, such as Betwitched, Adams Family (ok, the first one wasn't too bad), Starsky and Hutch, Charlie's Angels, Dukes of Hazzard, Wild Wild West, Brady Bunch, Honeymooners, Avengers, I-Spy, SWAT, Mission Impossible, I dream of jeannie (in production now), Dragnet (ok, that wasn't *too* bad), and probably others i missed... (i'm not counting the super-hero things that are always in cycle somewhere like Spiderman, Hulk, Batman, or Superman)

and of course the cartoons that became shitty live-action movies like Fat Albert, Flintstones, Josie and the Pussycats, Scooby Doo, Thunderbirds (well, it was effectively a cartoon), and Garfield...

get ready, 'cause here comes:


I think i'm going to throw up.  The rediculous thing about it is that Ice Cube is playing the title role, totally destroying the original premise (a white, Jewish but mainstream-looking teacher from what the neighborhood *used* to be like finds his hood and school significantly different with a diversity of minorities to deal with that he has to keep control over and still manage to educate).  Putting Ice Cube there makes it a minority-inhabited version of "To Sir, With Love", only Cube's never going to get the respect that Potier had.

and now, all that's left is Barney Miller, One Day at a Time, All in the Family, and Happy Days (with its 2 spin-offs)...

and maybe, if they're desparate (because some of those shows have too much self-respect), "Chico and the Man"!

or Maude?

they wouldn't *dare* redo MASH?

and, of course, its almost time to start remaking the 80s.  start with Square Pegs and 21 Jump Street and see where it goes from there...Cheers and Night Court?

why can't we actually have an *original* film idea somewhere?

and then if they have it, execute it well?  Thank You For Smoking looks ok, but not too promising...

[identity profile] scaleslea.livejournal.com 2006-03-14 10:41 pm (UTC)(link)
The reason you can't get an original film made these days is simple: the studio doesn't know how well it will do.

It's not about pandering to the lowest common denominator, it's about pluggin into a built in fan base. Retread TV shows will make money because people who saw the show will go see the movie to see how they compare. The movie doesn't have to be GOOD, it just has to be out there.

Original movies have to be GOOD to make money, or pander very heavily. Or both.

Doc

[identity profile] javasaurus.livejournal.com 2006-03-14 11:33 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. Looking at IMDB.com, there are about 55 movies releasing between now and the end of May. Of those, Scary Movie 4, Mission Impossible 3, XMen 3 are the only sequels I noticed, and Poseiden is the only remake. (I may have missed a couple.)

There are a lot of original movies out there. The real question is, "Why do people keep going to remakes and sequels instead?" I think part of the answer is familiarity -- seeing characters we know is perhaps like seeing old friends again. Nostalgia is part of that, like when you hear the Mission Impossible theme. Several of the movies based on old TV shows are spoofs, reminding us of the best and worst parts of shows that we (perhaps) took too seriously when we were younger. Maybe it's also part laziness -- we don't have to invest thought or emotion in gaining familiarity with a new story and characters and place, but instead just turn off our minds and cruise.

[identity profile] scaleslea.livejournal.com 2006-03-15 02:11 am (UTC)(link)
Like a said... plugging into an existing fan base.

It's all about what will make more money quickly.

Doc

[identity profile] javasaurus.livejournal.com 2006-03-15 04:28 am (UTC)(link)
I wasn't disagreeing about the nature of the remakes and sequels, only about "The reason you can't get an original film made these days is simple: the studio doesn't know how well it will do." 90% of the upcoming movies are original.

[identity profile] neadods.livejournal.com 2006-03-15 02:40 pm (UTC)(link)
plugging into an existing fan base.

Yeah, but then they sodomize the existing fans with the new scripts. Agent Phelps is a traitor! The cops in Dragnet are incompetent! The Dukes of Hazzard don't have three brain cells between them! (Well, okay, arguable...)

The only reason the Addams Family movie rocked is because they *remade the show* with higher quality. They didn't change the tone or lombotomize the characters or otherwise decide to freshen the concept by making it utterly incompatible with the original fandom's memories.

re: Addams Family

[identity profile] acroyear70.livejournal.com 2006-03-15 02:59 pm (UTC)(link)
actually, they did.

BOTH movies (the legit ones) were based on the premise of Uncle Fester not being "Uncle Fester" and having to rediscover himself and his family.

Re: Addams Family

[identity profile] neadods.livejournal.com 2006-03-15 03:16 pm (UTC)(link)
But I thing I dimly recall amnesia and/or "let's deprogram the kids" plots in the original series, so while yeah, it was used to introduce the Family to people who hadn't watched the series, I'm not sure it's totally unthinkable as an Addams plot.

That they didn't have enough confidence in the material to have a new plot the second time around is a different complaint.