What is aceptable to you?

[batosai]

so i am sure anyone that has known me for any length of time is probably sick of hearing me rant about sequels and remakes, even those that agree with me. But one in particular has really been pushing my buttons of late

Comments

Re: My thoughts......

[batosai]

1) now, in your batman example, at what point is the interpretation too far off base from what everyone thinks of the character? If someone did a Batman movie in pastels, would you be ok with it called Batman? Superman as a creepy stalker didn't do to well for the last installment of that story...

2 & 3) fair enough & good points

4) but you know someone will try, we are not too far away from someone trying to remake Rocky Horror

5) i know, and i have been so cautious about it, as they hold my dreams in their hands! it BETTER be good.

6) haven't seen it...

7) miss you two

[gunslnger]

So, it should be called Kung-Fu Kid then. :)

[thefreak]

Actually, outside of America it will probably be called The Kung Fu Kid according to Jackie Chan

[batosai]

do you have answers to the 6 questions?

[thefreak]

Fine...fine...

[sabah]

I would just like to say

[batosai]

or Disney's Hercules?
where Zues and Hera are a happy couple and not related?
where roman numerals are used in greece?
where gospel music is sung in greece?
where Perseus loses his winged horse to another story?
where the name should be Herecles (the greek name for the roman story Hercules)?
does this get credit?

oh, and how would you answer those six questions?

[thefreak]

Your argument is nullified the moment you said "Disney." To expect them NOT to pervert whatever their subject matter is would be foolish.

[batosai]

adapt, i am fine with that
but to piss all over it

i can deal with the mermaid living...
but if pinnochio were a frog trying to become a real boy, i might have to work on my sniper skills

[thefreak]

1) How much should be changed if deciding to remake a movie under the same name?
In the case of foreign film remakes, the setting can change. In a lot of remakes actually (look at Shakespeare plays updated in time and place). If the first movie was shit, then you are free to change a lot. Case in point, Judge Dredd, which is being "rebooted" again. Or the second Punisher ignoring the Dolph Lundgren version.

2) How much needs to stay the same to keep the same name?The characters and the overall story. Robin Hood had all the same characters, but never told the Robin Hood story. Arthur got away with that because it wasn't called "King Arthur" or "Camelot" or anything that required it to follow the original tale. Robin Hood should have been called Robin of the Hood or Nottingham or something. Naturally, Karate Kid needs to have actual Karate in it at the BARE MINIMUM to keep the name. Otherwise, it is every Kung-Fu movie ever made. King Kong added characters, but kept the original ones, too, as well as the original story, just

[batosai]

someone already remade Star Wars, some Prick named George Fucas or something.
I hope Mr. Lucas runs into him in a dark ally and beats the shit out of him.

i wholeheartedly agree with you about remaking bad films if you feel you have the formula that could make it a success. Sadly, more often lately people are remaking and sequelling popular films as they see them as guaranteed revenue.

[stacymckenna]

5) - but then you have Sondheim's "Into the Woods" - Cinderella and the rest of the happily ever after stories can be sequelled, if you're clever about it, though you are right about them losing a lot of what we thought they had (honorable princes) at the end of the first half.

[thefreak]

And the sitcom "The Charmings, which I rather liked.

[stacymckenna]

1) You're inevitably going to be using different cast and crew so the movies going to come out differently, even if it's the same script, no matter how hard you try to replicate the original. After that, you don't HAVE to change anything else, Frankly, I prefer the stories to stay the same (I hate that the mermaid lived in Disney's version