Rich I've emailed several times are my emails getting through? thanks jim ------------------------------------ Unshredded Nostalgia Jim Episale [EMAIL PROTECTED] 323 south main st Route 9 Barnegat nj 08005 tel: 800 872 9990 www.unshreddednostalgia.com ------------------------------------
-----Original Message----- From: MoPo List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Richard Halegua Comic Art Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 2:53 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MOPO] REMAKES Remakes have always been a part of Hollywood.. with some even better than the original versions.. Do you guys like William Gillette's version or Sherlock Holmes or Basil Rathbone's ?? How many other actors have played the famous detective?? How about Tarzan ?? There were a number of good Tarzan flicks w/ Lex Barker.. all are the same stories as the Wesimullers used at different times. Wizard of Oz.. this movie was made before & after the Garland classic and of the Bond movies.. how many stories did Fleming write that were adapted 2, even 3 times? The reality is that with the exception of when we get something new - like Terminator, Star Wars, Usual Suspects, Matrix, Crying Game, Shawshank, Hudsucker Proxy, Devil's Rejects.. there is a reality that most films are of a repertoire of maybe 20-30 storylines. I loved the Front Page as done by Billy Wilder with Lemmon-Matthau.. It is however a remake of a 1931 film with Pat O'Brien that is quite good and it was also remade as His Girl Friday with Cary Grant and Ros Russell in a superb version. The thing about King Kong being remade to old time fans is we hate to see someone mess with "our girlfriend" so to speak. We despised the 1976 version because A) we hated the man in a monkey suit B) we all thought Jessica Lange couldn't act ((boy were we wrong about that one!)) C) it just wasn't our idea of a good film. But I didnt gripe when King Kong met Godzilla! I thought that was cool. If Jackson does a good version of Kong.. we may all love it. If he doesn't.. we'll hate it, and guess what.. for the next generation there will be yet another remake of the film. Kirby is right that some films just cannot be remade because of the time they were made in. How anyone could ever remake Citizen Kane would be a feat of Herculean proportions (I wonder if Rupert Murdoch could be satirized instead of W.R. Hearst?), but remaking Gone With the Wind would be another matter and the only reason it isnt being done right now is that "period films" arent as popular with the public today as they were in the 30's-40's when the story wasn't so old to much of the population who had family members who may have remembered the time vividly. I'd say it is more likely to be updated as a sci-fi film! I have no doubt many of our "sacred cows" that have not yet been remade will be.. Casablanca will be updated, Double Indemnity will be as well, , Metropolis could easily be remade today. It's a matter of taste I know... But sacred cows... well there is a time in life when they aren't so sacred, and that's usually when the next generation comes around. It isn't history to them. It's something they have no connection to like we did wehn we were kids (for the over 40's). History today is more throw-away then a candy wrapper in our world now. That's the sad comment.. as for Kong.. I hope it's a really good film .. cause I'm gonna see it!! Rich============================ At 10:47 PM 11/21/05, you wrote: >It's always good to hear Walter's take on things. I've known him >for a long time, and he put out >the most erudite film poster catalog ever - his first one - and I >still own my copy of it. > >Some films present opportunity for a remake, with room for a twist >of tone or plot. > >Others however are not so much sacred cows as just films that were >just right for the moment they >were made, and have lived on in our collective memory simultaneously >"classic" and "modern." > >Do we EVER want a remake of: > >THE WIZARD OF OZ? >GONE WITH THE WIND? >CITIZEN KANE? >RIVER KWAI? >BRINGING UP BABY? >A CLOCKWORK ORANGE? >ANNIE HALL? > >THE THREE STOOGES GO AROUND THE WORLD IN A DAZE? > >HELEN OF TROY? Oops, I forgot, they remade that already. > >Kirby McDaniel > > > >On Nov 22, 2005, at 12:27 AM, Walter Reuben wrote: > >>For what it's worth, a couple of people I know have seen a not >>quite complete version of this film by Jackson, and they were both >>mightily impressed. Who knows...There are cases in film history >>where a remake was as good as the original. >>Think of >>MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH Two Hitchcock versions, both quite >>different, both classics >>Renoir's 1937 LA BETE HUMAINE became Fritz Lang's HUMAN DESIRE >>(1954), Again, two great films. >>John Stahl's IMITATION OF LIFE of 1934 is remade by Douglas Sirk in >>1959. Personally, I prefer the earlier version, but they are both >>clearly great in very different ways. >>And, oddly, Howard Hawks makes RIO BRAVO in 1959, then basically >>remakes it as EL DORADO in 1967. >> >>On the other hand, we have >>Hitchcock's PSYCHO remade by Gus Vant Sant, awful! >>And then there was Ross Hunter's ghastly musical remake in 1973 of >>LOST HORIZON, which featured such great singing talents as Peter >>Finch, Liv Ullman, and George Kennedy. >>What are your favorite and least favorite movie remakes? >>Walter Reuben >>Walter Reuben, Inc. >>500 North Harper Avenue >>Los Angeles CA 90048 USA >>Email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>(323) 651 3313 >>www.walterfilm.com >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>JR >>To: <mailto:[email protected]>[email protected] >>Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 8:55 PM >>Subject: Re: [MOPO] the original KONG is on the loose ! (film at eleven... >> >>All the surveys I've seen (plus random sampling of my own among my >>son's friends) indicate that most "young people" (who at this point >>are anyone under 30 as far as I'm concerned... what an ironic >>turnaround... but I digress...). Anyway, it seems most "young >>people" really won't watch old black and white movies, even if the >>old fogies keep telling them they are classics and they don't know >>what they're missing. Such is youth. Besides, since the only place >>the original KONG has played on TV in decades is Turner Movie >>Classics, there's a good chance that even a lot of those who might >>watch a film in black and white haven't had the opportunity. I >>doubt that TMC reaches more than 30 million households in the U.S. >>(if that). It is a premium "add-on" channel that a lot of people >>don't get, even if they have cable, believe it or not. >> >>Like a lot of people, at first I was surprised that Jackson didn't >>take his new found wealth and power and strike out with a >>completely original screenplay -- but, unlike George Lucas, who >>really wanted to remake his childhood favorite of FLASH GORDON but >>couldn't get the rights and so had to create STAR WARS instead, >>Jackson was in a position to actually get the chance to do his >>childhood favorite, KING KONG. I don't think many of us with >>filmmaker aspiration (such as myself) could resist the temptation >>to remake one of our childhood favorites, so I can't fault him for >>that, particularly since I have every confidence he would do a >>great job. Plus, since I believe that the original *has* in fact >>been fading from public consciousness over the years, list so many >>classics of the '30s and '40s, I was very glad he got the >>opportunity to turn the spotlight on it again. For him to invest >>his own personal funds in the remastering of the original KONG onto >>DVD is certainly not something he had to do -- or something that >>most would have done. I believe he did it out of respect and >>fondness for the original -- and to help insure that his new >>version wouldn't become "the only Kong" that young people knew. I >>think it is also a way for him to publicly say "Hey, the original >>will always be great, no matter what I do with this modern >>version." I can't help but respect all of that. >> >>As for his new version, all we can do is wait another 3 weeks and >>see for ourselves. I'm betting it will be flamin' fantastic. >> >>-- JR >> >> >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Tom A. Pennock >>To: <mailto:[email protected]>[email protected] >>Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 12:08 >>Subject: Re: [MOPO] the original KONG is on the loose ! (film at eleven... >> >>I also like Peter Jackson as a director and the "Rings" trilogy but >>I wish that he would choose a "new" project instead of a remake. It >>was well made in 1933 and the original have a lot of charm to it. >>All I can see is that Peter Jackson will use CGI which was not >>available in 1933. CGI does not make a good movie. A good story >>(screenplay) does. So IMHO I think a remake is unnecessary. We have >>the 1933 version which always will be the best version. Even with no CGI. >> >>--Tom Pennock >>Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at >><http://www.filmfan.com>www.filmfan.com >>___________________________________________________________________ >>How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List >>Send a message addressed to: >><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L >>The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. >>Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at >><http://www.filmfan.com>www.filmfan.com >>___________________________________________________________________ >>How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List >>Send a message addressed to: >><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L >>The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. >> >>Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at >><http://www.filmfan.com>www.filmfan.com >>___________________________________________________________________ >>How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List >>Send a message addressed to: >><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L >>The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. > >Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com >___________________________________________________________________ >How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List >Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L >The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.5/177 - Release Date: 11/21/2005 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.5/177 - Release Date: 11/21/2005 Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
