• SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    5 months ago

    Basically that’s what they did with Ocean’s 11. The original Frank Sinatra version was shit. But it was a good idea, a crew of super cool dudes get together to rob a casino.

    They remade it and it was very successful.

    The Thing has a similar origin.

    But it’s rare things like that happen because Hollywood execs usually need an existing property with good numbers to greenlight a movie.

    • Rusty@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      For a second I thought you were trying to say that The Thing (2011) is a better remake of The Thing (1982), but then I remembered that 1951 version exists.

  • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    Ghost in the Shell was an unnecessary remake of a fantastic original animation that was improved by the series that followed it. There was never a need for a live action version.

    • ClaraBecker@threads.net@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Ghost in the shell was decent. They paid incredible attention to the art direction and casting ranged from perfect to acceptable. I can’t remember a single scene but their rendering of 90s retrofuturism sincerely blew me away. Maybe modern cinema has tainted me but it really wasn’t terrible.

      • Taffer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        It could have been an acceptably decent movie if it wasn’t trying to be part of the GitS franchise. As a GitS fan I hated it, but I wonder if it could have been more fun to watch if I was unfamiliar with the series. I remember thinking the same with a lot of movies based on books I hadn’t read like Percy Jackson, the movie became a lot worse after reading the source material.

        • Carlo@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          It could have been an acceptably decent movie if it wasn’t trying to be part of the GitS franchise.

          Yeah, I think this is a pretty common phenomenon. In the same vein, Discovery could have been a fun sci-fi show if it wasn’t trying to be part of Star Trek.

          As a GitS fan I hated it, but I wonder if it could have been more fun to watch if I was unfamiliar with the series.

          Yeah, this as well. I’m sure I would have enjoyed the Hobbit trilogy more if I’d never read the book. Still, there are such huge chunks of those movies that just feel like video game cut scenes—probably not the best example.

  • gibmiser@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Word War Z.

    Have it actually be a mocumentary with interviews. Once people start talking switch to the scene. It is a collection of short stories. Would be fun.

    Or make it a mini series.

    • kinther@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Personally I thought the book was good, but I don’t think an adaptation to a movie format is the right move. Maybe a mini series would be best.

    • JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yeah I’ve never read the book but I’ve heard the movie was literally just a generic zombie movie that had nothing to do with the book.

          • Iapar@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            Didn’t read the books and can’t remember much of the movie but one thing.

            The way the zombies moved as a fluid.

            That was the best depiction of horde behavior I have seen. The thought that they climb over obstacles by climbing over each other was brilliant and scary.

  • rekabis@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Virtually every single bad adaptation can be directly traced back to studio interference.

    Movies like LoTR only happened because the studios thought it would be a colossal flop, and so left the directors and producers alone.

    If you want great movies, the studios need to leave the producers and directors the hell alone.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Counterpoint: Game of Thrones. The studio would have been happy to give them a few more seasons to develop a better ending. It’s the creators who gave up and phoned in the ending we got.

      • UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        The only problem is that GoT didn’t have any more source material, as Martin didn’t finish the story (think he still hasn’t?).

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          The creators were in constant touch with GRRM. They knew where he intends to go. The ending we got could be done better if things were fleshed out over a longer period of time.

          • Volkditty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            You’re assuming GRRM knows where he intends to go. Or more importantly, how he intends to get there.

            • frezik@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              We know he has a specific destination in mind. It’s well established that he had an outline for what was originally a trilogy. It’s why the first book is heavier with hints of (for example) Jon’s lineage than the others.

              How to get there has clearly changed, and GRRM might not know how anymore.

    • Kairos@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Writing is the only thing that matters. I point to “Everything Everywhere All at Once” and “Amsterdam”. The latter of which had 4x the budget.

  • pavnilschanda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    His Dark Materials was like this. The Golden Compass was poorly reviewed, and I’m glad that the TV series were made.

  • gdog05@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Some older movies that come to mind: Enemy Mine. Great sci fi premise that was ahead of its time. Just plagued with bad effects and limitations.

    The Last Starfighter Not bad even for the day but I think it’s a solid enough concept that could use a refresh. Set in the 80’s to get the retro video game vibe. I think it could even be a multiple movie property.

    Masters of the Universe It was a goofy premise with some interesting characters that were wasted. Even the updated animated series didn’t do great. Or even go off in a space Western and do a Rio Blast movie.

    Krull was really missing the visual elements to tell the story and it ended up cheesy and stilted (still holds some nostalgia for me though). It could still be a fun space fantasy.

  • darko8472@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    I would love a proper remake of Eragon. That movie felt so rushed, like they just chopped the meat out of the story and gave us the bloody mush instead of the whole thing.

  • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    I think the main thing here is that the original was such a flop that they don’t want to repeat the error.

    It’s a hard sell to take an unsuccessful film (with admittedly a good underlying story/concept), and then convince the suits that this time will be different because reasons.

    When they can remake an old hit, even if it’s done poorly, most people will want to see it for themselves, if for no other reason than to join in on the chorus of hate. Those ticket sales are still sales. So whether people like it or not, they stand a good chance to turn a reasonable profit.

    Meanwhile, films that did poorly, whether due to script issues, or poor execution of the underlying material or whatever, people will be more willing to let it pass them by unless they have it on his authority that it’s good. Of course, not everyone will think this way, but it’s the basis for judgement for most.

    Additionally, by remaking a movie they can renew their copyright on the film, which is why, I believe that many of the older films are getting unnecessary remakes and sequels. Even if it’s bad, it locks them in on copyrights for a while longer; so if they want to continue to profit from the property, whether through licensing, promos, merchandise, whatever, they can. The base point being: does anyone want to license this property? If not, the suits wouldn’t care as much if the copyright expires.

    Think about something like star wars. It had a pretty strong following at the first three films, even decades after the release, it was very likely that there were ongoing licensing deals. So to renew the copy rights, they remastered and rereleased it to theatres. Even if it flopped, it would have ensured they can continue their licensing deals for years to come. Since it didn’t, they decided instead to expand the franchise and see if they can get more money from it, and they did. Which is how we ended up with the sequels and several spin off shows.

    Simply put, it’s just too risky to invest more money into properties to renew copyright when there’s no interest in licensing the content in the first place. Many of the production companies are happy to let a property rot while they’re collecting paycheques on licensing. It’s all about the numbers.

  • Alteon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is how we’ve ended up with 17 different attempts at the fucking Fantastic Four. Each one is shit, and EVERY director thinks that they’ve got the chops to make it work.

    Hollywood…please…fucking stop. It doesn’t get better. It’s a cursed movie. Stop fucking trying to get the Fantastic Four to work. Just…put the poor thing out of its misery and let it sleep peacefully.

    • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Ehh, some of them were to maintain Fox license from Marvel. They were contractually obligated to put out a movie every X years or they lost control of it. Mostly they just wanted something cheap or weird out of the door.

      Now that Fox entertainment and Marvel have been gobbled by the mouse, it may not be a problem anymore. They sure got Reid Richards right in that doc strange film, even if he got obliterated on alternative earth.

  • lectricleopard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    How are our corporate overlord supposed to know what a good story is other than the success of a movie based in them?

    • InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Ironically capitalism does not like to take much risk, nor do the large companies who are best able to take them. It also sucks that many things are switching to being ads supported, so there is further limiting of creativity. For example, Love, Death, and Robots is a really awesome animated anthology. It is something that does not try to have the broadest appeal; however, the customers are now advertisers who may not want to run ads on something with a narrower audience. Oddly it seems Netflix will be going down the path of YouTube battling that to keep the content adverts will buy space for, and YouTube trying to be independent of it with its premium. Strange world.