Jets Insider.com Forums - View Single Post

Warfish · 06-27-2012, 10:53 AM

[QUOTE=JStokes;4501834]You don't think the new Batman franchise isn't 1000X better than the one starring Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer and George Clooney? Heath Ledger versus Jack as The Joker? Much darker, much more serious, better cinematography. Don't get me wrong, I liked the earlier versions, but the new franchise blows them away.[/quote]

Comic Book moviews are all fail. But thats just me.

[QUOTE]You don't think the newest Bond franchise isn't better (darker, more serious) than almost all of the previous Bonds (other than Connery--and his were still a bit campy). Casino Royale WAS a remake.[/QUOTE]

Sort of remake at most tbqh. Also, very different genre. Spy vs. Sci-Fi.

But I agree, 2000's Blond Bond is (IMO) 100% better than 70's Sly Sexy Spy Bond.

[QUOTE]One of my favorite movies as a kid was The Omega Man with Charlton Heston--but it's extremely dated. I Am Legend was a very solid remake.[/QUOTE]

You think I Am LOLgend was solid?

Um, ok. You get jiggy wit dat.

[QUOTE]Look, I loved Blade Runner, but doing a remake doesn't mean you have to throw out your DVD of the Ridley Scott/Harrison Ford version--neither of which, btw, even liked the way it was originally released--they were extremely vocal in their displeasure with the way the producers recut it to satisfy Hollywood.[/QUOTE]

Fair criticism, there WAS (and probably still is) alot of issues between Scott, Ford and teh studio on what version was best, what should be in, what not in, ect, ect, ect.

[QUOTE]And as much as I liked the original Total Recall, I think the new Colin Farrell version is going to be great.[/QUOTE]

I agree. But I just don't see the same differences with Blade Runner. TR V1.0 was a Campy Musclebound Action Flick. TR V2.0 is (it seems) more Blade Runner, less Commando. Very different.

[QUOTE]Just saying, I wouldn't mind seeing a newer take on Blade Runner. You don't have to see it, you know. [/QUOTE]

Aye, we don't have to want it to be made either.

Guess it goes back to each of our "darlings" as it were. Personally, I could give a rats ass if they remade "Godfather". Couldn't care less, in fact would probably be fine with it cause Mobster flicks aren't my thing anyway.

But some films need a good long time before they get remade, especially if other NEW and not-yet-made material is available instead. Remake Jaws, **** you. Remake Blade Runner, no, **** you. :D:P

I just don't understand why one would want another Balde Runner, before they'd want a new version of other novels not yet made. Would seem natural to want new, not more Hollywood remake-rehash-recycle.

06-27-2012, 10:53 AM	#56
Warfish JetsInsider.com Legend Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 35,000	[QUOTE=JStokes;4501834]You don't think the new Batman franchise isn't 1000X better than the one starring Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer and George Clooney? Heath Ledger versus Jack as The Joker? Much darker, much more serious, better cinematography. Don't get me wrong, I liked the earlier versions, but the new franchise blows them away.[/quote] Comic Book moviews are all fail. But thats just me. [QUOTE]You don't think the newest Bond franchise isn't better (darker, more serious) than almost all of the previous Bonds (other than Connery--and his were still a bit campy). Casino Royale WAS a remake.[/QUOTE] Sort of remake at most tbqh. Also, very different genre. Spy vs. Sci-Fi. But I agree, 2000's Blond Bond is (IMO) 100% better than 70's Sly Sexy Spy Bond. [QUOTE]One of my favorite movies as a kid was The Omega Man with Charlton Heston--but it's extremely dated. I Am Legend was a very solid remake.[/QUOTE] You think I Am LOLgend was solid? Um, ok. You get jiggy wit dat. [QUOTE]Look, I loved Blade Runner, but doing a remake doesn't mean you have to throw out your DVD of the Ridley Scott/Harrison Ford version--neither of which, btw, even liked the way it was originally released--they were extremely vocal in their displeasure with the way the producers recut it to satisfy Hollywood.[/QUOTE] Fair criticism, there WAS (and probably still is) alot of issues between Scott, Ford and teh studio on what version was best, what should be in, what not in, ect, ect, ect. [QUOTE]And as much as I liked the original Total Recall, I think the new Colin Farrell version is going to be great.[/QUOTE] I agree. But I just don't see the same differences with Blade Runner. TR V1.0 was a Campy Musclebound Action Flick. TR V2.0 is (it seems) more Blade Runner, less Commando. Very different. [QUOTE]Just saying, I wouldn't mind seeing a newer take on Blade Runner. You don't have to see it, you know. [/QUOTE] Aye, we don't have to want it to be made either. Guess it goes back to each of our "darlings" as it were. Personally, I could give a rats ass if they remade "Godfather". Couldn't care less, in fact would probably be fine with it cause Mobster flicks aren't my thing anyway. But some films need a good long time before they get remade, especially if other NEW and not-yet-made material is available instead. Remake Jaws, ** you. Remake Blade Runner, no, ** you. :D:P I just don't understand why one would want another Balde Runner, before they'd want a new version of other novels not yet made. Would seem natural to want new, not more Hollywood remake-rehash-recycle.