sallupo wrote:I think they should remake "3 days of the condor".
That is one underated movie. A smart CIA thriller way before the bourne trilogy.
I agree. Much smarter than Bourne and would be an excellent thriller.
sallupo wrote:I think they should remake "3 days of the condor".
That is one underated movie. A smart CIA thriller way before the bourne trilogy.
valeriewriter wrote:Citizen Kane. It should be updated to be about someone more relevant to today like Steve Jobs or Bill Gates.
BuckyO'harre wrote:Ted Turner or Rupert Murdoch would be more apropos.
valeriewriter wrote:BuckyO'harre wrote:Ted Turner or Rupert Murdoch would be more apropos.
Maybe they can do them all and make it a trilogy.
TheButcher wrote:Cinematical Seven: Franchises J.J. Abrams Should RebootSerenity / Firefly.
Back to the Future.
Speed.
Wonder Woman.
True Lies.
Superman.
Star Wars.
Serenity / Firefly.
Back to the Future.
Speed.
Wonder Woman.
True Lies.
Superman.
Star Wars.
SilentBobX wrote:Star Wars.
Please, just don't. The last 3 were a mess, don't let the next ones end up in similar commercial vehicle circumstances.
papalazeru wrote:Back to the Future.
Why, isn't it perfect the way it is?
Spandau Belly wrote:Alright, I have a bit of trouble putting my thoughts into words here but here it goes.
You know how Ridley Scott has been trying for decades to re-edit Blade Runner and doing interviews claiming that the movie was actually about a replicant who is designed to hunt other replicants but doesn't know that he himself is one? No matter how many edits, and remasterings, and public statements Ridley Scott makes, Blade Runner will never be that movie. It's just not about those things. They're not there in the movie.
But what if Scott did a movie that actually was that? The world would look the same and all, but it would be a different story. So not even a remake really. Just a shot at making the movie Scott has deluded himself into thinking but never did.
Eric Bana would good as the lead Blade Runner guy. They don't even have to call it Blade Runner, they could use the original title Dangerous Days or think up something else.
thefraze wrote:I wouldn't say it was entirely his fault... besides, "Alien: Resurrection" destroyed the Alien franchise.
Peven wrote:thefraze wrote:I wouldn't say it was entirely his fault... besides, "Alien: Resurrection" destroyed the Alien franchise.
how did it do any worse than Alien 3? seriously. i at least had fun with it and liked the cast a whole lot more, too
Spandau Belly wrote:Peven wrote:thefraze wrote:I wouldn't say it was entirely his fault... besides, "Alien: Resurrection" destroyed the Alien franchise.
how did it do any worse than Alien 3? seriously. i at least had fun with it and liked the cast a whole lot more, too
Maybe because even though Alien 3 is full of plot holes it is still a logical and compelling conclusion to the series and then Alien 4 just goes back hits 'undo' on death making it all kinda meaningless. Once you start doing stuff in a film like making death inconsequential it's hard to care about anything.
But I will give you that Alien 4 is a fun movie. It's a good time in that stupid P.M.S. Anderson kind of way, but as an Alien movie it's a total embarassment.
Peven wrote:Spandau Belly wrote:Peven wrote:thefraze wrote:I wouldn't say it was entirely his fault... besides, "Alien: Resurrection" destroyed the Alien franchise.
how did it do any worse than Alien 3? seriously. i at least had fun with it and liked the cast a whole lot more, too
Maybe because even though Alien 3 is full of plot holes it is still a logical and compelling conclusion to the series and then Alien 4 just goes back hits 'undo' on death making it all kinda meaningless. Once you start doing stuff in a film like making death inconsequential it's hard to care about anything.
But I will give you that Alien 4 is a fun movie. It's a good time in that stupid P.M.S. Anderson kind of way, but as an Alien movie it's a total embarassment.
but that is pretty much what Alien 3 did first, by going back and killing off Hicks and Newt, infecting Ridley with an alien, making Bishop one of the bad guys, undoing all of what had been worked for and built in Aliens making the audience's journey through that story almost entirely moot. it was arrogance, and so compared to that i cut Alien 4 some slack for one concept they used to create a starting point for that story
thefraze wrote:It was a foreign object resting in her insides, at least with a human pregnancy I could believe some aspect of the biology taking place.
Besides, cheeseburgers are parasitic.
Spandau Belly wrote:There is an Alien thread and this chat will probably get relocated there soon.
But I definately disagree with you guys about killing off well-liked characters like Newt and Hicks being the same as bringing a character back from the dead. I'm not going to get into the science holes in these movies, because.... well.... they're movies.
I'm also not sure exactly what you guys thought would happen with those characters still alive in part 3 and still make it have an alien. I guess it could be a movie about a family bonding through fighting an alien together, but that seems like the type of bullshit that would piss more people off than what they actually did do.
I liked Alien 3 as a conclusion to the series because it made sense. No matter where Ripley went and what she did the alien would destroy it so she destroys herself along with the alien. The end.
Anyway, I realize there's a lot of love for Michael Beihn out there. And I feel he's been in some good movies, but cutting his character from Alien sequels is not the same as cutting Ripley or the alien.
Maybe you guys were just happy with Aliens as the final Alien movie and should just watch those two?
OriginalGagBonkers wrote:They need to get the guys who wrote the dark knight or Frank Miller to remake this movie
Ribbons wrote:For a while I've thought that a good movie to remake would be The Hitch's (The Cock's?) Shadow of a Doubt. It's actually pretty solid on its own and in general I'm not really big on the idea of remaking stuff that already works, but certain scenes in it kept making me think of an alternate version of the movie that isn't a thriller.
For anyone who's never seen it before, the plot is about an uncle and his niece, both named Charlie, who initially share a close, almost psychic bond: several shots of both characters at the beginning of the film mirror one another. But it turns out that guy Charlie isn't quite as nice as girl Charlie thinks: he murders an old woman and makes off with her money, then hides out at his sister's house while on the lam. Uncle Charlie tries to kill his niece a couple of times to prevent her from ratting him out, and eventually falls off a train and dies.
I really dig the idea of the uncle and niece having a close relationship despite that fact that he's a thug and a fuck-up and she's, well, pretty much the opposite. And there was this one scene in the original movie where she relays a dream she had where "You were getting on a train... you were going away... and I was happy." It was meant to be an insult, but I think it'd be an interesting twist if her dream actually came true, just not in the way she expected. As in, she came back around, ended up helping him escape, and was "happy" because she kept him out of harm's way. I don't know, I just feel like there's an interesting story there that could work in a different genre.
Fried Gold wrote:What's interesting is that you sorta expect the uncle to not really be a murderer, that the detective is wrong and it's just Charlie's suspicion that will unsettle things. Then he goes a bit psycho.
Ribbons wrote:Fried Gold wrote:What's interesting is that you sorta expect the uncle to not really be a murderer, that the detective is wrong and it's just Charlie's suspicion that will unsettle things. Then he goes a bit psycho.
Yeah, that's part of it, I think. I liked the beginning better, when the question of whether he actually committed the crime was more ambiguous. By the end of the movie it wasn't so much "Shadow of a Doubt" as "I'mma Kill This Bitch"
Bloo wrote:Basically it's a redneck Hunchback of Notre Dame
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests