|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
Hollywood just keeps coming out with remakes after remakes. The origional PLanet of the Apes is better than the remake as is true of most remakes. Now Footloose has been remade and is out in theaters.
Is there anyone besides me that hears about these remakes and just wants to hang themselves with a tie?
I'm getting tired of both remakes and REBOOTS as well. Don't get me wrong, I think some remakes are good if they can somehow add something that the original didn't bring to the table (i.e. Karate Kid and Peter Jackson's King Kong remake), or adds clever twists while presenting it in a unique way that separates it from the original story ("Fistful of Dollars" for instance being remade from the Kurasawa film, "Yojimbo")
However, most of them are generically laughable and rarely live up to the original's premise.
As for reboots, I know it's still a fairly new concept in Hollywood, but you can already sense that it's starting to wear out it's welcome, as many franchises are being rebooted that frankly...don't need to be rebooted at all. Take Spider-Man for instance. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against a darker take on the character, as I know many of the 80's and 90's comics were dark, but i merely question the timing of it.
Why are they rebooting the franchise again after only a mere few years since the last Spider-man movie came out? Granted, the last one sucked, but it wasn't "Batman & Robin" bad where it turned the franchise into a damn joke. Hell a damn good sequel would've just been as sufficient, and they still could've casted other actors too if they felt the original was getting old...haven't they seen the Bond movies? Plus, unlike Batman's reboot, Spider-man's origin has already been told on the big screen, and quite well too if you want my opinion. Therefore, does Sony honestly think that people are going to see another Spider-man origin story again after less than ten years since it was told the last time? Are they high? Are they on drugs? Or does Disney really have Sony by the balls so much that they're just releasing this reboot to retain the film rights to Spider-man? (FYI: Marvel is now owned by Disney) I could understand if they were waiting say at least twenty or fifteen years, then I'd say reboot it, but not now. It's way too soon. Plus, all it's going to do is create animosity between fans of the last Raimi trilogy, and fans that hated it, when it shouldn't be that way.
Plus, to make matters worse, Batman is said to be getting ANOTHER reboot after Nolan finishes his trilogy. Yes, WB has already stated that Batman will be getting another damn reboot. Therefore, we might have to see Bat's origin...AGAIN on the big screen because Nolan can't end his Batman movie on a open ended note to leave room for a sequel. And DC/WB can't seem to make any of their other characters successful in films outside of Superman and Batman.
You would think that after the several other Batmans' they would get the hint and stop making them. I guess they're like a veteran sports player who doesn't know when to quit.
Another Spider Man movie might be ok, but they want to have someone else play Spider Man. That could end in disaster.
Well I don't know what you mean by that, as pretty much most of the batman movies usually do well in the box office, so that kind of kills what you're trying to say. However, I do agree with you in the sense that I don't see why they should reboot Batman after Nolan's trilogy ends. If they do reboot it, the only way I can see it being possible, and doing well is if two things happen. a) Nolan somehow ends his trilogy on a positive note where Batman doesn't get killed and/or beaten too severely where he couldn't still technically fight crime, and just make some ending up where he just chooses to quit. Then this would fall into the new director's hands to make the next film a quasi reboot/sequel to batman, where they take a sort of James Bond approach to the series. They don't necessarily come out to say it's a sequel to Nolan's trilogy, but they can say the story revolves around "The Dark Knight Returns" where Batman comes out of retirement after being gone for a while. This is the only way I think Batman fans would be happy, and WB could do a reboot. If they try to do the whole origin stuff again, then it'll fail.
Well I'm not really that concerned about Toby Mcguire being recast, as he always struck me as a great peter parker, but he never was able to grasp the Spider-man persona too well. any true spider-man fan will tell you that Spider-Man was not only a super genius, but he was also kind of a wise guy if he had to be. He'd often do this to psyche out some of his more stronger enemies if he couldn't over power them. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that spidey is some sort of comedian, but Toby was never spider-man to me. He was always a great Peter Parker, but never spider-man. It's a shame that Topher Grace was cast as Venom in the last movie, as I think he would've been a great choice to play Spider-Man in this reboot if you ask me.
However, I'm not sure about this new guy, Andrew Garfield. Granted, he was good in the social network, but so far everything that guy says doesn't really make me believe that he can truly pull it off, or has a strong understanding of the character. At least with Macguire, you could sense a level of enthusiasm for playing the character, and a basic understanding of who spidey is supposed to be. Whereas with Garfield, all he says typically is that he was a fan of his because he was skinny...just like him. I'm sorry, but that doesn't exactly instill a lot of confidence in me that he understands the character, as it sounds more like a cop out answer to appease fans. At least, that's just me. However, I'm willing to give the reboot a chance though.
Have you seen the new Three Musketeers commercial? I had to roll my eyes and shake my head at this one.
Yes, I saw that commercial too! They should call it 'Matrix revisited a la Three psychos or something crazy that never happened'. Way too much!
As long as it does the original justice its ok. The karate kid was just as good as the 1st and the new planet of the apes was 10x better then the original. I thing with P.O.T.A people say charlton heston should not be remade but franco was just as good. I can hear all the over 40 crowd crying and complaining about this lol!
I have to say that I agree. Although, I wouldn't be so bold to say that James Franco is better than Charleton Heston, as that's kind of hard to swallow. However, I agree with pretty much everything else you just said; even though I still say the original Karate kid is slightly better. However, i can easily see how one can say the remake is better, as it's a much better told story overall.
I agree for the most part, but there are some remakes that have been better. Case in point Batman. But I wont argue with the fact that most are crap.
Batman was never remade. It's been rebooted a few times, but it's never been remade. Remakes is basically when you retell the same story, but in a new, but rather different way. Or, you choose to expand and improve on an aspect that the original story didn't cover when you retell it.
A reboot is basically a reimagining of a movie/character completely where everything starts over from scratch. However, I get what you're trying to say though.
oh sorry. I misread you there. lol. well I don't know about that either to be honest, but he did do a pretty good job in the movie. much better than most critics have made it out to be. although, I think the best actor in the new movie is Andy Serkis if you ask me. any actor that can make you feel SOMETHING for his character without saying anything...definitely deserves an Oscar in my book.
People are not as creative as they once where they cant come up with their own unique cool stories. Plus its much easier and cheaper to make a profit off a remake as always. I dont see it changing any time soon unless people stop going to watch them
yeah that's true. plus not to mention that with the economy being what it is these days, most studios aren't willing to take a big chance on a new product that could make or break them over a proven well known marketable brand that they can easily remake.
Try to think of it in terms of the total lack of originality that comes from too few people determining what will be produced. The producers of the movie industry are no longer risk takers. They are now business entities looking to maximize their investments. How about the cartoon character super hero upgrades that have been proliferating. The production of the remake has become an end in itself. The new market, comprised of those who have not seen the original, is huge. This does not include the emerging Asian markets for anything new and American. Why would you remake "True Grit?" We're not looking to create art just give me a definite winning story that will give me a reasonable return on my investment.
Its a new twist I actually like it. Mila jovavich is aweome and perfect for this movie it will be interesting!
i cant stand a majority of the remakes. in fact i cant think of one that has been worth watching. The Thing was the most recent dissapointment and of course 3 Musketeers will be. Paul Anderson is a terrible writer/director and he always manages to get his wife involved in all off his projects.
I like to see them to find out what kind of vision the director is going to put to it. I can't recall being dissappointed in any remakes that I have seen. I'm sure if I thought about it though I could come up with some.
by Zaiden Jace4 years ago
Do you think movies should be remade?
by Steven Escareno5 years ago
Okay, I'm sure most people have seen both versions, so in your opinions, which is the better film? The remake of Karate Kid? Or the original? Here are the criteria for you to judge by:Better Karate Kid...
by Alem Belton7 years ago
When will it end? I hear there are talks going on right now to 'reboot' the "Lethal Weapon" movie series. How the hell do you reboot "Lethal Weapon?" I can understand James Bond,...
by Kenna McHugh14 months ago
Should male dominated movies be remade with female dominated movies?This is the first image of Ocean 8 (remake of Ocean 11) starring Sandra Bullock, Cate Blanchett and Rest of the All-Female Cast.
by Noel Tanti4 years ago
Which film do you wish had never been remade?
by JP Carlos5 years ago
What old movie or TV series do you want to see a remake?For TV series I want to see MacGyver. I also I want to see a remake of The Lone Ranger.
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.