Started By
Message
Hollywood has truly run out of ideas
Posted on 6/18/16 at 12:00 pm
Posted on 6/18/16 at 12:00 pm
Remaking one of the GOATs, Ben Hur? What's fricking next, The Godfather? Will nothing be sacred? Stop this shite. Do not watch.
14
Posted on 6/18/16 at 12:06 pm to PrivatePublic
Well at least theyre not remaking Ghost Busters with a bunch of womenz.
This post was edited on 6/18/16 at 12:07 pm
Posted on 6/18/16 at 12:20 pm to PrivatePublic
What's wrong with updating a 57 year old classic? You think kids these days have interest in watching a 3 hour movie from 1959? By remaking/ updating it you're further preserving it by creating interest for another generation.
As long as they do it justice and just remake it with modern technology instead of bastardizing it with an all female cast then I don't see the problem.
As long as they do it justice and just remake it with modern technology instead of bastardizing it with an all female cast then I don't see the problem.
Posted on 6/18/16 at 12:33 pm to PrivatePublic
Would you prefer for me to stay off your lawn?
This post was edited on 6/18/16 at 12:36 pm
Posted on 6/18/16 at 1:53 pm to PrivatePublic
It gets worse dude, they'r re-booting Stargate.
Nothing is sacred.
Nothing is sacred.
Posted on 6/18/16 at 1:55 pm to BowlJackson
quote:
You think kids these days have interest in watching a 3 hour movie from 1959?
Don't give me that time bullshite. Modern movies are routinely 2 and a half hours now. They have plenty of time to watch these shitty remakes. How hard is it to google "great classic movies"?
Posted on 6/18/16 at 2:05 pm to PrivatePublic
quote:
Do not watch.
Don't tell me what to do.
This post was edited on 6/18/16 at 2:06 pm
Posted on 6/18/16 at 2:13 pm to PrivatePublic
Judah is a black lesbian this time around.
Posted on 6/18/16 at 2:31 pm to PrivatePublic
More coke please!
Posted on 6/18/16 at 5:56 pm to PrivatePublic
If you don't like it, nobody's making you watch it. Now STFU and let the free market work.
Posted on 6/19/16 at 11:24 am to PrivatePublic
You are aware that Charlton Heston's Ben-Hur was also a remake, right? 
Posted on 6/19/16 at 11:33 am to PrivatePublic
I don't have any issue with the premise of a Ben-Hur remake given its age. I just don't have any faith in Hollywood making a good religious epic anymore.
I think the last really good religious epic I've seen was Kingdom of Heaven and it was the Director's Cut, not the Theatrical Release. That's been over a decade.
I think the last really good religious epic I've seen was Kingdom of Heaven and it was the Director's Cut, not the Theatrical Release. That's been over a decade.
Posted on 6/20/16 at 2:50 pm to BluegrassBelle
I heard that version of the movie was 3+ hours. I want to see that someday, Belle. I have the dvd but not that version.
Posted on 6/20/16 at 11:13 pm to PrivatePublic
quote:
What's fricking next,
An all female Ocean's 11
Posted on 6/21/16 at 10:06 am to BluegrassBelle
quote:
I don't have any issue with the premise of a Ben-Hur remake given its age.
Exactly. After a certain amount of time movies basically become historical pieces, then it's time to reboot for a new generation. My wife won't watch almost any movie before 1978 because of the way the women act for example. But she might enjoy the same story with a little CGI and a modern female character or two.
I hate it when it's like Spiderman and they want to reboot three time in twenty years.
Posted on 6/21/16 at 12:01 pm to PrivatePublic
Hollywood has a lot of original ideas. You just never see them. And if they do come out with something original, it's rarely supported at the box office.
To that end, executives are looking for something with a built-in audience. Unless they're going to spend under the 5.5 million cut-off so that it's a Tier 1 film.
Studios hedge their bets by using properties they already own the rights to (remakes, sequels, TV show adaptations) or/and or things that have a built-in audience (the above listed, popular novels, etc.).
The reason they do this is to protect investors and -- if going the independent route -- can sell investors the idea, by proving its success as a known commodity, by using its past success as a barometer.
But that's all part and partial to moviegoers rewarding those investments with a return at the box office. If people didn't reward that with ticket sales, Hollywood wouldn't churn out the movies they do. They simply give the public what it wants, and the public wants crappy movies that they can recognize.
To that end, executives are looking for something with a built-in audience. Unless they're going to spend under the 5.5 million cut-off so that it's a Tier 1 film.
Studios hedge their bets by using properties they already own the rights to (remakes, sequels, TV show adaptations) or/and or things that have a built-in audience (the above listed, popular novels, etc.).
The reason they do this is to protect investors and -- if going the independent route -- can sell investors the idea, by proving its success as a known commodity, by using its past success as a barometer.
But that's all part and partial to moviegoers rewarding those investments with a return at the box office. If people didn't reward that with ticket sales, Hollywood wouldn't churn out the movies they do. They simply give the public what it wants, and the public wants crappy movies that they can recognize.
Posted on 6/21/16 at 5:12 pm to PrivatePublic
You sound like an old degenerative fart.
Its 5:00 so you must be getting tired
Its 5:00 so you must be getting tired
Posted on 6/21/16 at 6:27 pm to PrivatePublic
That movie is boring as shite. It needs a remake.
Plus the one that came out in 59 was a remake itself.
Plus the one that came out in 59 was a remake itself.
This post was edited on 6/21/16 at 6:30 pm
Posted on 6/21/16 at 6:37 pm to PrivatePublic
I wish Mel Brooks coulda done a film like History of the World except using the way the world is now. I bet it would be hilarious with his spin on Islam and Rs vs. Ds.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News