Andrew Forbes wrote:
Dunnyman wrote:aaaaand the End Times are upon us, folks. Glad to have known y'all....
Well as long as we're getting predictably, prematurely hysterical. Remakes bad! George Luca$! Hollyweird no ideas! CGI! 3D!
Meanwhile, countless other options exist in foreign, independent and mainstream American cinema. And the original Thin Man—with its phenomenal writing, iconic performances, dull mystery and flat direction—remains.
Hysterical? Two sentences?
Funny, I've never ever said that all remakes are bad. Nor have I ever said that 3D or CGI is bad. Lighten up dude, t'was a joke.
Nothing wrong with remaking something that was OK or even second rate and making it better. Remaking great things tends to come out poorly because trying to capture the lightning in a bottle that made the first so special is bloody difficult to do. An excellent example of my point is the recent David Suchet version of Murder On The Orient Express
. The production values for the Poirot series have been uniformly excellent, the casts have all been good, and while the scripts tend to make some changes I'm not fond of, they've done pretty good work for the most part. Yet, it lacked in so many ways. Suchet was excellent, but the co-stars didn't have the combination of star power and sheer talent that the 74 version did, and it made the remake seem flat compared to the superb original.
Now is that hysterical? Seems to be well reasoned.
My objections to a Thin Man
remake are based on the same rationale, 11 freaking days to shoot that first movie with 'One Take Woody' at the helm, the amazing chemistry between Loy and Powell and possibly the greatest animal actor in history? A great story by one of America's greatest writers? The drinking was a huge part of it yes, because America was drinking like never before due to the repeal of Prohibition. So where can they go wrong? I'll take some guesses, shall I?
1. They'll cut back on the drinking because "they don't want to set a bad example for people or glorify alcohol abuse". There goes a large part of the charm.
2. They will cast the co-star based on bankability, unlike Van Dyke's insistence on the unexpected Loy because he realized how funny she could be in the right situation. So we'll get Emma Stone or some other equally bland actress that can't even come close to keeping up with Depp who can command the screen at any moment. Loy and Powell were one of the greatest teams in cinema history for a reason. They had incredible chemistry and neither one could dominate the other onscreen.
3. They'll change the period setting. Splendid. Nick Charles following up the clue on his iPad.
4. Instead of finding a gifted canine actor, Asta will be a cute CGI creation because it'll be easier.
5. They'll have some overdone plotline with way too much going on, and ignore the fact that it was the bickering/lovey dove between the two leads and the jokes that were important, not the fairly slight plots.
Oh yeah, for the whole "remakes are the greatest idea in history" crowd, how'd the recent Robin Hood work out for y'all? I was gonna go see it but it was out of my theater in three weeks. Lost over 100 million dollars on that "great idea", they did.
Someone or other around here said that would happen but they were probably just hysterical.