quote:

Originally posted by ericg75:

quote:

Originally posted by ChrisFromAstoria:
I have no interest in seeing the YOURS, MINE & YOURS remake, which has been castigated by the critics. It stars Dennis Quaid, the classic second- or third-tier actor, who takes the roles no one else wants. He ends up in junk like this or the ALAMO remake.

Although this movie looks like it sucks, and probably does, I have to disagree with your assessment of Dennis Quaid's acting ability. He's done some great work in some terrific films lately, with back to back roles in "Traffic", "The Rookie", and "Far From Heaven" a few years ago, and a great turn in the terribly underrated "In Good Company" earlier this year.

While I will probably never see Yours, Mine, and Ours, I agree with eric that Dennis Quaid has had some good roles, starting way back with Breaking Away and as Gordo Cooper in The Right Stuff. In the last 10 years, in addition to the movies eric listed, I also enjoyed him in Wyatt Earp and Any Given Sunday. I thought he played the perfect father role as Dan Foreman in In Good Company.

quote:

Originally posted by PRG:
Although this movie looks like it sucks, and probably does, I have to disagree with your assessment of Dennis Quaid's acting ability. He's done some great work in some terrific films lately, with back to back roles in "Traffic", "The Rookie", and "Far From Heaven" a few years ago, and a great turn in the terribly underrated "In Good Company" earlier this year.

quote:

Originally posted by ericg75:
While I will probably never see Yours, Mine, and Ours, I agree with eric that Dennis Quaid has had some good roles, starting way back with Breaking Away and as Gordo Cooper in The Right Stuff. In the last 10 years, in addition to the movies eric listed, I also enjoyed him in Wyatt Earp and Any Given Sunday. I thought he played the perfect father role as Dan Foreman in In Good Company.

I guess I meant that Quaid's leading man days in big budget films are over. Quaid was indeed good in FAR FROM HEAVEN TRAFFIC & ANY GIVEN SUNDAY, but those were in supporting roles. I agree THE ROOKIE was surprisingly good, but that was a movie that kind of came out of nowhere.

BREAKING AWAY and THE RIGHT STUFF were a long time ago. WYATT EARP also was also a long time ago, but Kevin Costner was the lead in that film.

IN GOOD COMPANY is an art film.

When Quaid gets a gig in a big budget film where he is the lead or a big role, they tend to be stinkers like FLIGHT OF THE PHOENIX (another stinker remake I forgot about), THE ALAMO or THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW.

TCM screened a pile of Olivier's Shakespeare films. I remember once, the same weekend, going to see Ken Branagh's recent HENRY V and Olivier's acclaimed version and feeling that the Branagh version was the better of the two, rare that a remake was superior to the original. Though, I'm not saying that the original was very good.

Because the Barbra Streisand/Kris Kristofferson A STAR IS BORN remake is on tv this weekend, that movie is an interesting one to evaluate.

There have been three or four versions, depending if you consider WHAT PRICE HOLLYWOOD? from the early 1930's as the first.

For argument's sake I'll exclude that film, but the best of the 3, if not the best known, versions actually called A STAR IS BORN may be the late 1930's version directed by William Wellman and starring Frederic March and Janet Gaynor I believe.

The best known version is the widely acclaimed early 1950's film directed by George Cukor and starring Judy Garland and James Mason, who was magnificent, but not the first choice for the role. Cary Grant is who they wanted. I think Cukor is way overrated as a director. I find Cukor-directed films to be static and stagey. ANd the Cukor version is way, way overlong. In fact, after original release, its running time was cut. There have been attempts to restore the original version, but I think it should have been cut.

The third version, with Streisand, is a certified camp classic. It has to be seen to be believed. Barbra, was, well, Barbra. The 1970's-era fashions have dated badly and Barb has this horrendous curly hairdo that has to be seen to be believed.

Well, the second KING KONG remake has fared better than the other remakes that have been released this year. Today, FUN WITH DICK AND JANE opened, starring Jim Carey & Tea Leoni, and judging by the review I read in the "New York Times" and the 47 score on metacritics.com I'm giving this one a wide berth. I saw the late 70's original years ago on video and I didn't think that was so hot either, but sounds like it would be better than the remake.

Then you have CHEAPER BY THE DOZEN 2, which isn't technically a remake, but a sequel to a lame remake. This one again was dismissed with a brief review in "The Times" today by a free-lance critic and scored low, low, low on metacritics (38). It looks like Steve Martin is just cashing a paycheck.

I was looking through the "Favorite Directors" thread and someone chose Guy Ritchie, aka Mr. Madonna. That reminded of a weak remake helmed by Mr. Madonna and starring Mrs. Madonna, SWEPT AWAY. I didn't see the Madonnas' version, but it was castigated by critics when it was released two or three years ago and disappeared from theatres in about a minute. In fact, it tanked so much that it didn't even get released in parts of the country.

I actually liked Ritchie's first two films, LOCK, STOCK & TWO SMOKING BARRELS and SNATCH so hope that Mrs. Madonna doesn't kill Mr. Madonna's career.

I did like the original, Italian/Lena Wertmuller version of SWEPT AWAY and based on what the critics said, the remake could be classified as a stinker.

I caught THE MAN WHO KNEW MUCH remake the other day and it held up pretty well. What is odd about this remake is that Hitchcock also directed the original THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH 20 years earlier. I'm sure there are examples of the same director remaking the same thing, but other than TMWKTM, I can't think of one offhand.

One other oddity, now that I think of it, is RED DUST and its remake MOGAMBO. The directors were different, Victor Fleming and John Ford respectively, but Clark Gable starred in both versions. The actresses were different, however, In the original, I think the female leads were Jean Harlow and maybe Mary Astor. In MOGAMBO, the same roles were played by Grace Kelly & Ava Gardner.

quote:

Originally posted by ChrisFromAstoria:
I caught THE MAN WHO KNEW MUCH remake the other day and it held up pretty well. What is odd about this remake is that Hitchcock also directed the original THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH 20 years earlier. I'm sure there are examples of the same director remaking the same thing, but other than TMWKTM, I can't think of one offhand.

Cecil B. Demille remade his own "The Ten Commandments". There have also been several cases of foreign directors helming the english language remakes of their previously successful foreign films. This was the case with "The Vanishing", and the recent "The Gudge" movies.

One of the strangest remakes had to be the two versions of the EXORCIST prequel. Paul Schrader was the original director and finished the film, but the financers were so unhappy with the finished product -- not scary enough or something -- they scrapped it and filmed it all over again helmed by hack Renny Harlin. Well, the Harlin version was released, was panned and came and went quickly. The studio then in '05 released Schrader's version. I don't know which one is the remake because Schrader's version was made first but released second. I didn't see the Harlan verson, but am a fan of Schrader and while not a great film, Schrader's EXORCIST prequel was interesting and there was some intelligence behind the film.

The Longest Yard was probably the worst remake. Terrible. I haven't seen the original, but I heard it was decent. The recent one was anyhting but.

One movie that hasn't been remade but I always thought would be interesting is It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World. I loved it as a kid and still enjoy it today. (Just not nearly as often). I think that a remake, if done properly and cast well, could be dynamite. I have even contemplated who should be cast in certain roles, although a few of the best choices have passed away in the last 10 years.

Mike Myers for Milton Berle
Chris Farley for Jonathan Winters
Anthony Hopkins for Spencer Tracy
Peter Falk for Peter Falk
Tom Hanks for Sid Cesear
Dana Carvey for Mickey Rooney
John Candy for Buddy Hackett
Bette Midler for Ethel Merman

I'd love to hear some other ideas or feedback on this. (Including how stupid I am)

quote:

P-Bo posted:

One movie that hasn't been remade but I always thought would be interesting is It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World. I loved it as a kid and still enjoy it today. (Just not nearly as often). I think that a remake, if done properly and cast well, could be dynamite. I have even contemplated who should be cast in certain roles, although a few of the best choices have passed away in the last 10 years.

Coincidentally enough, I recently saw this movie on television late at night and, unfortunately, it just wasn't as fun and entertaining as I remembered it as a child. It used to be one of my favorite comedy movie memories. Yet there is something timelessly classic about it and I think it would wonderful if an attempt was made to remake and update this movie. A very good idea.

It's a mad mad mad mad world was remade. It was called Rat Race. It was pretty much the same movie.

quote:

keitht7 posted:

It's a mad mad mad mad world was remade. It was called Rat Race. It was pretty much the same movie.

And I admit to seeing Rat Race (2001). It must not have made much of an impression on me. I barely remember it. I guess as an adult what I found funny as a child I must have really moved onto other movie interests and I haven't even yet realized it. Alas, change.

Best: King Kong (2005)

One of the best remakes that makes for some great side by side comparisons is the Point of No Return (1993) remake of the original French La Femme Nikita (1991). What's so fascinating about this film analysis is that technical parallel available between to the two movies in terms of scene and dialogue duplication. Three scenes come to mind in particular:

(1) The scene when the protagonist is escaping through the restaurant kitchen and how she manages to elude her antagonists is much more dramatically spectacular in the remake.

(2) The clean-up man scene seems much more eerie and scary in the remake and the resolution of the confrontation between the protagonist and the clean-up man is more emotionally tinged.

(3) The ending of the remake is more haunting than in the original by the way the suggestive nuance of figures and insinuations are made at the end.

Funny, but I was completely blown away when I caught LA FEMME NIKITA. I actually went to a preview screening and didn't know a thing about it and was captivated by it. That is the best way to see a film is to go in cold/know nothing about the film.

I thought POINT OF NO RETURN was an awful remake and nowhere near as good as the original.

One other homage to LA FEMME NIKITA/POINT OF NO RETURN is "the cleaner" played by Harvey Keitel in PULP FICTION. It looked like his character moved right from PONR return into PF. In the original, the *great* Jean Reno played the cleaner. I can't remember who played "the cleaner" in PONR, but it might have also been Keitel.

quote:

ChrisFrom Astoria posted:

Funny, but I was completely blown away when I caught LA FEMME NIKITA. I actually went to a preview screening and didn't know a thing about it and was captivated by it. That is the best way to see a film is to go in cold/know nothing about the film.

I thought POINT OF NO RETURN was an awful remake and nowhere near as good as the original.

Your opinion probably reflects a significant majority of critics. I often wonder how I find myself in the minority so often. Somehow, I beginning to think that American and non-American perspectives are different and people look at different components to movies.

Unfortunately your post like many others who post opinions don't offer much in the way of discussion. Sigh.

I liked the remake for its more simple storyline, sharper colors that reflect the elegant transformation of Bidget Fonda, the emotional crispness of the emotional inflection was more apparent for American tastes, and the action was much more tight and clean for a general public action thriller that kept one's interest.

quote:

Originally posted by tabuno:

Unfortunately your post like many others who post opinions don't offer much in the way of discussion. Sigh.

I liked the remake for its more simple storyline, sharper colors that reflect the elegant transformation of Bidget Fonda, the emotional crispness of the emotional inflection was more apparent for American tastes, and the action was much more tight and clean for a general public action thriller that kept one's interest.

I can't really articulate what I didn't like about POINT OF NO RETURN since I caught it on its original theatrical release and don't remember all that much about it, other than the fact that I thought it was a stinker.

It also probably suffered in comparison to LA FEMME NIKITA, a film I absolutely loved so much I own the laser disc and bought the film's poster, had it framed and it sits in my living room.

I kind of had the same reaction to POINT OF NO RETURN/LA FEMME NIKITA as I did to the original Dutch version of THE VANISHING and the lame American remake of the same name by the same director.

quote:

ChrisFromAstoria posted:

I can't really articulate what I didn't like about POINT OF NO RETURN since I caught it on its original theatrical release and don't remember all that much about it, other than the fact that I thought it was a stinker.

It also probably suffered in comparison to LA FEMME NIKITA, a film I absolutely loved so much I own the laser disc and bought the film's poster, had it framed and it sits in my living room.

I kind of had the same reaction to POINT OF NO RETURN/LA FEMME NIKITA as I did to the original Dutch version of THE VANISHING and the lame American remake of the same name by the same director.

Thank you for your gracious and honest response. If we had had the same converstion reqarding The Vanishing (1988 and 1993), I would have had to use very similar language as you and I share your opinion.