Films, remakes, homages, and downright thefts...

Saw Swept Away last night. I have the original Swept Away on tape, so was curious to see how it fared in the hands of Madonna and Guy Ritchie.

It didn't fare well at all.

Why the hell did they bother? Most of the film more or less faithfully follows the original, except that most of the class warfare politics of the original were cut out of the remake.

Now, if you cut the class-warfare politics out of a film about class warfare, you're left with nothing. I.e., an American film, about nothing. Oh yeah, it's now a love story. Two people from different sides of the tracks meet and fall in love.

And Madonna sings.

Allegedly, she acts as well. Not nearly the performance Mariangela Melato gave in the original, mind, and Adriano Giannini really toned down the character his father played in the original.

And then, just to make sure American audiences "get it," the ending was changed; now, instead of the wealthy woman betraying her lover for a return to privilege, the wealthy woman and the poor fisherman, who truly want to be together, are tricked by the wealthy husband. Neat, no messy class warfare to ruin a love story now.

Roger Ebert gave the original four stars; he gave the remake one star. He was being generous.

The Americans MUST be stopped, they destroy every movie or book they touch.

have you SEEN that version of the Time Machne they made a few years ago, OMG, it is my sincere wish that whoever wrote that ( cos it wasn't HG fuckin Wells), dies slowly and painfully of cancer.

And I believe my feelings on WOTW are on record here.

As for the Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy for the intelectually challenged....good GOD, they missed the punchlines from all DNA's best jokes, presumably cos they didn't comprehend that they were jokes.

I was actually toying with a 'Better Sequel?' thread cos i just watched Predator 2, again.

Doctor? wrote:

have you SEEN that version of the Time Machne they made a few years ago, OMG, it is my sincere wish that whoever wrote that ( cos it wasn't HG fuckin Wells), dies slowly and painfully of cancer.

Which one?.. I can recall two. One is a fifties technicolor thing with an Australian lead actor. It really is a pile of cack.

The other one.. I think I've seen mebbe ten minutes of, I think stars Samantha Mumba (what happened to her?), and again, is a steaming pile of cack.

Burt Reynolds wrote: I was actually toying with a 'Better Sequel?' thread cos i just watched Predator 2, again.

I believe sequels and prequels would fit here.

I hear some directors are recycling their earlier work these days as well...

The 50's version is at least based on the book, albeit more stuff has been added in and the final scene on the beach at the end of time is gone. But the new one.......OH MY FUCKING GOD!!! No one involved in that had ever read the book. I feel strongly about this because Wells's Time Traveller is the prototype for The Doctor.

Cameron Crowe's Vanilla Sky is pretty much an Americanised version of a Spanish film whose title escapes my mind right now. I saw the Spanish film first and enjoyed it and later tried watching Vanilla Sky, but it was really boring. It seemed to be translated scene for scene, but it just didn't work. And Tom Cruise as a guy whose face gets disfigured? Aren't there other actors who could've made this more believable?

Doctor? wrote: the final scene on the beach at the end of time is gone.

I thought that scene was in the fifties Time Machine?

But the ending--- where he returned to the future with a few books from his library-- was added in...

With no offence, American "remakes" are not that good...

A good film is like a piece of poetry and poetry is the hardest thing to translate...

One problem with American films is that the marketing people decide which ending the film will use, based on which ending the test audiences prefer...

"Which ending"? Whatever happened to "artistic statement"?

When you have marketing people making artistic decisions that pander to the lowest common denominator, the "product" isn't likely going to be poetry.

On that thought that reminds me of that tragedy of a movie "The Firm".... What a great book, but why the hell, half way through the movie, did they completely change the story into something gay? It wasn't even a realistic ending, Tom Cruise pissed off the mob, but goes to the mob boss and says "I'm done" and the mob boss is all hunky-dory with it? Yeah right.

Guess that's what happens when the far-lefties are in control of something

Comrade Shampanyov wrote: One problem with American films is that the marketing people decide which ending the film will use, based on which ending the test audiences prefer...

"Which ending"? Whatever happened to "artistic statement"?

When you have marketing people making artistic decisions that pander to the lowest common denominator, the "product" isn't likely going to be poetry.

We use a "franglish" word of slang for that : "bankable". The problem is to know whether a film is to be "bankable" or artistic.

EdelBrock wrote: On that thought that reminds me of that tragedy of a movie "The Firm".... What a great book, but why the hell, half way through the movie, did they completely change the story into something gay? It wasn't even a realistic ending, Tom Cruise pissed off the mob, but goes to the mob boss and says "I'm done" and the mob boss is all hunky-dory with it? Yeah right.

Yeah, they really went off track with that one.

Guess that's what happens when the far-lefties are in control of something

You really think the far-left runs the film industry? Is that why, as I pointed out above, they completely excised the class warfare elements from a film about class warfare? Oh, those clever lefties!

Comrade Shampanyov wrote: One problem with American films is that the marketing people decide which ending the film will use, based on which ending the test audiences prefer...

"Which ending"? Whatever happened to "artistic statement"?

When you have marketing people making artistic decisions that pander to the lowest common denominator, the "product" isn't likely going to be poetry.

I still think one of the biggest tragedies of film-making by Hollywood is the remake of 'The Vanishing' which was a fantastic Dutch/French made film which the subtitles made all the more absorbing.

Some things just shouldn't be touched.

Jeffari Jackass wrote: quit jacking up the forums!!!

learn how to use your quotes...or don't quote!!!

thank you!

WTF....I fixed it five seconds after I posted it! F'ing patience people

Could you fix the thread, please ?

Thank you.

Burt Reynolds wrote: I still think one of the biggest tragedies of film-making by Hollywood is the remake of 'The Vanishing' which was a fantastic Dutch/French made film which the subtitles made all the more absorbing.

Some things just shouldn't be touched.

Do you know the original title of that one ?

Edit : ok, it is the same in French. I'm out...

I think the worst was "City of Angels" the Americanized remake of Wim Wenders "Wings of Desire".

Guess that's what happens when the far-lefties are in control of something

You really think the far-left runs the film industry? Is that why, as I pointed out above, they completely excised the class warfare elements from a film about class warfare? Oh, those clever lefties!

(Since Jeffari-ala-Jackass wanted to mess up the last post, I'll repost.)

About time you came to you're senses Comrade

Not sure about the "clever thing though

Yeah TEST AUDIENCES have got a lot to answer for."No it's too downbeat,gotta have a happy ending.GET CARTER? No he's gotta live at the end.THE VANISHING? Gotta get out of the coffin. All brings to mind Robert Altman's THE PLAYER. Richard E Grant's film within a film with un-Hollywood ending,innocent woman goes to the gas chamber and dies..."Because that's how life is." Till he gets offered a shit-load of money,and the final cut,Bruce Willis's cop breaks the gas chamber hatch to rescue condemned Julia Roberts in the nick of time. "What took you so long?" "Traffic was a bitch!"

EdelBrock wrote:

Guess that's what happens when the far-lefties are in control of something

You really think the far-left runs the film industry? Is that why, as I pointed out above, they completely excised the class warfare elements from a film about class warfare? Oh, those clever lefties!

(Since Jeffari-ala-Jackass wanted to mess up the last post, I'll repost.)

About time you came to you're senses Comrade

Seriously, The Firm as a leftist interpretation?

True, many Hollywood types are "liberals"-- i.e., center-left, but not "far-lefties"-- but that doesn't mean that "far left" films are Hollywood fare.

Not sure about the "clever thing though

Er, if a film is "far left," but the "far lefties" who made it have removed all "far left" elements from the film, it must be a clever ploy to get us to watch a film that is not "far left"....

MONTY The Merciless wrote: Yeah TEST AUDIENCES have got a lot to answer for."No it's too downbeat,gotta have a happy ending.GET CARTER? No he's gotta live at the end.THE VANISHING? Gotta get out of the coffin. All brings to mind Robert Altman's THE PLAYER. Richard E Grant's film within a film with un-Hollywood ending,innocent woman goes to the gas chamber and dies..."Because that's how life is." Till he gets offered a shit-load of money,and the final cut,Bruce Willis's cop breaks the gas chamber hatch to rescue condemned Julia Roberts in the nick of time. "What took you so long?" "Traffic was a bitch!"

Hmmmm... Another film excised of its political content by "far lefties"-- including noted Republican Bruce Willis-- in order to trick American audiences into watching a film excised of its political content.

Those clever, clever lefties!

it's true hollywood only has one story.

if they had got a hold of control ian would have gotten better.

rev-2-9k wrote: it's true hollywood only has one story.

if they had got a hold of control ian would have gotten better.

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

EdelBrock wrote:

Guess that's what happens when the far-lefties are in control of something

You really think the far-left runs the film industry? Is that why, as I pointed out above, they completely excised the class warfare elements from a film about class warfare? Oh, those clever lefties!

(Since Jeffari-ala-Jackass wanted to mess up the last post, I'll repost.)

About time you came to you're senses Comrade

Seriously, The Firm as a leftist interpretation?

True, many Hollywood types are "liberals"-- i.e., center-left, but not "far-lefties"-- but that doesn't mean that "far left" films are Hollywood fare.

Not sure about the "clever thing though

Er, if a film is "far left," but the "far lefties" who made it have removed all "far left" elements from the film, it must be a clever ploy to get us to watch a film that is not "far left"....

Rightly so.....So you understand my point now, damn lefties!

So.... Which "far left" films have slipped under our watchful American radar, thanks to those clever lefties?

Er, and please explain the leftist reinterpretation of Grisham's novel....

Comrade Shampanyov wrote: Er, and please explain the leftist reinterpretation of Grisham's novel....

Gladly, leftists are always under the impression that diplomatic talks will solve everything. Just go talk to the mob boss and tell him of the great misunderstanding and he will understand. Hence the hit on Cruise was called off because of his diplomatic prowness. If we only had others in the government with such intellect than maybe Hezbula and Al Queda would simply understand their misconceptions, and we could all laugh over it while watching "Lifetime" dramas and drinking grass tea.......:)

EdelBrock wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote: Er, and please explain the leftist reinterpretation of Grisham's novel....

Gladly, leftists are always under the impression that diplomatic talks will solve everything. Just go talk to the mob boss and tell him of the great misunderstanding and he will understand. Hence the hit on Cruise was called off because of his diplomatic prowness. If we only had others in the government with such intellect than maybe Hezbula and Al Queda would simply understand their misconceptions, and we could all laugh over it while watching "Lifetime" dramas and drinking grass tea.......:)

That is not what makes a "leftist film," my friend. Take it from somebody who's seen a leftist film or two in his film studies classes. ;)

And in the film, they hinted at what was in the book-- i.e., the boat at sea. He clearly was blackmailing them in the book, and that involved talking to them to let them know-- ie.e., diplomacy. Mind you, it's been many, many years since i've read the book. Unfortunately, they mucked it all up it with all that bit about "mail fraud."

So what does make a leftest film then? A film on southpaw masturbation?