Oiling the Squeaky Wheels of Childhood

Lori Lancaster | October 29, 2005
[hidden by request]

Amy Austin | October 29, 2005
Oh, hell no...

WTF?!?!?! Is this world so completely lacking in imagination that they can't some up with some altogether new characters for kids today??? I guess this is really no different from the makeovers that Barbie herself has received over the decades of her life... or is it really the price our culture is paying for "zero tolerance"? ;-D

Jackie Mason | October 30, 2005
[hidden by request]

Erik Bates | October 31, 2005
[hidden by request]

Erik Bates | November 1, 2005
[hidden by request]

Kris Weberg | November 1, 2005
Well, in fairness, neither The Dukes of Hazzard nor The Brady Bunch were any damn good the first time around, either. I class them as "shows we're fond of because they were on when we were kids" rather than as quality TV.

But the big problem is that it's nigh-well impossible to launch a big new toy line that stands on its own. The stuff that sells now tends to derive from videogame and movie tie-ins, because games are simply more popular with children today than any other medium, while movies have an advertising budget toys and syndicated cartoons can't even dream of.

Michael Paul Cote | November 1, 2005
I can understand "waxing nostalgic" with toys and bringing TV shows, good or bad, back to the spotlight, but is Tinseltown just running out of new ideas for films? I think that there should be a time stipulation on how soon a movie can be "remade". Man on Fire with Denzel came too soon after the same movie with Scott Glenn in the lead(1987). But the primary "done too soon" has to be The Longest Yard. They could have at least waited until Burt Reynolds was dead to redo this film(1974).

Scott Hardie | November 1, 2005
I'm not a fan of most of today's entertainment for kids. This is my impression of the trailers for "Chicken Little":

AAAAAAAAH!! SHOUTING!! SHOUTING!! SHOUTING!! SHOUTING!! SHOUTING!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!

Thank you.

Lori Lancaster | November 2, 2005
[hidden by request]

Michael Paul Cote | November 2, 2005
News flash - remake of Poseidon Adventure be afraid.

John E Gunter | November 7, 2005
I'm afraid that Hollywood is worried that if they put out original content, then most movie goers won't get the new story and won't go to see the show. So they'd rather 're-do' a movie, but re-casting the roll with a big star of the moment.

The Wild Wild West, The Honeymooners, Man on Fire, The Longest Yard, etc.

That doesn't mean that the director and actors don't do a fantastic job and make the movie good, although out of that list, and I've seen all but the Honeymooners, I only found them entertaining, and not so much as good movies.

But Hollywood seems to be just giving the consumers what THEY think WE want, and not what WE really want. But, that's not really all that different from what they've been doing for years.

Oh and what's wrong with running around shouting! :-)

John

Jackie Mason | November 7, 2005
[hidden by request]

John E Gunter | November 9, 2005
Now that it's out on DVD, I'll be able to take a look at Charlie & the Chocolate factory. Though I have heard bad things about it.

John

Aaron Shurtleff | November 9, 2005
Jackie, I'm afraid it's been done. Ever heard of "The Wiz"? It's got Michael Jackson...*shudder*

Jackie Mason | November 9, 2005
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | November 19, 2005
I'm sure Hollywood is already revving up for a major remake of the classic, beloved 2005 hit "Zathura."

The sick thing about remakes, and I'm already planning to gripe about this in my 2005 best-of feature (current subtitle: "Attack of the Remakes"), is that they don't remake the bad ones that deserve the treatment. They only remake the ones that were perfectly fine to begin with.

That said, I'm no fan of the Gene Wilder Wonka, so the new one was fun for me. But I think I enjoyed it much more as the latest Burton-Depp collaboration than as itself, since there isn't much to it.

Just by coincidence, I recently happened to see two older movies days before the remakes were announced: "The Poseidon Adventure" (good) and "Piranha" (not, not, not). I'm sure the new "Piranha" will be some shitty Lion's Gate production with one of the Hilton sisters in it, but it's not like the original is a masterpiece at risk of being tarnished. Poseidon, however, was pretty damn good, with the same artistic ambition in the midst of a commercial blockbuster that helped the similar "Titanic" become such a hit twenty years later. And while I have no doubt that "Titanic"'s success is partly responsible for the Poseidon remake, I have plenty that whatever hack director-for-hire (what's Brett Ratner up to?) is saddled with the job won't have Cameron's same ambitions.

Amy Austin | November 21, 2005
Did anyone else here happen to see it last night??? I watched it -- with no more info or warning than I got here from Mike -- and I would have kind of potentially thought the same as you about it, Scott (the first one was always a favorite of mine), but it was actually pretty decent... as far as TV movies go. Some pretty big names (even if they haven't been too active lately!)... LOVE Rutger Hauer! (And I hadn't seen C.Thomas Howell in YEARS... perhaps DECADES, even -- not much there beyond the interest in seeing him all these years later) -- speaking of which... Steve Guttenberg is aging quite noticeably, too. And (although it could just be me and my sensitivity in light of recent personal events) true to the first, the most poignant moment was Mrs. Rosen's contribution to the escape of the group of survivors... I tried hard not to cry (I've had quite enough of that lately!), but barely succeeded.

Michael Paul Cote | November 21, 2005
I only saw part of the film last night, because it coincided with shows that I enjoy and try not to miss (Supernatural and Grey's Anatomy) but what I saw did seem pretty decent. The homeland security thing kinda threw me at first though.

Amy Austin | November 21, 2005
Haha -- yeah, me, too. Mike, do you need a DVR?!?! Sounds like you do! (Trust me -- it will revolutionize your TV watching... ;-D)

Scott Hardie | November 22, 2005
I didn't realize there was a new TV movie of it until I heard a conversation today on the subject. I was referring to the May 2006 feature film. :-\ (link)

Amy Austin | November 22, 2005
Oh!? No kidding... me, neither.

Michael Paul Cote | November 22, 2005
Now, that's kinda sad. Good cast list though.

John E Gunter | November 22, 2005
Well, I always try to go into a movie with an open mind, neither expecting nor looking forward to anything. Notice, I said try, doesn't always work.

If I'm entertained by the movie, then it's a good movie. Course, that doesn't mean there might be things about the movie that I don't like. For instance, I didn't really like Depp's Willy Wonka or the new songs, but I enjoyed the movie.

John

Amy Austin | November 22, 2005
I am 100% in agreement with you on that one, John.

On Wonka: As a fan of Wilder's Wonka, I guess I really wasn't expecting such a dramatic departure from that character... to me, he seemed very much modeled after Michael "Wacko Jacko" Jackson -- but maybe that's just me -- and so I found him a little creepy (as, I suppose, Wonka is supposed to be)... but in a way that just wasn't as enjoyable to me as the original. And the take on the Oompa Loompas was pretty far-removed, too, but I did find it quite amusing! A little disappointed by the complete abandonment of all the original music, however, I did find the new songs amusing also. And while the extra biographical information on Wonka did work well to support this updated plot, I still couldn't help finding it a bit antithetical to the 70s version. Overall, an enjoyable film, but not so much in light of the original -- I think that's a fair, unbiased opinion... but I might have liked it a whole lot more if I were a kid today who had not first seen the trippy, psychedelic original!

Scott Hardie | November 22, 2005
Me, I never agreed with the charge that the newest Wonka is reminiscent of Jackson. Maybe in some of the superficial details, but Jackson adores children and this Wonka squirms at the sight of them.

Amy Austin | November 22, 2005
True, true... but I did come to that conclusion without ever knowing that there were any public critical "charges" made -- I really stay rather sheltered from all reviews on movies that I haven't yet seen... keeps me from being informed of what I think! But I found it quite interesting to learn afterwards that I was not alone on this line of thought. Perhaps it was just the coincidence of timing and all the press MWJ was getting at the same time -- lots of people making fun by way of imitation -- that made it seem so...

Scott Hardie | November 22, 2005
I agree, the timing probably had a lot to do with it. A year earlier or a year later and it wouldn't have seemed nearly so much that way. (Then again, I avoided all coverage of the Michael Jackson trial, which might explain why I didn't see the connection.)

Amy Austin | November 22, 2005
Well, it isn't like I was following it... ;-D I don't know how in the world you would have managed to avoid it altogether! But like I said... a lot of comedians making fun, impersonating, etc -- and that I don't avoid! ;-D

Scott Hardie | November 22, 2005
Merely by not clicking any link about it, since I wasn't interested. The web and Netflix are my TV.

Amy Austin | November 23, 2005
Ah... see, I'm plugged into my tube, even while online -- like a steady mainlining of pop culture. (And yet, I *still* can't keep up!)

Scott Hardie | November 23, 2005
I think you get tired of people pointing out reasons why you're so good at the goo game, but it looks like there's another one right there...

Amy Austin | November 24, 2005
Hmm... somewhat, to be sure. But actually, the game usually keeps me more current on pop culture than the other way around, I think. For instance... had no idea about FSM until it was a goo, and now that it's made more appearances in the news, I feel like I already had a clue (ahhaha... no pun intended)!