The UBS Evening Television & Movie News 10.15.09
Posted by George H. Sirois on 10.15.2009
A quick look at the latest theatrical and DVD releases, the trailer for Black Dynamite, last week’s box office report and the return of the “Mad Prophet of the Airwaves.” All this and Andy Critchell’s introduction to Carli Banks in The “Much Ado About Remakes” Edition…
Welcome everyone to the latest edition of the UBS Evening Movie News. I'm George H. Sirois, and if you're on Twitter, you can find me HERE! And don't forget, for all of you who are new to 411Mania.com, make sure you check out all of our zones. We have some of the best writers on the Internet right here, and we love to hear from all of you! So keep coming back to read what we have for you, make us your homepage and if you have Facebook, make sure to join our group HERE!
As always, I have the button available here for you to send in your pre-order deposit for my upcoming novel. A big thank you to everyone who already sent in their deposits, and just so you know, when you do send it in, expect to see a special surprise from me to you in your e-mail once I get the first 50.
And feel free to check out the new blog for the novel HERE!
This week, we'll be taking a break from the new section "Re-Writing Miss-tory" and getting a visit from an old friend, the "Mad Prophet of the Airwaves." I have a little something to say about my frequent nemesis, the "remake," and what to do about this craze that's grown out of control almost as quickly as the reality series. We also have Andy Critchell delivering his top-quality work as usual, a quick look at upcoming theatrical and DVD releases and some comments on various TV & movie news stories from this week.
Oh, one more thing. I don't know why the hell I waited so long to see it, but I finally sat down and watched Disc 1 of Season 1 of "Battlestar Galactica" and it was just all kinds of awesome! Loved it! So thank God for Netflix and it's off to Disc 2…
And now, on with the news!
SYBIL THE SOOTHSAYER
UPCOMING MOVIES
Law-Abiding Citizen: Gerard Butler plays a man who decides to take justice into his own hands after a plea bargain sets his family's killers free -- his main target is the district attorney (Jamie Foxx) who orchestrated the deal.
Seems like an ideal film for Gerard Butler, since he's got the skills and charisma to play an action movie villain. Reading the plot here, however, makes the commercials seem a bit misleading since they make it look like the writers borrowed a bit from the plot of The Exorcist III, focusing on Butler's character able to conduct his killings while inside a cell. So it'll be interesting to see how this plot ties into those commercials.
Where the Wild Things Are: An adaptation of Maurice Sendak's classic children's story, where Max, a disobedient little boy sent to bed without his supper, creates his own world--a forest inhabited by ferocious wild creatures that crown Max as their ruler.
This is definitely taking the Number 1 spot at the box office, and it looks like it's captured the spirit of Sendak's book perfectly. The only thing that worries me is the possibility of the movie turning out like Ron Howard's Grinch movie and stretching the small amount of source material too thin. But I am looking forward to seeing it for myself.
Credit: TheMovieBox.net
DVD NEWS
Blu-Ray owners who happen to be fans of Shakespeare will be happy to know that Kenneth Branagh's 1996 version of Hamlet is making its way to the Hi-Def shelves next year. For those that aren't familiar with this version, Branagh filmed a full adaptation of the unabridged play. I believe the running time was almost 4 hours.
The bonus features haven't been revealed yet, but if everything works out as expected, the disc will hit shelves in August of next year.
Credit: DVDReview.com
MOVIE TRAILER OF THE WEEK: Black Dynamite
No explanation necessary. No comments necessary. Putting down money to see this, necessary.
JIM WEBBING AND HIS IT'S THE HONEST TRUTH DEPARTMENT
Unneeded Reboot News of the Week: Paramount Pictures has begun negotiations with Chris Pine to play CIA analyst Jack Ryan in the reboot of the franchise based on the Tom Clancy novels.
Pine is positioned to topline his second Par franchise. He played James T. Kirk in "Star Trek," the JJ Abrams-directed summer hit, and will reprise in the sequel.
Pine is separately in talks to team with director D.J. Caruso in the Paramount drama "The Art of Making Money," early next year.
Talks are just getting underway, but Pine is expected to come aboard the Jack Ryan film as the project takes shape. The studio and producers Lorenzo di Bonaventura and Mace Neufeld are working with a script draft by Hossein Amini, based on an original concept. They are still in deep development and it is unclear whether Pine would make another "Star Trek" before the Jack Ryan film. He will clearly be working often for Paramount over the next several years.
Pine, currently starring with Denzel Washington in the Tony Scott-directed "Unstoppable" for Fox, is vying to be the fourth actor to play Ryan, the CIA analyst in the Par film series.
I don't mind an original script Jack Ryan script, but there's still a hell of a lot of material out there that can be turned into very effective films. It doesn't matter if some of the books are outdated by the times (like "Red Storm Rising" and "The Cardinal of the Kremlin"); there is no need to disregard the already released films in the Jack Ryan universe. It doesn't have to be viewed as a full-on reboot. Even The Sum of All Fears was looked at as a prequel, so that's what this new film can be looked at as too.
All I'm asking Paramount is not to re-do the movies that have already come out. Use this original film to jumpstart the franchise again, and then move on to cover some of the other Clancy books that have yet to be made into movies, like "Debt of Honor" and "Red Rabbit." Give Chris some years before moving on to making movies out of "Executive Orders" and "The Bear & The Dragon" so that it won't look like a kid is sworn in as President of the United States.
Credit: Variety
Hey, look! It's Laurence…… (putting on sunglasses) Fishburne. YEEEAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!: Generally speaking, the CSI franchise has been a ratings juggernaut for CBS. Still, this season the original CSI has been declining a bit. It started last season when Laurence Fishburne took on the role of Dr. Ray Langston, becoming the main man on the show with William Petersen exiting.
Well, in an effort to perhaps pump up Fishburne's popularity, CBS is doing something unique. For the first time, a CSI character -- Langston -- will crossover to the other two shows in the same week, all part of the same story.
The story line will commence on CSI: Miami on November 9. Horatio Cane finds a severed leg in the Everglades. It turns out to belong to a missing girl from Las Vegas, so he summons Ray to Miami.
Then on CSI: NY, Wednesday, November 11, Ray flies to New York when Mac Taylor links the case to an interstate trucking ring involved in human trafficking and black market organs.
Finally, on Thursday, November 12, Langston is back in Vegas to wrap up the case on CSI with the help of the usual gang.
I had to put this tidbit of news in here, since Cheryl and I have watched a few episodes of CSI: Miami and got a kick out of them. Of course, I watched them just to see the opening moments before the title sequence kicked in, but I've gotten into it enough to be interested in seeing how this crossover plays itself out. Gotta love Sweeps week, you know?
ANDY CRITCHELL'S INTERACTIVE BABE PHOTO NEWS BRIEF WITH ANDY CRITCHELL
This week, I thought I would feature one of my favorite adult stars, Miss Carli Banks. I first discovered her in the pages of Penthouse and boy, is she great! Easily one of the hottest naked chicks you will ever see. Anyway, let's see some pics of her almost naked…
If you want to see more than just that, run a Bing search. That's it for me, have a great week!!
MAD PROPHET OF THE AIRWAVES
So it's been a couple weeks now. If you heard the podcast when we all discussed the trailer to the remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street, you already know that I'm not looking forward to this movie at all. If you're a regular reader of 411Mania, you've likely seen the trailer in question, but just in case, here's – to quote Ric Flair – "what's causing all this…"
Now, I got a few major problems with this. First of all, there's the hint of a possibility that Krueger is looked at as a sympathetic figure. Awful, awful, awful decision. Nothing about this character should be even the slightest bit redeeming. He's not one of these guys who do something terrible and are immediately remorseful or, even worse, aren't aware that they did anything wrong. Freddy made the choice to kill a child, enjoyed it, and kept doing it. It's that trait in his dark soul that made him worthy to be reborn in a dream state.
Then there is the choice to re-create of several famous moments like the upside-down death of Tina and the bathtub scene with Nancy. If the filmmakers hold these scenes in such high regard, by re-creating what took only a fraction of the $1.1 million budget used to make the 1984 film, they only prove that the Wes Craven original still holds up well today and doesn't warrant a remake. When Friday the 13th was remade earlier this year, the big moment of the 1980 film – Mrs. Voorhees' decapitation – was shown very quickly within the first minute. This showed an attempt to use the original films as a template to go beyond what was already seen. Whether you look at that film as a success or failure is up to you, but that was the goal.
Another problem is a very simple one: Freddy Krueger was a product of his time, which was the 1980s. He preyed on kids that were out after school, kids that were tricked into going with him to his boiler room, kids like us that were independent and weren't on leashes attached to parents' wrists. And people like Freddy couldn't be tracked down on the Internet and weren't potential guest stars on Dateline's "To Catch a Predator." He was the most effective during the Reagan era, when it was "morning again in America" and the majority of the people believed that all you needed was a house with a white picket fence for you to be protected. If there was anyone that fit perfectly into that decade as the ideal nemesis, it was Freddy Krueger. If he were around nowadays, where's he going to find the kids? In their home playing PS3? The way I see it, Freddy was effective in the 80s and re-watching the movies shows they're still effective, so there's no need to give them a do-over. The series had its time and created some outstanding visual effects and nightmare sequences without the benefit of CGI or budgets over $15 million, and the world has moved on to other horror icons like Jigsaw. (The man's been dead for three movies now and he's still raking in the money.)
And here's the main reason why I have a problem with this movie. Wes Craven has expressed his disdain for the filmmakers and for New Line in letting it happen, and how can you blame him? This wasn't like Last House on the Left, which he simply made as a re-telling of The Virgin Spring and which he helped remake this year. He put years of work into this. He put his childhood memories and loads of research into this. And with such a limited budget, he put a whole studio on the map, making New Line Cinema "the House That Freddy Built." All of a sudden, along comes Michael Bay and Platinum Dunes saying, "we can make it better" and the new-and-eviscerated version of New Line says, "Sure, go ahead." If Bob Shaye were still running New Line, I don't think this project would be greenlit so easily since he always held the original film in such high regard.
As an aspiring writer, I know what it's like to put so many years into a character and a project. And it scares me to death that there's the chance that, should one of my stories become a success, someone's gonna just come running in with a bigger budget and no imagination declaring they can make it better than I could.
This brings me to what can be done about remakes like this. It's not likely these films are going to stop being made since they do bring in money, and it seems like Hollywood is content on coasting with these until the next big idea comes in. So I'm willing to put aside my contempt for this rehashing flood if they're willing to keep some things in mind…
1 – Not every franchise needs a "reboot." When you hear about 20th Century Fox wanting to start over with the Predator franchise, I wonder why they don't just pick up where the second film left off. Arnold's film took place in 1987. Danny's film took place in 1997. Just go from there and throw in a couple brief references of 1 & 2, and you're golden! Look at how the 2009 film Star Trek found a way to create a new legion of fans and still satisfy the established ones. All it takes is a little creativity and everyone can be happy.
2 – If the filmmaker of the original wants another crack at their work, go right ahead! We live in a time where if you see a DVD of your favorite film on the shelf, give it a month or so and the Director's Cut will be available. It's highly likely that what you saw on the big screen wasn't quite what the original writer/director intended, and second chances in this business are incredibly rare. If someone gets that second chance to show the world what they had in mind when the original concept was put on paper, they should not only be accepted, but encouraged. I know I'm anxious to see what Don Mancini had in mind over twenty years ago when he wrote up the initial storyline to Child's Play.
3 – If the original source material is based on something other than a movie, I'm okay with new interpretations. Just look at how many different takes we've seen on (off the top of my head) Dracula, Frankenstein and The Phantom of the Opera on the big screen. Not a single writer and director involved with those characters could be credited with creating them, so all every other subsequent person who tries to tackle the story would simply be adding another take. If you wanted to see what the original storyteller had in mind, you can simply read the book or watch the play or enjoy the television show or play with the toys.
4 – (Here's the big one) If the remake in question is based on an original film, then the original filmmaker must give their blessings. They don't have to be involved; they just have to say it's okay to the audience. Nothing is as constant in Hollywood as filmmakers picking up where others left off, and getting a blessing from a predecessor can only be beneficial to the new film coming out. James Cameron claimed to have enjoyed Terminator 3 and refused to give McG his full blessing for Terminator: Salvation. John Carpenter has nothing against getting some extra paychecks for other people's work (he'll be the first to tell you how much of a capitalist he is), so he gave his blessing to Jean-Francois Rochet for the Assault on Precinct 13 remake, he gave his blessing to Rob Zombie for the Halloween remake and he has already said he wouldn't be against an Escape from New York remake. We have also seen Sean S. Cunningham producing the Friday the 13th remake himself. So the way I see it, if the ones who first came up with these characters and these stories have no problem with giving someone else a crack at it, there's no reason why I should be all pissed off about it.
So there you go, Hollywood. I'll continue to criticize your remaking trend if I see something I don't like, but I'll also keep these stipulations in mind. However, we better start seeing some original movies coming out soon because the established characters we've come to know and love over the decades can't keep popping back up forever.
And that's a wrap for Chapter 134 of The UBS Evening Movie News! For Andy Critchell, I'm George H. Sirois and we'll see you next week!
