411 Fact or Fiction Movies/TV 4.02.10: Week 222

Posted by Ben Piper on 04.02.2010

Are people bummed that 24's been canceled? Will Clash Of The Titans be an awesome remake? Will people get behind another Harold and Kumar movie? Will The Hangover 2 fail to live up to the original? 411's Porfirio Diaz and Jeremy Thomas debate these and other subjects in week 222 of 411 Fact or Fiction: Movies/TV!



Hello, everyone. Welcome back once again to the only 411 column that prompts commenters to insist that they aren't trolls but then they quickly turn around and make troll-like statements, Fact or Fiction.

As always, I'm Ben Piper, and who the hell are you?

This week, Porfirio Diaz and Jeremy Thomas step up to bat. Let's hear them out.



1. Clash Of The Titans will be an awesome remake.

Jeremy Thomas: Fiction. Don't get me wrong, I think that it could well be a decent remake, but to call this "awesome" is stretching things a wee bit. I was seriously worried when they first announced the Clash remake, because the original is a cult classic, a campy film that is a hell of a lot of fun to watch. Everything I've seen tells me that they're very probably going to succeed on a financial level and that as an action-adventure movie it will be quite serviceable. But despite some cool-looking effects and the presence of some quality actors, you can't convince me this will be top-notch. For my money the Kraken looks rather iffy, and it has a lot to live up to in fun factor with the original. It does have Sam Worthington going for it who should be a definite improvement over Harry "L.A. Law" Hamlin and Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes always bring their A-Game. The possibility of this completely bombing out on a creative level, however, is just too strong for me to agree with this one.

Porfirio Diaz: Fiction. Clash of the Titans may diverge in a sea of cheesy CGI wonderland but maybe that's part of the charm that the remake is trying to bring. Does it make for an awesome film? Well…no. Like Jeremy, I also don't think the level of creativity will match the level of digital effects that will be shown on the screen. I have no doubt that the film will be decent but that's it. There's also news going around that the 3-D version left people completely dissatisfied. How can a movie be awesome when the standard version might be superior to the fancy 3-D one? The remark is going to be a different kind of campiness than that the 1981 original version, albeit a more expensive one, but it'll just be another pretty picture to look at. Avatar did it better.

Score: 1 for1

2. Dermot Mulroney is a great choice to play the title character in the TV remake of The Rockford Files.

Jeremy Thomas: Fact. Why not? Mulroney is much like Dylan McDermott in that he's a talented guy who hasn't found the success he seemed destined for on the big screen, so television would be a good place for him to go. For the record, I've been a fan of Dermot's since one of his very first roles: "Dirty Steve" Stephens in Young Guns. Now that was a role for him. But yeah, his career hasn't gone very far on the big screen since My Best Friend's Wedding despite several film roles, so a television role seems to be the way to go for him. Is he right for the role? He has a bit of the James Garner look to him, so that's going for him. I can also see him capturing Rockford's attitude nicely. So yeah, I can totally get behind this, especially since he's getting supporting performances from Beau Bridges and Alan "Wash" Tudyk. They certainly could have chosen worse cast members than this.

Porfirio Diaz: Fact. Dermot Mulroney is a damn fine actor and should be able to fit in well in the "modern day" detective setting. I like The Rockford Files's view of a detective: less violence, less ass-capping…err…gun shooting, and more investigating. You know, like real detectives do. Now the decision to remake this 1970s TV classic is still up for debate but this could be Mulroney's big break into the world of television. He may find his niche that he could make into his own. He brings in a lot of movie stardom to the role and should be nothing but good for him and the show. It's going to be tough replacing a role that James Garner perfected. In fact, the fear may be that people are so in love with the original that they may not even give Mulroney or the show a chance to shine. But I think Mulroney's first big television break will be a successful one. Besides I couldn't find anyone else in the role of Rockford than Mulroney.

Score: 2 for 2


3. You're bummed that 24 is being canceled.

Jeremy Thomas: Fiction. I've been a fan of 24 ever since I saw the first season on DVD right after it came out, and stuck with the show through thick and thin. And honestly, despite the show getting some serious flack for the past few seasons, I don't think there's been a lot of thin. It's maintained a high level of quality and made eight seasons out of what should have been a concept that lasted one, maybe two. The show gets a bit silly with the twists (Another CTU mole? REALLY?) from time to time but otherwise there's very little I can fault. With that being said, as a fan of 24 I think that it is the right time for the show to end. If it had kept going then any quality problems would have gone up exponentially, so ending it now when it still has life to it is the best possible option. The other reason it should be ended now is that, as Howard Gordon and Kiefer Sutherland have confirmed, the film is officially winding up and I'm very interested to see how that plays out. The script is having the finishing touches put on it by Billy Ray who wrote the awesome State of Play and according to Gordon, could hit as early as next year. If they take Jack Bauer and put him in a movie that ups the stakes sufficiently and gives him a chance to become an action movie franchise, I'm all for it.

Porfirio Diaz: Fiction. I am also a fan of 24 but there are only so many ways to kidnap Jack's daughter/wife before it eventually turns into satire. 24 has been steadily going downhill for some time thanks to a decline in believable storylines and an increase in silliness. Jack becoming a vicious parody of himself also played a cruel hand in it as well. Frankly it was time for the series to end before it got too out of hand with recycled plots, Jack's love of torture, and his soft LOUD WHISPERS. By ending the series, they can fully commit themselves to the film and have all the loose ends tied together for a satisfactory conclusion.

Score: 3 for 3

Switch!!!



4. You'd be on board for a third Harold And Kumar movie.

Porfirio Diaz: Fact*. Sure, why not complete the Harold and Kumar trilogy? The first movie was pretty funny but the second one left a bad taste in my mouth. This third one should set everything right once and for all. Supposedly the name of third movie will be titled A Very Harold & Kumar Christmas. While the sound of a holiday themed movie may be unappealing to some, I welcome it. If the producers handle everything right, this could be the best raunchy Christmas movie since A Christmas Story Bad Santa. Plus having Neil Patrick Harris back as the poon prince of awesome couldn't hurt.

*- Fact only if Kal Penn comes back to play as Kumar again. Penn accepted a job with President Obama's administration in the early part of 2009 and so far it's unsure whether he's would return to the acting fields to play as the popular stoner once more. Playing a role of a stoner in a stoner film is not exactly something the President would approval but we'll see. Frankly, having someone else play as Kumar wouldn't be the same. Penn and John Cho have developed such great chemistry together that it'll be a crime to make a third film without both of them. Switch to "Fiction" if Penn couldn't convince Obama for some vacation time off to play as the lovable pot-loving smartass once more. Unless, of course, if Penn is willing to give Obama a small role in the film…

Jeremy Thomas: Fiction. I know I'm one of the few, but I was never that enamored of the original Harold & Kumar. I'm not saying that I hated it, just that I didn't think it was all that. The second one was a step down in quality from the first by pretty much anyone's reckoning, and I don't see them turning that around with a third one. What more do they have left for Harold and Kumar to do? Like Porfirio said, the last thing that was rumored was a holiday-themed movie and while they could pull a few chuckles out of smoking a Yule log or whatever, this largely just seems like going back to the characters just because they can. Penn has reportedly gotten things squared away with the White House, and John Cho looks ready to come back since Star Trek 2 isn't filming for a while still and Flash Forward is on the ropes. The one good thing is that Neil Patrick Harris is supposedly coming back, although again what can he do that he hasn't already done? I simply can't see where this is a good idea in any way, shape or form.

Score: 3 for 4

5. There's no way that The Hangover 2 will be as successful critically or commercially as the original.

Porfirio Diaz: Fact. I kept going back and forth with this question. The first film was awesome but I was skeptical when I heard they were producing a sequel. Everything from the first movie was wrapped up nicely with a neat little bow at the end. How can they possible top themselves creatively with a sequel? The first film was set with low expectations because people didn't know what to expect. Now that it became a critical hit, people might set themselves up too high for the sequel and might end up disappointed by the final product. One positive I will say is that the three stars, Zach Galafiaslhvxksdf, Ed Helms, and Bradley Cooper, wouldn't have come back for another round if they thought the script was bad. Then again receiving a $5 million check can make people come back to do anything. In relation to the previous question, Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay grossed higher at the box office than Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle but was not received as well as its predecessor. I imagine the same will happen to The Hangover 2. Fine commercially, not so good critically.

Jeremy Thomas: Fiction. I think it definitely COULD be. It will definitely be tricky, as sequels don't often outdo their originals in any measurable way, but there are exceptions to the rule...those rare carrots that keep franchises going. Do I think that this could easily fail to recapture the magic, but I'm not ready to throw in the towel quite yet. If anyone can do so, I'll give it to these guys because it wasn't necessarily the script that made it so funny; it was the camaraderie and the performances of the cast. If they bring their A-Game than this could very well be as funny and successful as the first one. Of course, marketing will have to be handled in a top-notch fashion but that was one of the strengths behind the first film's success. Bottom line: I think that of all the sequels ready to pollute theaters, this has the best chance to replicate the original's success.

Score: 3 for 5

6. Anna Faris would be a perfect choice to play the title character in a remake of Private Benjamin.

Porfirio Diaz: Fiction. I would have preferred Kate Hudson for no other reason that she's Goldie Hawn's daughter. Having a daughter perform in a remake of an original in which her mother participated in would have been pretty cool to see. Anna Faris seems like a natural fit but I don't see how she can fare well as the title character that's defined by the actress who received an Academy Award nomination because of her performance in the original. Has Anna even opened a good movie as the main star before? I'm pretty sure The House Bunny doesn't count. I'm just having a hard time picturing Faris coming close to filling Goldie's shoes but then I could be saying that about any actress in Faris' place. I would love to be proven wrong and see Anna break through to stardom with this film but overall I think there could have been better choices out there.

On a related note, just how many Goldie Hawn remakes are we going to get? First Jennifer Lopez starring in Overboard and now this? I hope Goldie is seeing some royalty checks or else Goldie is going to have to choke a bitch. Now if you will excuse me, I have to go rescue my kidnapped daughter from terrorists

Jeremy Thomas: Fact. As interesting (and potentially marketable) as it would be to have Kate Hudson playing a role her mother originated, I think that she's had enough crap movies to last a couple of lifetimes; plus, her forte as we've seen is clearly not comedy. Anna Faris, on the other hand, is a gifted comedic actress who is looking for that movie to push her over the top. The House Bunny was mildly amusing and financially successful, but it failed to erase her reputation as "The Scary Movie Girl." Her stints in the animated films Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs and the Alvin and the Chipmunks sequel probably helped her cred within the industry, but didn't raise her name value in terms of carrying a movie any. While I'm not a huge supporter of this remake in general, if it has to happen than Faris would be a pretty perfect choice because she has the looks, she has the attitude and comedic sense to pull it off.

Final Score: 3 for 6

_________________________________________________

And that's it. Porfirio and Jeremy split the difference this week. Thanks to them both for taking part.

See you next time,
-BP


TWITTER

http://www.twitter.com/411s_Ben_Piper
http://www.twitter.com/411mania
http://www.twitter.com/411wrestling
http://www.twitter.com/411moviestv
http://www.twitter.com/411music
http://www.twitter.com/411games
http://www.twitter.com/411mma