Remakes/Reboots: What WOULD you wanna see redone?

[Duke Bushido]

4 hours ago, Old Man said:

I often wonder if there aren’t two sharply different versions of the Starship Troopers book running around out there with the same cover. 

 

 

I can't remember the author's name, but if you count "Armor," then there was at least one other, yes. 

 

Excellent book; I've been trying to get my wife to read it for twenty years.  I hold it up there with Santiago for "books that really aren't my style but blew me away in spite of that." 

 

It was almost a love letter to the concept of Starship Troopers, with the focus squarely on war and its effects on one particular man. 

[Christopher R Taylor]

Supposedly the sequels to Starship Trooper are closer to the book.

[Old Man]

Which book?  ;)

[Spence]

5 hours ago, Logan.1179 said:

Geek confession: I never read or saw Starship Troopers. 

 

Well as a stand alone fruity bug hunt designed for bad actors to belt out cheesy lines while getting stabbed or melted by giant bugs and "professional soldiers" run around and make a three stooges skit seem to be high drama. It isn't bad.  I have enjoyed it as a mindless boom boom show. 

 

But it doesn't even come close to the book. 

Imagine you hear that they are making a major motion picture on the classic novel War and Peace by Tolstoy.

The movies opens with a circa 1870's wagon crossing American west and Laura Ingles asks Pa how long till they reach the farm..........

 

When you try to say "but......" everyone shushes you and says "it's a parody and you obviously can't understand true art".

 

If you listen to Veer'idiot talk about the military, you realize that his concepts on just what the modern military is basically qualifies as a parody itself.   When I listened to an interview once I was taken by his complete lack of knowledge on the subject.  He basically took all the vitriol and name calling of the 60's protesters as fact. 

 

Anyway, the movie is a fun bug hunt, but shares nothing with the book.

 

If you wnat to read the book, you will need to find a 70's or earlier hardcopy to make sure you get the actual book as written.  I'm sure there are still e-books out there that haven't been "modernized for understanding" but I do not know how you could tell. 

[Spence]

3 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

 

I can't remember the author's name, but if you count "Armor," then there was at least one other, yes. 

 

Excellent book; I've been trying to get my wife to read it for twenty years.  I hold it up there with Santiago for "books that really aren't my style but blew me away in spite of that." 

 

It was almost a love letter to the concept of Starship Troopers, with the focus squarely on war and its effects on one particular man. 

 

Oh I remember Armor by John  Steakley.  Good book. 

But I am talking about comparing Starship Troopers 70's and earlier edition by Heinlein to Starship Troopers late 1990's edition by Heinlein estate and editor accepting money to lean toward the movies.

 

[Spence]

3 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Supposedly the sequels to Starship Trooper are closer to the book.

 

The animated version had kinda powered armor.  Kinda. 

But the follow on movies just extended the movie concept. I will give them the nod that they did try to improve the script and acting.  Much better than the first movie.  Kinda a bad B flick or a good C flick, maybe...

 

[Ternaugh]

The only revision that I'm aware of with the book, Starship Troopers, was when it was originally purchased by G. P. Putnam's Sons (in 1959), who modified it to be more marketable to adults. Heinlein's original version was meant to be one of his juveniles, but his publisher, Scrivener's, turned him down.

 

 

[Spence]

51 minutes ago, Ternaugh said:

The only revision that I'm aware of with the book, Starship Troopers, was when it was originally purchased by G. P. Putnam's Sons (in 1959), who modified it to be more marketable to adults. Heinlein's original version was meant to be one of his juveniles, but his publisher, Scrivener's, turned him down.

 

That's what they say.  But when you compare a 1970's print to a modern print it will raise your eyebrows. 

 

[Ternaugh]

15 minutes ago, Spence said:

 

That's what they say.  But when you compare a 1970's print to a modern print it will raise your eyebrows. 

 

 

Oh, trust me. My eyebrow's already raised.

[Hermit]

I'm of the opinion that a lot of bad movies could be salvaged

 

One of my own guilty pleasures I'd like to see redone would be the 1986 movie "Troll" 

Now there has been talk of this, mostly capitalizing on the fact the hero of the story was named "Harry Potter Jr.!" 

But I don't think for one Minute Rowling took the name from this despite what the makers of the 1986 film claimed.

 

The idea of a troll remaking an entire apartment complex into his fairie kingdom? A young boy the only one at first aware of his sister's possession, and a witch in the apartment on the top floor? Oh the CGI alone would be worth it as a fun flick

 

 

 

[death tribble]

You couldn't remake Troll 2 however. Because how could you ever outdo

 

[Hermit]

Yeah. I knew someone would go there.

 

And I have no interest in that one. Gave it a try once, it wasn't even good in a 'so bad it's good way' for me.

[Pattern Ghost]

1 hour ago, Hermit said:

1986 movie "Troll" 

 

Troll was pure awesome. I don't really see how they could improve it, save for having better SFX.

[Christopher R Taylor]

A quality, solid remake of Journey to the Center of the Earth that treats it as science rather than a goof would be good.  Updating some of the science and making it more plausible to modern viewers would be solid.

Flash Gordon should be re done, it could be a pretty fun rockets and rayguns retro sci fi adventure

Sum of All Fears was such a dreadful disaster, redoing that closer to the book would be nice

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen done as a serious, mature, thoughtful movie rather than an adventure romp would be good.

 

If I had the Bond franchise, I'd reboot the entire series, setting it as retro stuff in the 60s.

[Pariah]

Sahara was of course a huge flop, and killed any chance at a Dirk Pitt franchise. But it's been almost 15 years now. Maybe an attempt could be made now to reboot the franchise, maybe with a different book to start.

 

Maybe we could get an Eragon movie that tells an actual story instead of just giving us pretty scenery to look at. But I realize that Eragon is a complete rip-off of Star Wars, so it may be necessary to wait until that franchise has played out first.

[Hermit]

The Book of Three

Disney Flubbed the Black Cauldron HARD

 

Do the original book, stick to the script, get good actors.. do it right.

 

 

[Hermit]

35 minutes ago, Pattern Ghost said:

 

Troll was pure awesome. I don't really see how they could improve it, save for having better SFX.

 

I admit, it's the SFX going nuts I most want to see if they can at least make the acting equal.

I mean, there's no way they can top the monster song

 

[Duke Bushido]

35 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

A quality, solid remake of Journey to the Center of the Earth that treats it as science rather than a goof would be good.  

 

 

See?  That's what I'm talking about.  I would _hate_ that. 

 

When I watch Journey to the Center of the Earth,  I want pure pulp-style adventure, period. 

[Ternaugh]

1 hour ago, Pariah said:

Sahara was of course a huge flop, and killed any chance at a Dirk Pitt franchise. But it's been almost 15 years now. Maybe an attempt could be made now to reboot the franchise, maybe with a different book to start.

 

Maybe we could get an Eragon movie that tells an actual story instead of just giving us pretty scenery to look at. But I realize that Eragon is a complete rip-off of Star Wars, so it may be necessary to wait until that franchise has played out first.

 

To be fair, Raise the Titanic didn't do a Dirk Pitt franchise any favors either.

[Spence]

1 hour ago, Hermit said:

 

Do the original book, stick to the script, get good actors.. do it right.

 

We are talking about the movie industry? Right?  😬

 

[Bazza]

Anyone suggested The Princess Bride yet? The Deadpool one doesn’t count. (  ) 

[Pariah]

Pariah →  ← Bazza

 

INCONCEIVABLE!

[wcw43921]

I remember, if not distinctly, a post by lapsedgamer (Rest You Well, HERO) in which he said he liked to recast movies with African-American actors.  With that in mind--and because it actually might work--I give you this casting of The Andy Griffith Show (which would likely be retitled Life In Mayberry)--

 

Andy Taylor------------------------Will Smith

Opie Taylor-------------------------Jaden Smith

Aunt Bea-----------------------------S. Epatha Merkerson

Barney Fife-------------------------Chris Rock

Howard Sprague----------------Eddie Murphy

Helen Crump----------------------Jada Pinkett Smith

Goober Pyle-----------------------Martin Lawrence

Otis The Town Drunk---------Leslie David Baker (Stanley in The Office (USA))

 

I was also thinking a remake of The Prime Of Miss Jean Brodie might be nifty.  Alex Kingston would be Miss Brodie, Emma Watson would be Sandy, and Maggie Smith would be the headmistress of Marcia Blaine as a way of paying tribute to the original movie.  (And while this might be a long shot, it could be updated to present day America, with Miss Brodie sympathizing with Trump instead of Franco and Mussolini.)

[Cygnia]

53 minutes ago, wcw43921 said:

I was also thinking a remake of The Prime Of Miss Jean Brodie might be nifty.  Alex Kingston would be Miss Brodie, Emma Watson would be Sandy, and Maggie Smith would be the headmistress of Marcia Blaine as a way of paying tribute to the original movie.  (And while this might be a long shot, it could be updated to present day America, with Miss Brodie sympathizing with Trump instead of Franco and Mussolini.)

My 14yr old me would like a remake.  When we did this in high school as a play, the [EXPLETIVE] pretending to be a drama teacher neutered the hell out of it.

[wcw43921]

I can imagine.  The movie had nudity on the part of Sandy, not to mention she was in a relationship with a much older art teacher--which could be reasons for Our Miss Watson to turn it down.  On the other hand, the part is definite Oscar bait and the character does take down a fascist sympathizer, so there's that going for it.

 

But yeah--screw censorship up the behind with a double-barrel shotgun.