Weird Science (Remake)

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Yet another classic being remade.

http://spinoff.comicbookresources.com/2013/04/19/21-jump-street-writer-to-pen-weird-science-remake/

Surely they'd save themselves a lot of time and money by just re releasing the originals into the cinema again? Fashions aside I think there are a lot of 80's and 90's movies that still hold up.

Thwip!

Who's a modern day LeBrock?

in your face

Kelly 'Le'Brook?! I don't know why I feel proud of myself for that one, I know I shouldn't.

Kinski

I hear the sound of the bottom of a barrel being scraped.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31g0YE61PLQ

There is no replacing Kelly.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

I know yer woman was quite sexy and ultimitely they had less than wholesome reasons for creating her, but there was still some innocence or sweetness about the film. I can't see them managing to capture that same thing in a remake, especially when it's the guy that wrote 21 Jump Street and Project X that's writing it.

John Hughes is one of my favorite directors, and weird science is in my top 5 films, I just know it is going to be wrecked by the scum that call themselves filmmakers these days. It is going to be eviscerated and every drop of honesty and innocence will be squeezed out of the story.

I feel like calling the guards to be honest.

WoollyRedHat

Can we have an embargo on remakes unless it's really, really, really neccesary?

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

Can we have an embargo on remakes unless it's really, really, really neccesary?

Under what circumstances would you consider it really, really, really necessary?

tommy890

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

Can we have an embargo on remakes unless it's really, really, really neccesary?

I would replace le btock with Kelly brook.

WoollyRedHat

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Under what circumstances would you consider it really, really, really necessary?

Like when the orginal is really old and outdated, or where a director can bring something genuinely different or new to the remake that the orginal didn't offer/ left out, or when the orginal sucked and got it wrong.

In the case of Weird Science it is from the 80s, a product of the 80s and should be left in the 80s. I don't think Hughes would approve either.

tommy890 wrote: »

I would replace le btock with Kelly brook.

Sure she's hot, but she just doesn't have that je ne sais quoi that a lebrock possessed.

Bipolar Joe

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Under what circumstances would you consider it really, really, really necessary?

When the original is shit and remaking it is the only answer, other than forgetting it ever existed.

Solair

Remakes should only be permitted where all copies of the original movie have been destroyed - for example after the sun goes supernova (and only if there are no copies held outside the solar system )

Otherwise - no!!

There are a lot of classics that should just be re-released.
Saw the original Back to the Future on the big screen last year and it looked amazing.

Would love to see some 80s stuff in the cinemas.

'The Terminator' for example would be amazing on a modern multiplex screen.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Solair wrote: »

There are a lot of classics that should just be re-released.
Saw the original Back to the Future on the big screen last year and it looked amazing.

Would love to see some 80s stuff in the cinemas.

'The Terminator' for example would be amazing on a modern multiplex screen.

That's what I said in the original post. If a film still stands up just re release it!

I guess you can't get the cast of a 20 year old movie to do a promo tour though.

Tom.D.BJJ

Chips says no!!!

Renn

I like me some John Hughes but wasn't as crazy about Weird Science as I was about some of his others. Casting Ilan Mitchell-Smith wasn't the best move and him not being able to keep a straight face throughout really detracted from the film.

Find it funny when people get all bothered by a remake. If there's a demand for it then it would be a bit stupid not to meet that demand. If it's not for you then don't watch and don't give a sh*t

Technocentral

Renn wrote: »

I like me some John Hughes but wasn't as crazy about Weird Science as I was about some of his others. Casting Ilan Mitchell-Smith wasn't the best move and him not being able to keep a straight face throughout really detracted from the film.

Find it funny when people get all bothered by a remake. If there's a demand for it then it would be a bit stupid not to meet that demand. If it's not for you then don't watch and don't give a sh*t

Demand from who? Nobody's lobbying production companies to remake this kind of crap which then takes up screen space where new original films should be shown, a look at the first page of this forum is depressing for any fan of films made from original ideas, more than half the titles (almost two thirds) are remakes (or reboots in bankrupt Hollywood speak) or sequels, sad state of affairs.

johnny_ultimate

Technocentral wrote: »

Demand from who? Nobody's lobbying production companies to remake this kind of crap which then takes up screen space where new original films should be shown, a look at the first page of this forum is depressing for any fan of films made from original ideas, more than half the titles (almost two thirds) are remakes (or reboots in bankrupt Hollywood speak) or sequels, sad state of affairs.

They make money, they're cheap to develop, they come with existing audience awareness - easy to see why they exist. Just ignore them if you wish, it's extraordinarily easy to do so!

And why not start some threads on the endless bounties of original, creative films released with dizzying frequency? Or participate in the pre-existing threads about those films? It's easy to simply not click into the threads that don't interest you!

conorhal

tommy890 wrote: »

I would replace le Brock with Kelly brook.

GREENLIGHT!GREENLIGHT!GREENLIGHT!

Also acceptable might be Gemma Arterton as a bit of posh crumpet.

They will never however manage to replace Bill Paxton's sheer douchebaggery as Chet.

Technocentral

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

They make money, they're cheap to develop, they come with existing audience awareness - easy to see why they exist. Just ignore them if you wish, it's extraordinarily easy to do so!

And why not start some threads on the endless bounties of original, creative films released with dizzying frequency? Or participate in the pre-existing threads about those films? It's easy to simply not click into the threads that don't interest you!

Its easier for me to remake/reboot my previous comments than come up with new and original ones.

syklops

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I know yer woman was quite sexy and ultimitely they had less than wholesome reasons for creating her, but there was still some innocence or sweetness about the film. I can't see them managing to capture that same thing in a remake, especially when it's the guy that wrote 21 Jump Street and Project X that's writing it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89Ou-iK2_kQ