For God sake, someone stop this
POSTED BY: whozit
UPDATED: Monday, June 14, 2010 01:52
VIEWED: 3041
PAGE 2 of 2
Considering that 1939's The Wizard of Oz that everyone holds so dear was at least the fourth time Baum's stories had been brought to the screen, would you have been critical of MGM and Victor Fleming at that time? How about the six or seven times other people have dabbled in that world since then? Some have been watchable, others atrocious, but can't you wait a bit before being so dismissive of the idea?
And BTW, Raimi's Drag Me to Hell wasn't that original, nor was it very good.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:But the 1939 vertion seems to be the best of the lot, Raimi is a great director and did wonders with "Spider-Man", but this is a classic best left alone.
Originally posted by ecgordon:
Considering that 1939's The Wizard of Oz that everyone holds so dear was at least the fourth time Baum's stories had been brought to the screen, would you have been critical of MGM and Victor Fleming at that time? How about the six or seven times other people have dabbled in that world since then? Some have been watchable, others atrocious, but can't you wait a bit before being so dismissive of the idea?
And BTW, Raimi's Drag Me to Hell wasn't that original, nor was it very good.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
And BTW, Raimi's Drag Me to Hell wasn't that original, nor was it very good.
It was original in that it wasn't based on any existing property. And the quality is irrelevant to the conversation. Film openings have nothing to do with quality, very few people read reviews any longer, so they rely on public awareness and interest. Which goes back to the point - even if they think it'll be lame, people are more likely to go check out something familiar than take a chance on something unfamiliar. And Drag Me to Hell was no worse than most of the big blockbuster remakes and sequels anyway.
And on the flip side, no one here is complaining about remakes because of quality. Raimi may well make a hell of an Oz film - but people are complaining without knowing anything of the quality.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:Quote:
Originally posted by asortafairytale:
Sheesh can't people in the entertainment business just come up with new ideas?
Apparently not.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
But the 1939 vertion seems to be the best of the lot, Raimi is a great director and did wonders with "Spider-Man", but this is a classic best left alone.
I may be one of the very few who doesn't think Raimi is a great director. I feel he is an able director, being that he can do a good job on whatever he tackles. I still hold the original Evil Dead(droll, manic, brilliant) to be the high watermark of his career. A Simple Plan came close to putting Raimi in the great category, but overall the films you choose define you. With the exception of Steven Spielberg on both Jaws, and Close Encounters: No director has been very 'original' and 'groundbreaking' on standard summertime popcorn fare.
-------------------------------------------------
70's TV FOREVER
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah, most likely the sheer classic-ness of the '39 film will make it teflon to any of these projects, similarly as it did to several other "installments" people have attempted over the years. I know there is The Wiz which gets mild acclaim only for it's major overhaul of the story. But there is also a film (the title of which evades memory) that had Dorothy returning to Oz to find it a very dark place ruled by a dragon or spirit or something rather threatening. Instead of her old companions, she had a different scarecrow.... maybe the cowardly lion and a Tik-Tok creature that had a striking resemblance to a very fat WWI British soldier (tommy helmet and mustache) It was very dark and not very good, but it did not tarnish the '39 film, so most likely any bad films carrying that title will have the same fate.
Even well done additions or rehashes of the Oz universe have not really impacted the film's standing. Just look at Wicked. The novel is very very dark and adult in nature. It's sales success made for the inspiration of a more family friendly take on the same premise with The Wicked musical. It's BOOMING success didn't really do anything to superscede the film. Of the four legs it stood on, 3 were of it's own construction and the 4th was loaned by the overall pop culture impact that over 70 years of families watching that film has made.
Only thing the musical effects is a little twist on the ending of the original film, (can't say without spoiling the musical) but it definitely doesn't ruin anything about the film, unless your sense of characters is so immature, or you are a tea-bagger, that would require archetypes of good and evil to be totally unshakable. But if you are here enjoying Firefly's awesomeness, then you definitely have an appreciation for the flexibility of characters to go beyond stereo- and even archetypes(one of my favorite things about Joss's work by the way) , or.... you just have a major crush on someone in the show. 
"...we need a hood ornament..."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
