Because then if the movie tanks, the exec would be on the hook for greenlighting some "dog of a movie" that "failed before and will likely fail again".
With a remake of a successful movie, there is a whole other layer of protection with the even-more-insulated corporate owners.
I believe (iow: know for a fact) that any film that "got it right" the first time should be left alone. Because the best you can hope for is second place, and who would want to make something inferior on purpose?
Either remake a film with a good idea and bad execution...or think of something original.
speaking of, isn't it time for another Star Is Born with rap stars?
Wasn't there a STAR IS BORN remake rumor floating around with Will Smith as the lead?
I thought I read or heard about a possible remake of WHAT'S UP DOC (yes, I am aware that it is essentially BRINGING UP BABY but then you have a remake of remake). Please someone tell me this is merely a rumor... I couldn't take anyone but Ryan O'Neal as Dr. Howard Bannister.
I fear the remake of Pelham 123 will miss the humor in the original; it's such a fun yet suspenseful movie, and I doubt the remake will capture that tone.
For a blasphemous remake I would like to see: One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. I'd love to see a movie closer to the book that makes the Chief the main character. The sequences they could do of his hallucinations could be great.
Last I heard, Todd McFarlane was remaking THE WIZARD OF OZ, only dark, edgy and "muscular".
The Warner Brothers remake will see the Munchkins go, Dorothy will be "sexed-up- and her dog Toto will become a warthog.
The film studio has joined forces with a comic book artist and writer Josh Olson, better known for his screenplay of a History of Violence. The new version was dreamt up by Todd McFarlane, a media entrepreneur who began his career on the Spider-Man Comic before moving on to his own anti-hero Spawn.
Comment