remakes - good way to gouge the public without having to come up with new ideas or scourge of the cinematic landscape? can't it be both?
fine, fine... let's go ahead and make a quick buck by remaking a moving the the average movie goer might not have seen in its original run or where the original movie was an abomination and the newer version is just slightly not as bad (hulk vs. hulk). but when we get into making remakes of movies that are less than years old, that's just ridiculous. and taking what looks like an exceptional british film and (excuse the phrasing) turning it black for sheer money making potential is beyond belief. it looks like they took the original movie, replaced all the actors** and tried to make it as shiny and outrageous as possible.
take a look at both trailers and you can make your own decision:
Death at a Funeral (2007)
Death at a Funeral (2010)
**the part in all of this that tickles my fancy the most and is perhaps the shrewdest ploy by the makers of the newer movie is that they employed peter dinklage in the exact same role!
UPDATE: ok, i've been reading one of the comment boards for the newer movie and people are all up in arms and it is HILARIOUS! but here's snippet from commenter PredaTAZ that's pretty succinct:
"Before anyone jumps on the racist band wagon, STFU, it's not racism it's realism. By putting chris rock into this film, all the studio are doing is making themselves money and publicity. That's the difference between indie and mainstream, mainstream movies can't use non entity actors because they flop. [...] This argument was never a question of race, it's just money."
No comments:
Post a Comment