Remakes don’t have to suck.
Following the source material doesn’t necessarily guarantee the film won’t suck, but it may satisfy the purist. The studio execs need these films to make money or they’d stop making them. Sure, you may hit a cold streak, lose a ton of money on a series of promising adaptations and want to kill yourself before the studio heads do it for you, but ultimately you get back on the horse, learn from your mistakes and turn out a winner. You don’t, you’re promoted to figurehead status and told to go home, we’ll mind the store from here on out.
(Can you guys tell I’m making this stuff up?)
I don’t know jack about the industry (and when I say ‘industry’ I mean ‘the business’ ) but I went to school in LA and knocked elbows with film geeks. Saw a few private screenings (Scarface, with DePalma there telling war stories after, episodes of ‘Taxi’ with some of the cast and execs there (Andy Kaufman must’ve been busy tormenting Jerry Lawler or Letterman that night), etc.) and can imagine how the movie business works just by growing up in So Cal and being a movie fan. You guys put me in my place about enjoying the bad films made from Elmore’s books, so feel free to crank up the barrage again now.
Remakes don’t have to suck. Peter Jackson, IMHO, did a fine job with Tolkien’s Ring Trilogy and King Kong. He’s now the man. Can write his own ticket with the likes of Speilberg, Scorsese, Tarantino, the Coen brothers, Woody Allen. Got to be tons of excellent remakes to cite. Keep it going.
Now, movies made from classic TV shows suck by definition. (I’ll hold judgement on ‘The Simpson Movie’ until I see it.) Remember The Flintstones?
As Gregg says: go to work, minds.
BTW, my man David Lynch tops this list of 40 top directors.