That would be Robert Zemeckis.
They'll use the original script of "Wizard of Oz," so what's the point? Better scenery and special effects. More realistic characters? Have Dorothy be a real child... but do we want a real Scarecrow, Lion, and Tin Man as opposed to guys in Scarecrow, Lion, and Tin Man costumes? Maybe just better Scarecrow, Lion, and Tin Man costumes? Eh... it's hard to picture. Warner Brothers wants to do it because they already own the script and they want to compete with Sam Raimi's Disney project "The Great and Powerful Oz."
November 16, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
40 comments:
So it will be like the George Lucas/Steven Spielberg shitfests ('scuse me) where they retrofitted their older, classic movies with modern advances in film making and in the process sucked all the soul out of the story.
I could never sit through even five minutes of the first film.
It must be for some other audience, I thought.
Probably women.
It will be completely overwhelmed and ruined by computer generated pyrotechnics which not one whit of the warmth, charm or wisdom of the original will survive.
I have the original on DVD. There is no need for me to go see a knock off.
they actually did a pretty good update of it on the sci fi channel. called it "tin man" if memory serves. Kind of gave it all a very skewed, and mostly sci-fi approach. Very good.
RH:
Maybe you watched the wrong 5 minutes.
I realize I'm one of maybe 3 people in the entire world who thinks this way, but for my money "Return to Oz" was a far superior movie. Fairuza Balk was a better actress in the role, and the film itself did a much better job of capturing Baum's world.
There simply can never ever be another Dorothy - anywhere over the rainbow.
Period.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhzbzwPNgXA
Forget about Wizard of Oz!
They're going to screw up Yellow Submarine!!!?
How can you re-do a hippie-dippie 60's piece of pyschedelia like Yellow Submarine? Half of the Beatles are dead. Who's the Peter Max among the new animators?
Up next --- Re-Birth of a Nation!
Doesn't anyone in Hollywood have a shred of imagination anymore?
"Doesn't anyone in Hollywood have a shred of imagination anymore?"
It's called Pixar. It's a little bit farther north.
They're going to screw up Yellow Submarine!!!?
They could use the surviving Bee Gees and Peter Frampton ! Oops, they already did that.
It's called Pixar. It's a little bit farther north.
Yep. I can't remember the last Zemeckis or Spielberg movie I bothered to see, but Pixar keeps turning out gems.
I am an aspiring (i.e., struggling) screenwriter. I have plenty of original ideas, but so far getting them read and/or sold is a tall task.
Movies today are 'packaged' goods — preconceived with built-in audiences.
It's an inadequate/inefficient version of risk mitigation. Why risk losing money on the unknown?
Could Star Wars happen today?
I had a concept for an off-kilter sequel series/feature called Oz Wars. Let's just say it wasn't for younger kids.
This is still the bomb.
I love Judy Garland, she was amazing as Dorothy.
Pffffffffft.
I can't wait til Wicked comes to the big screen too.
Well, it took Hollywood long enough but they finally seem to be getting around to this:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0401729
I can imagine how the special effects would be expensive and dificult, but why did it take so long to get around to it?
Now, what they do about the fact that on Edgar Rice Burrough's Mars no one wears any clothes, that's going to be interesting to see....
Ooops! I all but missed this:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1531911
I understand why they picked Traci Lords for Dejah Thoris.
She's used to filming movies without any clothes on!
Cue Trooper's entry 1 - 2 - 3.....
For once, I have to agree with Titus. If they want to adapt something, do "Wicked".
I'm sure Hollyweird can't understand why box office keeps shrinking when all they can do is sequels, live-action versions of computer games, and remakes of old TV shows and older movies.
A little originality seems beyond the capacity of the Lefty mind.
Well. Once, when I was about 11 my parents took us out on their bowling league night. On the same night 'Oz' played. My sisters and I were royally PISSED.
Every five or ten years, they do another remake of Pride and Prejudice, and they've all been pretty good. And everyone from Olivier through Mel Gibson and on to Rin Tin Tin has had a crack at Hamlet. There's no need for Oz to be sacrosanct just because it's perfect and any remake will be invasive and destructive of a happy, childhood memory......What I don't understand is why Hollyood doesn't do remakes of properties they screwed up. Bonfire of the Vanities comes to mind. At least Wes Craven is not the director.
"I love Judy Garland, she was amazing as Dorothy."
Too obvious, Troop.
Keira Knightley's mugging for the camera ruined the latest Pride and Prejudice for me.
For one thing, this has been going on for a long time. Anybody here ever see The Maltese Falcon? I mean the 1931 version with Ricardo Cortez, not the Bogart picture from 10 years later.
For another thing, I thought "The Great and Powerful Oz" was an Axelrod/Ayers production.
@Revenant
I must be the second.
Who's third?
Edutcher,
Have box office numbers been declining in any significant way?
Looking at the numbers, I'm not so sure. I mean, 2009 was a huge year at the box office -- the top 10 films alone made $3.25 billion (although Avatar box office was spread over 2009 and 2010). This years seems to be on a similar track, with the top 10 pulling in about $2.7 billion (and the latest Harry Potter film has yet to be released).
I know that Hollywood keeps bleating about being drained dry by pirates, but they primarily take that hit on cable/network showings (which is where they make the most money) and DVD sales.
Hollywood claims that it's in a crisis, but the rest of us have no reason to take them at their word.
Clang Clang Clang went the Trolly
"Wizard of Oz" is such a great story for little kids, so why not update it, and even word for word? The new movie will be THEIR movie, not their grandparents' movie.
Besides, I'm rather liking the idea that all sorts of Oz related items will hit the stores in the movie's wake. To this day, the "Wizard of Oz" appears on my list of favorite movies, so I am more than ready for a good dose of nostalgia.
Am I the only person who reads Althouse who saw The Wiz? I thought it was a pretty decent remake. (Though not as good as the original)
I think it's cool to see a different person's vision.
In fact I'd love to see a project where several directors get togther and make their version of the same script...perhaps an HBO miniseries with a different take each week? The first week have Raini, and then maybe Penny marshall, followed by Tarantino, followed by Kevin Smith, followed by Merchant/Ivory?
I have read about the new improved Wiz-Dorothy is a big dyke, natch and the Tin Man, Lion and Scarecrow have a three way-Lion is on bottom, natch.
I can't wait.
Full Frontal Lion-so I heard.
YoungHegelian,
Doesn't anyone in Hollywood have a shred of imagination anymore?
Took the words right out of my mouth.
It's more accurate to say my sisters and I were OUTRAGED.
Anyway, there's no reason there shouldn't be a remake. The book is quite different from the movie in tone and story line. I read the book a few times as a teen and like it as much as the movie, in a different way. The first line, IIRC, is Uncle Henry saying:
"There's a cyclone coming, Em!"
I got the blu-ray version and it was interesting. The increased details made the plastic plants and painted background very noticable. Maybe some of the magic was lost. The black and white had a lovely sepia tone to it which I really enjoyed.
They can do it again, but that movie is special and cannot be replaced.
Trey
Now that I think about it, this makes sense, considering we just got through the period of fraud defined by Alice In Wonderland.
Hey it is working with the new remake of Hawaii 5-0.
It works for Broadway - plays and musicals are redone - same script, new cast, new sets, new choreography, etc.
The new Jeff Bridges/Matt Damon remake of True Grit looks good in the trailers - it appears they have pretty much kept every scene from the John Wayne original.
You Tube: John Wayne winning Best Actor for "True Grit"
The problem though will be exactly what Coketown said tn the first comment above: whether or not the soul of the story - so very present in the original John Wayne version - is still there.
John Wayne in True Grit: "I mean to kill you in one minute, Ned. Or see you hanged in Fort Smith at Judge Parker's convenience. Which'll it be?"
Won't sound the same with anyone else sayin' it will it?
Why would you remake the Yellow Submarine movie? The music is now close to 50 years old. I realize that the Beates are great and just appearing on iTunes now, and that Yellow submarine was a passable movie if you're into trippy cartoons. But it's so retro and of a specific time. Two of the Beatles aren't even a loeWhy remake it?
And Wizard of Oz? Maybe if they stay close to the books it will be diffeent enough to warrant a remake. But it will inevitably be compared to its predecessor and found wanting.
The new Jeff Bridges/Matt Damon remake of True Grit looks good in the trailers - it appears they have pretty much kept every scene from the John Wayne original.
Personally, I never cared for the John Wayne version of True Grit. Too hammy.
The remake looks great, though. Damn, Jeff Bridges is a fine actor.
Post a Comment