Jump to content

The Wild Bunch

RPM

By RPM
in Movies and TV

 Share

Recommended Posts

RPM

RPM 26319

Posted
Posted

or "How Hollywood Fucks Up Another Classic"

michael-fassbender-jamie-foxx-peter-dink

While Mel Gibson is attached to act in several films being sold in Cannes, he is getting closer to the next project he’ll direct, The Wild Bunch. Deadline hears that Michael Fassbender, Jamie Foxx and Peter Dinklage are in early talks to take part in the contemporized remake of the 1969 Sam Peckinpah Western about a group of aging outlaws looking for one last score.

Bryan Bagby wrote the script with Gibson, and Jerry Bruckheimer is producing. Warner Bros is financing and releasing. Deals aren’t done but sources said the film looks on course to begin production in the fall. The film will be Gibson’s first film as director since 2016’s Hacksaw Ridge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RPM

RPM 26319

Posted
  • Author
Posted
33 minutes ago, UTCzech III said:

William Holden.  

Nuff said.

Now fuck off with this bullshit.

Bill Holden, Robert Ryan, Ernie Borgnine, Edmond O'Brien, Ben Johnson. There are no modern equivalents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eskimohorn

Eskimohorn 5635

Posted
Posted
He’ll try to out bloody and out violence Peckinpaugh’s classic and it will look ridiculous. 


Peckinpaugh’s stuff hasn’t aged well, but it was different than it’s contemporaries.

Gibson’s Hacksaw Ridge was ridiculous. Couldn’t tell the difference between that and Tropic Thunder.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NeverMarryAStripper

NeverMarryAStripper 21905

Posted
Posted (edited)

Is there any classic that they won’t fuck up these days?  What’s next a Gone Wind the Wind remake, except without slavery because PC.  I’m a big Dinklage fan, but WTF, and seriously Jamie Fox.  There’s only one great western that ever had a little person in it.  This sounds more like a SNL skit.

Edited by NeverMarryAStripper
Link to comment
Share on other sites
phdhorn

phdhorn 6224

Posted
Posted

I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it... any remake of a post-1940 movie, any remake, sucks.  The only reason I use that date is some of the earlier movies were pre-technological advances that made a difference.  The rest suck.

So this will be some dumbass mindless "fast and furious" adaptation of a classic which will suck.  Although people will go because I do admit that Gibson is great with violence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
phdhorn

phdhorn 6224

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

The Thing (1983)

Father of the Bride (1991)

The Magnificent Seven (1960)

A Fist Full of Dollars (1964)

All remakes. We could probably keep going. 

1) Readaptations aren't remakes per se.  Didn't see any samurai in Fistful.  Or Mag 7.  Tropes have been redone for thousands of years (the original Japanese movies themselves are based on stories at least 1,500 years old).  The screenwriting for re-adaptations is often involved and creative.  These aren't pure re-hashes.
 

2) Father of the Bride '91 can't even lick the original's balls.  You might as well have also listed Steve Martin's depiction of Clousseau in the Pink Panther (yeah, that's a 2006 classic).  Nope, not even close.

3) The Thing was at first regarded as Carpenter's worst film and received about the worst reviews possible - Carpenter himself said he could never improve upon the Hawks original (he didn't) but took the job because he wanted to update the creatures and in turn paid homage to Hawks in Hallowe'en (you might know where)..  It made only $19.5 million at the box office.  Since then if of course has morphed into its own well-liked cult classic of sorts (time will do that), and I guess it's not bad (mostly for effects that were available in 1981-2 that weren't 30 years earlier).  But the original has been far more influential on the work and effects of the genre than the follow up.  But I'll give you this.. it's among the best of the remakes, which goes to show you how shitty almost all "true" remakes are.

And... we can keep going.

Edited by phdhorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eskimohorn

Eskimohorn 5635

Posted
Posted
1) Readaptations aren't remakes per se.  Didn't see any samurai in Fistful.  Or Mag 7.  Tropes have been redone for thousands of years (the original Japanese movies themselves are based on stories at least 1,500 years old).  The screenwriting for re-adaptations is often involved and creative.  These aren't pure re-hashes.
 
2) Father of the Bride '91 can't even lick the original's balls.  You might as well have also listed Steve Martin's depiction of Clousseau in the Pink Panther (yeah, that's a 2006 classic).  Nope, not even close.

3) The Thing was at first regarded as Carpenter's worst film and received about the worst reviews possible - Carpenter himself said he could never improve upon the Hawks original (he didn't) but took the job because he wanted to update the creatures and in turn paid homage to Hawks in Hallowe'en (you might know where)..  It made only $19.5 million at the box office.  Since then if of course has morphed into its own well-liked cult classic of sorts (time will do that), and I guess it's not bad (mostly for effects that were available in 1981-2 that weren't 30 years earlier).  But the original has been far more influential on the work and effects of the genre than the follow up.  But I'll give you this.. it's among the best of the remakes, which goes to show you how shitty almost all "true" remakes are.

And... we can keep going.


The 1982 Thing is a good movie and much more suspenseful than original. And I like it better because I couldnt even finish the original (and I like old movies)

I’ll list the remakes I like better

Cape Fear (close)
Dawn of the Dead
War of the Worlds (I just dont care for the 50’s b-movie feel)
Ocean’s Eleven (far superior because they used actors in 2001)
The Fly
Invasion of the Body Snatchers
Casino Royale (maybe a remake of title only)
True Grit (far superior in my opinion on a number of fronts)

You see part of a good remake is remaking b-movies that have interesting concepts.

But Cape Fear, Casino Royale and True Grit are just different movies, told from different perspectives.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eskimohorn

Eskimohorn 5635

Posted
Posted
No.

Add to list of movies that does not need to be remade.


I disagree. We need more subversive mainstream movies and, in the right hands, could be a breath of fresh air. Gibson just is not the right choice to pull it off. I know he likes cartoon violence, which was fresh when Peckinpaugh did it back in the day, but just is pointless now.

But, yes, we do not need a Fast in the Furious Wild Bunch, packed with one-liners and cliches.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steamboat1874

Steamboat1874 4058

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Eskimohorn said:

 


The 1982 Thing is a good movie and much more suspenseful than original. And I like it better because I couldnt even finish the original (and I like old movies)

I’ll list the remakes I like better

Cape Fear (close)
Dawn of the Dead
War of the Worlds (I just dont care for the 50’s b-movie feel)
Ocean’s Eleven (far superior because they used actors in 2001)
The Fly
Invasion of the Body Snatchers
Casino Royale (maybe a remake of title only)
True Grit (far superior in my opinion on a number of fronts)

You see part of a good remake is remaking b-movies that have interesting concepts.

But Cape Fear, Casino Royale and True Grit are just different movies, told from different perspectives.

 

There is no fucking way any of the Ocean's are better than the original and they are not even close.

Not sure what you mean by "real" actors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eskimohorn

Eskimohorn 5635

Posted
Posted
There is no fucking way any of the Ocean's are better than the original and they are not even close.
Not sure what you mean by "real" actors.


Frank Sinatra no longer “acted” by that time. Want song and dance men, watch the Rat Pack. Want actors, watch a different movie. It had the look and feel of an episode of Quincy, M.D.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
On 5/18/2019 at 2:13 PM, NeverMarryAStripper said:

Is there any classic that they won’t fuck up these days?  What’s next a Gone Wind the Wind remake, except without slavery because PC.  I’m a big Dinklage fan, but WTF, and seriously Jamie Fox.  There’s only one great western that ever had a little person in it.  This sounds more like a SNL skit.

Oh, one was in several episodes, but was always foiled by Artemis and Jim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bateshorn

Bateshorn 9927

Posted
Posted (edited)

The original Ocean’s is generally considered a weightless Ratpack cash grab.  

 

It’s very rare for a remake of a classic to become a classic.  Cape Fear and True Grit are the only two that readily come to mind. Usually remakes of movies that weren’t well regarded the first time around end up being successful,  because there’s space to go up. 

 

While The Wild Bunch isn’t a perfect movie, the combination of an iconic film and Gibson’s obsessive bloodlust is likely a very bad mix.  

Edited by Bateshorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...