Possibly Unnecessary Remakes

Culture
41

Now, let me just state as disclaimers:

  1. I don’t mind the idea of re-telling classic stories with a reversed perspective
  2. I certainly don’t mind the idea of re-telling adapted stories with an emphasis of pulling things from the original material that were missed by the best-known adaptation
  3. I don’t mind the idea of writing erotic fanfiction of classic stories
  4. I don’t mind mash-ups with characters from multiple classic stories (as long as the inclusion of all those characters makes sense)
  5. I don’t mind modern retellings of classic stories that were originally told as period pieces, and
  6. I don’t find BDSM stories to be particularly to my taste, but I understand that others do, so I don’t have any problem with them.

For instance, I enjoy the novel Wicked (categories 1 and 2, with hints of 3 and 5), Into the Woods (2 and 4), the first couple seasons of Once Upon a Time (4 and 5, dipping into 1 occasionally), and the novel American Gods (4 and 5).

That said, the story described, which seems to have all six elements, just seems like a mess.

I think there’s definitely potential for a perspective-reversed Aladdin (despite, from what I’ve heard, the Broadway musical Twisted being rather awful), and even more so, Hercules (as Hades generally isn’t a villain within Greek mythology).

I can kind of see the argument for a crossover to happen in modern times, as sultanates didn’t exist in the time of Ancient Greece. I think it’s a bad decision (setting Aladdin in modern times makes all of the characters a lot less sympathetic), but the idea is probably salvageable. With a very good author.

Turning that story into erotica, though, and specifically BDSM erotica… It’s too many twists on the concept. It stretches the idea of fanfiction to the point of self-parody, and it looks like, by stripping the fantasy elements out of the series, that the author is trying to take it all a lot more seriously than the concept can sustain.

It just sounds like it would have been better doing what 50 Shades did in respect to Twilight (or, for a more tasteful example, Dennis L. McKiernan’s Faery series and the fairy tales it’s based upon), and filing off the original’s serial numbers, if they were going to deviate from the setting, premise, genre, themes, plot, and characters so completely.

2 Likes
42

Eh… it’s been done. Ann Rice, writing as A.N. Roquelaure, re-imagined Sleeping Beauty as a series of three very hardcore BDSM novels back in the 80’s. There was a fourth written in 2015, though I have not read that one.

They were quite good if you’re into that genre. They were also issued twice as audiobooks.

5 Likes
43

As I said, it’s not “erotic BDSM reimagining” that I have a problem with. It’s not to my taste, but, given the popularity of Fifty Shades, there seems to be a market for it.

It’s having that on top of being a modern-day, villain’s perspective, mashed-up-with-other-stories, “realistic” adaptation.

At that point, what is really left from the original but the names, and maybe something vaguely recognizable as the beats from the plot? Is it really an adaptation at all, or is it a completely different story with someone else’s serial numbers pasted on, like Reboot: The Guardian Code, I, Robot (Will Smith version), Riverdale, etc.

3 Likes
44

The I, Robot movie annoyed the hell out of me at first. The filmmakers changed so many things from the Asimov stories that I felt like they should have called it something else, anything else. It took a couple of years for me to mellow out and view it as its own take on the tale… and then I kind of liked it. (Of course, having Alan Tudyk as the voice of Sonny helped-- he tends to improve any movie he’s in.)

But then, very few books can be faithfully adapted into movies without changing some details. Still, the more filmmakers alter the original work, the more I start to wonder, why not just “file the serial numbers off” and do your own thing.

Possibly the best adapter of books-to-movies is Don Coscarelli. I am less familiar with the written Bubba Ho-Tep than I was with John Dies at the End, but I can say both are magnificently done. Especially JDatE– I would have said that book was practically unfilmable, yet Coscarelli doesn’t just make it work, he makes it shine. (He rewrote the climax, largely to fit the special effects budget… but it still functions fairly well and is faithful to the tone of the narrative, even if it leaves out one hell of a plot twist from the novel.)

3 Likes
45

Was there anything from I, Robot, specifically? I mean, there were a lot of random ideas from Asimov’s work in general, but it didn’t seem like an “adaptation” of any particular story, to me.

The most meticulous adaptation I’ve ever seen was the TV version of The Maxx, by Sam Keith. The animators used the original artwork, and it was so by-the-book that if you saw the series first there was really no reason to read the comic.

4 Likes
46

It’s been a few years since I’ve seen the movie and much longer since I’ve read Asimov, but I’ll try…

The original “I, Robot” was a short story, so there honestly wasn’t a lot of story there. But there were many Robot stories (I devoured a huge hardbound collection of them over a summer in my youth), and they tended to be far more intellectual than action-oriented. Susan Calvin was portrayed as an older, rather plain-looking and emotionless woman who only loved her creations, so they cast… Bridget Moynihan? (To her credit, she did try to pull off the emotionless part.) The plot itself seemed more like your standard Hollywood action movie with bits and pieces of Asimov lore bolted on here and there. Will Smith’s typical cynical, world-weary protagonist didn’t help either.

But like I said, I watched it again a few years later with a more open mind, and it just didn’t seem that bad. I could appreciate it more for what it was on its own merits and flaws, instead of holding it up to the original concept and expecting all the edges to match up.

4 Likes
47

for when ones hands are otherwise occupied?

2 Likes
48

Wait until they do the foundation series. It’ll be all car chases, fist fights, explosions, and CGI. That is something that really should not be made into a movie until humanity progresses.

2 Likes
49

If it’s specifically about the Disney versions of those characters, she is on thin ice publishing for profit and could end up making things harder for the fanfic community in general.

OTOH, if it’s not about those versions and the reporter is one of those who doesn’t realize that many of those characters (especially the folklore sourced ones) are public domain, it’s an entirely different ballgame.

Some people don’t realize the difference. They think that you can’t do a Cinderella story, because of Disney. Nope.

Disney knows fanfic exists, of course. They just treat it in a “don’t make us come after you” way. She may be violating that rule.

2 Likes
50

It sounds like she’s going back to the original source material for more details specifically so that Disney has a harder time proving that it’s based on the Disney version.

On the one hand, that’s going to be hard, given that “Jasmine” and “Jafar” are names from the movie and not from the 1001 Nights stories.

On the other, if Gregory Maguire can get away with making his Elphaba green…

1 Like
51

I can’t remember if the witch was green in the book, but The Wizard of Oz the book is in public domain.

https://www.newmediarights.org/business_models/artist/wizard_oz_public_domain

ETA: Hm.

1 Like
52

She wasn’t green in the books; that’s exactly what I mean.

The book is public domain but I don’t think the film is, yet (and it certainly wasn’t when Wicked was first published).

3 Likes
53

Maybe because that’s the only trait he really riffed on from her.

I noticed the article I linked to above said costumes could not be copyrighted. I wonder if that includes makeup?

2 Likes
54

We already have, by my count, seventeen musical adaptations of A Christmas Carol. [Edit to add: oops, I missed a couple. There were two TV movies and four operas, bringing the total to twenty-three.]

Don’t get me wrong, Ryan Reynolds is a hoot, but why?!

2 Likes
55
56

What part of “there can be only one” did they not understand?

More seriously… this is definitely one that could go either way.

3 Likes
57

I didn’t think the original was such a masterpiece that it couldn’t be improved on, but on the other hand, I also think that it’s such a thin premise for a story, that they’re lucky the original came out as good as it did. (Wait, have I actually sat through the entire film since I was a child? Probably not. So, never mind.)

3 Likes
58

It wasn’t good but it seemed pretty into the murdering. If the murdering was more John Wick style then it would be an improvement. Also not having the Scot play the Spaniard and the French dude playing the Scot… that would be good too.

4 Likes
59

I always felt like what made the original was that confluence of the music and a lot of really iconic scenes, but it definitely has plenty of flaws.

On the one hand, having John Wick’s director on it could mean much improved action scenes. On the other, I’d worry about the possibility of it turning into nothing but action scenes… the Wick movies are starting to wear a little thin.

I suppose if they do it well, maybe we’ll finally get a sequel. :smiling_imp:

You can always “improve” it with the Rifftrax commentary…

3 Likes
60

Ok, not quite a remake, but… going by the trailer, it’s got promise, at least. I do hope they don’t try to be too topical in a pandemic age when nothing seems to be topical for more than a week at most (and usually less…).

Remember back when a president playing the saxaphone was a joke that could be milked for the intro for years?

4 Likes