It is my considered opinion . . .

User avatar
mrsl
Posts: 4200
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 5:20 pm
Location: Chicago SW suburbs

It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by mrsl »

.
I have discovered that when watching a remake, you must have NOT seen the original. I guess it's just human nature to compare, but often there is absolutely no comparison that is fair and just. I just saw the remake of Winchester 73 with Tom Tryon and John Saxon. Tom is definitely no Jimmie Stewart, but since the story has been completely re-written, there is no need for him to be similar. Most remakes are fairly good movies in their own right, but the acting and direction are so vastly different between the 40/50's and now, even when the script is followed to the T, the remake comes off lacking somehow. In the original Winchester, Shelly was a seemingly virginal young bride who thought of Stewart and his side kick as "nice people" simply because they had treated her like a lady, and though she may have been a "goo" girl, she wasn't a saint. On the other hand Barbara Luna was a tough, saloon/upstairs girl from the get-go. Shelly brought a kind of warmth to the part which pulled you into her charming psyche, whereas Luna leaves you not really caring what happens to her.

Although I still haven't seen Lee Marvin's Monte Walsh, I expect he also was able to bring a kind of caring from the audience because Lee is good at that, but Tom Selleck didn't play it for sympathy. The only time he really showed feeling was when his lady (?) died. But again, seeing this version, by Selleck I feel this is a remarkable study of the changing times of the American cowboy and how he was forced to deal with it, and I imagine many of them couldn't.

Can anyone give me any more thoughts on the subject?
Anne


***********************************************************************
* * * * * * * * What is past is prologue. * * * * * * * *

]***********************************************************************
User avatar
Lomm
Administrator
Posts: 719
Joined: September 5th, 2013, 9:14 am

Re: It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by Lomm »

I have to basically take it as a clean slate or I spend the whole film comparing the two. It's hard, especially if the original (as it so often is) was a superior take on the subject.
User avatar
movieman1957
Administrator
Posts: 5522
Joined: April 15th, 2007, 3:50 pm
Location: MD

Re: It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by movieman1957 »

I quite agree you kind of have to take it as new or you do compare. Another example is Audie Murphy's "Destry." Murphy is pleasant enough on his own and handles that genial character that was Jimmy Stewart in the original but best not to make comparisons between the two. The rest of the supporting cast won't hold up to the original but if you leave the comparison alone it is pleasant enough entertainment.

"Monte Walsh" was mentioned and I wonder if others had the same experience when seeing a newer version first. I liked Selleck's better. More of a sense of familiarity that Marvin's was different and suffered for my comparison. (No doubt unfair to Marvin.)

The 1966 version of "Stagecoach" is just asking for comparisons especially as it was made when the original would have been on television. Maybe that would be an instance where you see that one and discover the Ford/Wayne version and maybe have a different opinion of the first.

Remakes are tricky. Back in the 30s and 40s they would have made them likely counting on the audience never remembering the original but often coming our pretty well. "The Maltese Falcon", "Holiday", "Gaslight", etc.

Then when you come to "Rio Bravo" and "El Dorado" would only Hawks be enough to remake his own film? Maybe in the same way Hitchcock did with "The Man Who Knew Too Much" as who else would try?

Then if you want to spend an entire weekend with "A Star Is Born" have at it.
Chris

"Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana."
Marysara1
Posts: 46
Joined: December 2nd, 2022, 1:14 pm

Re: It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by Marysara1 »

Too bad they can't blend both adaptions together. I heard Arsenic and Old Lace was written for Boris Karloff. He was in an adaption of it for T.V.
User avatar
EP Millstone
Posts: 1048
Joined: October 20th, 2022, 9:40 am
Location: The Western Hemisphere

Re: It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by EP Millstone »

Marysara1 wrote: December 3rd, 2022, 3:20 pm Too bad they can't blend both adaptions together. I heard Arsenic and Old Lace was written for Boris Karloff. He was in an adaption of it for T.V.
According to Potent Potion, Part 1, playwright and author of Arsentic and Old Lace Joseph Kesselring wrote the line "He said I looked like Boris Karloff" before Broadway producers Howard Lindsay and Russel Crouse had the inspired "genius" to have the actor saying the line actually be Boris Karloff.

Karloff played "Jonathan Brewster" twice on television -- first in 1955 and then in 1962 on The Hallmark Hall of Fame. In the later presentation, 74-year-old Karloff was older than the actresses playing his aunts! Even more incredible, Jonathan's brother Mortimer was portrayed by 42-year-old Tony Randall! Utterly ridiculous!

"Start every day off with a smile and get it over with." -- W.C. Fields
User avatar
ziggy6708a
Posts: 933
Joined: January 14th, 2013, 9:17 am

Re: It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by ziggy6708a »



:smiley_chinrub: :smilie_happy_thumbup:
was "mr6666" @ TCM
User avatar
ziggy6708a
Posts: 933
Joined: January 14th, 2013, 9:17 am

Re: It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by ziggy6708a »


:tickedoff:

was "mr6666" @ TCM
User avatar
jamesjazzguitar
Posts: 766
Joined: November 14th, 2022, 2:43 pm

Re: It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by jamesjazzguitar »

ziggy6708a wrote: December 6th, 2023, 2:48 am
:tickedoff:

Why does this need to stop? It was approved by the family, who was paid for the effort.
User avatar
Dargo
Posts: 2412
Joined: October 28th, 2022, 10:37 am

Re: It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by Dargo »

jamesjazzguitar wrote: December 6th, 2023, 12:09 pm
ziggy6708a wrote: December 6th, 2023, 2:48 am
:tickedoff:

Why does this need to stop? It was approved by the family, who was paid for the effort.
Yeah, so then when can we expect to see...wait for it...

'It's a Wonderful Robotic Life' ???

Can't ya just see it now? Yeah, sort of a Bedford Falls/Blade Runner kind'a thing?

(...and with one of the most memorable lines in it being: "Teacher says, every time a bell rings, Microsoft gets another billion bucks!")
User avatar
Allhallowsday
Posts: 1419
Joined: November 17th, 2022, 6:19 pm

Re: It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by Allhallowsday »

jamesjazzguitar wrote: December 6th, 2023, 12:09 pm ...Why does this need to stop? It was approved by the family, who was paid for the effort.
Because it's not JIMMY STEWART ...?
User avatar
txfilmfan
Posts: 465
Joined: December 1st, 2022, 10:43 am

Re: It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by txfilmfan »

jamesjazzguitar wrote: December 6th, 2023, 12:09 pm
ziggy6708a wrote: December 6th, 2023, 2:48 am
:tickedoff:

Why does this need to stop? It was approved by the family, who was paid for the effort.
In general, there's concern for fake AI generated content and a gullible public. Just yesterday, a local sports radio station here in DFW used an AI tool to create voice recordings of several of their hosts. You apparently feed a couple minutes of audio recordings of a person, and the AI tool can then replicate the voice by reading any text you want. This is the "amateur" version of the tool, and it sounded realistic. The only way you could tell it was fake (other than then absurd text they had it read) was that the speech as a bit halting. Apparently the professional version is more realistic. And all of this was done for free.

You can see how these tools can be abused. Any famous celebrity or politician will have hours and hours of their voice recordings available to feed into these tools. They are essentially photoshop for audio recordings. Malevolent people will be able to put words in the mouth of others. Soon you will no longer be able to tell what's real and what's not.
User avatar
jamesjazzguitar
Posts: 766
Joined: November 14th, 2022, 2:43 pm

Re: It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by jamesjazzguitar »

If the media that is used by AI is in the public domain, or authorized by the holder of the rights, then I don't see an issue.
User avatar
CinemaInternational
Posts: 776
Joined: October 23rd, 2022, 3:12 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by CinemaInternational »

It's weird, definitely, but since the family signed off, I guess it is okay.
User avatar
Dargo
Posts: 2412
Joined: October 28th, 2022, 10:37 am

Re: It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by Dargo »

Here's a thought for ya!

If or when there's a remake of Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyessey', will HAL's voice ("Sorry, I can't do that, Dave") be AI generated OR will they use the original one???

(...kind'a makes ya wonder, doesn't it?!) ;)

LOL
User avatar
CinemaInternational
Posts: 776
Joined: October 23rd, 2022, 3:12 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: It is my considered opinion . . .

Post by CinemaInternational »

Dargo wrote: December 8th, 2023, 2:21 pm Here's a thought for ya!

If or when there's a remake of Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyessey', will HAL's voice ("Sorry, I can't do that, Dave") be AI generated OR will they use the original one???

(...kind'a makes ya wonder, doesn't it?!) ;)

LOL
They would likely try to reuse the original if they ever remade it, but I'm not sure if they will try. The sequel, 2010: The Year We Make Contact was the film that seemingly broke the camel's back and ended MGM's days as a major studio after it financially lost its shirt in 1984. MGM after that was demoted to a mini-major, or a second rung studio.
Post Reply