Page 1 of 1
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 1:52 pm
by OscarGuy
Here's more on O'Brien's ire.
Rocky Horror Creator Horrified By TV Movie Plans
14 August 2008 10:24 AM, PDT
Wednesday's announcement that the 1975 cult film The Rocky Horror Picture Show would be remade for Britain's Sky Movies and the U.S.'s MTV has been knocked by the film's original creator, Richard O'Brien. Although the announcement said that O'Brien would co-produce the new version, O'Brien himself told the BBC: "I'm not co-producing it and I won't be involved in any way. The first I heard about it was when people sent me cuttings from U.S. papers." He also denied the suggestion that he had given the movie a seal of approval. "It doesn't have my blessing," he said. "I don't know where they'll go with it really. ... I've even heard that they're going to put new songs in. I wrote the book, the music and the lyrics. Where are they going to get the songs from? Who's going to do that? That's a bit strange isn't it?"
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 1:47 pm
by Zahveed
Alright, fine.
Next time Gadget, next time!
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 1:41 pm
by OscarGuy
Are they really? I would need verification from the posters on the board who are more familiar, but I'm certain a lot of the "sequels" and "story continuances" were done more because the films were popular at the box office than for any real or perceived necessity to finish a story.
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 12:55 pm
by Zahveed
Besides, sequels for the sake of completing a story and blockbuster franchises are absolutely different.
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 12:52 pm
by Zahveed
OscarGuy wrote:screw you and the horses you rode in on!
I believe this is widely frowned upon in most cultures.
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 11:09 am
by OscarGuy
I doubt it. Sequels and such have been around for decades and they haven't stopped. I mean look back at Going My Way and The Bells of St. Mary's for examples of early "sequels". They may not be the massive special effects spectacles of the modern era, but they exist, which suggests that the remake desire will continue for decades until enough people stand up and say "screw you and the horses you rode in on!"
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 10:33 am
by Zahveed
OscarGuy wrote:I mean, we've already been subjected to a remake of classic Psycho...will it really take a remake of Citizen Kane or Casablanca or Gone With the Wind to finally bring a screeching halt? Or since Hollywood is running out of ideas is this the wave of the future?
I read an article suggesting since early Hollywood relied heavily on novels and stage adaptations, present-day Hollywood is relying heavily on remakes and franchises because these are the mediums that inspired them. It's only been a decade, to my knowledge, since the surge of the remake. Give it another decade and we'll have a new generation of filmmakers that have been overexposed to these remakes and opt to create new, original ideas - perhaps for a medium we can't even fathom.
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 10:19 am
by OscarGuy
Zahveed wrote:OscarGuy wrote:Just like Halloween should have been a bomb and all the horror remakes should have been bombs, it will probably be a success and make us sad and mopey that they would destroy a classic.
There's always a turning point. We just have to be patient.
I mean, we've already been subjected to a remake of classic Psycho...will it really take a remake of Citizen Kane or Casablanca or Gone With the Wind to finally bring a screeching halt? Or since Hollywood is running out of ideas is this the wave of the future? I saw an article the other day by effects specialists who said technology is or soon will be in place to take long-dead actors and create digital performances... The commercials were bad enough...
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:46 am
by Zahveed
OscarGuy wrote:Just like Halloween should have been a bomb and all the horror remakes should have been bombs, it will probably be a success and make us sad and mopey that they would destroy a classic.
There's always a turning point. We just have to be patient.
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:42 am
by OscarGuy
Just like Halloween should have been a bomb and all the horror remakes should have been bombs, it will probably be a success and make us sad and mopey that they would destroy a classic.
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:01 am
by Zahveed
I only wish MTV puts so much money into it that when it bombs horribly, they are bankrupt and must live off their Nickelodeon income.
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 8:43 am
by OscarGuy
And when the original creator says he won't be involved (which means no new songs or music), you know there's further trouble.
Rocky Horror Remake Slammed By Creator
14 August 2008 5:01 AM, PDT
A remake of cult classic The Rocky Horror Picture Show has been slammed by its creator Richard O'Brien.
The original 1975 film, starring Tim Curry, Susan Sarandon and Meat Loaf, was a cult hit for O'Brien and MTV bosses are keen to replicate its success.
But the Brit won't be involved - and is not happy the remake is going ahead without him.
He says, "I have no view on whether it should be remade but it doesn't have my blessing.
"I'm not co-producing it and I won't be involved in any way. The first I heard about it was when people sent me cuttings from U.S. papers."
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:18 pm
by kaytodd
I predict that when MTV announces who they cast in the roles Tim Curry, Richard O'Brien, Patricia Quinn, Nell Campbell, etc. made legendary, this board will explode in waves of ridicule and disbelief.
They should not do a remake. Make it a Rocky Horror for the 21st century. Borrow the brand name but tell a different story.
This had "bad idea" written all over it.
Edited By kaytodd on 1216945677
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 9:16 am
by Zahveed
Of all the times to remake this, why during a time when MTV doesn't even play music videos or programs dedicated to music. This idea would have been more acceptable ten years ago when "shock-rock" was scaring soccer moms everywhere but not today when the big seller is Miley Cyrus and High School Musical.
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:43 am
by OscarGuy
Oh god...I'm a fan of the original, but why...?
http://www.variety.com/article....13&cs=1