I don't want to sound closed minded, which I admit I AM sometimes when it comes to certain movies, but I don't know how I can bring myself to give this movie a chance. There should be an unwritten rule as far as what movies should become 'remakes'. This would definitely be in my top five along with Exorcist, Oz, and a few others that I actually haven't seen but I know are classics. Maybe the guideline could be 'any movie that's a current staple with all audiences, played in it's original form-regardless of age'. Who could watch Depp in this flick and not be constantly thinking back to the perfect style and timing that Wilder had throughout the first one? Maybe it's Hollywood looking at those movies and saying "that was such a good movie-we should make it again". Perhaps because it's such a good movie, that's why you SHOULDN'T do it again! Or maybe a simpler test. Any movie that when a fan is asked about it, responds "I saw that one! that's a classic!" should be tossed onto the unremakable pile.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - Charlie and the Chocolate Factory...? - NuWave 13:57:37 04/13/05 (8)
- Re: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory...? - Analog Scott 11:12:32 04/16/05 (0)
- Agh! Nu . . . you want Hollywood to be "sensitive"? - Auricle 11:29:28 04/14/05 (0)
- I agree - mishmashmusic 11:09:37 04/14/05 (0)
- Gene Wilder is in SF this week... - mkuller 20:43:34 04/13/05 (1)
- He said - NuWave 10:20:48 04/14/05 (0)
- Re: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory...? - Tom ยง. 19:35:24 04/13/05 (2)
- Roald Dahl? I loved his books when I was a youngin' - PdL 22:36:59 04/13/05 (0)
- my favorite scene is when the girl gts crackd in the head with the - Duilawyer 21:26:07 04/13/05 (0)