Why are people ignorant of the real originals?

[Worr Monger]

Remakes are fine if they're done right:

John Carpenter's The Thing - Greatest film ever.. better than the 50's original.

Let Me In - I liked it more than the Swedish original.... that's right I said it.

I'm banking on the new Girl With the Dragon Tattoo to be better than the Swedish original as well (For Trent Reznor's soundtrack alone)

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

This has come up a lot recently with the news of new Oldboy and Akira movies. People cry "It'll never surpass the original movie!"

both of those movies were based off of a manga, so they're not even original themselves.

Key phrase there is "original movie". Nowhere in that sentence is it implying that the movie was the original overall, just the original in that medium.

P.S. I want to hurt people who are calling the new Spider-Man movie "a remake of the original."

Same thing here.

The people who think that the 2002 movie was the origin of the Spider-Man character, unaware that he's near-50 years old, are not cool, man.

Those people do not exist, or at the very least, are very rare. When people say "a remake of the original" there's an implied "film" at the end there.

 

[maxcarrion]

OK so people are ignorant of things, I think you're going to have to get over that, it's really unavoidable, there is now far too much information for any one person to keep in their heads and people aren't going to fact check everything they say. When they say it's not going to be as good as the original feel free to translate it in your head to a previous iteration of the story that they know and like will likely continue to be better as there are reasonably few (but certainly not none) remakes that were actually worth making. That just seems like an unecessary requirement to have people add those sorts of qualifiers themselves when you can just assume it's what they mean and even if you're wrong not really have to worry about it, really they're just saying that they liked something and they have little faith that say, Michael Bay, will give a good accounting of it rather than just raping their childhood memories with a talentless display of messy film making in an attempt to cash in on a previously profitable franchise

When it comes to dealing with ignorant people, educate, forgive, compensate for or ignore, getting angry with them and threatening them with pain is really just being a jerk, I bet there are subjects they know more about then you but maybe it's the comings and goings of certain celebrities so obviously there life is worth less than yours as clearly knowledge of obscure progenitors of entertainment works is far more important.

 

[ChildofGallifrey]

I'm banking on the new Girl With the Dragon Tattoo to be better than the Swedish original as well (For Trent Reznor's soundtrack alone)

Me too, but mostly because David Fincher is at the helm (though Reznor's remix of the Immigrant Song is badass to the nth degree). Goddamn, that man should be able to gold-leaf his house with awards by now, but he doesn't have a single Oscar. Well, I guess it took Scorsese nearly 50 years to win one, and for a remake as well. That seems pertinent for this topic...

 

[GamerKT]

Remakes are fine if they're done right:

John Carpenter's The Thing - Greatest film ever.. better than the 50's original.

Let Me In - I liked it more than the Swedish original.... that's right I said it.

I'm banking on the new Girl With the Dragon Tattoo to be better than the Swedish original as well (For Trent Reznor's soundtrack alone)

See, that's what I'm talking about. Are you aware that those two Swedish movies aren't entirely original, but based off books? :I

 

[GamerKT]

I'm banking on the new Girl With the Dragon Tattoo to be better than the Swedish original as well (For Trent Reznor's soundtrack alone)

Me too, but mostly because David Fincher is at the helm (though Reznor's remix of the Immigrant Song is badass to the nth degree). Goddamn, that man should be able to gold-leaf his house with awards by now, but he doesn't have a single Oscar. Well, I guess it took Scorsese nearly 50 years to win one, and for a remake as well. That seems pertinent for this topic...

Kind of off-topic, but is David Fincher's track record really that awesome? I just checked his filmography, and he's done a lot of cool stuff. A lot of adaptations. I liked Benjamin Button (beats the shit outta the book), Fight Club, and The Social Network. Would you recommend any of his other stuff in particular?

 

[OmniscientOstrich]

There's a key difference here. I'm by no means against adaptations (unless it's video games, they inexorably fuck those up). After all a great many classics have been adapted from literature and stage productions. I am however, against blatant cash in Americanisations of films less than a fucking decade old being developed for the benefit of those too fucking lethargic to read subtitles. Oldboy is one of my favourite films, so YES I MAD.

 

[GamerKT]

There's a key difference here. I'm by no means against adaptations (unless it's video games, they inexorably fuck those up). After all a great many classics have been adapted from literature and stage productions. I am however, against blatant cash in Americanisations of films less than a fucking decade old being developed for the benefit of those too fucking lethargic to read subtitles. Oldboy is one of my favourite films, so YES I MAD.

They're using Josh Brolin as the main guy (Joe). I liked it better when it was gonna be Will Smith...

 

[JesterRaiin]

Why are people ignorant of the real originals?

Why does it bother you ? Isn't it wonderful to make "Scarface" impression and enlighten those who don't know about secret origin of their beloved franchise ? :]

 

[GamerKT]

Why are people ignorant of the real originals?

Why does it bother you ? Isn't it wonderful to make "Scarface" impression and enlighten those who don't know about secret origin of their beloved franchise ? :]

I've been thinking about it, actually. I think it just bothers me that a lot of people just don't respect books (the usual source for movies). Like, when people call the movie "the original," I hear "that visual thing was the important one, and that stack of paper can fuck off even though I'm unaware of it."

Yes, I'm an English major, in case anyone was wondering.

 

[OmniscientOstrich]

They're using Josh Brolin as the main guy (Joe). I liked it better when it was gonna be Will Smith...

O rly? I heard they were going for Colin Firth to play who I shall now refer to as Joe Dae-Su and that Spike Lee was going to direct. The latter definately does not inspire confidence...Anyway, personally I think for the role in question I'd much prefer Josh Brolin over Smith, he's more much more suited to this kind of gritty role. At any rate, I've already made my dissaproval of this project vehemently clear and it would take nothing short of a miracle to even come close to the original movie. (Can't fault me for being specific :3)

 

[GamerKT]

They're using Josh Brolin as the main guy (Joe). I liked it better when it was gonna be Will Smith...

O rly? I heard they were going for Colin Firth to play who I shall now refer to as Joe Dae-Su and that Spike Lee was going to direct. The latter definately does not inspire confidence...Anyway, personally I think for the role in question I'd much prefer Josh Brolin over Smith, he's more much more suited to this kind of gritty role. At any rate, I've already made my dissaproval of this project vehemently clear and it would take nothing short of a miracle to even come close to the original movie. (Can't fault me for being specific :3)

Joe Dae-Su is awesome. It was gonna be done by Spielberg and Will Smith at first, but they dropped it. Spike Lee picked it up. I appreciate you saying movie, though.

 

[Wintermoot]

maybe people are afraid the remake is handled by a complete douche (not a real remake but look at the Bayformers movie) I,m already afraid of the new Akira (what,s the point of having it set in new Manhattan?!) although it could also turn out positive the 1980,s Scarface was awesome.

 

[JesterRaiin]

Why are people ignorant of the real originals?

Why does it bother you ? Isn't it wonderful to make "Scarface" impression and enlighten those who don't know about secret origin of their beloved franchise ? :]

I've been thinking about it, actually. I think it just bothers me that a lot of people just don't respect books (the usual source for movies). Like, when people call the movie "the original," I hear "that visual thing was the important one, and that stack of paper can fuck off even though I'm unaware of it."

Chill man. Some people simply don't respect things you know and like. And here's the catch : that doesn't label them as "bad person". They simply are different than you and that's all. No need for excitement.
Sooner you accept it, the better.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I've been thinking about it, actually. I think it just bothers me that a lot of people just don't respect books (the usual source for movies). Like, when people call the movie "the original," I hear "that visual thing was the important one, and that stack of paper can fuck off even though I'm unaware of it."

Yes, I'm an English major, in case anyone was wondering.

Gee, I would've thought that an English Major would've been well aware that the word "original" when used in that context typically means "that one which the new one is based on" and not necessarily completely new material.

 

[GamerKT]

I've been thinking about it, actually. I think it just bothers me that a lot of people just don't respect books (the usual source for movies). Like, when people call the movie "the original," I hear "that visual thing was the important one, and that stack of paper can fuck off even though I'm unaware of it."

Yes, I'm an English major, in case anyone was wondering.

Gee, I would've thought that an English Major would've been well aware that the word "original" when used in that context typically means "that one which the new one is based on" and not necessarily completely new material.

Did you read the whole thread? I'm not making an original(first)/original(never been done before) comparison here.

 

[Anarchemitis]

No one credits the real genius behind all modern art.

Caesar Augustus.

 

[dimensional]

People are ignorant of originals a lot of the time because they have never seen/heard of them so it is impossible not to be of course if they go around telling people something is the original when it is not well that is just a bit stupid and they should have checked their facts but at least if they do that usually sooner or later someone will pull them up on the matter and set them straight.

Original is also open to interpretation as in a book cannot be a film same as it cannot be a game they are all different mediums and sure they can all tell the same story more or less but it will likely be told in very different ways so you can have the original movie or original game even if it is based off the source material of the book which may have come before the others.

I've been thinking about it, actually. I think it just bothers me that a lot of people just don't respect books (the usual source for movies). Like, when people call the movie "the original," I hear "that visual thing was the important one, and that stack of paper can fuck off even though I'm unaware of it."

Yes, I'm an English major, in case anyone was wondering.

I dont believe I have ever heard anyone disrespect books as a whole (or not have respect for) films occasionally radio yes games most certainly but books absolutely not. (probably because these people have not mastered proper speech patterns) Books are one of the most important creations ever conceived.
Also I think you may be making things up which annoy you such as how can people tell something to fuck off that they are unaware even exists it seems you are interpreting their ignorance and actions as open hostility which it is not.

 

[Worr Monger]

Remakes are fine if they're done right:

John Carpenter's The Thing - Greatest film ever.. better than the 50's original.

Let Me In - I liked it more than the Swedish original.... that's right I said it.

I'm banking on the new Girl With the Dragon Tattoo to be better than the Swedish original as well (For Trent Reznor's soundtrack alone)

See, that's what I'm talking about. Are you aware that those two Swedish movies aren't entirely original, but based off books? :I

But see? Nothing wrong with that either.. 5 of my favorite films evAr were based on books.. The Thing, Let Me in, The Shining, Blade Runner, The Lord of the Rings.... Original doesn't ALWAYS mean it's the best... just that it was the original... it should still receive recognition no doubt. But "better" is in the eye of the beholder.

I have yet to read Stephen King's The Shining... but many people think that Kubrick's film was an abomination... I'd LOVE to see a remake of The Shining this decade that tries to overshadow Kubrick's masterpiece (Please note: I'm not a die-hard Kubrick fan at all). I'm willing to bet you won't get anyone to portray Jack Torrance the way that Nicholson did... No fucking way NEAR as memorable.

While I love The Lord of the Rings books... Jackson did a great job of bringing them to film. It's a different medium, and CANNOT be treated the same way as books. Some things don't work on film as they do in books, and some things MUST be omitted... especially for time constraints. I hear a lot of people complain about the length of The Return of the King.... I guarantee that MORE people would complain if they included everything in Tolkien's story... It'd be a 20 hour damn octilogy... good luck with that. Jackson only intended to make TWO films because he thought NO ONE would let him make three.

* TLR - Original DOES NOT equal better... but original should at least get some props & recognition for inspiration.

 

[GamerKT]

Remakes are fine if they're done right:

John Carpenter's The Thing - Greatest film ever.. better than the 50's original.

Let Me In - I liked it more than the Swedish original.... that's right I said it.

I'm banking on the new Girl With the Dragon Tattoo to be better than the Swedish original as well (For Trent Reznor's soundtrack alone)

See, that's what I'm talking about. Are you aware that those two Swedish movies aren't entirely original, but based off books? :I

But see? Nothing wrong with that either.. 5 of my favorite films evAr were based on books.. The Thing, Let Me in, The Shining, Blade Runner, The Lord of the Rings.... Original doesn't ALWAYS mean it's the best... just that it was the original... it should still receive recognition no doubt. But "better" is in the eye of the beholder.

I have yet to read Stephen King's The Shining... but many people think that Kubrick's film was an abomination... I'd LOVE to see a remake of The Shining this decade that tries to overshadow Kubrick's masterpiece (Please note: I'm not a die-hard Kubrick fan at all). I'm willing to bet you won't get anyone to portray Jack Torrance the way that Nicholson did... No fucking way NEAR as memorable.

While I love The Lord of the Rings books... Jackson did a great job of bringing them to film. It's a different medium, and CANNOT be treated the same way as books. Some things don't work on film as they do in books, and must be omitted... especially for time constraints. I hear a lot of people complain about the length of The Return of the King.... I guarantee that MORE people would complain if they included everything in Tolkien's story... It'd be a 20 hour damn octilogy... good luck with that. Jackson only intended to make TWO films because he thought NO ONE would let him make three.

* TLR - Original DOES NOT equal better... but original should at least get some props & recognition for inspiration.

Not arguing that, man. The latter part of your last sentence is my point. I just want people to be aware that "the original" is the book, not movie. It peeves me when a director gets all sorts of recognition for the movie when it was the book's author who came up with the the damn thing. Anyway, as long as you're aware, it's fine.