- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 8/22/16 at 8:10 am to Jack Ruby
quote:
I've seen the commercial at least 20 times during the Olympics
I watched a decent amount of the Olympics, but this thread is the first I've heard of a Ben Hur remake.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 8:30 am to Jack Ruby
I actually saw it and I actually liked it. Morgan Freeman's hair is a mess and he plays his usual self, but it doesn't detract from the movie. The slave ship scene is particularly intense and well done.
I'm too young to have a sentimental feeling towards the original, and I'm not snob enough to shite on a movie unless I see it. Despite the creation of a remake, you can still always go back and watch the original. Sometimes it seems people don't realize that.
I'm too young to have a sentimental feeling towards the original, and I'm not snob enough to shite on a movie unless I see it. Despite the creation of a remake, you can still always go back and watch the original. Sometimes it seems people don't realize that.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 10:21 am to biglego
quote:I will never understand why remakes freak so many people out. It changes ZERO about the original
Despite the creation of a remake, you can still always go back and watch the original. Sometimes it seems people don't realize that.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 12:12 pm to lsupride87
I do understand the idea that instead of spending money on a remake, studios could use that money to make an original film. I get that. But on the other hand, there's nothing wrong with a remake of a 60yr old film if it's well done. Esp since the 1959 version is a remake itself, and was based on a book. So the 1959 was a 35 yr update on a silent movie, but suddenly a 60 yr update is sacrilege. If you're not interested in a remake Bc you think it's unnecessary, then fine. But there's no need call it a pile of shite unless it actually is. This is the type of movie that probably would be received ok if critics weren't thinking "how dare they ruin my childhood" before even seeing it.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 12:30 pm to biglego
Does it stick to the original story?
I almost brought my family to see it this wknd but feared that it would disappoint me, and I want my kids to see what I feel is one of the top 5 films of all time.
I almost brought my family to see it this wknd but feared that it would disappoint me, and I want my kids to see what I feel is one of the top 5 films of all time.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 12:42 pm to wahoocs
I think it made $11.4 million on the opening weekend. Ouch
Posted on 8/22/16 at 12:48 pm to lsupride87
quote:
I will never understand why remakes freak so many people out. It changes ZERO about the original
It takes time and resources away from studios and people who could otherwise be funding and creating original movies.
Also people get excited when they hear the name of their favorite IPs, if you're going to make a movie using that IP, most people would hope it pays proper tribute to that original IP and it's made so that the original fanbase will be excited to see it.
Also, a remake with a lot of effort behind it, like Ocean's 11 or True Grit, is awesome. Not too many people bitch about that.
A remake for the sake of lazily throwing a movie at audiences without a real audience or purpose behind it, like Ben Hur, or a remake with the explicit purpose of pushing an agenda, like Ghostbusters, is an entirely different thing.
This post was edited on 8/22/16 at 12:50 pm
Posted on 8/22/16 at 2:02 pm to wahoocs
quote:
Does it stick to the original story?
I almost brought my family to see it this wknd but feared that it would disappoint me
Honestly, it's been so long since I've seen the 1959 that I couldn't even tell you how it compares, story wise. It's been about 25 yrs since I've seen it.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 2:23 pm to Gusoline
quote:
Don't watch TV
but you post on the Movie/TV board?
Posted on 8/22/16 at 2:47 pm to Jack Ruby
it seriously looked like the worst movie ever made.
I mean Morgan fricking Freeman reprised his role from the Lego movie in this garbage.
I didn't and won't see it but when I saw that trailer... a truly wow moment
and why screw with a classic Heston Movie.
I mean Morgan fricking Freeman reprised his role from the Lego movie in this garbage.
I didn't and won't see it but when I saw that trailer... a truly wow moment
and why screw with a classic Heston Movie.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 4:12 pm to Jack Ruby
Even if it was a solid movie, they've made too many movies in this time period recently, AND it's a reboot.
Gods of egypt
Exodus: Gods and Kings
Both were super hyped and not very good.
It's becoming obvious that Hollywood really is out of ideas.
Gods of egypt
Exodus: Gods and Kings
Both were super hyped and not very good.
It's becoming obvious that Hollywood really is out of ideas.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 4:26 pm to tiggerthetooth
I enjoyed Gods of Egypt. I went in expecting a CGI monster battle, and that's what it was. Nothing less nothing more. Another movie that was crapped on by throngs of people who didn't see it.
Exodus, now that one wasn't very good. I simply can't accept Bale as Moses.
Exodus, now that one wasn't very good. I simply can't accept Bale as Moses.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 4:40 pm to Jack Ruby
This movie looks so fricking bad.
They could've done a decent remake of this, but decided to squirt post-taco bell diarrhea all over a screen and hope people pay to go smell it.
They could've done a decent remake of this, but decided to squirt post-taco bell diarrhea all over a screen and hope people pay to go smell it.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 4:47 pm to wahoocs
quote:
I almost brought my family to see it this wknd but feared that it would disappoint me, and I want my kids to see what I feel is one of the top 5 films of all time.
You chose wisely here. There is no reason to see this remake when you can watch the version that is one of the greatest movies of all time.
This post was edited on 8/22/16 at 4:47 pm
Posted on 8/22/16 at 4:57 pm to John Keating
That's really the point I'd make. If the prior version is already an all-time great movie, why re-make it? Do you really think you can top it? If not, and if you are honest with yourself, you will probably fail to top it, just leave it alone. It's pure vanity to think you could outdo the Heston Ben-Hur, and if you can't out-do it, what is the freaking point?
If you want to re-make something, re-make a bad or mediocre movie because you think you can do it BETTER. Re-make something that a lot of people think could be done better, like Dune. Something like that, which is hard to do, that others have tried and failed to do. That's a worthy, legitimate project. Not re-making Ben-Hur or Schindler's List. "Hey guys, I'm doing a re-make of The Shawshank Redemption!" Just... no.
If you want to re-make something, re-make a bad or mediocre movie because you think you can do it BETTER. Re-make something that a lot of people think could be done better, like Dune. Something like that, which is hard to do, that others have tried and failed to do. That's a worthy, legitimate project. Not re-making Ben-Hur or Schindler's List. "Hey guys, I'm doing a re-make of The Shawshank Redemption!" Just... no.
This post was edited on 8/22/16 at 4:59 pm
Posted on 8/22/16 at 5:06 pm to Cooter Davenport
I agree. The purpose for a remake typically revolves around two aspects: first, a lack of creativity (it is hard to craft a good story, so just take an already great story and remake it) and, second, to make easy money. It is essentially a lazy money grab, that is all.
I believe this remake cost $100M. Hopefully, it loses money or fails to pass the point of making projects like this worthwhile. Remakes need to lose money for Hollywood to get the message. Otherwise, they will continue to happen for the previously mentioned reasons.
I believe this remake cost $100M. Hopefully, it loses money or fails to pass the point of making projects like this worthwhile. Remakes need to lose money for Hollywood to get the message. Otherwise, they will continue to happen for the previously mentioned reasons.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 5:27 pm to Jack Ruby
quote:
Ben Hur Expected to be a MASSIVE Flop
Uhhh, ya think?!
Posted on 8/22/16 at 5:48 pm to Jack Ruby
quote:
Captain Oveur: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators?
Posted on 8/22/16 at 6:52 pm to Jack Ruby
I'm hoping the Blade Runner remake does even worse.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News