Escape from New York (Remake)

[Advanced Dark]

^ Watch Tim Burton get the job. LOL There's someone who wrecked Planet of the Apes. The old Planet of the Apes is one of the best sci-fi films ever and then Tim Burton got his hands on it and ruined it. Several of my favorite films to me were given inferior follow ups including War of the Worlds (ughhh), and King Kong. Yeah Kong was visually awesome at times meh.

 

[Mr. Credible]

that gerard butler guy has weird teeth... they make him look like a nerd, and at times, totally brought me out of his 'badass' persona in 300. i know that's a weird complaint, but seriously, the guy has weird teeth.

i can see from 300 that he's good at yelling most of his lines and flexing, but i don't see him as snake at all. i get that he's popular after that overhyped movie came out, but there've got to be 100 other actors out there better suited to replace kurt russell.

 

[ghost_x]

I can dig it

 

[Advanced Dark]

that gerard butler guy has weird teeth... they make him look like a nerd, and at times, totally brought me out of his 'badass' persona in 300. i know that's a weird complaint, but seriously, the guy has weird teeth.

i can see from 300 that he's good at yelling most of his lines and flexing, but i don't see him as snake at all. i get that he's popular after that overhyped movie came out, but there've got to be 100 other actors out there better suited to replace kurt russell.

Snake doesn't need to do alot of yelling. He basically whispers all of his lines...at least in the original.

 

[Michael Allred]

with Carpenter as optimistic about this project as well as serving as executive producer...it makes me wanna see this even more!

i'm gettin' tired of hearing all these people complain about how Plissken and Escape from NY are untouchable. it's not as if they're remaking Gone with the Wind or Godfather. in my opinion most of the people who don't want a remake of this are too stuck in the past. someone said they shouldn't give Snake an origin because EFNY was made in a time when the hero didn't need a past...well, now is not that time. we're in a new era of movies that are more fleshed out and feel more realistic than they were in the 80's. now-a-days, it's hard to sell a character that doesn't have a past ESPECIALLY when that character is the main focus of the film. that's one of the reasons why the previous 3 James Bond movies fell flat, because James Bond didn't feel fleshed out. he was a secret agent without a past....

There's a HUGE difference between "fleshing out" a character and stripping away the character's mystery. One only needs to see the what happened to Boba Fett...at one time he was a badass bounty hunter then we learned he's just a little boy who misses his clone daddy. What happens when we find out Snake lost his eye in a gardening accident? See what I mean? Some things you don't have to explain, you leave it to the audience's imagination which always, always gives a character greater appeal than the filmmakers spelling it out for you.

 

[Michael Allred]

double post

 

[Michael Allred]

I can dig it

Ah, so now we get some of Snake's backstory, he was a gay soap opera actor.

 

[Advanced Dark]

There's a HUGE difference between "fleshing out" a character and stripping away the character's mystery. One only needs to see the what happened to Boba Fett...at one time he was a badass bounty hunter then we learned he's just a little boy who misses his clone daddy. What happens when we find out Snake lost his eye in a gardening accident? See what I mean? Some things you don't have to explain, you leave it to the audience's imagination which always, always gives a character greater appeal than the filmmakers spelling it out for you.

At least attempt to make a legitimate argument. Yeah I'm sure New Line, Neil and Gerard are working hard developing the back story of Snake Plisskin by prepping a scene of him losing his eye in a gardening accident. Yeah that's what's gonna happen.

 

[Advanced Dark]

 

[Mr. Credible]

Snake doesn't need to do alot of yelling. He basically whispers all of his lines...at least in the original.

that was entirely not my point... at all.

 

[Advanced Dark]

^ I know I was just making my own point within the point of your point. I thought I might point that out so you don't think the point of my point was referencing your point otherwise it'd be pointless.

 

[DorkyFresh]

There's a HUGE difference between "fleshing out" a character and stripping away the character's mystery.

CR managed to flesh out James Bond without stripping his mystery away. besides, who says they're going to strip his mystery away? as tempting as telling why he wears a patch is we don't know for sure they're going to do that and even if they do, that doesn't mean they'll be telling his life story ala Batman Begins. the movie is Escape from NY...not the Chronicles of Plissken. the whole movie isn't going to be about his origin...a few scenes at the most.

One only needs to see the what happened to Boba Fett...at one time he was a badass bounty hunter then we learned he's just a little boy who misses his clone daddy. What happens when we find out Snake lost his eye in a gardening accident? See what I mean?

no i don't. Boba Fett is a good example of what can happen in the hands of a man who lost his magic long before Episode 2 was written. all we know is that there'll be an origin tale involved...we don't know how old he'll be, what he'll be doing, or where he'll be doing whatever he's doing. there's no reason to think the scenes they'll be showing of his origin will be anywhere near as cheese or corny as the stuff you've described. granted...it COULD happen but as of right now, there's nothing indicating that it's going to.

Some things you don't have to explain, you leave it to the audience's imagination which always, always gives a character greater appeal than the filmmakers spelling it out for you.

always, ALWAYS? funny...cuz i thought showing how Indiana Jones got the scar on his chin was a GREAT opener for the Last Crusade.

 

[Advanced Dark]

All great points Dorky. I think alot of people feel threatened that one of their favorite movie icons might be treated as poorly as other remakes or restarts have been treated. I can understand not jumping up and down if one's been dissapointed before as I have been, however I'm a huge fan of the character and want to see more. I want to see more of his origin. No I don't want to see his birth or have his origin really screwed with like in Riddick. I want to see more of the events that led up to his capture. In fact I'd love to see his capture happen about 25% of the way into the film. Make it a 2hour plus film too. If they name the baddie "Duke" like the original there are a few possibilities out there. Don't laugh: Vin Diesel, Samuel Jackson, LL Cool J, Michael Clark Duncan, etc...I think Sam is probably too old to play that role/personality...we'll see. I love the MCD suggestion the most.

 

[DorkyFresh]

thanx AD, and i agree about it being a 2+ hour film. an action scene to start the movie off with how he got captured would be nice. as far as Duke is concerned...



...i think this dude would be perfect.

in case you dunno who he is, his name is Terrence Howard.

 

[Michael Allred]

At least attempt to make a legitimate argument. Yeah I'm sure New Line, Neil and Gerard are working hard developing the back story of Snake Plisskin by prepping a scene of him losing his eye in a gardening accident. Yeah that's what's gonna happen.

Holy **** I was joking. I was using a far fetched example to show the lengths producers go with remakes and the like. I'm sorry you're too dense to have understood my argument.

 

[Mr. Credible]

^ I know I was just making my own point within the point of your point. I thought I might point that out so you don't think the point of my point was referencing your point otherwise it'd be pointless.

you game me a nose bleed

 

[dpm07]

Should be interesting. I'll definitely check it out.

 

[Advanced Dark]

Here's the deleted opening scene where Plisskin's involved in the Bank Robbery. I want to see more of stuff like this before he's capture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Riy0mRFjCbA

 

[cryptic name]

with Carpenter as optimistic about this project as well as serving as executive producer...it makes me wanna see this even more!

i'm gettin' tired of hearing all these people complain about how Plissken and Escape from NY are untouchable. it's not as if they're remaking Gone with the Wind or Godfather. in my opinion most of the people who don't want a remake of this are too stuck in the past. someone said they shouldn't give Snake an origin because EFNY was made in a time when the hero didn't need a past...well, now is not that time. we're in a new era of movies that are more fleshed out and feel more realistic than they were in the 80's. now-a-days, it's hard to sell a character that doesn't have a past ESPECIALLY when that character is the main focus of the film. that's one of the reasons why the previous 3 James Bond movies fell flat, because James Bond didn't feel fleshed out. he was a secret agent without a past....

that being said...if they can get a decent director i hope this film gets made. i know Kurt Russell was one of the things that made Escape in NY and LA so awesome but as i said...those films aren't untouchable. they're FAR from perfect and there's a lot of room to improve not only the story, but the action as well.

i really couldn't agree less as far as giving snake plisken a clear history. the vague backstory prensented in the first escape is perfect and tells you everything you need to know. i personally don't want to know how he damaged his eye, how his first mission went or exactly how he fell out of the military's good graces, those are things better left up to the audience. i swear all theses "lets go back to the beginning" stories just show how lazy writers are becoming.

as far as there being room for improvement...has it occured to anyone else that film (and kinda music) are the only art mediums where people have the audacity to look at someone elses work and say "i'm going to do it better"? you don't see someone rewriting Catcher in the Rhy with a more level headed Holden or repainting The Mona Lisa with a hotter Mona. let artists make their own movies instead of redoing someone else's idea, i don't car what you think can or should be changed about it.

 

[I_Hate_U_All]

well said and I agree that hollywood needs to get off its ass and be more original.

One thing to note about the comparison between books and movies is that beyond the language evolving in whatever ways it does, not much changes about the book writing format. but yeah it'd be stupid if someone wanted to re-write Angela's ashes for example, adding proper punctuation and such. It's a memoir.

 

[DorkyFresh]

i really couldn't agree less as far as giving snake plisken a clear history.

i never said i wanted to see Snake's life story...where did you read that?

i personally don't want to know how he damaged his eye, how his first mission went or exactly how he fell out of the military's good graces, those are things better left up to the audience.

well you may personally not want to see any of that and i can respect that opinion, but try not to use "the audience" to justify yours.

i swear all theses "lets go back to the beginning" stories just show how lazy writers are becoming.

another opinion...but this time i can't respect it. you mean to tell me that Paul Haggis (Casino Royale) and David Goyer and Christopher Nolan (Batman Begins) are lazy writers? wanting to set the record straight or making something better doesn't equal laziness. the Japanese are known for taking things that have already been invented and making them better....are they lazy also?

as far as there being room for improvement...has it occured to anyone else that film (and kinda music) are the only art mediums where people have the audacity to look at someone elses work and say "i'm going to do it better"?

is that so? i could've sworn i remember seeing Alex Ross redo a cover for Wizard (magazine) that has Spidey in the same pose and same clothes that Todd McFarlane drew back when Wizard was first starting off. also...Konami released "Metal Gear Solid: the Twin Snakes" for the Gamecube which was a remake of the original "Metal Gear Solid" for the first Playstation. most fans welcomed it with open arms. i'm also sure that there are countless books that have been made using the same formula from previous books only to change character names or ethnicities....those are essentially remakes. hell, a lot of people would even consider Jesus's story a "remake" of Hercules's. remakes aren't only confined to film and music. video games and books have been remade as well...

you don't see someone rewriting Catcher in the Rhy with a more level headed Holden or repainting The Mona Lisa with a hotter Mona.

Mona Lisa was an actual person. her name was Lisa Gherardini and the title "Mona Lisa" actually means "Madam Lisa". as we all know, you can't "remake" an actual person. i want to see Escape from NY remade because even though i like the movie...the acting, the effects, music, sound, etc. are pretty outdated and i'd love to see a more fleshed out version of it. i've never read Catcher in the Rye but i seriously doubt it has outdated special effects or camera work. every situation is different...you can't just say "no remakes AT ALL!"

let artists make their own movies instead of redoing someone else's idea, i don't car what you think can or should be changed about it.

if the original artist is alright with the idea then what's the problem? David Bowie helped Trent Reznor remix one of his songs and Sting helped sing "I'll Be Missing You" at one of the MTV Music Awards. if an accomplished artist lets another accomplished artist redo his/her own work it's commendable in my opinion. it's more humbling. i know Casino Royale might not've had that luxury but i doubt anyone's gonna argue that it shouldn't have been remade.

i have no problem with everyone stating their opinions on remakes but please stop trying to make them out to be artistically unethical or immoral as a whole.

 

[Warhammer]

I'm all for seeing it in the theater, but this movie is really not necessary.

 

[Advanced Dark]

^ No movie is neccessary.

 

[Advanced Dark]

i really couldn't agree less as far as giving snake plisken a clear history. the vague backstory prensented in the first escape is perfect and tells you everything you need to know. i personally don't want to know how he damaged his eye, how his first mission went or exactly how he fell out of the military's good graces, those are things better left up to the audience. i swear all theses "lets go back to the beginning" stories just show how lazy writers are becoming.

as far as there being room for improvement...has it occured to anyone else that film (and kinda music) are the only art mediums where people have the audacity to look at someone elses work and say "i'm going to do it better"? you don't see someone rewriting Catcher in the Rhy with a more level headed Holden or repainting The Mona Lisa with a hotter Mona. let artists make their own movies instead of redoing someone else's idea, i don't car what you think can or should be changed about it.

Then don't watch the movie. End of story. See ya.

BTW John Carpenter is executive producing this film and regarding the original film...he was just writing an action movie to fulfill a contract. He didn't know what he had. If they had the budget to make the story more rich and detailed they would have.

 

[RedIsNotBlue]

So people are only allowed to talk about movies they like or are looking forward too?