Videodrome being remade. Yes you read that correctly.

[TheOnlyOmega]

I doubt it will end up being a tent pole. I'm a fan of Adam Berg's work and have been looking forward to his debut picture for quite sometime. If he can bring what made Videodrome so good to a mainstream picture I don't see the problem in a remake.

 

[Octoberist]

I doubt it will end up being a tent pole. I'm a fan of Adam Berg's work and have been looking forward to his debut picture for quite sometime. If he can bring what made Videodrome so good to a mainstream picture I don't see the problem in a remake.

If it was anything else, that's fine. But again, have you seen Videodrome? No offense t doesn't sound like it and paint in broad strokes won't work here. Adam Berg might be a talent of course, and I'm not putting him down, but this is one of the weirdest ideas for a remake in a long time.

And you gotta thing about the logistics of a new director working a Hollywood studio and how the execs may (or may not) micro-manage the living crap out of this thing.

 

[Octoberist]

I'm not trying to be condescending but once you've seen Videodrome, you'll get where I'm trying to get it. This aint' Robin Hood. This ain't Friday the 13th.

Sometimes I feel like people would defend an idea of a remake of Mulholland Drive as a rom-com.*

*Not against remakes as long it makes some sense.

 

[TheOnlyOmega]

I've seen Videodrome. It's probably just because I don't like any of Cronenberg's other movies but Videodrome aint my thing. I see why people like it, but I just don't like surrealism.

 

[Ultimatehero]

I feel like some here who are somewhat defending this type of remake has absolutely NOT seen Cronenberg's Videodrome. Sorry Ultimatehero. It's a weird, sexual, flesh-core film, not an action tentpole for the masses. You know what? Total Recall made sense. Not this.

Sorry Octoberist, don't rush to judgements. As anyone can tell you part of what makes Videodrome is the SURREAL nature of it.

And what did this guy show us in his take on it? HIS SURREAL APPROACH TO FILM! Not only that, his bank robbery short had a very dark tone to it that is rare to see and find.

Look at the trailer, tell me it doesn't have surreal and messed up imagery:

[YT]M6AXQeCE9Rw[/YT]

The very SECOND I saw that guy's approach - what came to mind? No, not the guys with guns, not jumping around... the out-of-the-box level thinking and visuals. That with visuals alone he was able to tell a classic tale in a very surreal way which had a dark tone throughout and a shocking/disturbing ending.

And... um... ARLINGTON ROAD. Ever saw it? It's a serious film (FAR from tent pole) that builds up tension and paranoia of one's surroundings.

So combine a writer who, while he's off on the action genre, is a good thriller writer with a director who knows surreal dark visual cues? You've got potential by bringing those two worlds together - nightmare surrealism and high tension.

So... tent-pole film? Where did ANYONE even hint to that??

Again, correct your reading comprehension dude. Because as far as I can see? No one's even hinted to thinking that way.

And yeah, I'm a bit of a hot head.

EDIT:

It's also not 'far fetched'...

http://www.bloodsprayer.com/uncategorized/the-medium-is-the-message-why-were-living-in-videodrome/

Basically, it's current and could make an impact.

According to Deadline, Berg and Kruger plan to “modernize the concept, infusing it with the possibilities of nano-technology and blow it up into a large-scale sci-fi action thriller.” Hit the jump for my reaction.

Alright, that wasn't in the first post. Kind of on edge now. They had it right with bringing a dark surrealistic director and a writer who knows tension without throwing slasher monsters or ghosts but rather the mind into it on board... just hoping the way it's described is exagerating it because otherwise... they could have been on to something. Now if that part of it is false information... as said... a guy who knows tension of the mind and a guy who knows nightmarish imagery... that combination equates something.

 

[moviedoors]

So... tent-pole film? Where did ANYONE even hint to that??

"they planned to modernize the concept, infusing it with the possibilities of nano-technology and blow it up into a large-scale sci-fi action thriller."

Now, I'm speaking off the cuff here, but that sounds like some PG-13 ********.

 

[Mace Dolex]

Yeah, sure he wrote Transformers. But ANYONE in the movie industry can tell you for the majority of blockbusters? Screenwriters don't have much say. We're brought in to write and try to make sense of what a director wants. That's ALL Michael Bay.

And Transformers was good! at least i liked it.

 

[Ultimatehero]

"they planned to modernize the concept, infusing it with the possibilities of nano-technology and blow it up into a large-scale sci-fi action thriller."

Now, I'm speaking off the cuff here, but that sounds like some PG-13 ********.

Dude, read the last part of my post....

 

[moviedoors]

You'd have a point if I thought any of those things about this screenwriter, but unfortunately, I don't. Yeah, yeah, I know imdb, aggregate websites. Don't care. Don't like his writing. Period.

I don't even want to comment on you throwing out that it was just "false information." That's just wishful speculation and nothing more.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Different strokes, different folks. As said, I can look at Arlington Road and The Ring and say in confidence that they are not guilty pleasures because critics and mass audiences thought the same. Was it everyone? No, yet things rarely are.

Now as to mere speculation... it is questionable unless/until I see that from two separate sources... the first site indicates that the premise and notion can go in any given form... while the second one is the only source that brings that up - making me question, "well, why was this left out in the speculative first site posted? Did that information come after the fact? Was that information ignored? Was that information speculative of the second site?" As said - when I think of this director and writer I don't think of...

 

[Octoberist]

I saw your edit so I'm glad that you kinda get where I'm getting at, Ultimatehero. If it was a new take on the surreal original that's fine. But as a large scale sci-fi romp? No thank you.

I think Arlington Road was good but your defense is lacking because that was more than a decade ago. The Ring is nearly 10 years old. The man has not done a whole lotta good in the past few years like how DJ Cuarso sucks now despite his amazing work on 'Salton Sea'..

 

[Ultimatehero]

I still think the large scale sci-fi romp thing might just be an over exaggeration, or at least I hope it is - as said... that director's short posted on the first page? THAT needs to be around the same tone. That gave me definite surreal chills with a creepy twist ending that was well thought out.

I'm of the belief that writers and directors are still good at their craft, but they just get sucked into the hollywood system more or less and start to play it safe. As a writer this is one thing I really don't want to start buying into. I constantly challenge myself going from one genre and one extreme to the polar opposite and to the next without caring if it's hollywood or indie or won't the possibility of not seeing the light of day. It keeps me on my toes. One thing is very telling though - his roots were dark thrillers - and once he started to tell action films is when he started to sell out and become Michael Bay's go-to Transformers guy. Now, if he went back to his roots? He could capture it again because that might be where his passion still is.

Basically writing, directing, acting (you see this with the likes of DeNiro and Pacino at times even) just have learned to sell out for the easy buck. But, there are still those lightning in a bottle performances that show us that they still have it. Basically that shows their talent is still there, they're just waiting to flex that muscle again.

Again, would you rather have the guy who wrote THE RING attached - or the guy who wrote episodes of GLEE ('Carrie' remake). It's no 'Departed,' but in remake terms yeah this is a possible winning team if their goal is to recreate the same experience as the original.

 

[Octoberist]

Well, I'm a fair guy but I'm very inititaivte to the Hollywood mindset, since I worked in the industry for a little bit. You have creative people out there, but the people who are running the studios are either straight up businessmen or clueless people who are always a day late and a dollar short.

Here, it feels like cliche misunderstanding on the source material and the current exploitation of 'branding' everything. It just doesn't feel right.

That being said, I'm not bashing the writer or the director but I just have a bad feeling about it and a lot of times, I'm right. (I was wrong about Dredd though, thinking it would've been a disaster.)

 

[Assassin32]

I expect this to be an abomination.

 

[Sawyer]

I still think the large scale sci-fi romp thing might just be an over exaggeration, or at least I hope it is - as said... that director's short posted on the first page? THAT needs to be around the same tone. That gave me definite surreal chills with a creepy twist ending that was well thought out.

I'm of the belief that writers and directors are still good at their craft, but they just get sucked into the hollywood system more or less and start to play it safe. As a writer this is one thing I really don't want to start buying into. I constantly challenge myself going from one genre and one extreme to the polar opposite and to the next without caring if it's hollywood or indie or won't the possibility of not seeing the light of day. It keeps me on my toes. One thing is very telling though - his roots were dark thrillers - and once he started to tell action films is when he started to sell out and become Michael Bay's go-to Transformers guy. Now, if he went back to his roots? He could capture it again because that might be where his passion still is.

Basically writing, directing, acting (you see this with the likes of DeNiro and Pacino at times even) just have learned to sell out for the easy buck. But, there are still those lightning in a bottle performances that show us that they still have it. Basically that shows their talent is still there, they're just waiting to flex that muscle again.

Again, would you rather have the guy who wrote THE RING attached - or the guy who wrote episodes of GLEE ('Carrie' remake). It's no 'Departed,' but in remake terms yeah this is a possible winning team if their goal is to recreate the same experience as the original.

He's also written for Big Love and a number of comic books, including Marvel's adaptation of The Stand.

But, sure, lets discredit him based on one show he's written for.

 

[Maximus One]

I've actually been wanting to see this get a remake for a while now. This and Altered States are two of my all time favorite's and if handled correctly could be amazing

 

[Octoberist]

I've actually been wanting to see this get a remake for a while now. This and Altered States are two of my all time favorite's and if handled correctly could be amazing

Except for this part:

According to Deadline, Berg and Kruger plan to “modernize the concept, infusing it with the possibilities of nano-technology and blow it up into a large-scale sci-fi action thriller.” Hit the jump for my reaction.

 

[dark_b]

I had to come out of my sabbatical to comment on this:

I feel like some here who are somewhat defending this type of remake has absolutely NOT seen Cronenberg's Videodrome. Sorry Ultimatehero. It's a weird, sexual, flesh-core film, not an action tentpole for the masses. You know what? Total Recall made sense. Not this. This is the equivalent of remaking Mulholland Drive as rom-com with Selena Gomez. This is not an exaggeration.

SO let me drive the point home with this quote from Matt Goldberg of Collider.com




http://collider.com/videodrome-remake-adam-berg-ehren-kruger/190757/

I'm not so against remakes though Hollywood is using them as a crutch as of late. Total Recall? The Thing reboot/prequel? Makes sense. But most of these remakes/reboots have bombed hard. So how can Videodrome, with no public name value, can become a hit is beyond me. So even the people who are defending an idea of an action remake of VD has barely any weight because the success rate has been slim to none.

i agree with Devin why remakes are happening


Fear and laziness.
See, when an executive greenlights a remake, he's covering his ass. The argument is that this is a known property and that leaning on a known property is a smart move. It has a built-in audience, they'll say. It has name recognition. When it fails (and many of them have been failing. See Total Recall) the executive is more secure, having made what looked like a smart decision at the time. If the executive had greenlit something original that failed, they would take the fall. With the remake, blame the property or marketing or the director - the studio guys step between the raindrops.

 

[TheOnlyOmega]

This article sums up the way I feel about remakes nicely
http://io9.com/5931046/why-remakes-are-one-of-our-greatest-achievements-as-a-civilization
I've never seen the big deal about remakes, and I will never get why some of you act like an obscure 80s flick being remade is the end of the world.

 

[dark_b]

This article sums up the way I feel about remakes nicely
http://io9.com/5931046/why-remakes-are-one-of-our-greatest-achievements-as-a-civilization
I've never seen the big deal about remakes, and I will never get why some of you act like an obscure 80s flick being remade is the end of the world.

if modern remakes would be like The Fly 86 and The Ting 82 noone would have a problem. a movie that takes inspiration and goes in another direction.

but now they are doing the same movie with modern effects. sometimes they copy the same shots and dialoge.

 

[TheOnlyOmega]

if modern remakes would be like The Fly 86 and The Ting 82 noone would have a problem. a movie that takes inspiration and goes in another direction.

but now they are doing the same movie with modern effects. sometimes they copy the same shots and dialoge.

Those are the shining examples of that era. Nobody remembers the remakes of The Bad Seed, The Blob, or Cat People from that same era. Just like how in the future people will remember The Departed, True Grit, and Let Me In while forgetting Prom Night, The Fog, and Black Christmas.

 

[moviedoors]

Hey now, I like The Blob remake. Takes no prisoners and great effects work. That movie is ****ing brutal. It looks like it sucks to get eaten by the blob; an orgy of agony and terror.

 

[Ultimatehero]

I'll go down in this order...

OCTOBERIST...

Working IN the industry, yeah many executives are not knowledgeable on the creative side - I was talking the creative people themselves and not the executives.

That said, I have yet to meet executives who don't know good work and aren't against what their boss is doing. Want to blame someone? Blame the higher higher up. Because these guys just have to meet a quota, sometimes are given **** and have to try to make the best out of it, and really want something quality to wind up in the end. Do they sometimes sell out? Yes. But, their job is also on the line for being handed what they are at times.

SAWYER...

The point is - the guy really has no foreseeable background with thriller or the horror genre. Not a knock on Glee. But, more as - at least we know the writer has handled similar stories before - rather than it being up in the air what will result from it. I'm interested in it. But, hell - a thriller remake by a guy who has done non-thriller and not really dark work vs. someone who has? At least here we have a clue is what I'm getting at.

DARK B....

Actually whether a remake or some form of based-on property an executive can be fired. How do I know this? Let's just say an executive who worked on a 80s hit or prior hit property that became a big summer blockbuster tanked epically and he was fired as a result of it. I will not say the film or the property. But, there is no safety net. It's not "I can make a remake/adaptation off something known and it tanks, eh I'm at least safe!" That person can just as easily get fired.

 

[Ash J. Williams]

I expect this to be an abomination.

As do I, considering that practical effects probably won't be used.

 

[Evil Twin]

I don't get this at all. From what I can tell, the premise has almost nothing to do with the original. Plus, outside of Cronenberg fans, the title Videodrome means nothing to the general public. That seems the worst of both worlds.

But it's not my money and I doubt it will make any impact. Low expectations are probably the movie's friend in this case.