Wednesday, November 4, 2015

The Return of Everything

One, yes, I'm back. My guest has left for parts unknown (Iowa is greatly unknown to me) and I am now free and clear to right blogs again. The first thing I did was go over to the Catholic Geeks and pump out some articles, because I like to fulfill my obligations.

And, after finishing those news articles, I have to ask ... What is wrong with everyone lately?  Why is everyone and everything dedicated to reboots?

Okay, in some cases, I understand it. If it's a comic book something, fine, yay.  But why are people bothering bringing back crap that no one liked in the first place?

For example, Star Trek.  I understand bringing back Star Trek, because it's a force to be reckoned with, a franchise that's on the rebound.  So I understand having the return of Star Trek to the small screen.  Granted, in this case, it's smaller than usual, because it's "coming back" to computer streaming services, not to network or cable television. And, since the films are doing so well, it only stands to reason that Star Trek would take another stab at TV.

Star Trek has a fan base. It has some really die hard fans. These fans will cut you if you point out how DS9 ripped off Babylon 5Star Trek is a franchise monster that's on the rebound.

THAT I understand.

But Van Helsing?  Remember that terrible Hugh Jackman film in 2004?  It's coming back, only to the Syfy channel and gender-swapped. And apparently with nothing to do with the original movie. None of the original people behind the film seem to be working on it, none of the cast are released, and it's being brought to us by the channel behind Sharknado.

Who thought this was a good idea? No one liked the original film, it died a horrible death at the box office, and it's so old, no one currently going to college probably even remembers it.  Honestly, it was 2004.  Do you remember that year very well?  It was the year after Lord of the Rings had finished, leaving Harry Potter to continue on inertia. Van Helsing was just a bad film.  And even worse, they've made it Vanessa Helsing -- unless it's Vanessa van Helsing, that means even THE NAME OF THE SHOW IS WRONG.  And if they make her nickname "Van," I'm going to throw rocks at the tv screen. That's such a stupid nickname, no one would swallow it.

Yes, I'm only pissed at the gender-swapping because they've managed to screw up the name in that route.


And, again -- why are they turning to a film that's over a decade old, that failed as a movie, and then making a tv show that's NOTHING LIKE THE MOVIE. If that's the case, why even bother claiming any connection to the original film in the first place? Because the weapons are all copyrighted? Because the clothing is? Because they wanted to avoid claims of lawsuits by Hellsing or Vampire Hunter D?  What?

Rate this Vampire Hunter F, for fail.

At the same time, they're also bringing back His Dark Materials, the books upon which the film The Golden Compass was based in 2007.  Again, why? It was a flop of a movie, making nowhere near the profit it needed to, and more or less destroying United Artists, who wanted the series to make Lord of the Rings-level money without using original material of a similar quality.

Golden Compass was comprised of fail.  It died a horrible, horrible, on-fire, screaming death. And yet, it's back. On television this time. And honestly, given what the Wrights have told me about Pullman's trilogy, and what I've seen of his work, I suspect the only reason he has a career is that he's over-hyped by the "right" people.

Okay, look, I know that TV is big right now. People can do more on NetFlix or television than they can on the big screen in some cases -- especially story-wise. Daredevil proved that NetFlix could make a fun, entertaining, dark, yet semi-artsy TV show that was awesome.

But going into failed films to hunt down material?  Really? Does no one in Hollywood read? Do they only see movies, and think "Hey, we could have done sooooo much better with this idea" and then run with it?

And why films that are so relatively old? 2007 was 8 years ago, folks, and that's the most recent film here. It can't be nostalgia.

Maybe they think that no one remembers how truly bad the original was, and that they can improve on the material so much more.  Which feels very much like glorified fan fiction.

Oh well, I don't get it. Though if anyone in Hollywood wants to make my books into movie, cut me a big enough check, I will go away and you will never have to listen to me bitch about what you did to my book -- because I will not see the movie. Yes, about half that check will be bribe money to keep me away from the film -- the script, the set, the casting, the actors, everything.

But that would require that these people can adapt their ideas from books instead of other films. Please, someone, get Peter Jackson to make more films based off of books... Just not another Hobbit movie, please.

9 comments:

  1. "These fans will cut you if you point out how DS9 ripped off Babylon 5."

    That's still controversial? It was the _starting_ assumption here (Spain) back in the 90s, even for trekkies.

    "And apparently with nothing to do with the original movie."

    Then how is it a reboot? Ah, sorry, network claims, missed that one. Personally, mind you, I'd have reshaped Mina Harker if I'd wanted to change the gender of the main character, but that would assume a XIXth century world.

    "Rate this Vampire Hunter F, for fail."

    I quite liked the original VH D [1985]. I think I got it in the early 90s.

    "At the same time, they're also bringing back His Dark Materials, the books upon which the film The Golden Compass was based in 2007. Again, why? It was a flop of a movie, making nowhere near the profit it needed to, and more or less destroying United Artists, who wanted the series to make Lord of the Rings-level money without using original material of a similar quality."

    Well... the Lord of the Rings IS a second take in the story. There was that animation by Bakshi...

    Now, there _are_ a lot of remakes that scare me "The Greatest American Hero", for example. Basically, any 80s series with a low budget. Can you imagine a modern "Scarecrow and Mrs. King"? One that passed all current social filters? At least we seem to be in a new chilly war, so there's that.

    "Please, someone, get Peter Jackson to make more films based off of books... Just not another Hobbit movie, please."

    I want him on The Silmarilion.

    Take care.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yup, it's still a thing in the US. Some people just won't let go.

      Not sure what VH has to do with it being a reboot. The entire idea confuses me.

      Heh. A "Scarecrow and Mrs. King" retread. Yeah, that would be odd as heck.

      Ah, Jackson on The Silmarilion -- that should take up the rest of his career

      Delete
  2. Hollywood is out of ideas. I think they've said as much themselves. That's why we get reboot after reboot instead of original material from them anymore.

    Heck, outside of Marvel or Pixar films I can't remember the last film I saw in theater. There just isn't much out there.

    On another note, is there something up with the Catholic Geeks website? I can't sign in with my google account to comment.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wasn't Van Helsing the movie with the repeating crossbow? I really really wanted to have one of those.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One of them. I think it's become a thing.

      Delete
  4. John and I liked the Van Helsing movie. Not everything that flops is bad. My all time favorite movie was the worst flop I've ever heard of.

    As to Golden Compass. It' has a huge fan base. They just made a bad movie. BBC did a great job with Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell. Maybe they can do a good job of Northern Lights, too. (Golden Compass is the American name.) I loved the first book very much. So much, in fact, that I am still waiting patiently for the sequel. (I don't count the second two books in the trilogy. They were boring and had nothing to do with the cool stuff in Book One.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Really? Interesting. I think that was the earliest films I've ever had problems cinematography. I tired it twice, and I think I preferred the original Universal Monster serial (it really was a continuing story after a while). Also, Hugh Jackman playing a character with amnesia. I'm shocked. :) Maybe the movie just rubbed me the wrong way.

      As for Northern lights ... A huge fan base? Huh. I never would have guessed. All of my friends are readers, and, to my knowledge, you and John are possibly the first people I know of to have ever finished the series.

      Delete
    2. Oh! Oh! ... A Northern remake...

      Northern Exposure.

      Take care.

      Delete

Please, by all means, leave a message below. I welcome any and all comments. However, language that could not make it to network television will result in your comment being deleted. I don';t like saying it, but prior events have shown me that I need to. Thanks.