I wonder if it's a situation like the Marvel films, where a studio has to keep making them so they don't lose the rights.

If it isn't, it is completely pointless as there are so many 'cabin in the woods' films available already.

I just don't get it.

I mean, it looks okay, but why? it's the same film, i really don't get it. Why remake a film that was made all of 5 minutes ago and basically change nothing.

I don't understand.

So What Remake is Next?
 

They were going to make 2 prequels to the original, back to back, and changed their mind. Just took the script for the first film and decided to film that. Worse still that Roth has put his name to it as a producer.

Better to make something original with that money than remake a film from this century.

Roth says it's a fun movie because they remade it and only changed the manner in which the different characters die. Oh well, that's ok then. 🙄

Makes all the difference – a completely different film!

Are you against recycling, all those unfilmed, original scripts will be in a landfill site soon!

If the choice is between burying a script which has been made into a film or a script which hasn't, I'd bury the one which has.

They really are just taking the piss now.

Am I so f****g old that Cabin Fever became an old movie? It seems too new to actually remake.

I suppose it is 14 years old which, in today's film industry, seems ancient!

I'm not sure about reasonable but i do prefer the original Fly over Cronenbergs heartless redo.

Heartless? If anything, I find it more moving because it is a tragic love story in which a woman falls for a man who develops a horrible, and fatal, wasting disease. It may have been David Cronenberg who equated the idea of 'Brundlefly' with someone who contracts HIV/AIDS, but it's that aspect of the story which I find heartfelt and quite moving.

Don't get me wrong, in many ways it's a great film, but like all Cronenbergs work i find it cold and clynical.

I'm going to shake my walking stick at youngsters!

Let's just hope that isn't a euphemism!

:mod: It's fine. He said 'walking'.

Alert over. :mod:

Back to the future

Universal Pictures announcing a reboot for the iconic film franchise for the summer of 2017.
As part of “Back to the Future Day”, fans inevitably speculated whether a 4th film in the popular franchise was on the cards, in hope rather than expectation. And with every company from Toyota to Ashley Madison cashing in on “Back to the Future day”, all eyes were on NBC Universal.
Initially Universal execs dismissed reports as “fan fiction”, but were forced to confirm the rumours after the domain www.BackToTheFuture2017.com was registered by the company, as well as several social media handles under the same name.
Speaking to Variety, an unnamed exec confirmed the reboot has been in development for over 20 years. “This was always the long term plan for the series,” he said. “We knew that by putting October 21st, 2015 as the future date, we could create demand on social media. It was great foresight on our part.”
Shia LaBeouf is favourite to be cast in the lead role as the infamous Marty McFly, replacing Michael J.Fox. Earlier today, the 29-year-old actor tweeted: “@TheRock Great scott! Yo Doc, you ready? It’s time to go back baby!” The tweet which was quickly deleted, appeared to suggest Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson would replace Christopher Lloyd as the iconic Doc Brown.
The WWE superstar, admitted earlier this week, that he would be “very interested” in playing the role if his demanding schedule would allow it. Johnson is currently signed on to star in the next 10 Fast and Furious films, which will begin filming consecutively in December.
(foooking hell talk about milking a franchise ).
'Back to the Future' Reboot Confirmed
Jared Fogle to be force-fed Subway – ‘Back to the Future’ Reboot Confirmed
Steven Spielberg will executive produce the film, passing the directorial duties to JJ Abrams. Abrams appeared to pour cold water on suggestions of cameos from the original cast. “Cameos?” He said surprisingly. “Where we’re going with this film, we won’t need cameos.”
Whether or not the original cast will make cameo appearances in the reboot remains to be seen, but one “star” from the cult-classic, already confirmed for the reboot, is Crispin Glover who will reprise his role of George McFly. The actor announced to both his twitter followers, that he was “thrilled” to be “returning home”.
The role of ‘Biff’ is expected to be handed to Channing Tatum, with Megan Fox emarked for an unnamed role, presumably as a scientist

Bit early for April Fool's jokes, which this clearly is :wise:

Why would gag post a piece of humour as fact? :rolleyes:

It'll be from Newsthump or something like that. It's clearly not true.

I mean it mentions Ashley Madison, a swingers site or something on those lines.

This is just getting worse!

Everything we know about the Rocky Horror Picture Show remake so far

Looks like the Soska Sisters are doing a remake of Rabid.

Starring Katharine Isabelle or Tristan Risk, no doubt!

In that case bring it on :lol:

The first official trailer for the long awaited (by some) 'Ghostbusters' re-boot

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3ugHP-yZXw

Hmmm - seems like the two original parts have been melded together to make this one!

Jesus.

Someone call the Ghostbusters-there's some deranged females thinking they're gonna fill Ackroyd,Murray,Weaver and Ramis's boots. :tsk:

Hollywood eh?

Anything for a dollar.....:rolleyes:

I'd rather blow my brains out. :bananaride:

Watched it earlier. At the start, it looks like they're trying to fool you into thinking it's more of a sequel set 30 years later, then you realise it's a remake.....or maybe they know it's shit (which it looks like to me), and they thought they'd mention the original (which is the wrong thing to do. It just looks bad, bad, bad.

I must be going soft in my old age, because i actually thought it looked ok.
Considering what i expected, it looks watchable.:critter:
The ghosts looked reasonable to me.
I love the original, saw it at the cinema as a kid, but i think the sequel was shite.:headache:
So in my opinion if it's more entertaining than the sequel then they've done a reasonable job.:pop2:

'Cujo' is set to be remade. However, it will be titled 'C.U.J.O.'. Which stands for Canine Unit Joint Operations. Word is, the dog will be some sort of robot/cyborg thingy, or a dog that has been 'altered' by the military, then escapes.
Seriously, you couldn't make this shit up.

Could
U
Jog
On

Or

Could
U
Just bleeeeeep
Off

The film itself. Looks watchable its the female cast and dont look like they can pull it off where as in the original the jokes and humour kinda come naturaly where in this trailer it looks like their trying to hard with the humour to make it work to the extent it fails.
The ghost effects etc seem ok
But we be like sheep and watch it out of curiosity even tho deep down inside we really dont want to.

I won't!

Haven't they already done that one?

Attachment 176381

http://www.screamhorrormag.com/wp-co...er-200x300.jpg

Suspiria remake brings the stars out - THE HORROR ENTERTAINMENT MAGAZINE

Tilda Swinton is an interesting one, Dakota Johnson is that bird from 50 Shades isn't she? Is she supposed to Suzi do you think?

She ain't doing me!

I've got a girlfriend!!

A Suspiria remake could never capture the style that made the original such a classic.

The greatness of Suspiria isn't the script or general story, it's the vision of Dario Argento and his technical abilities with sound, colour and the camera. It's similar to Val Lewton's techniques with light and shade in the forties, and is not a thing you can replicate.

So i would think any Suspiria remake will stand or fall on it being a better story than the original and perhaps taking the action out of the girls school all together.

One Q? Why
One film that will be ruined and cant and shouldnt be remade, why is the film industry so hell bent on remaking just about every film in existence or rebooting films because either 99% of the time they are awful/garbage etc just the odd few here and there slip the net and end up being good.
The film industry really is in a sad state of affair now it seems to be remakes reboots sequels or dc and marvel superheroes, im getting bored of it now. No wonder people stick to watching the old films or obscure and underground films. And thats why its hard to have a conversation with a friend about films unless their a film enthusiastic themselves because everybody to busy watching main stream films and avoid everything else and missing out on some really good films.

If a really creative film-maker gets Suspiria it could be good, but it probably wont be and it'll be crap.

I'm dreading the day when the live-action Akira re-make is greenlit, it looks like that's never going to happen though as it's been on the cards for about 10 years now at least.

Are Hollywood writers really that short of ideas now that they can only make films that have been made before?