The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Long version:
Seeing posters for the new Starsky + Hutch film dotted around town sends shivers down my spine. Not because the thought of a classic series being remade as a hour and a half movie offends me - I’m not much of a Starsky and Hutch fan. So neither am I bothered by the fact that an entire generation will end up thinking that S+H was just a mediocre comedy movie starring Ben Stiller and Owen ‘My range includes grinning, grinning and grinning’ Wilson. No, what bothers me is that the release of Starsky and Hutch is the final nail in the coffin of cinematic originality, at least where mainstream cinema is concerned.
Every other film spat out by Tinseltown’s movie mill is a completely unnecessary remake or retread - we’ve had the god awful remake of The Haunting, which was given to the director of Speed who created a film laden with cgi effects but devoid of any suspense. There’s Ring, a film which has none of the tension or appeal of its Japanese original. Then there’s Vanilla Sky, Tom Cruise’s personal vanity project, yet another remake which didn’t need making. Only the remake of Charlies Angels was any good and its sequel was as much fun as sticking chopsticks in your eyes.
It’s not that there aren’t good films being release, but they rarely get any publicity - Session 9, The Contenders, Memento - all these films were original and enjoyable to boot, but they were hardly advertised at all. They certainly didn’t a wide release, ending up being relegated to arthouse cinemas, where they sat uneasily alongside films about gay cowboys eating pudding. It might seem you need to have big name actors attached to a film to get any publicity - the superb and original Fight Club certainly wouldn’t have got a decent release if Mssrs Pitt and Norton weren’t attached to the project - but it’s not just down to that.
The sad fact is, it’s down to you - the public. The only reason Hollywood keeps pumping out remakes and crappy sequels is because people watch them. And let’s face, it everyone’s gone into a film, thinking ‘Hey, this might not be so bad’ only to come out wishing they could get their money and their two hours back. The only way to get it into the Hollywood execs skulls that maybe they shouldn’t just churn out such crap is to vote with your wallet. If there’s nothing good on at your local megaplex, don’t go - go to the pub/video store/pizza place instead. Or sit home and watch TV - just don’t support crappy low-effort unoriginal films.
Short Version: Starsky and Hutch - just say no.
Seeing posters for the new Starsky + Hutch film dotted around town sends shivers down my spine. Not because the thought of a classic series being remade as a hour and a half movie offends me - I’m not much of a Starsky and Hutch fan. So neither am I bothered by the fact that an entire generation will end up thinking that S+H was just a mediocre comedy movie starring Ben Stiller and Owen ‘My range includes grinning, grinning and grinning’ Wilson. No, what bothers me is that the release of Starsky and Hutch is the final nail in the coffin of cinematic originality, at least where mainstream cinema is concerned.
Every other film spat out by Tinseltown’s movie mill is a completely unnecessary remake or retread - we’ve had the god awful remake of The Haunting, which was given to the director of Speed who created a film laden with cgi effects but devoid of any suspense. There’s Ring, a film which has none of the tension or appeal of its Japanese original. Then there’s Vanilla Sky, Tom Cruise’s personal vanity project, yet another remake which didn’t need making. Only the remake of Charlies Angels was any good and its sequel was as much fun as sticking chopsticks in your eyes.
It’s not that there aren’t good films being release, but they rarely get any publicity - Session 9, The Contenders, Memento - all these films were original and enjoyable to boot, but they were hardly advertised at all. They certainly didn’t a wide release, ending up being relegated to arthouse cinemas, where they sat uneasily alongside films about gay cowboys eating pudding. It might seem you need to have big name actors attached to a film to get any publicity - the superb and original Fight Club certainly wouldn’t have got a decent release if Mssrs Pitt and Norton weren’t attached to the project - but it’s not just down to that.
The sad fact is, it’s down to you - the public. The only reason Hollywood keeps pumping out remakes and crappy sequels is because people watch them. And let’s face, it everyone’s gone into a film, thinking ‘Hey, this might not be so bad’ only to come out wishing they could get their money and their two hours back. The only way to get it into the Hollywood execs skulls that maybe they shouldn’t just churn out such crap is to vote with your wallet. If there’s nothing good on at your local megaplex, don’t go - go to the pub/video store/pizza place instead. Or sit home and watch TV - just don’t support crappy low-effort unoriginal films.
Short Version: Starsky and Hutch - just say no.
If Hollywood's not giving you what you want, maybe it's time you started looking at other styles of films. Maybe you have the wrong idea about "gay, pudding eating cowboy" Art House films, you should check some out. American Splendor, that is recent and I already consider it one of my all time favourite films. Just look around, there's some amazing films coming out all the time, you just need to know where to look. Not every good film has its trailer shown between Friends and its poster stuck on a bus shelter.
If David Soul and Paul Micheal Glasier don't mind this movie being made, then why should we?
I think it'll be a good movie and I'll go see it, and I've got the box set of the original series pre-ordered so hopefully it should come through my letter box tomorrow.
Also, I hope the movie is successful because I would like to see the old Starsky and Hutch appear on television again.
I think it'll be a good movie and I'll go see it, and I've got the box set of the original series pre-ordered so hopefully it should come through my letter box tomorrow.
Also, I hope the movie is successful because I would like to see the old Starsky and Hutch appear on television again.
Every review I've seen so far of Starsky and Hutch has been positive, so why not remake old TV shows, movies etc? Ocean's Eleven is a great example of a good remake.
Why put a blanket over all remakes, rather than judging each one on its own merits?
Why put a blanket over all remakes, rather than judging each one on its own merits?
Whilst browsing around my local Blockbusters yesterday I saw someone purchasing Tomb Raider: Cradle of Life, Italian Job and Bad Boys 2 on DVD and I really did feel like saying something; when I thought about it though providing they enjoy it thats all that actually matters. I wish it wasn't like that ut as you say, its the public that supports the stuff and as such it will continue around and around.
ÂLŠ†ÂÎR wrote:
> As much as I agree with what you say you can't s**top people from
> enjoying the films. I haven't been to the Cinema above a couple of
> times in the las**t year and a bit purely because I refuse to watch the
> sh*t turned out, some people though enjoy the films on offer and thus
> these films will appear again and again and again.
>
> Sad but true.
I didn't really have any idealism about the idea - if I could make every single person in the country read the rant, it would make no different - there'll always be a market for pap, but I can always dream :)
> As much as I agree with what you say you can't s**top people from
> enjoying the films. I haven't been to the Cinema above a couple of
> times in the las**t year and a bit purely because I refuse to watch the
> sh*t turned out, some people though enjoy the films on offer and thus
> these films will appear again and again and again.
>
> Sad but true.
I didn't really have any idealism about the idea - if I could make every single person in the country read the rant, it would make no different - there'll always be a market for pap, but I can always dream :)
As much as I agree with what you say you can't s**top people from enjoying the films. I haven't been to the Cinema above a couple of times in the las**t year and a bit purely because I refuse to watch the sh*t turned out, some people though enjoy the films on offer and thus these films will appear again and again and again.
Sad but true.
Sad but true.
Long version:
Seeing posters for the new Starsky + Hutch film dotted around town sends shivers down my spine. Not because the thought of a classic series being remade as a hour and a half movie offends me - I’m not much of a Starsky and Hutch fan. So neither am I bothered by the fact that an entire generation will end up thinking that S+H was just a mediocre comedy movie starring Ben Stiller and Owen ‘My range includes grinning, grinning and grinning’ Wilson. No, what bothers me is that the release of Starsky and Hutch is the final nail in the coffin of cinematic originality, at least where mainstream cinema is concerned.
Every other film spat out by Tinseltown’s movie mill is a completely unnecessary remake or retread - we’ve had the god awful remake of The Haunting, which was given to the director of Speed who created a film laden with cgi effects but devoid of any suspense. There’s Ring, a film which has none of the tension or appeal of its Japanese original. Then there’s Vanilla Sky, Tom Cruise’s personal vanity project, yet another remake which didn’t need making. Only the remake of Charlies Angels was any good and its sequel was as much fun as sticking chopsticks in your eyes.
It’s not that there aren’t good films being release, but they rarely get any publicity - Session 9, The Contenders, Memento - all these films were original and enjoyable to boot, but they were hardly advertised at all. They certainly didn’t a wide release, ending up being relegated to arthouse cinemas, where they sat uneasily alongside films about gay cowboys eating pudding. It might seem you need to have big name actors attached to a film to get any publicity - the superb and original Fight Club certainly wouldn’t have got a decent release if Mssrs Pitt and Norton weren’t attached to the project - but it’s not just down to that.
The sad fact is, it’s down to you - the public. The only reason Hollywood keeps pumping out remakes and crappy sequels is because people watch them. And let’s face, it everyone’s gone into a film, thinking ‘Hey, this might not be so bad’ only to come out wishing they could get their money and their two hours back. The only way to get it into the Hollywood execs skulls that maybe they shouldn’t just churn out such crap is to vote with your wallet. If there’s nothing good on at your local megaplex, don’t go - go to the pub/video store/pizza place instead. Or sit home and watch TV - just don’t support crappy low-effort unoriginal films.
Short Version: Starsky and Hutch - just say no.
Seeing posters for the new Starsky + Hutch film dotted around town sends shivers down my spine. Not because the thought of a classic series being remade as a hour and a half movie offends me - I’m not much of a Starsky and Hutch fan. So neither am I bothered by the fact that an entire generation will end up thinking that S+H was just a mediocre comedy movie starring Ben Stiller and Owen ‘My range includes grinning, grinning and grinning’ Wilson. No, what bothers me is that the release of Starsky and Hutch is the final nail in the coffin of cinematic originality, at least where mainstream cinema is concerned.
Every other film spat out by Tinseltown’s movie mill is a completely unnecessary remake or retread - we’ve had the god awful remake of The Haunting, which was given to the director of Speed who created a film laden with cgi effects but devoid of any suspense. There’s Ring, a film which has none of the tension or appeal of its Japanese original. Then there’s Vanilla Sky, Tom Cruise’s personal vanity project, yet another remake which didn’t need making. Only the remake of Charlies Angels was any good and its sequel was as much fun as sticking chopsticks in your eyes.
It’s not that there aren’t good films being release, but they rarely get any publicity - Session 9, The Contenders, Memento - all these films were original and enjoyable to boot, but they were hardly advertised at all. They certainly didn’t a wide release, ending up being relegated to arthouse cinemas, where they sat uneasily alongside films about gay cowboys eating pudding. It might seem you need to have big name actors attached to a film to get any publicity - the superb and original Fight Club certainly wouldn’t have got a decent release if Mssrs Pitt and Norton weren’t attached to the project - but it’s not just down to that.
The sad fact is, it’s down to you - the public. The only reason Hollywood keeps pumping out remakes and crappy sequels is because people watch them. And let’s face, it everyone’s gone into a film, thinking ‘Hey, this might not be so bad’ only to come out wishing they could get their money and their two hours back. The only way to get it into the Hollywood execs skulls that maybe they shouldn’t just churn out such crap is to vote with your wallet. If there’s nothing good on at your local megaplex, don’t go - go to the pub/video store/pizza place instead. Or sit home and watch TV - just don’t support crappy low-effort unoriginal films.
Short Version: Starsky and Hutch - just say no.