Time Bandits remake

[Demesnedenoir]

I have zero hope for a Time Bandits remake being watchable, in particular stretched into 10 episodes..

This horrifies me. I foresee another Dark Crystal demolition of a classic. Or the Willow debacle. Maybe even worse, since they've eliminated dwarfs from the production.

Rumor is Gilliam walked off the set. I'm proud of him, assuming this is true. Too bad he couldn't have stopped the whole thing in its tracks.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

I loved Time Bandits as a kid, but good or bad, this reboot crap really needs to stop. "Give us the same thing, only different," is absolutely destroying the movie industry as it stands, and in Hollywood the only heroes are the ones on the page.

 

[pmmg]

Cause holywood is running out of stuff to screwup? Why should time bandits be immune.

I dont care. They are free to keep making flops.

 

[pmmg]

I got a book if they want something new.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

Immunity isn't needed, H'Wood demonstrating the capacity to learn would be nice.

John Rhys-Davies was in KC and was talking about a series he signed onto because he thought it had massive franchise potential... I'll admit to not recalling the series' name... and he would have left the show if he could have. But anyhow, he was talking to one of the show's writers who said something like, "Coming up with stories for the episodes is really tough." Davies thoughts on this were: You have a series where you can go anywhere in time and space, and you can't think of stories? What are doing in this business?

Sliders! That was the name of the series.

Sadly, I think this is prevalent throughout the industry, along with a laundry list of other issues.

On the other hand, Shogun was a good remake. I don't think it needed to be made, but it was well done.

Cause holywood is running out of stuff to screwup? Why should time bandits be immune.

I dont care. They are free to keep making flops.

 

[Finchbearer]

I enjoyed watching how the new dark crystal was made…but that was about it.

 

[skip.knox]

I'm all for remakes. Every generation deserves a chance to re-tell favorite stories. We've been doing it for thousands of years.

I earnestly wish all remakes would be good ones, but I rather think that the same rule applies to remakes as to originals. 70% of everything is crap. Holding that standard close relieves me of much stress and anger, though not disappointment.

Part of the problem is me. I want the remake to affect me the way the original did. Alas, the only way that works is if the studios can remake *me* as well, return me to age twenty-eight or fifteen or forty-two or whenever it was I encountered the original.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

Remakes are fine, see Shogun, but this has become a disease in the industry. I understand the disease because producing movies without a (hopefully) built-in audience is dangerous. I've written a couple of good scripts that could've been money-makers (IMO) and have read way more than that from talented writers and not a single one was given a chance, and that's only worse these days. The one that might've gotten made was a Krampus horror script I read about 25 years ago. I know Krampus films were made, but I forgot the writer's name, so I have no idea if it was based on his work or someone else's take on Krampus.

Okay, I only read part of the Krampus script, but the concept was brilliant in its horror sort of way.

I'm all for remakes. Every generation deserves a chance to re-tell favorite stories. We've been doing it for thousands of years.

I earnestly wish all remakes would be good ones, but I rather think that the same rule applies to remakes as to originals. 70% of everything is crap. Holding that standard close relieves me of much stress and anger, though not disappointment.

Part of the problem is me. I want the remake to affect me the way the original did. Alas, the only way that works is if the studios can remake *me* as well, return me to age twenty-eight or fifteen or forty-two or whenever it was I encountered the original.

 

[Jackarandajam]

From an industry outsiders perspective, it seems like greed is the core issue. Sounds trite, but throwing out sloppy remakes is a quick way to get a lot of fans to watch it once, and even if they hate it the money is made. Music industry is the same way; making flash-in-the-pan earworms is a more statistically reliable way to pay back investors than betting on what seems like the genius of a specific artist. Masterpieces are rare, blockbusters are yearly. If money is the only goal, screw the time it takes to do it well, just make the marketing loud enough to force it to trend.

 

[Rexenm]

I liked Sliders. And the Cats remake wasn’t for me. The Worst Witch remake made sense. Selling Star Wars wasn’t the worst move we all expected it to be, but I bet someone would disagree.

Its all this waiting in line for the block busters, nostalgia really works. My advice, if you loved the original, don’t watch the remake, its just more.

A lot of my writing is fueled by nostalgia. I can recreate it, but I just have to move on. My question, is why a timeless classic would want a remake, in the first place.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

This is a ten-episode series (I think) on Apple+. H'Wood would love to do exactly as you say and did it for years. The trouble with this concept now is that H'Wood is losing its collective shirt on much of the crap it is putting out. Apple is a different beast. I have no doubt they are overpaying and overhyping Major League Soccer to make some point while angling toward bigger (US) sports in the future. Apple+ is still seeking street cred, in a sense, and has done okay with its early projects, although they don't release viewership numbers, the best I know. If they were smart, they would focus on entertainment, but these are tricky times. And i suspect they will lose money on this series, but it doesn't matter too much because they're still building their stable of original works to serve up for the next decade-plus.

The industry itself has a list of issues in order to fix itself, and I'd say they did better when "greed" was there motto rather than dipping their toes too deep into political and social issues—even in the heyday of "deep drama" before Star Wars, H'Wood's profits were comparatively abysmal—and started serving them with a mallet instead of artistically in the trees of plot and character. If a movie costs $200 million to produce and they spend another $200 million on promotion they don't break even on $400 million box office. Numbers aren't public, but one can speculate that theaters take about half the gross—this is variable to say the least—but half is a nice, easy figure. It is generous to say that a movie that cost $400 million to produce and market is in the black at $600 million. Oh, and that doesn't even include that raw box office numbers don't account for sales tax coming out. Making a killing in foreign theaters? Well, some of those countries have outrageous taxes. H'Wood wants the numbers inflated to impress audiences and investors. How Apple+ will count success with this film venture, I won't bother to figure out.

This isn't to say one should weep for H'Wood—oh, hell no. They deserve what they get, whether good or bad.

Plus, all gravy trains end. The remake and superhero trains are sputtering, and if H'Wood gets back to being greedy, movies will be better for it.

From an industry outsiders perspective, it seems like greed is the core issue. Sounds trite, but throwing out sloppy remakes is a quick way to get a lot of fans to watch it once, and even if they hate it the money is made. Music industry is the same way; making flash-in-the-pan earworms is a more statistically reliable way to pay back investors than betting on what seems like the genius of a specific artist. Masterpieces are rare, blockbusters are yearly. If money is the only goal, screw the time it takes to do it well, just make the marketing loud enough to force it to trend.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

Selling Star Wars was a financial success, I have no doubt, and frankly, Disney hasn't done much worse than Lucas himself did after iv, v, and vi. Rogue One is the only one I'd call good and that because it ties into iv for a massive nostalgia win. For Disney+, the franchise along with Marvel and other stuff gives them a broad pallet to work with that has baked in audiences, rather than shooting for new and original. It was a win-win even if I think the resulting product is mostly crap.

I need to watch some Sliders, if for no other reason than to see what Davies was talking about.

I liked Sliders. And the Cats remake wasn’t for me. The Worst Witch remake made sense. Selling Star Wars wasn’t the worst move we all expected it to be, but I bet someone would disagree.

Its all this waiting in line for the block busters, nostalgia really works. My advice, if you loved the original, don’t watch the remake, its just more.

A lot of my writing is fueled by nostalgia. I can recreate it, but I just have to move on. My question, is why a timeless classic would want a remake, in the first place.

 

[Rexenm]

Rogue One is the only one I'd call good and that because it ties into iv for a massive nostalgia win.

I prefer Rogue One out of all of them, and loved it when Mads says, “The Death Star.” It was a hologram. Makes it feel like you were there.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

I prefer Rogue One out of all of them, and loved it when Mads says, “The Death Star.” It was a hologram. Makes it feel like you were there.

Awesome flick. I can't say best because I saw Star Wars in the theater ~20 times as a kid. That can't be beat.

 

[CupofJoe]

It’s not Hollywood, it is us. With streaming the services [Disney, Paramount, Netflix etc] have to have a headline show to announce every week or people will de-sub and go somewhere else. For whatever reasons, the streaming services can’t find enough writers, producers, directors etc, to keep the shows good. Even in the pre-streaming days, there were more hits than misses, but if a show was a hit [and I’m talking American TV here] then it would get a 20+ show deal for year after year. Now it seems that even a big streaming show will be 10 episodes or less and last for only a season or three.
They need more new shows, more frequently and there is less of each.
But I can’t see a Time Bandits TV series working. Part of the fun was not knowing what crazy thing would happen next. Now we know...

 

[Demesnedenoir]

Ehhh, not exactly, though maybe a little right. H'Wood writers tended to be different than tv, West Coast vs East Coast. For a long time, even back when I was actively pursuing H'Wood, a successful screenwriter fessed up to say that all the writing talent was heading to NYC and tv because of what? Money, of course. What tv writers earned smoked all but the high-end movie screenwriters. Lots more to that, but, that's the simple take. Talent was fading in H'Wood 25 years ago but they still managed wins.

With streaming added in there, well, there is going to be a major learning curve as folks try to figure all this shit out. It's really a risk to reward assessment at this point, but to be blunt, Apple, Amazon, and Netflix as well as the major studios can afford to pay the best, and they still produce sludge.

A lack of writing talent I just don't buy into, at least not in total. The trouble is what they are being forced to write. Wrters aren't creating what they want to create; they're producing what they're told to write, the difference between a spec script writer (me, back in the day) and a contract writer in NYC. Contributing factor? Maybe. An all-around lack of talent from directors on down? This makes sense on the fringes but not at the high-end budgets. Hell! I'd almost think that bringing in new blood from the film schools would help! (See Lucas, Spielberg, and the up-and-comers of the 70's fresh out of film school) but no. Pixar and Disney can buy all the talent they want. Hell, Disney, up until a couple of years ago, was like printing money, but now inflation has set in, heh heh. Pixar movies damned near never failed. I love animated features, but after disappointment after disappointment, I just shrug when a new one comes along.

There are a lot of factors, but we won't know them all until there is an autopsy or the patient recovers.

It’s not Hollywood, it is us. With streaming the services [Disney, Paramount, Netflix etc] have to have a headline show to announce every week or people will de-sub and go somewhere else. For whatever reasons, the streaming services can’t find enough writers, producers, directors etc, to keep the shows good. Even in the pre-streaming days, there were more hits than misses, but if a show was a hit [and I’m talking American TV here] then it would get a 20+ show deal for year after year. Now it seems that even a big streaming show will be 10 episodes or less and last for only a season or three.
They need more new shows, more frequently and there is less of each.
But I can’t see a Time Bandits TV series working. Part of the fun was not knowing what crazy thing would happen next. Now we know...

 

[Rexenm]

It’s not Hollywood, it is us. With streaming the services [Disney, Paramount, Netflix etc] have to have a headline show to announce every week or people will de-sub and go somewhere else. For whatever reasons, the streaming services can’t find enough writers, producers, directors etc, to keep the shows good. Even in the pre-streaming days, there were more hits than misses, but if a show was a hit [and I’m talking American TV here] then it would get a 20+ show deal for year after year. Now it seems that even a big streaming show will be 10 episodes or less and last for only a season or three.
They need more new shows, more frequently and there is less of each.
But I can’t see a Time Bandits TV series working. Part of the fun was not knowing what crazy thing would happen next. Now we know...

It’s the end of sitcoms. Considering the whole light and dark aspect of the medium, and the whole mystique of fiction in general - I would say that modernity has become the new norm, and that is why we are receiving a lot of backlash - with critiques in every niche. A nook and cranny trend is keeping most armchair polities on their tippy toes.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

Awesome flick. I can't say best because I saw Star Wars in the theater ~20 times as a kid. That can't be beat.

We've got a funny connection with Star Wars. A New Hope was my first movie. I'd qualify with 'in theaters,' but I don't know if you could see a movie anywhere else in 1974. The Empire Strikes Back was my sister's first. She was scared of Darth Vader and ended up not seeing too much. And The Return of the Jedi was my brother's.

And of course, when they were rereleased we did it all again, only with the next generation sitting next to us. Heady stuff, that.

 

[Jackarandajam]

Went and saw Mad Max: Furiosa over the weekend. Must recommend. Mr. Miller kinda sits back and does alot of wasteland worldbuilding. Not as good as Fury Road, but a less concise style of storytelling, very well told, and he delivers on some absolutely incredible action and visuals.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

For me, Mad Max fizzled after the first two. Seen each of those multiple times. I'll eventually see this one some bored evening when I don't feel like writing.

Went and saw Mad Max: Furiosa over the weekend. Must recommend. Mr. Miller kinda sits back and does alot of wasteland worldbuilding. Not as good as Fury Road, but a less concise style of storytelling, very well told, and he delivers on some absolutely incredible action and visuals.