Some things to mull over

Marlboroprojects · Post by **Marlboroprojects** » Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:35 pm

Now, before I get started let me just say that I'm NOT against the "remake" of this movie and will be looking foward to it. That being said, I think a lot of people need to consider some of the things I say in here or they run the risk of being VERY dissapointed. Let me make a few points:

1. I see a lot of posts like "who will play Luther", and "Ajax better not be...", ect. ect. GET USED TO THE IDEA THAT THERE MOST LIKELY WON"T BE A LUTHER OR AJAX OR ANYONE ELSE FROM THE ORIGINAL. Now, before you say I'm crazy go to IMDB and look at the cast & credits for some of the recent remakes:

Assault on Precinct 13 - only same character is Bishop with different 1st name.

Dawn of the Dead - none of the same characters

Texas Chainsaw Massacre - none of the same characters except for Leatherface, who had a different real name.

If we get more then 3 or 4 of the same characters I will be surprised. That's not to say there won't be characters BASED on ones from the original.

2. Gangs - Other then the Warriors, there is no guarantee any of the other gangs will be the same. I also seriously doubt we'll be seeing anyone looking like the Furies or High Hats cause MTV will want to "keep it real".

3. Locations - Remember, The Warriors just have to get from the meeting at point A back home to point B. Whether these 2 points are still The Bronx & Coney Island remains to be seen.

Basically what I'm getting at is, other than the similar plotline of a gang being wrongly accused and having to get past other gangs to make it home, everything else is up in the air. So, we should not get all worked up & just judge this movie on it's own merits when it comes out.

After all, they can't take away the original from us, & if nothing else, the remake will most likely lead to a special edition dvd of the original being released which is what we all want anyway.

Just some of my thoughts

tomboy · Post by **tomboy** » Sat Feb 12, 2005 12:10 am

Marlboroprojects wrote: After all, they can't take away the original from us, & if nothing else, the remake will most likely lead to a special edition dvd of the original being released which is what we all want anyway.

I never thought of that, actually.

Marlboroprojects · Post by **Marlboroprojects** » Sat Feb 12, 2005 12:33 am

You just can't watch it with the expectation that it will be any improvement on the original. I just saw Assault on precinct 13 & thought it was a pretty good movie. I didn't try to compare it to the original & that made it more enjoyable.

tomboy · Post by **tomboy** » Sat Feb 12, 2005 2:54 am

kind of like having high hopes for a movies spawned from a book, right? Valley of the Dolls pissed me off royally. You've got a point.

Post by **SoldierHeavyMuscle** » Sat Feb 12, 2005 4:43 am

what sux, is the word remake means just that, REMAKE! i mean your right other than the basic idea it will be completely different. which is fine, but it should not be a classified as a remake, as a matter of fact we should probably stop calling it that! and yeah the special edition dvd will be the best thing to come out of this.

warriorchick · Post by **warriorchick** » Sat Feb 12, 2005 4:49 am

i have always felt that the remake would most probably be very different from the original (a good thing). but, for most people that have seen the original, it will be extremely hard, psychologically, not to compare the two movies. it's something that will be done naturally on a subconscious level. i hope the remake is very different from the first. this way, our elite group of warrior fans will always have 'our movie', the original unchanged one. 8)

Marlboroprojects · Post by **Marlboroprojects** » Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:23 am

kind of like having high hopes for a movies spawned from a book, right?

The absolute worst is when some schlock writer sells a screenplay, it gets made into a completely forgettable B movie, & before it gets released some studio bean counter finds out that there is the slightest bit of resemblance to a book. So rather then risk getting sued, they buy the rites to the book and name it the movie & slap a great big "Based on the novel by......" on the ads.

Now as a fan of the book or author, you plunck down your 10 bucks to see this steaming pile of crap, and surprise, surprise.

This happened to me a couple of years ago with the movie Valentine. The book was a great suspense novel, written by Tom Savage (who incidently works here in a mystery book store in lower manhattan called Murder, Ink.)

The movie was turned into a slasher pic with only the smallest plot thread tied to the book. It was almost as if they just read the little summary on the back and then wrote the script.

Irishfan · Post by **Irishfan** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 1:06 pm

I know its gonna be a completley difrent movie because if a writer or director just recycled the same ideas used in the original that could be seen as taking the lazy way out and there just freeloading off someone elses hardwork and either of the above could destroy their carers and reputations. Well thats what I think anyway and thats why I think all the recent remakes have been so difrent to the source material.

Marlboroprojects · Post by **Marlboroprojects** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 2:23 pm

I can't see why anyone would want to remake ANY movie the exact same way. It's one thing to put your own spin on something. It's something else to make a carbon copy.

Look at the Psyco remake. Line for line, shot for shot duplicate of the original, and it SUCKED.

Irishfan · Post by **Irishfan** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 3:30 pm

Yeah I know. I think its time someone in Hollywood was told the expresion "If its not broke dont fix it"

BigMike7 · Post by **BigMike7** » Mon Feb 28, 2005 5:37 am

I wouldn't be surprised if there is girl Waqrriors considering it will be remade in this day and age.

The Warriors Movie Site Forum