Keanu as Spike Speigel. Whoa.
Captain Nerd
I don't know whether to be horrified or just terrified, but this
may be disturbing:
http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-12-17/keanu-reeves-hopes-to-sta
r-in-live-action-cowboy-bebop
Cap.
--
Since 1989, recycling old jokes, cliches, and bad puns, one Usenet
post at a time!
Operation: Nerdwatch http://www.nerdwatch.com
Only email with "TO_CAP" somewhere in the subject has a chance of being read
Pat Kiewicz
>
>
>
> I don't know whether to be horrified or just terrified,
despairing comes to mind
>but this
> may be disturbing:
"May" you say? MAY??
>
>http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-12-17/keanu-reeves-
hopes-to-sta
>r-in-live-action-cowboy-bebop
NO.
--
Pat in Plymouth MI
After enlightenment, the laundry.
email valid but not regularly monitored
for better results:
change user name to 'kiewicz'
change domain name to 'comcast.net'
Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers
> I don't know whether to be horrified or just terrified, but this may
> be disturbing:
>
> http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-12-17/keanu-reeves-hopes-to-star-in-live-action-cowboy-bebop
Actually I think he'd make a rather good Spike.
cu
59cobalt
--
"My surname is Li and my personal name is Kao, and there is a slight
flaw in my character."
--Li Kao (Barry Hughart: Bridge of Birds)
Giovanni Wassen
> Captain Nerd <cpt...@nerdwatch.com> wrote:
>> I don't know whether to be horrified or just terrified, but this may
>> be disturbing:
>>
>> http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-12-17/keanu-reeves-hopes-to-
>> star-in-live-action-cowboy-bebop
>
> Actually I think he'd make a rather good Spike.
What? Spike does have emotions.
--
Gio
http://blog.watkijkikoptv.info
http://myanimelist.net/profile/extatix
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> I don't know whether to be horrified or just terrified, but this
> may be disturbing:
>
> http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-12-17/keanu-reeves-hopes-to-sta
> r-in-live-action-cowboy-bebop
>
> Cap.
>
There are worse choices I could see. Spike is visually a laid-back
toned-down Lupin III who can actually fight, so a guy who's done action
flicks and who always plays in an understated fashion isn't a bad choice.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://seawasp.livejournal.com
S.t.A.n.L.e.E
> Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers <usene...@planetcobalt.net> wrote:
>
> > Captain Nerd <cpt...@nerdwatch.com> wrote:
> >> I don't know whether to be horrified or just terrified, but this may
> >> be disturbing:
> >>
> >> http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-12-17/keanu-reeves-hopes-to-
> >> star-in-live-action-cowboy-bebop
> >
> > Actually I think he'd make a rather good Spike.
>
> What? Spike does have emotions.
>
Hardly when? (Comedic and stoned don't count.
They're not gonna do "silly" in this live-action film.) ^_^
Spike is pretty much deadman-walking,
with 1 eye to the present, 1 eye to the past, but no future. ;)
But anyway, they need to get someone who can do
the smooth martial arts and gun-shooting moves in a cool way.
Laters. =)
Stan
--
_______ ________ _______ ____ ___ ___ ______ ______
| __|__ __| _ | \ | | | | _____| _____|
|__ | | | | _ | |\ | |___| ____|| ____|
|_______| |__| |__| |__|___| \ ___|_______|______|______|
__| | ( )
/ _ | |/ LostRune+sig [at] UofR [dot] net
| ( _| | http://www.uofr.net/~lostrune/
\ ______| _______ ____ ___
/ \ / \ | _ | \ | |
/ \/ \| _ | |\ |
/___/\/\___|__| |__|___| \ ___|
Travers Naran
> I don't know whether to be horrified or just terrified, but this
> may be disturbing:
>
> r-in-live-action-cowboy-bebop
At times like these, I begin to think Alan Moore was right.[1]
[1] Why does everything need to be adapted as a movie? Maybe the
original doesn't need to be adapted to anything.
hcobb
> Captain Nerd said:
> >but this
> > may be disturbing:
>
> "May" you say? MAY??
It could be worse.
How about Tom Cruise?
-HJC
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> On Dec 18, 2:28 am, Captain Nerd <cptn...@nerdwatch.com> wrote:
>> I don't know whether to be horrified or just terrified, but this
>> may be disturbing:
>>
>> http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-12-17/keanu-reeves-hopes-to...
>> r-in-live-action-cowboy-bebop
>
> At times like these, I begin to think Alan Moore was right.[1]
>
>
> [1] Why does everything need to be adapted as a movie?
Because it may make lots of money.
The Relic
Captain Nerd
"Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> Captain Nerd wrote:
> > I don't know whether to be horrified or just terrified, but this
> > may be disturbing:
> >
> > http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-12-17/keanu-reeves-hopes-to-sta
> > r-in-live-action-cowboy-bebop
> >
> > Cap.
> >
>
> There are worse choices I could see. Spike is visually a laid-back
> toned-down Lupin III who can actually fight, so a guy who's done action
> flicks and who always plays in an understated fashion isn't a bad choice.
Well, it always seemed that Spike had emotions but he was subtle
in expressing them, as opposed to Keanu's having them but not
able to express them. I'm always willing to be surprised, like
I was when he did that one Branagh Shakespeare movie.
But I remember Johnny Mnemonic...
Derek Janssen
>
> There are worse choices I could see. Spike is visually a laid-back
> toned-down Lupin III who can actually fight, so a guy who's done action
> flicks and who always plays in an understated fashion isn't a bad choice.
I've never really understood *why* people keep comparing Spike to Lupin,
even in these days when it's okay to watch anime without Cartoon Network
to publicly validate it for newbies.^1 He's NOT.
Yes, he's skinny, wears a loud jacket, has the same clunky shoes, and
Jet and Faye look like You-Know-Whos--
But Lupin was a libidinous, hedonistic bon vivant who never usually even
keeps half the money he makes, spends the rest on champagne and
Fujiko-maintenance, and lives more devotedly for his own immortal niche
of Wiseassery on any epic scale it can present itself...
While Spike is in a dirty business for the subculture, the money, and
the personal demons, struggles to make enough to keep his ship repaired,
and rarely expresses an emotion deeper than stomping out a cigarette.
(...Seriously--Will some people just FORGET about the shoes?? >_< )
Derek Janssen
eja...@verizon.net
----
[1 - And on that note, at least it's nice to see that West Coast
Perceptions have finally moved the next step past Akira, Speed Racer and
Gigantor...]
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
>>
>> There are worse choices I could see. Spike is visually a laid-back
>> toned-down Lupin III who can actually fight, so a guy who's done
>> action flicks and who always plays in an understated fashion isn't a
>> bad choice.
>
> I've never really understood *why* people keep comparing Spike to Lupin,
> even in these days when it's okay to watch anime without Cartoon Network
> to publicly validate it for newbies.^1 He's NOT.
Yes, he is. Visually. Which is what I said.
And he walks like Lupin, too, especially in the opening credits.
>
> (...Seriously--Will some people just FORGET about the shoes?? >_< )
It's HARD to forget shoes like that.
dump...@hotmail.com
Interesting quote, considering the "Watchmen" movie is coming out next
year:
Antonio E. Gonzalez
<eja...@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
>Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
>>
>> There are worse choices I could see. Spike is visually a laid-back
>> toned-down Lupin III who can actually fight, so a guy who's done action
>> flicks and who always plays in an understated fashion isn't a bad choice.
>
>I've never really understood *why* people keep comparing Spike to Lupin,
>even in these days when it's okay to watch anime without Cartoon Network
>to publicly validate it for newbies.^1 He's NOT.
>
"Publicly (sic) validate it for newbies"; that should be a clue as
to how desperately Derek wants to believe he's the only one North
Ameica (maybe the world!) who knows anytihing about anime, and
despises it to boot . . .
>Yes, he's skinny, wears a loud jacket, has the same clunky shoes, and
>Jet and Faye look like You-Know-Whos--
>But Lupin was a libidinous, hedonistic bon vivant who never usually even
>keeps half the money he makes, spends the rest on champagne and
>Fujiko-maintenance, and lives more devotedly for his own immortal niche
>of Wiseassery on any epic scale it can present itself...
>While Spike is in a dirty business for the subculture, the money, and
>the personal demons, struggles to make enough to keep his ship repaired,
>and rarely expresses an emotion deeper than stomping out a cigarette.
>
>(...Seriously--Will some people just FORGET about the shoes?? >_< )
>
>Derek Janssen
>eja...@verizon.net
>----
>[1 - And on that note, at least it's nice to see that West Coast
>Perceptions have finally moved the next step past Akira, Speed Racer and
>Gigantor...]
They moved past that "next step" at least five years ago . . .
--
- ReFlex76
- "Let's beat the terrorists with our most powerful weapon . . . hot girl-on-girl action!"
- "The difference between young and old is the difference between looking forward to your next birthday, and dreading it!"
- Jesus Christ - The original hippie!
<http://reflex76.blogspot.com/>
<http://www.blogger.com/profile/07245047157197572936>
Katana > Chain Saw > Baseball Bat > Hammer
Lee Ratner
<seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> Travers Naran wrote:
> > On Dec 18, 2:28 am, Captain Nerd <cptn...@nerdwatch.com> wrote:
> >> I don't know whether to be horrified or just terrified, but this
> >> may be disturbing:
>
> >>http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-12-17/keanu-reeves-hopes-to...
> >> r-in-live-action-cowboy-bebop
>
> > At times like these, I begin to think Alan Moore was right.[1]
>
> > [1] Why does everything need to be adapted as a movie?
>
> Because it may make lots of money.
>
make a lot of money. In Cowboy Bebop's case, many people will not see
the original because it is animated and Japanese and does not have
actors they know about (in the English dub and the original Japanese).
A live action Cowboy Bebop with at least one star can draw in a much
larger audience.
Pat Kiewicz
I'll admit, that would be worse.
The Wanderer
> On Dec 18, 5:54 pm, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
> <seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>
>> Travers Naran wrote:
>>> At times like these, I begin to think Alan Moore was right.[1]
>>
>>> [1] Why does everything need to be adapted as a movie?
>>
>> Because it may make lots of money.
>>
> A bit of an overstatement, more like it has the potential to make a
> lot of money.
Um... isn't that kind of what the "may" meant?
--
The Wanderer
Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any
side of it.
Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.
Rob Kelk
<AntE...@aol.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 01:32:05 GMT, Derek Janssen
><eja...@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
>>>
>>> There are worse choices I could see. Spike is visually a laid-back
>>> toned-down Lupin III who can actually fight, so a guy who's done action
>>> flicks and who always plays in an understated fashion isn't a bad choice.
>>
>>I've never really understood *why* people keep comparing Spike to Lupin,
>>even in these days when it's okay to watch anime without Cartoon Network
>>to publicly validate it for newbies.^1 He's NOT.
There are enough similiarities that the comparison is an easy one: they
both have roots on the wrong side of the law, they're both more
intelligent than most of their opponents, they're both suckers for a
pretty face (although Lupin takes things further than Spike does in this
regard), and they're both very, *very* good at what they do. The fact
that they wear the same style of shoes is almost irrelevant...
> "Publicly (sic)
Why the "(sic)"? The word is spelled correctly.
> validate it for newbies"; that should be a clue as
>to how desperately Derek wants to believe he's the only one North
>Ameica (maybe the world!) who knows anytihing about anime, and
>despises it to boot . . .
He's posting on-topic; don't discourage him.
>
>>Yes, he's skinny, wears a loud jacket, has the same clunky shoes, and
>>Jet and Faye look like You-Know-Whos--
>>But Lupin was a libidinous, hedonistic bon vivant who never usually even
>>keeps half the money he makes, spends the rest on champagne and
>>Fujiko-maintenance, and lives more devotedly for his own immortal niche
>>of Wiseassery on any epic scale it can present itself...
>>While Spike is in a dirty business for the subculture, the money, and
>>the personal demons, struggles to make enough to keep his ship repaired,
>>and rarely expresses an emotion deeper than stomping out a cigarette.
>>
>>(...Seriously--Will some people just FORGET about the shoes?? >_< )
>>
>>Derek Janssen
>>eja...@verizon.net
>>----
>>[1 - And on that note, at least it's nice to see that West Coast
>>Perceptions have finally moved the next step past Akira, Speed Racer and
>>Gigantor...]
>
> They moved past that "next step" at least five years ago . . .
Not if they're just now thinking "Cowboy Bebop" is a hot property, they
haven't...
--
Rob Kelk <http://robkelk.ottawa-anime.org/> e-mail: s/deadspam/gmail/
"Santa sure says some mean things, you know?"
- Ayumu "Osaka" Kasuga, talking about the Ruldolph story,
"Azumanga Daioh" episode #17
Antonio E. Gonzalez
wrote:
>On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 23:23:25 -0800, Antonio E. Gonzalez
><AntE...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 01:32:05 GMT, Derek Janssen
>><eja...@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> There are worse choices I could see. Spike is visually a laid-back
>>>> toned-down Lupin III who can actually fight, so a guy who's done action
>>>> flicks and who always plays in an understated fashion isn't a bad choice.
>>>
>>>I've never really understood *why* people keep comparing Spike to Lupin,
>>>even in these days when it's okay to watch anime without Cartoon Network
>>>to publicly validate it for newbies.^1 He's NOT.
>
>There are enough similiarities that the comparison is an easy one: they
>both have roots on the wrong side of the law, they're both more
>intelligent than most of their opponents, they're both suckers for a
>pretty face (although Lupin takes things further than Spike does in this
>regard), and they're both very, *very* good at what they do. The fact
>that they wear the same style of shoes is almost irrelevant...
>
>
>> "Publicly (sic)
>
>Why the "(sic)"? The word is spelled correctly.
>
*checks M-W*
Fourteen years, and English can still mess with me; though it seems
"publically" is also an acceptable spelling, I guess that's a grey
area, or a gray area . . .
>> validate it for newbies"; that should be a clue as
>>to how desperately Derek wants to believe he's the only one North
>>Ameica (maybe the world!) who knows anytihing about anime, and
>>despises it to boot . . .
>
>He's posting on-topic; don't discourage him.
>
>>
>>>Yes, he's skinny, wears a loud jacket, has the same clunky shoes, and
>>>Jet and Faye look like You-Know-Whos--
>>>But Lupin was a libidinous, hedonistic bon vivant who never usually even
>>>keeps half the money he makes, spends the rest on champagne and
>>>Fujiko-maintenance, and lives more devotedly for his own immortal niche
>>>of Wiseassery on any epic scale it can present itself...
>>>While Spike is in a dirty business for the subculture, the money, and
>>>the personal demons, struggles to make enough to keep his ship repaired,
>>>and rarely expresses an emotion deeper than stomping out a cigarette.
>>>
>>>(...Seriously--Will some people just FORGET about the shoes?? >_< )
>>>
>>>Derek Janssen
>>>eja...@verizon.net
>>>----
>>>[1 - And on that note, at least it's nice to see that West Coast
>>>Perceptions have finally moved the next step past Akira, Speed Racer and
>>>Gigantor...]
>>
>> They moved past that "next step" at least five years ago . . .
>
>Not if they're just now thinking "Cowboy Bebop" is a hot property, they
>haven't...
This may have more to do with the recent successes of Transformers,
Iron Man and The Dark Knight, making the "comics/cartoony stuff" open
to processing; it also tends to take years for these projects to get
off the development stage . . .
Arnold Kim
"Antonio E. Gonzalez" <AntE...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:0t3ok45d6eosr31af...@4ax.com...
I think the Speed Racer movie was in development in some form for over a
decade...
As for the Cowboy Bebop movie- the ONLY way this movie could be any good is
with one of these directors at the helm: Soderbergh, Tarantino, or Robert
Rodriguez.
Arnold Kim
Jack Bohn
>As for the Cowboy Bebop movie- the ONLY way this movie could be any good is
>with one of these directors at the helm: Soderbergh, Tarantino, or Robert
>Rodriguez.
Give Eastwood a shot at it...
--
-Jack
Bill Martin
John Woo gets to direct the finale, right?
Bill Martin
I always pictured Steve Buscemi as Rorshack when I read it. Also, in my
opinion, it would've been better off as an HBO miniseries.
And on the "remake" part of this thread, why remake Star Trek? I saw
the latest trailer, and I'm forever going to see Zachary Quinto as
Sylar. His brooding look doesn't fit a Vulcan quite right.
Justin
You mean the one he's opposed to?
Invid Fan
<nos...@insightbb.com> wrote:
He's opposed to all adaptations regardless to quality or how accurate
it is. I prefer Stephen King's point of view, that the originals are
unharmed by a bad movie.
--
Chris Mack *quote under construction*
'Invid Fan'
The Wanderer
> In article <slrngl221n...@debian.dns2go.com>, Justin
> <nos...@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
>> dump...@hotmail.com wrote on [Thu, 18 Dec 2008 21:21:05 -0800
>> (PST)]:
>>> Interesting quote, considering the "Watchmen" movie is coming out
>>> next year:
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Slj55jYuMro
>>
>> You mean the one he's opposed to?
>
> He's opposed to all adaptations regardless to quality or how accurate
> it is. I prefer Stephen King's point of view, that the originals are
> unharmed by a bad movie.
I'm not sure what I think about that. It's definitely reasonable on the
face of it, but I'm not sure it holds true.
I can say from experience that an original can definitely be harmed by a
sequel; The Matrix was a better movie - rated in terms of how much I
could enjoy it on re-watching - before Reloaded came out (and that
wasn't even a bad movie itself).
Additionally and perhaps somewhat similarly, the general perception (and
individuals' perceptions) of the original can be tainted by awareness of
the remade version, particularly if the remade version reaches a broader
audience than the original did - as is often true in the case of movies;
it might not be unreasonable to categorize that as harm.
There's also the question of the respect, or lack thereof, for the
original involved in the making - or even existence - of the remade
version. That becomes a complicated issue to discuss, however, and I
don't really want to get into it in depth here.
I think that I would say that the existence of a bad (version of, remake
of, sequel to, retcon on, et cetera) an original can indeed degrade the
original, for those people who are aware of both; remaining unaware of
(the existence 0f) the bad foo would obviate the effect, but that is
rarely a practical option, particularly if the original is itself
high-profile.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> Invid Fan wrote:
>
>> In article <slrngl221n...@debian.dns2go.com>, Justin
>> <nos...@insightbb.com> wrote:
>>
>>> dump...@hotmail.com wrote on [Thu, 18 Dec 2008 21:21:05 -0800
>>> (PST)]:
>
>>>> Interesting quote, considering the "Watchmen" movie is coming out
>>>> next year:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Slj55jYuMro
>>>
>>> You mean the one he's opposed to?
>>
>> He's opposed to all adaptations regardless to quality or how accurate
>> it is. I prefer Stephen King's point of view, that the originals are
>> unharmed by a bad movie.
>
> I'm not sure what I think about that. It's definitely reasonable on the
> face of it, but I'm not sure it holds true.
Of course it does.
>
> I can say from experience that an original can definitely be harmed by a
> sequel; The Matrix was a better movie - rated in terms of how much I
> could enjoy it on re-watching - before Reloaded came out (and that
> wasn't even a bad movie itself).
Again, if the Matrix was a good movie (which it wasn't) it's only
affected by the sequel if you WANT it to be.
I've heard tell there's this guy George Lucas, parasitized by his neck,
produced some abominable follow-ups to prior great movies. Oddly, those
movies are just as good now as they were when they first came out.
> I think that I would say that the existence of a bad (version of, remake
> of, sequel to, retcon on, et cetera) an original can indeed degrade the
> original, for those people who are aware of both; remaining unaware of
> (the existence 0f) the bad foo would obviate the effect, but that is
> rarely a practical option, particularly if the original is itself
> high-profile.
>
Eh. I don't agree. I have little doubt that if any of my books are made
into movies that the vast likelihood is that they'll suck. But they
won't change the books.
Invid Fan
Wanderer <inverse...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Invid Fan wrote:
>
> > In article <slrngl221n...@debian.dns2go.com>, Justin
> > <nos...@insightbb.com> wrote:
> >
> >> dump...@hotmail.com wrote on [Thu, 18 Dec 2008 21:21:05 -0800
> >> (PST)]:
>
> >>> Interesting quote, considering the "Watchmen" movie is coming out
> >>> next year:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Slj55jYuMro
> >>
> >> You mean the one he's opposed to?
> >
> > He's opposed to all adaptations regardless to quality or how accurate
> > it is. I prefer Stephen King's point of view, that the originals are
> > unharmed by a bad movie.
>
> I'm not sure what I think about that. It's definitely reasonable on the
> face of it, but I'm not sure it holds true.
>
Bad movies can be ignored easily :)
> I can say from experience that an original can definitely be harmed by a
> sequel; The Matrix was a better movie - rated in terms of how much I
> could enjoy it on re-watching - before Reloaded came out (and that
> wasn't even a bad movie itself).
>
That can hold for books, too, if the first ones promise more then the
later ones deliver. It's no different then your opinion of the first
100 pages of a novel changing once you find the last 200 pages suck :)
> I think that I would say that the existence of a bad (version of, remake
> of, sequel to, retcon on, et cetera) an original can indeed degrade the
> original, for those people who are aware of both; remaining unaware of
> (the existence 0f) the bad foo would obviate the effect, but that is
> rarely a practical option, particularly if the original is itself
> high-profile.
So has the original King Kong been hurt by the two remakes?
The Wanderer
> In article <Ytqdneemqbev5szU...@giganews.com>, The
> Wanderer <inverse...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Invid Fan wrote:
>>> He's opposed to all adaptations regardless to quality or how
>>> accurate it is. I prefer Stephen King's point of view, that the
>>> originals are unharmed by a bad movie.
>>
>> I'm not sure what I think about that. It's definitely reasonable on
>> the face of it, but I'm not sure it holds true.
>>
> Bad movies can be ignored easily :)
For some values of "ignore". I am arguing that values of "ignore" which
are sufficient to eliminate all effect, or even any sufficiently large
majority of the effect, are very difficult - and probably in most cases
impossible - to achieve.
Note also the use of the word "can", in the quote below; it certainly
may be possible for any particular case (combination of original + new +
observer) to be an exception, but it is quite certainly possible for any
particular case to not, and I am (or would be) arguing that the latter
possibility is by far the more prevalent one.
>> I can say from experience that an original can definitely be harmed
>> by a sequel; The Matrix was a better movie - rated in terms of how
>> much I could enjoy it on re-watching - before Reloaded came out
>> (and that wasn't even a bad movie itself).
>
> That can hold for books, too, if the first ones promise more then the
> later ones deliver. It's no different then your opinion of the first
> 100 pages of a novel changing once you find the last 200 pages suck
> :)
Not much different, no. That actually supports my point.
>> I think that I would say that the existence of a bad (version of,
>> remake of, sequel to, retcon on, et cetera) an original can indeed
>> degrade the original, for those people who are aware of both;
>> remaining unaware of (the existence 0f) the bad foo would obviate
>> the effect, but that is rarely a practical option, particularly if
>> the original is itself high-profile.
>
> So has the original King Kong been hurt by the two remakes?
I wouldn't know; I haven't seen any of them. Not my cup of tea. (And,
again, note "can".)
It's possible that "degree of difference" (in a sense perhaps not
dissimilar to the memetic degrees of Kevin Bacon) between the two works
may be relevant to how strong this effect would be, or indeed to whether
it would exist at all in any particular case, but going into that depth
of analysis is well beyond what I'm competent to do briefly in the
course of a Usenet discussion and would be far offtopic in any case. ^_^
The Wanderer
> The Wanderer wrote:
>
>> Invid Fan wrote:
>>> He's opposed to all adaptations regardless to quality or how
>>> accurate it is. I prefer Stephen King's point of view, that the
>>> originals are unharmed by a bad movie.
>>
>> I'm not sure what I think about that. It's definitely reasonable on
>> the face of it, but I'm not sure it holds true.
>
> Of course it does.
>
>> I can say from experience that an original can definitely be harmed
>> by a sequel; The Matrix was a better movie - rated in terms of how
>> much I could enjoy it on re-watching - before Reloaded came out
>> (and that wasn't even a bad movie itself).
>
> Again, if the Matrix was a good movie (which it wasn't) it's only
> affected by the sequel if you WANT it to be.
Nonsense.
The existence of and events in Reloaded are present in the back of my
mind, and will inevitably and inescapably affect how I see, interpret,
and otherwise react to the original movie - even if I decide to reject
Reloaded entirely, those things still remain in my mind and cannot but
have an effect.
Wiping Reloaded from my memory entirely, in a way which is probably
impossible in our universe short of surgical amnesia (if there is such a
thing), would remove its effect. Nothing short of that is going to do
so.
> I've heard tell there's this guy George Lucas, parasitized by his
> neck, produced some abominable follow-ups to prior great movies.
> Oddly, those movies are just as good now as they were when they first
> came out.
I may agree with you on that one, but I still think I would stand by my
point. As mentioned elsewhere, it may be a matter of the degree of
difference (or closeness of connection) between the works, and there
does remain the possibility of any specific case (original + new +
person observing the pair) being an exception.
>> I think that I would say that the existence of a bad (version of,
>> remake of, sequel to, retcon on, et cetera) an original can indeed
>> degrade the original, for those people who are aware of both;
>> remaining unaware of (the existence 0f) the bad foo would obviate
>> the effect, but that is rarely a practical option, particularly if
>> the original is itself high-profile.
>
> Eh. I don't agree. I have little doubt that if any of my books are
> made into movies that the vast likelihood is that they'll suck. But
> they won't change the books.
No, they won't change the books. They may well, however, change how
people think of the books and the events therein - perhaps in a small
way, perhaps in a large one - and that is at least nearly as good.
Invid Fan
Wanderer <inverse...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Invid Fan wrote:
>
> > In article <Ytqdneemqbev5szU...@giganews.com>, The
> > Wanderer <inverse...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> I can say from experience that an original can definitely be harmed
> >> by a sequel; The Matrix was a better movie - rated in terms of how
> >> much I could enjoy it on re-watching - before Reloaded came out
> >> (and that wasn't even a bad movie itself).
> >
> > That can hold for books, too, if the first ones promise more then the
> > later ones deliver. It's no different then your opinion of the first
> > 100 pages of a novel changing once you find the last 200 pages suck
> > :)
>
> Not much different, no. That actually supports my point.
>
For certain types of films, and books, I am agreeing with you. If the
first movie asks questions the sequel answers badly, you'll downgrade
the original. However, it doesn't hold for other types. The third
Godfather film doesn't downgrade the first two, I don't hold Superman 4
against the first movie, etc. At WORST, for me, a bad sequel or remake
may make me look at something I loved as a kid from a fresh adult
perspective and see it really isn't much better :)
Antonio E. Gonzalez
Ummm . . . :
1. It's not a remake, it's a prequel; basically, James T. Kirk's days
at the Academy.
2. I find Zachary Quinto's emotionless face almost too perfect for a
Vulcan; he might just do a good young(ish) Spock.
--
- ReFlex 76
Invid Fan
Gonzalez <AntE...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 16:06:41 -0600, Bill Martin
> <bill_r...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On 2008-12-18 23:21:05 -0600, dump...@hotmail.com said:
> >
> >> On Dec 18, 10:00 am, Travers Naran <tna...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Dec 18, 2:28 am, Captain Nerd <cptn...@nerdwatch.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I don't know whether to be horrified or just terrified, but this
> >>>> may be disturbing:
> >>>
> >>>> http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-12-17/keanu-reeves-hopes-to...
> >>>> r-in-live-action-cowboy-bebop
> >>>
> >>> At times like these, I begin to think Alan Moore was right.[1]
> >>>
> >>> [1] Why does everything need to be adapted as a movie? Maybe the
> >>> original doesn't need to be adapted to anything.
> >>
> >> Interesting quote, considering the "Watchmen" movie is coming out next
> >> year:
> >>
> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Slj55jYuMro
> >
> >I always pictured Steve Buscemi as Rorshack when I read it. Also, in my
> >opinion, it would've been better off as an HBO miniseries.
> >
> >And on the "remake" part of this thread, why remake Star Trek? I saw
> >the latest trailer, and I'm forever going to see Zachary Quinto as
> >Sylar. His brooding look doesn't fit a Vulcan quite right.
>
> Ummm . . . :
>
> 1. It's not a remake, it's a prequel; basically, James T. Kirk's days
> at the Academy.
Yes, but the idea is to reboot the series with this cast.