Automotive Holiday Deals Books Holiday Gift Guide Shop Men's Cyber Monday Deals Week Learn more nav_sap_SWP_6M_fly_beacon Black Friday egg_2015 All-New Amazon Fire TV Grocery Gifts for Her Amazon Gift Card Offer mithc mithc mithc  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 Kindle Voyage Cyber Monday Video Game Deals Outdoors Gift Guide on bgg
Customer Discussions > Movie forum

Are Some Stories Resistant To Modernization?

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 26-50 of 76 posts in this discussion
Posted on Jun 7, 2012 5:08:52 PM PDT
Q says:
I like it.

Couldn't we have Robin attack all cyberlife in general? Like a big F.U. to Big Brother?!

Posted on Jun 7, 2012 5:12:22 PM PDT
Q says:
He could become so angry with modern technology that his gang devises a virus to electronically shut down the entire world, taking us back to a much simpler era...where little things matter.

(I'd better watch it...the last time I made an anti-technology comment I got called the Alibi's very own wackjob!)


Posted on Jun 7, 2012 5:37:36 PM PDT
C. J. Vasta says:
Sounds like you turned your "hero" into a villain that would be taken down by these guys:Tom Clancy's Netforce.

While this is a bit of a spoiler, I believe that is done in the Day the Earth Stood Still remake with an EMP blast. I've only read the Wikipedia summary. Ever since reading that we a good set-up more a modern version of Canticle for Leibowitz.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 7, 2012 6:17:14 PM PDT
Q says:
Shoot. I should have known that idea was too good to be uncharted!

Posted on Jun 8, 2012 7:03:11 AM PDT
W.T. says:
In MY version, a modern Robin Hood would primarily target the IRS. Come to think of it, America had a number of it's own "Robin Hoods" as early as the Whiskey Rebellion, where Americans took up arms to prevent collection of an ill-conceived tax on spirits.

Posted on Jun 8, 2012 7:17:43 AM PDT
Louise says:
I was pleasantly surprised with the recent adaptation of Beastly based on Beauty and The Beast. It stars Alex Pettyfer and Vanessa Hudgens. I really enjoyed it.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 8, 2012 8:01:34 AM PDT
D. Larson says:
The premise of CBS's "Elementary" has that scent of "ten episodes and out" that clings to so many of these "high concept" series. It's not as if TV weren't already infested with Holmes Clones in the form of "Mentalists" and so on. Maybe a more direct homage/ripoff is the way to go, but these things are usually just the precursors to even worse midseason replacement shows.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 8, 2012 8:05:16 AM PDT
D. Larson says:
Isn't this the premise of those endlessly tiresome "Oceans 11, 12, 27, 313" movies?

Star studded though they may be, they're still an apparently endless dull slog through ridiculous plots and annoying bad acting. "All us famous people are having fun making this bad movie, so just put up with our phoning-it-in-itude."

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 9, 2012 8:15:17 AM PDT
Hmmm, I never thought of it that way since the original rat pack also did a film entitled Robin and the Seven Hoods. Still just taking the concept of robbing the rich and giving to the poor is only the superficial parts of the Robin Hood legend. It's rather like putting an airship in The Three Musketeers and trying to call it steampunk. You've missed something. The genre is more than just the gears and googles, and Robin Hood is about more than robbing the rich. That's why it would be difficult if not impossible to truly modernize it. Especially if you were trying to adapt it to western political climate.

Posted on Jun 9, 2012 1:44:09 PM PDT
D. Larson says:
I read on another thread about "Prometheus" a comment about the funny little IBM PC screens that were scattered all over the Nostromo in Alien 1; twelve inch CRT monitors with white type displayed on a back or green background. Prehistoric stuff.

Even when "Alien" was made, those monitors must have seemed kind of retro. So, what do you do when your prequel ship, the Prometheus, is supposed to pre-date the Nostromo by a hundred years or so? Is it going to have technology far in advance of the machinery on display in its successor? Lots of flat screens and holographic displays and shinier flashing lights and knobs? Remember, the Nostromo was apparently powered by steam, what with all the clouds of the stuff drifting about, not to mention dripping condensation and general damp. Chain hoists and floor gratings and Samurai space suits on the "newer" ship; JJ Abrams-style techoporn on the newer "older" one?

It's a prequel problem; by the time the prequel is made, the "look" of the "stuff" has moved on a bunch. So, to be true to the original, do you make the "older" ship look more primitive? Or do you go the Star Trek route, and make the prequel Enterprise, even though it's supposed to be decades older than the last ship we saw, look ever so much more advanced?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 10, 2012 10:15:54 AM PDT
Same problem with the Stars Wars prequels, you have to sometimes wonder did civilizations go through a dark ages or something when these prequels are done. The weird thing is "retroing" well seems almost harder for Hollywood to do than modernizing because they believe audiences somehow expect everything to look slicker now. It was the one aspect I liked of the modernized BSG, in that they made the Galactica actually look less modern than the original series.

Here's another aspect of modernization and why it's difficult. Many films/books, etc where made in a particular climate, that doesn't exist in the time you wish to modernize it for. For example, the original Night of the Living Dead was pretty radical for it's time, and it's still a very watchable film. Not only does it work because of the (lack of cell phones issues) fact that in 1968 you could realistically isolate people where they could be cut off from any news of the rest of the world, it was the first Sf/Horror film with a black-American as the protagonist. For the sequel we got fast zombies and a woman (who survives at the end). So you got a modernized version, but does it have the impact of the original? Is it as much fun? Did they basically take the lazy way out? Was there a better way to modernize it?

Posted on Jun 10, 2012 10:20:25 AM PDT
Just thinking, Horror films in general seem to be huge targets for modernization, but with few exceptions (John Carpenters the Thing) coming to mind, very few of the updated versions are memorable. As I said I liked the updated Thing of the 80's, but that's really a matter of going back to the source material and sticking closer to that than really trying to update the original film itself. How many Horror films and especially the classic's can you name that have or could survive modernization?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 10, 2012 12:37:11 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 10, 2012 12:41:43 PM PDT
Q says:
"For the sequel we got fast zombies and a woman"

Do you mean the remake? I'm pretty sure that all of Romero's zombies are slow.

I love watching movies such as the original Night, with aspects such as no cell phones. I guess I'm a little weird/old-fashioned. Haha.

I think the modern equivalent to no cell phones in disaster movies is the jammed phone circuit that results from every single individual on earth needing to call someone at the exact same moment.

One of the newer Romero's (Diary of the Dead, I think) uses a video camera approach, which actually works out pretty neat. The kid is trying to upload the "real story" of what is happening to the internet, so that other people can beware. He's also making a documentary so that people will know what happened, even if he dies.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 10, 2012 12:40:37 PM PDT
Q says:
I really like the new Nightmare on Elm Street (I was VERY skeptical going in). I like Rob Zombies Halloween, too. Although, I may be the only one.

I guess these don't count as "classics", but for someone born in '81 they seem fitting.

I also like I Am Legend better than both The Last Man On Earth and The Omega Man.

Posted on Jun 10, 2012 1:39:12 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 10, 2012 1:40:00 PM PDT
Hikari says:
"Sherlock" is almost universally hailed as a success (TAS seems to be the lone holdout here). I was wondering if anyone else besides me and McGhee had seen Steven Moffat's pre-Sherlock project "Jekyll" (2007) with James Nesbitt? Like "Sherlock", Moffat updates a trademark character of 19th century literature to our 21st century with seamless and spectacular result. The core premise remains unchanged; meanwhile the window dressing around our protagonist is adapted to a modern milieu--the same and yet fresh. Poor Dr. Jackman (Nesbitt) is extraordinary like Sherlock Holmes, inhabiting a singular position that makes him an isolated and lonely figure. Only, Dr. Jackman's 'specialness' is not in a good way, and he's got no Watson to make his extraordinary burden more bearable. The closest he's got is a private nurse/P.A. called Katherine Reimer. It's a recommend from me if you have enjoyed Mr. Moffat's latest project. Jekyll is much more 'sci-fi'-y than Sherlock, ironically enough.

Posted on Jun 10, 2012 7:46:30 PM PDT
One of the reasons I think the Holmes character works so well is that your dealing with the character of Holmes moreso than the environment. As long as a writer can come up with decent mysteries for him to solve the character will work no matter what age you stick him him.

They've tried various modernizations of Frankenstein, but none have worked well in my opinion.

Posted on Jun 12, 2012 7:32:26 AM PDT
Of course there are many stories and films that while they could certainly be modernized wouldn't work because the elements have been used in so many other stories that the originals would seem like cliches.(I think this was a problem with John Carter also) Star Wars mined so many older stories for it's plot that pretty much any Sf adventure story before the 1960's would seem like old hat.

How about the old detective story, does the 40's style smart aleck, rapid-fire dialogue detective work in the 21st century? They tried it in the movie Brick, which I loved, but a lot of the criticism was that people didn't understand the dialogue. Which was straight 1930/40's slang. Basically they went the oft-used Shakespeare approach which was to leave the dialog intact and change the setting.

Btw there is a rumor that a planned update of The Thin Man is in the works. How do any of you think that's gonna' fly?

Posted on Jun 12, 2012 7:53:32 AM PDT
K. Rowley says:
"Are Some Stories Resistant To Modernization?"

When I heard they were doing a movie version of Atlas Shrugged, and modernizing it to be set in the near future - I couldn't imagine that it would work. But it turned out not too bad
(not great though).. will probably see the next two parts if they ever get made.

Atlas Shrugged: Part One

Posted on Jun 12, 2012 8:08:13 AM PDT
D. Larson says:
It's been a long time since I suffered through any Ayn Rand, but wasn't the story built around trains? Some woman who owned a railroad and some guy who'd invented a new kind of rail? And that this was the invention that would revolutionize commerce and freedom and create a arch-libertarian paradise for all of the strong-jawed, clean-limbed sleek capitalists and non-parasites?

So, in the movie, did they stick with railroads? Because railroards, nice as they are, don't really seem like the linchpin of civilization anymore,

On the other hand, Ayn might well approve of the airlines today, unregulated, heartless and engaged in an endless war of all against all, and all against us passengers.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 12, 2012 8:34:39 AM PDT
K. Rowley says:
"So, in the movie, did they stick with railroads? Because railroards, nice as they are, don't really seem like the linchpin of civilization anymore,.."

That's the same question I had when I heard they were setting it in the near future.. But yeah, they stuck with trains - with a collapsing economy & rising fuel costs they became economical to use again... actually made sense the way they did it.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 12, 2012 9:40:27 AM PDT
D. Larson says:
Oh, trains still make brilliant economic sense; Warren Buffet thinks so, and he doesn't put a foot wrong very often. When Buffet bought BNSF, he was betting big that trains will still be the answer for transporting large bunches of heavy stuff for the least fuel.

But, they sure ain't glamorous anymore. We took the Amtrak to Chicago a couple years ago, and while the accomodations were certainly nicer than the cattle cars that Delta calls aircraft, the trip was s-l-o-w (although quite scenic) and subject to never-explained delays. And the cars had an over-used shabbiness about them. Still, the dinner was decent, you could get up and wander around as much as you liked, and you had plenty of elbow room in the reclining chairs.

If they could get the travel time down (like the high speed trains in civilized countries), I'd happily trade an extra three or four hours for the lack of Gestapo-wannabe TSA screeners and the roominess. And, Delta drops you at Midway or O'Hare, miles away from downtown. So, there's the expensive and often terrifying hour long cab ride into town versus the train pulling in at Union Station, within walkable distance.

Maybe someday, centuries from now, the cities of America will be joined by a web of shining steel rails, whisking travelers along at hundreds of miles an hour in cleanliness, comfort and safety.

Nah, never happen.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 12, 2012 12:35:26 PM PDT
Green Arrow was a Batman substitute back in the day so that he wouldn't get overused in books.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 16, 2012 12:23:45 AM PDT
C. J. Vasta says:
No that equpment was top of the line for the late 1970s. In the 1990s there was a low-budget British production called The Airzone Solution [VHS], an enviormental thriller notable for having most of the living actors who had played Doctor Who in the cast. It was supposed to be set in a not too distant future where you needed a breath mask to go out in London, but the personal computers were pretty much all 1980s PCs.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 16, 2012 12:32:36 AM PDT
C. J. Vasta says:
Ironically, one of the things Lucas & company were praised for in the original trilogy was presenting a "used future", showing ships that had actually showed wear from use and so forth. This is something that pretty much that went by the bye with the CGI-heavy prequels. I suppose you could justify less advanced technology at least for the cash-strapped rebels.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 16, 2012 12:35:22 AM PDT
C. J. Vasta says:
Unregulgated? What do you call the TSA and the FAA?
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in

Recent discussions in the Movie forum


This discussion

Discussion in:  Movie forum
Participants:  15
Total posts:  76
Initial post:  Jun 6, 2012
Latest post:  Jul 12, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions