May 06, 2010


Remake. The Dark Crystal.


Via SF Signal.

Dear Movie People:
I need to explain something to you. #1 - Not everything needs to be remade. #2 - Original Content is still a very good thing. An increasingly rare thing, yes, but trust me -- there are some original people still out there. You should hire them, and fire whomever thought this remake thing was a good idea. #3 - Just Say No to 3D. ALWAYS.

With dire affection,


R.J. Anderson said...

Ordinarily I'd agree, but... The screenplay was originally written by the same guy who wrote the first DARK CRYSTAL screenplay, and it was a project that he and Jim Henson were seriously talking about before Henson died. So this is not a newfangled thing -- there were always supposed to be two movies if all went well. The creatures are being designed by Brian Froud, just as in the original movie. As sequels go, this one has a lot better pedigree than most.

Though I agree about the 3D being annoying, but everything's in 3D right now, so it seems unavoidable... well, except if you're like me and live in a small town where the theatres aren't capable of showing 3D anyway, in which case you won't notice. :)

Melissa said...

Aaaah! Is nothing sacred? Though, I suppose, a sequel is *better* than just redoing the original. *sigh* Here's hoping it doesn't suck too much.

C. K. Kelly Martin said...

I'm so with you on the say no to 3D thing! Seriously, what's the big deal with 3D? Of all the 3D movies I've seen in the past couple of years a big fat zero of them were more impressive due to being in 3D. It feels like an emperor's new clothes thing to me.

Sarah Stevenson said...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the "new" 3D doesn't even seem as impressive as the 1980s, red-and-blue-glasses 3D. Though, to be fair, I was a lot younger and more easily impressed then...

I'm definitely apprehensive about this sequel. Glad it's not coming out of nowhere, and really glad Brian Froud is still involved, but still.

David T. Macknet said...

I fail to see how redoing the original (and, perhaps, burning all of the originals) could fail to be better. The movie was beyond horrid, even when it first came out!

Before adding a layer of icing, one should first taste the cake, in particular if one left out major ingredients (plot?) and did the whole thing up in puppets!

Saints and Spinners said...

I agree with you about original content, though part of me is still hoping for a remake of "Logan's Run" that will be relevant to this era without following the current fads (3-D, explosions whenever the plot lags). For me, a film that requires 3-D glasses works best when it is a once-in-awhile indulgence, i.e. once every 10-15 years or so. As someone else pointed out in a review recently, movies are already 3-D without the extra gimmick. If a film is good, I forget that I'm watching a film.