https://www.cbr.com/liam-neeson-potential-darkman-2/

Saw all 3 of the movies and enjoyed them.

I wouldn't mind seeing a modern take on the character, perhaps using advanced hologram tech to disguise himself? 99 minutes of power before recharging?

I enjoyed all of the movies well enough but isn't he only in the first movie?

Look Raist bunnies...

Yeah, Arnold Vosloo took over in 2 & 3. Oddly they replaced Neeson with Vosloo even in flashbacks to the first movie instead of just saying he was wearing a new face.

It has been a bit for me, but I did not recall that.

I was not sure if they changed distribution or anything and did not have the rights.

Although it is Sam Raimi. In Evil Dead 2 they reshot parts of Evil Dead 1 to sort of retcon it but indicate the same things that happened in a different way. So there is that I guess, although I think Raimi just did the first Darkman, I think.

Movies have odd things with rights though. Return of the Living Dead 2 is one that always springs to mind, as it lost the rights to the soundtrack along the way. So instead of punk rock and metal it went to like elevator music in one DVD release, which was pretty wild to me.

Look Raist bunnies...

Vosloo took over in Darkman 2 and 3 and both were direct to video.

Despite being direct to video they weren't awful to watch. As to switching Liam to Vosloo for flashbacks, well that way they only pay Vosloo.

Also if memory serves we were going to get Die Darkman Die first but the actor that played Durant became available so they gave us Return of Durant first instead.

Yes I believe for Evil Dead II they didn't have rights to the footage for Evil Dead so they reshot it. It worked better anyway because they had a new Linda. For Army of Darkness they actually used footage from ED2 but still reshot parts of it for brevity I suppose.

For Darkman II, I think they did use footage from the first movie but anytime you would have seen Liam Neeson's face they reshot it. I just thought it was unnecessary because his whole gimmick is switching faces anyway. But IMU7 is probably right about royalties.

Also, if they wanted to do a story where Darkman got to return to his original appearance I guess it would have to be Vosloo.

He could return to his appearance actually. In Darkman 3 he did perfect the formula and showed it by dipping his finger tip into the flesh and it reformed onto his finger tip. He used the rest to heal the kid's face damage.

But if that perfected skin is still on his finger then he can analyze and replicate it.

However even if he restores his old face with the new skin, he is legally considered dead and also he has some mental issues. He really can't return to his old life.

The problem as I see it is that there are more platforms for content than there is good content. There are a percentage of good creators who can create good content. For the mediocre creators out there they can remake something great and hope that it elevates their career. Then there's a lot of shovelware, junk content bound for Redbox or the streaming channels.

Red Letter Media (on Youtube) had what I thought was a smart insight into the streamers (I think they were talking about Amazon Prime but it could apply to any) that they are like a buffet restaurant. They have to make a lot of food that will never get eaten because their selling point is the appearance of variety and choice. I'll try to find the video where they talk about it. So they buy up tons of crap movies to fill space. There's so much junk that the only way for many to get noticed is to do a big name remake that gets more attention.

So I don't expect remakes to ever end, only to increase. Disney just announced that they found an old memo from Walt telling them not to remake animated films and they decided to halt production on all live-action remakes currently in development. But how long will the shareholders allow them to cut off revenue streams? That can't last long.

1. Benefits of modern FX tech

2. Would people want to watch the classic Zorro movie with Tyrone Power or a new one with modern cast? Nothing against Tyrone Power but do modern audiences know who he is?

Someday I fully expect the Star Wars movies, ep 1 to 6 to be redone despite all the planned retcons coming that will clarify and revise ep 7 to 9.


3. revise/update scripts for modern audiences and sensibilities, removing things that were fine back then but offensive today

4. the quest for more money

We can debate which looks better, a stop-motion creature or a CGI one. Generally they both look fake to some extent.

But there was a lot of changes between how movies were shot in the 1930s, with a lot of wide shots, like a play, and the 1970s/80s. Richard Donner on Superman said he could take the cameras up into the sky and show the world from Superman's perspective, which they couldn't do before. And more than that, the way people acted, the subject matter allowed, changed.

You look at The Fly 1958 and The Fly 1986 and beyond the main kernel of an idea, you couldn't get two more different movies.

But between the 1980s and now I don't see that much has changed. Now it's green screen instead of rear projection. CGI instead of matte painting. But they both get the same selection of shots. I don't know that technology has changed enough to justify remaking movies from the 80s yet. I see very little difference between Jurassic World 3 and Jurassic Park 1 in terms of special effects.

But I also feel like in movies these days, at least the ones I see, people act pretty much the same as they did in the 80s. Whereas when you see how people talk and act online, it's very different. Movies feel like they are so nostalgic for the 80s that they won't let anything change.

I can totally envision a time when social media is the only thing people look at and movies are gone.



Do we need another Zorro movie though? Why not create something new, inspired by Zorro? I mean Batman is pretty much Zorro combined with Sherlock Holmes. He has enough differences to be entertaining for a new generation, but that was 3 or 4 generations ago now.



Why not take the visual language of Star Wars and make a new saga? Mandalorian did that to good effect, much better than the sequels or prequels.



Maybe. There's probably a conversation worth having about taking something that's racist, for example, smoothing off the rough parts but leaving the core the same, and asking if it's appropriate. Or if it works. Can we retell Gone With the Wind without the inherent racism?



Well sure. I come from a theater background so I understand the appeal of a modern actor wanting to perform an old classic. But the beauty of the theater is that it captures a live moment that can't be viewed again. You can't go back and watch Olivier perform Hamlet, but you can watch a modern actor do it. But old films can be viewed forever. So there isn't the same demand from an artistic standpoint. It really is about the money.

Zorro was just an example I pulled out of thin air as it were.


As to Star Wars, sure an all new saga would be cool, but inevitably it will be rebooted and revised, not all new

Frankly after the disaster of the sequels, I am surprised they aren't rebooting the whole thing vs the retcons that are planned.

Gone With the Wind: given the era that it is set in, I don't think the racism could every truly be purged.

Money and merchandising, the life's blood of the industry.

Quote:
Zorro was just an example I pulled out of thin air as it were.

Since you brought it up, Zorro is already in the public Domain. (or so I learned after a quick Google search.) I think a lot of writers will use public domain material as a way to "cut their teeth" on the writing process. Its already being done with fan fiction.

Quote:

As to Star Wars, sure an all new saga would be cool, but inevitably it will be rebooted and revised, not all new

Quote:
Frankly after the disaster of the sequels, I am surprised they aren't rebooting the whole thing vs the retcons that are planned.

Quote:
Gone With the Wind: given the era that it is set in, I don't think the racism could every truly be purged.

Another Google search tells me that that particular IP will enter public domain in 2031 (in the US). It could be interesting to see a retelling of that book from the African Americans perspective.

Quote:
Money and merchandising, the life's blood of the industry.

Happy Hogan

Captain America Message Board	Iron Man Message Board

Marvel Universe Message Board	Doctor Who Message Board	Game of Thrones Message Board

I generally agree with you but the name recognition is something that gets more eyes than other original things tend to.

I was even onboard with some things getting remade because it could have been done better, but then the remake happens and it is meh.

One that comes to mind right away is George Romero's The Crazies. I enjoyed the commentary but it felt like it had potential to be great but did not get there. They remade it. It had good moments but came off like a forgettable zombie movie for the most part that only played on some of the better concepts a few times and were near the best parts of the film.

I have not see too many remakes be better, at least in recent years. Something like the Thing from 1981 and others have proven it can be done but it is rare.

Look Raist bunnies...

That is true. I like the guys at Red Letter Media most of the time. I do not always totally agree but I do think they have valid opinions most of the time.

I will say that the increase in platforms means there needs to be more content.

Although I would also argue that most movies throughout history have been forgettable. That does not mean they were terrible but they were knock offs of other films or fads to make movies. It is blown out now with all of the stuff getting made, but I think of the hand cam boom of microbudget movies in the 90's. Particular horror that was mostly unwatchable but it was out there on the Blockbuster shelves somehow.

Look Raist bunnies...