Shootout

Film Guests, News and Discussion

Copycat Films: Rewind, Revisit, Remake

Rewind_4 What's the difference between an homage and a rip-off? Intent. If the goal is profit, as it clearly is in the catalog of "mockbusters" from The AsylumThe Da Vinci Treasure, Snakes on a Train and the upcoming Alien v. Hunter – we tend to pre-judge the result as greedy and crass. 

Asylum co-founder David Michael Latt defends his company's work in a "New York Times" interview, saying "I'm not trying to dupe anybody...Other people do tie-ins all the time; they're just better at being subtle about it. Another studio might make a giant robot movie that ties into the Transformers release and call it Robot Wars. We'll call ours Transmorphers."

But copycat filmmakers who clearly love and respect the source material get a pass. Chris Strompolos and Eric Zala spent seven years, beginning when they were in grade school, on a shot-by-shot recreation of the first Indiana Jones film, calling theirs Raiders of the Lost Ark: The Adaptation. Now it's a cult hit, screening around the country.

And there's even a middle ground, explored in Michel Gondry's new film, Be Kind, Rewind. When Jerry (Jack Black) accidentally erases every video in the rental shop where his friend Mike (Mos Def) works, the two team up to replace the films with homemade versions.

Black was interviewed last year on Rotten Tomatoes and told Fred Topel "We were under (Gondry's) strict orders not to watch any of the movies again...Just do what you think it is based on the commercials you had seen of the movie because he wanted it to look that way."

And it does, as the trailer reveals. The slapped-together copies of classics like Ghostbusters and 2001: A Space Odyssey look worse than your average cell-phone video. And they're a lot funnier.

  • Comments (2)
  • (0)
  • Email this entry
  • Link


Comments

default userpic

I love "Shootout". However, your statement that movies are too depressing only holds true from an accounting/financial standpoint. There is plenty of light,humorous, or endearing fare out there. (For example, the Farley Bro.s stuff, Ben Stiller stuff, Owen Wilson stuff, Jane Austen stuff, Jane Hathaway stuff, Jennifer Aniston stuff, Adam Sandler stuff, Mike Meyer stuff, etc. and I don't try to belittle those people and their work when I mention them.) The people making the thought-provoking, relevant movies don't have dollars as a primary motive because they go into that labor of love understanding the same thing that you two understand: these days thought-provoking movies are not big boxoffice and they may lose money on the project. I think those people ought to be applauded and encouraged. Your commentary on the matter, however, throws cold water on those efforts. That cold water will make future production dollars harder to come by. I hope I'm wrong about the availability of future production dollars because thought-provoking movies serve a very useful, positive purpose and are also a measure of our society.

default userpic

Movies are too repeditive.

Meaning too many remakes. It's as if Hollywood has no imagination anymore.

There are thousands of great books out there that would make great films and nobody touches them.

Personally, I love westerns. I can never get enough. But they, too, have fallen to the remake stage and nobody goes out to find new stories to film and there are thousands of western novels out there screaming to be made into a movie and would be great ones.

Like Brian Garfield's novel, "Last Reville", for instance. A great novel and nobody touches it. It would make a fantastic western movie.

I tend to watch the classics and leave the remakes alone.

I also now tend to lean to the Independent Films for something new.

One of my favorite I.F. filmmakers is Tom Laughlin. His Billy Jack films are great and Tom would make a great guest on SHOOTOUT. He changed the way I.F. are made and paved the way for future I.F. productions.

Get Tom on as a guest. That will bring in 100's of viewers.

Leave a comment