No not a Remake!!! or is it the second Remake?

[jackfaire]

A friend of mine is lamenting that apparently she heard there was a remake of Dirty Dancing in the works. I said, "Well they already remade that you know Havana Nights" "No that was a sequel"

See in my opinion that was a sequel the same way that Evil Dead 2 was a sequel to Evil Dead.

"It's 1958 when the Miller family moves to Havana, where 18-year-old Katy's (Romola Garai) parents expect her to be the belle of a high-society ball. Instead, she falls for Xavier (Diego Luna), a waiter who teaches her how to dance and partners with her for an upcoming contest. But Fidel Castro's rise to power forces Americans to depart, putting Katy and Xavier's relationship in jeopardy. Patrick Swayze reprises his role as Johnny Castle."

Above is the description of the second movie. Other than including the elements of Fidel Castro's rise to power to me it reads like the same story set against a slightly different backdrop.

Am I wrong?

[Lace Neil Singer]

According to Wikipedia, it's not a remake but a "re-imagining".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_D..._Havana_Nights

[telecom_goddess]

According to Wikipedia, it's not a remake but a "re-imagining".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_D..._Havana_Nights

ok then....

But what is in the works now is supposed to be a remake...and frankly I think it's dumb to remake it at all....just leave it the hell alone. It's not going to be nearly as good as the original, I don't care who's in it or what they do with it.

[Andara Bledin]

I don't get why pop culture feels the need to re-live the 80's.

They recently re-did Footloose, for some reason. Actually, if the reviews on IMDb are anything to go on, they did a really good job of it, too.

Havana Nights was supposedly a prequel, not a sequel or a remake, despite the almost cookie-cutter plot.

Also, according to IMDb, there was a 3rd DD movie, Capoeira Nights, released direct to video in 2010.

^-.-^

[Greenday]

They are in the remake phase right now because:

A) It's tough to be original after so long.

B) People will watch it.

B is enough tbh. People will build/make/sell anything as long as they'll make a profit.

[jackfaire]

B is enough tbh. People will build/make/sell anything as long as they'll make a profit.

Honestly I don't mind when they remake stuff hell we all have our version of Robin Hood but really I think what kind of twigged me about it was how similar Havana Nights was and my friends loved it but they announce a straight remake and suddenly those people are "Oh my god noes not a remake!!!!"

[Nyoibo]

Evil dead 2 was a sequel, it was also a remake of the first movie, I'm pretty sure it's the only movie in history to be its own remake and sequel in the same movie, by the same director.

[jackfaire]

Evil dead 2 was a sequel, it was also a remake of the first movie, I'm pretty sure it's the only movie in history to be its own remake and sequel in the same movie, by the same director.

*Nods* Yeah Raimi even talked about how it was the only way he could get Army of Darkness out because he killed Ash at the end of the first one.

It did feel a bit different though. To me it seemed like in the first one Ash was more a part of a group and he just happened to live the longest but in the second one they brought in a new group that he had no prior connection with and it kind of set him apart and made him the experienced Indiana Jones, Crocodile Dundee of the group shifting the focus more to him and his story which allowed for the transition to Ash Centric Army of Darkness.


But I could just be overthinking it.

[Lace Neil Singer]

Kinda like the remake/sequel they did for Carrie; same plot, same storyline.

[guywithashovel]

Greenday raises a good point.

As a species, we have been writing and telling stories for at least 5,000 - 6,000 years, if not longer. By now, it's hard to do it without rehashing what someone else has done at least to some extent, if not doing a remake.

Honestly, I have never understood why some people get so riled up every time a remake comes out. I guess the people who wrote the original might get a little irked, but if their blessing was sought and received (and I would think it would have to be), then that wouldn't be an issue.

Besides, even if the remake sucks, many people will still go and see it, which means $$$ for the people doing the remake, so Rob Zombie and everyone else doing remakes can just ignore their detractors' claims that "it doesn't hold a candle to the original" while they pocket a few million dollars (at least).

[jackfaire]

Honestly, I have never understood why some people get so riled up every time a remake comes out.

Personally I don't get riled up as you put it but I don't like most remakes for one reason. The previous movie isn't even cold yet.

I like 10 Things I hate about you which was a remake of Taming of the Shrew because it had been a long time since Shakespeare's day.

It feels odd though to have them be remaking a movie that came out in my lifetime when I am only 30. The original came out when I was 7.

Evil Dead was a special case and there are special cases where a remake is necessary to allow for a sequel they want to do.

For example they should have remade Terminator 2 with a different ending so that T3 actually made sense.

That being said remaking a movie that is only 24 years old not even quarter of a century it feels like the first movie is still too fresh in people's minds.

A remake should be more about reintroducing people to a beloved story rather than copping a profit off of nostalgia and morbid curiosity. But hey if you wanna do a sequel to the Labyrinth Hollywood then by all means please do.

[HYHYBT]

Part of the problem is that it's film. We have a record of most of what's been done over the last hundred years.

[Andara Bledin]

It's funny, though.

We can have new production companies doing plays on Broadway that were last done merely a decade ago and nobody bats an eye, but for films there's supposed to be some sort of "cooling off" period between them, which is, honestly, rather silly.

^-.-^

[jackfaire]

It's funny, though.

We can have new production companies doing plays on Broadway that were last done merely a decade ago and nobody bats an eye,
^-.-^

Ah but you see there is a difference in the medium for one. Often times you go see a performance of a Broadway play you don't get a recording of it.

You can't go into a video store and buy a copy. You can't then rewatch the copy as often as you like. In fact if the production company that did a play within the last decade stops doing it and say 10 years go by and another production company starts doing it then they have had a cooling off period because you were unable to rewatch it.

However people could buy Dr. Zhivago and watch it over and over again. When they made the remake though enough time had passed that many younger people including people my age had not seen it and barely even heard of it so it made sense to reintroduce them to it.

Dirty Dancing I own a copy and people ten years younger than me own a copy. We watch it and rewatch it but it is quite possible that my daughter will be vaguely aware of it and if they wanted to remake it when she is in her teens or twenties I am sure that her and her friends would flock to the theaters to see it.

Instead your hitting the market already saturated with people who are quite familiar with the original and will judge it not by itself but entirely on how it measures up to the original.

[AdminAssistant]

Well, ideally the 1987 Broadway production of Anything Goes is a completely different beast than the production currently running on Broadway. As one of my professors likes to say, the script is not the play. Also, just to be contrary, all Broadway performances are recorded and stored in the Billy Rose Theatre Collection in the New York Public Library. PBS also records and airs quite a few as part of the "Great Performances" series.

Even with live theatre, many people complain about the stagnation of the material on Broadway, and I'm one of 'em. Actually, read this article about the recent re-imagining of Porgy and Bess about to open at the American Repertory Theatre and then move to Broadway: http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/20...orgy-and-bess/