egon1982
Sophomore
@egon1982
Posts: 994
Likes: 268
|
Post by egon1982 on May 12, 2019 7:23:04 GMT
Female cliffhanger remake in worksNot even remotely necessary. This idea and this remake can fall off a cliff. The original does not need a remake period. It is one of the best action thrillers of the '90s and of all time. Especially not some half-assed gender-swapped remake just trying to cash in on the name of Cliffhanger. Since when have these gender-swapped remakes even worked or made enough money in the box office to warrant more of them getting made? By my calculations, all of them have flopped and bombed badly in the box office. So why waste the time and resources on them? It is baffling. The brownie points you get for being inclusive don't equate to a good box office take. Just make a film like a Cliffhanger featuring a female lead and make your own damn franchise. Shitheads! Just make a film like Cliffhanger with a female lead. It is beyond pointless to waste time, money and resources on a remake that no one is asking for with another half-assed gender-swapped lead. And it is not sexist either. These films have all tanked hard in the box office as of late. And all of them have swapped leads just for brownie points for inclusivity and a lazy way to be "different". This is the best way to kill a franchise not resurrect it. And not every film needs to be remade anyway. Cliffhanger is still a great action film and it still holds up great to this day. Remake films that were flawed or weren't that great, that had clever ideas and failed in terms of their execution like The Wraith from 1986. Not great films that don't need updating, to begin with. Just because they are popular and still have a fanbase that doesn't mean you should remake it. It is not like Cliffhanger is that dated or there is an audience clamoring for a remake. So who is this for exactly studios? If you can't answer that question definitively then you shouldn't even waste your money on that movie. Take the money you were going to spend on this project and spend it on something truly daring and different or a safer bet. Otherwise, you end up with stinkbusters (2016), RoboCrap(2014), Point Break or that terrible Total Recall remake with Colin Farrell. All films that either bombed or underperformed immensely in the box office. You might as well be tossing your money off a cliff if you greenlight these kinds of projects. They don't make any money. These kinds of films do not make money and because of that, it makes zero sense to keep making them. Unless it is a tax write off and these studios are deliberately wasting their own money on remakes with no audience for the slim chance they could make a tiny profit. Which I honestly find very hard to believe. I just think they are lazy and don't want to really try to create their own franchises anymore. They don't want to take any risks. Except maybe John Wick which is a new franchise that's it's own instead of piggybacking on an older one and they are a hit franchise which some action fans like myself support. The truth hurts. The track record of remakes lately has been far worse than it ever was. And some of my favorite films are also remakes like the blob, scarface and The Fly, But they aren't remakes from the past ten years. I don't care that much about the box office either. And I am not arguing it is a sign of quality. I am just saying that studios seem to care about that more than anything else. And throwing money at remakes has been proven to not be that financially successful as of late and your just gonna keep getting diminishing box office returns, by not paying to see these is gonna send studios the message and with diminishing returns. Not caring about the track record is something I don't understand at all. It sounds like lowered expectations to me. But to each their own. The comedy genre is in the same boat as remakes lately. Stale and full unoriginality except maybe some few like Game Night which was excellent. The action genre has had its fair share of great films. I mean Dredd, John Wick 1 & 2, Mission Impossible 5 and 6, etc. etc. I support new franchises like John Wick which i love and support as it's a throwback to 80s/90s action films done right. I hope this Cliffhanger film bombs as this might be artificial instead of being filmed in a real location like the original.
|
|
|
|
Post by femalefan on May 12, 2019 9:20:57 GMT
This will be a flop. Movies don't need gender swapped remakes. Hollywood should create their own female led movies.
|
|
|
|
Post by theravenking on May 12, 2019 11:15:07 GMT
Will they turn the bad guys into bad girls too?
The John Lithgow character could be played by:
Viola Davis
Tilda Swinton
Michelle Yeoh
And for the scenery I would suggest some lovely female-looking mountains or perhaps hills would be better since they have rounder shapes.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on May 12, 2019 14:03:45 GMT
It's entertaining but not that great.
|
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on May 12, 2019 15:35:00 GMT
I mean the original ain't great at all.
|
|
egon1982
Sophomore
@egon1982
Posts: 994
Likes: 268
|
Post by egon1982 on May 12, 2019 22:15:42 GMT
I mean the original ain't great at all. To me it is great! i mean excellent stunt work, fine performances even one of Stallone's best, quality cinematography, fantastic score by Trevor Jones thrills even that intense opening and all, i'm a Stallone fanboy and he's been one of my favorite actor since i was a kid and i give the original movie 5 out of 5 stars as i see nothing wrong with it as it's a classic in my book. This remake will be ass just like the ones i mentioned and i'm a real person who is passionate about movies and can see the errors now in Hollywood.
|
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on May 12, 2019 22:20:16 GMT
I mean the original ain't great at all. To me it is great! i mean excellent stunt work, fine performances even one of Stallone's best, quality cinematography, fantastic score by Trevor Jones thrills even that intense opening and all, i'm a Stallone fanboy and he's been one of my favorite actor since i was a kid and i give the original movie 5 out of 5 stars as i see nothing wrong with it as it's a classic in my book. This remake will be ass just like the ones i mentioned and i'm a real person who is passionate about movies and can see the errors now in Hollywood. there are worse movies certainly but why not a mountain noir.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nora on May 15, 2019 3:44:10 GMT
most of these remakes feel so forced. and mostly make me like women less :-(
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2019 7:15:37 GMT
If they don't let women make these films, then Hollywood is sexist...  
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2019 7:07:30 GMT
Movies like this just show Hollywood is completely out of touch with what we want to see and the main reason they are doing these gender swapped movies is 'cause remakes are cheaper to make than to hire writers to come up with new movies and they are probably hoping they flop so they can just use them as an excuse to make less female lead movies. It is not hard to make good female lead movies and there are hundreds of very successful female Authors out there that could be writing these movies like Mary Higgins Clark, Patricia Cornwell, Karen Robards, Tara Moss, Patricia Briggs, Harper Bliss etc or having their novels adapted into movies and Danielle Steele is one of the top 5 biggest selling Authors of all time with over 800 million novels sold worldwide (Stephen King has only sold 350 million) but most of her adaptions were relegated to being TV Movies 'cause Hollywood studios saw them as being Women's movies which they have long looked down on. I just got the newest novel in the 'Mercy Thompson' series, 'Storm Cursed' by Patricia Briggs and the 'Mercy Thompson' series has a large following and is better than a large amount of the female lead movies I have seen on screen but instead of adapting something original and popular we get this gender swapped remake crap nobody asked for.
I love to see films with ladies that are at the forefront, with good comedic and\or dramatic narrative. I was just thinking of Desperately Seeking Susan - 85', which I fell in love with the first time I saw it when it was released. Films showcasing the ladies at the center of attention need to be "original" though and not phony Mary Sue characters, just to prove some biased and distorted point about women can just be as good as men. This has already been proven with films like Aliens - 86 and Melanie Griffith in Cherry 2000 -87' and even Something Wild - 86'. They don't have to be action orientated films either to showcase female talent and what they are capable off. It is all agenda driven now, and films are losing their sense of focus and even honesty. 
|
|
egon1982
Sophomore
@egon1982
Posts: 994
Likes: 268
|
Post by egon1982 on May 18, 2019 14:24:14 GMT
If they don't let women make these films, then Hollywood is sexist... It's about trying to make a movie that is different and not using a well known name, i mean just make a movie similar to Cliffhanger that can stand on it's own two feet with a different name. I mean some of these half-assed remakes have flopped at the box-office like i mentioned. Stealing names from beloved films which the original is beloved by Stallone and action fans like myself is just encouraging creative laziness, studios need to rediscover the spirit that birthed great films and series, not keep recycling past glories.
|
|
