Should ’ 80s Cla­sics Be Re­made?

SFX: The Sci-Fi and Fantasy Magazine - - Your sfx -

I think the re­make of Ghost­busters is a bad idea for var­i­ous rea­sons. Chiefly, it’s dis­re­spect­ful to the fans who have waited years for a con­tin­u­a­tion of their favourite film se­ries. It’s also a silly idea from a dra­matic stand­point. It never had to be Ghost­busters 3, but a film set in the Ghost­busters uni­verse. Imag­ine that Ja­nine’s daugh­ter, out to prove her­self, starts her own Ghost­bust­ing firm. Cast Emma Stone as Ja­nine’s daugh­ter. Job done. An all fe­male cast is a great idea. The re­boot idea is not.

Neil Lar­risey, email There’s a rea­son th­ese movies have stood the test of time. They were made with heart, pas­sion and old school think­ing out of the box. The char­ac­ters were mem­o­rable and re­lat­able. This need to re­boot a clas­sic, or cre­ate ut­terly un­nec­es­sary pre­quels is re­ally start­ing to grate my car­rot. Just be­cause you can, doesn’t mean you should. How­ever, when it comes to some­thing with po­ten­tial that stag­ger­ingly failed to de­liver, that’s a dif­fer­ent story. Re­makes should be done if there’s a need to cap­ture lost po­ten­tial, not to make a buck.

Michael Van Kesteren, Face­book I had no prob­lem with the ideas be­ing thrown about for the new Ghost­busters un­til that fa­tal word, “re­boot”, was men­tioned. You can eas­ily put a dif­fer­ent cast in the present canon be­cause Venkman’s whole plan in the orig­i­nal was to make money, this in­cluded fran­chis­ing. This is ex­plored in the re­cent( ish) videogame where you play a new kid who trains with the orig­i­nal Ghost­busters, test­ing new equip­ment. That’s set in 1991, so fast for­ward to now and it can still work.

Antony Blunt, Face­book

How many re­makes of ’ 80s clas­sics have ac­tu­ally been worth watch­ing? I hon­estly can’t think of any. I’m on my way home right now after tak­ing my five- year- old to see Ghost­busters at the cin­ema and we all en­joyed it thor­oughly, so the “mak­ing it rel­e­vant to the next gen­er­a­tion” ar­gu­ment is cobblers as well.

Rob Perry, Face­book Should ’ 80s clas­sics be re­made? Def­i­nitely, but not half- ar­sed, and it de­pends on the movie in ques­tion. Put a good spin on it, top spe­cial ef­fects and lots of laughs.

Kelvin Cro­ker, Face­book De­pends on the film. If it was poor to start with, then yes. But oth­er­wise there’s no point.

Richard Dixon, Face­book Re­makes are like se­quels: you should only make them if there’s some­thing new to say about them. In the ’ 80s, they got this right with The Fly, The Thing and more. Nowa­days, they’ve no idea what to do with the source ma­te­rial.

Ni­cholas Peat, Face­book An all- fe­male Ghost­busters is a great idea. A re­boot, I’m not so sure. I’ve al­ways thought re­makes should be limited to rub­bish stuff with po­ten­tial, like Hawk The Slayer ( Oi, watch it! – Dave B).

The Eyes Have It

While I agree with your old re­view of Ocu­lus, which said that the movie’s events are left open to in­ter­pre­ta­tion; I don’t feel it is that open- ended. Scenes of the su­per­nat­u­ral out­side the lead character’s point- of- view def­i­nitely skew it in one di­rec­tion. It is a good movie, but not quite a psy­cho­log­i­cal master­piece. And I cer­tainly dis­agree with Gary Rose’s let­ter from your last is­sue which claimed that “it’s quite clear Kaylie was mad in the first place.” What film were you watch­ing, Gary? The whole point of the film was that we weren’t sure.

Ti­mothy Wil­liams, Rich­mond I love films that leave their events open to in­ter­pre­ta­tion. Take In­cep­tion. I still find my­self think­ing about that blasted spin­ning top years later. If it had sim­ply fallen over that end­ing would lose all its magic.

Go­ing The Dista nce

I would like to say how grate­ful I am to once again be able to read your printed mag­a­zine. I used to read SFX all the time when I was

“You should only do a re­make if there’s some­thing new to say”

liv­ing in Eng­land but as soon as I moved to Ja­pan I was un­able to pur­chase it any­where. I went with­out your mag­a­zine for years, miss­ing up­dates on movies, games and the like. Now I am able to get a hold of your printed mag­a­zine and I can once again get all the in­for­ma­tion that I crave. As long as my out­let con­tin­ues to sell me your mag­a­zine I’ll be your num­ber one fan from Ja­pan.

Si­mon Phillips, Ama­gasaki Happy to hear you’ve found us again Si­mon! I’m quite in­trigued by this “out­let”. Is there a black mar­ket for ir­rev­er­ent UK sci- fi mags in the heart of Ama­gasaki?

Winch­este r Woes

In SFX 254 you tell us that – de­spite the fact Su­per­nat­u­ral is not be­ing broad­cast – we should take some com­fort that the sea­son nine DVDs were be­ing re­leased on 20 Oc­to­ber. Well cometh the day and not a sin­gle DVD has passed my let­ter­box for, as it turns out, the

The Thing ( 1982): a dif­fer­ent kind of ’ 80s re­make.

“Right guys. Look moody. Mood­ier. That’s not nearly moody enough for DVD.”

Is Ocu­lus open or closed? It’s in the eye of the be­holder...

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.