Ok. Stop it. All of you. Stop remaking movies. Stop remaking good foreign films to suit lame American audiences who refuse to read subtitles. Stop remaking classic American films because the youth doesn’t understand why there is no color or nudity.
Now, the picture above creates a new issue. DO NOT REMAKE A THREE YEAR OLD FILM, THAT IS ALREADY IN ENGLISH. Sure, it was technically a British film; and yeah, it was played mostly at art house theaters and didn’t make money. But you know what? Sometimes the best films out there aren’t seen, or don’t make money. They are the ones I still try to call art versus just being a product.
Death at a Funeral (2007) was art. Death At a Funeral (2010) will be a shitty, knock-off product.
___by me on ohnopleasedont
(tipped off by seriouslythough & dangermania)

ETA:  I’d like to think that films are art. When I called the original version art, I meant that it was likely made with that sense in mind; certainly more so than the 2010 version will be. They’re making a product to make money by remaking a rather good British film.
Also, people have tried to turn this into a racial issue, which I assure you, my original post made no mention of. I honestly didn’t even think about it in that context. But since some have brought it up, I’d like to suggest that those in charge of making and casting the remake are thinking of it in those terms. I wouldn’t be shocked if it was pitched AS a Black comedy. And honestly, I don’t take issue with that. It’s not a story that needs to be rooted in any certain culture.
Demographics, and the subsequent casting to reach those demographics, is a business decision, not an artistic one. So, while I have no issue with the remake being made with a predominantly African-American cast, I would point to that fact as furthering my argument about product versus art. —AJR

Ok. Stop it. All of you. Stop remaking movies. Stop remaking good foreign films to suit lame American audiences who refuse to read subtitles. Stop remaking classic American films because the youth doesn’t understand why there is no color or nudity.

Now, the picture above creates a new issue. DO NOT REMAKE A THREE YEAR OLD FILM, THAT IS ALREADY IN ENGLISH. Sure, it was technically a British film; and yeah, it was played mostly at art house theaters and didn’t make money. But you know what? Sometimes the best films out there aren’t seen, or don’t make money. They are the ones I still try to call art versus just being a product.

Death at a Funeral (2007) was art. Death At a Funeral (2010) will be a shitty, knock-off product.

___
by me on ohnopleasedont

(tipped off by seriouslythoughdangermania)

ETA: I’d like to think that films are art. When I called the original version art, I meant that it was likely made with that sense in mind; certainly more so than the 2010 version will be. They’re making a product to make money by remaking a rather good British film.

Also, people have tried to turn this into a racial issue, which I assure you, my original post made no mention of. I honestly didn’t even think about it in that context. But since some have brought it up, I’d like to suggest that those in charge of making and casting the remake are thinking of it in those terms. I wouldn’t be shocked if it was pitched AS a Black comedy. And honestly, I don’t take issue with that. It’s not a story that needs to be rooted in any certain culture.

Demographics, and the subsequent casting to reach those demographics, is a business decision, not an artistic one. So, while I have no issue with the remake being made with a predominantly African-American cast, I would point to that fact as furthering my argument about product versus art. —AJR

  1. gonzothegreat reblogged this from ohnopleasedont and added:
    agree. 100% F—-
  2. approachingchaos reblogged this from themattsmith and added:
    Actually the original kind sucked and wasn’t funny:
  3. claygharrison reblogged this from ohnopleasedont
  4. pajamapajacqueline reblogged this from jackiejormpjomp and added:
    WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU LUKE WILSON? THE ROYAL TENENBAUMS WAS GREAT AND SO WAS THE FAMILY STONE AND NOW YOU’VE SUNK TO THIS...
  5. jackiejormpjomp reblogged this from anotheractivist and added:
    was legitskis hilarious. Why?! WHY?! Dinklage, you should know better.
  6. retrotort reblogged this from tylercoates and added:
    Is the dwarf in blackface?
  7. blacklicorice reblogged this from popculturebrain and added:
    Question: Is Zoe Saldana Hollywood’s go-to-girl for interracial relationships? I’m sayin….
  8. intellectualthrust reblogged this from tjpytheas and added:
    Pardon? Isn’t that a naked James Marsden? Stay this madness.
  9. yogisarah reblogged this from tylercoates and added:
    Holy crap! Why didn’t they make it this way the first time?! It might have been less of a snooze-fest. MAA—IIIINNN for...
  10. anotheractivist reblogged this from fatmanatee
  11. dignan777 reblogged this from themattsmith
  12. excessandyy reblogged this from boutofcontext and added:
    Context I’m not sure what you mean by this…
  13. excessandyy reblogged this from 5500 and added:
    Original Since 1976...qualify my “art” statement for some people: I’m not saying 2007’s...
  14. apokalypsos reblogged this from ohnopleasedont and added:
    Oh man this looks...be utter shite … The fact...Martin...
  15. 5500 reblogged this from tylercoates and added:
    Let’s get one thing straight: Death at a Funeral (2007) was diverting, but it was not art. Having said that, though they...
  16. brandonjaaay reblogged this from fatmanatee and added:
    this isn’t real…right?
  17. whitewallz reblogged this from avocadosalad and added:
    This is so upsetting.
  18. tjpytheas reblogged this from themattsmith and added:
    One original cast member. Can you spot him? I’m biting my lip. But seriously… crikey, I can’t bear to think of the...
  19. boutofcontext reblogged this from fatmanatee and added:
    realize we’re all still bitterer than shit because Nick Cage ruined...Wicker Man. You...
  20. knifegoesin reblogged this from popculturebrain and added:
    I’m rebloging this from my phone, so i’m just posting on top but it’s bothersome that instead of promoting this films to...
  21. furiousfurious reblogged this from tylercoates and added:
    Whaa? Wait… AWESOME. I disagree with the main post - we have no idea what the remake will be like. And um, I sort of...
  22. consumergradevideo reblogged this from indieandyy
  23. fatmanatee reblogged this from themattsmith and added:
    The original will stand on its own regardless of how this does. I’m willing to give it a shot… the cast is a mixed bag,...
  24. indieandyy reblogged this from consumergradevideo and added:
    Consumer Grade Video Why does this have to become a race issue?...can only speak for...
  25. nearingtide reblogged this from themattsmith
  26. davidkendall reblogged this from themattsmith and added:
    I mean, seriously….can no one create anymore? Are we reduced to a nation of copiers? Okay, if you want to remake a movie...
  27. cijimcb reblogged this from themattsmith
  28. msnovember reblogged this from tylercoates and added:
    I’m not kidding. I want to see this. And part of me wonders if people (not anyone who posted this here, I just mean in...
  29. themattsmith reblogged this from excessandyy
  30. consumergradevideo reblogged this from brokensocial and added:
    I have a feeling people only feel this way because there are very few white people involved. Seriously. Also no one has...
  31. atroachis reblogged this from themattsmith and added:
    Oh God no. I loved the original, BRITISH version. I’ve always known Martin Lawrence would do something like this to me.
  32. excessandyy reblogged this from popculturebrain and added:
    my pop culture brain Right… Let was actually what...with “people won’t read subtitles”...
  33. excessandyy reblogged this from cijimcb and added:
    cijimcb Peter Dinklage has a name you know. And, honestly, I’m sort of pissed at him for agreeing to reprise his role....

Blog comments powered by Disqus