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
