Will the ‘Arthur’ box-office results put the kibosh on ’80s remakes?
Potential fallout from the failure1of Arthur (2011) to come anywhere close to duplicating the business of Arthur (1981)? From the LAT:
It’s probably too early in the remake renaissance to draw broad conclusions — or, for that matter, for studio executives to put all of their ‘80’s remakes on ice. But it’s not too soon to wonder if the remakes that work best come from originals that were liked — but not revered. Whatever you thought about the new “Karate Kid,” you didn’t hear a lot of people talking about how Hollywood shouldn’t try to replicate the acting feats of Ralph Macchio. Ditto for Harry Hamlin and “Clash of the Titans.” (It’s also worth noting that “Arthur” was Hollywood’s first remake in recent memory of a film that targeted an upscale adult audience. It may, after this weekend, also be one of the last.)
I first noted the trend of 80’s remakes here in December, 2008, a post that included the announcement of the Arthur reboot. Here we are a little over 2 years later wondering if all those 80s films Hwood put into development (e.g., Romancing the Stone, Adventures in Babysitting, Ghostbusters) should be left to wither on the vine.
The article makes two good points: (1) If you’re going to remake movies, pick ones that are liked, not beloved. (2) Don’t remake movies for adults. If we liked the original, we’re likely not to be disposed favorably to a clear attempt to make bank by taking a second bite at the apple.
In other words, leave our delicious pristine apples alone!
Or something like that.
How about your thoughts? 80s movie remakes: Good idea? Bad idea? Good idea executed badly? Bad idea that should rot in Hell? You’re suddenly hungry for apples?