Great! Another freaking remake! With Johnny Depp too!! I hate him!!

[alexora]

Originally Posted by Namcot

If that's the case, I wonder why he is not in the trailer in the wide moving shot of the train dining car introducing all the characters?

Perhaps in the film's timeline during that dining car scene his character had already been murdered?

[BenCodie]

Originally Posted by Namcot

Love Johnny Depp.

[virkole9]

It's been a long time since I've seen the '75 original film, and I haven't seen the tv adaptations, but I have to interject here that this is nothing new - the recycling and endless sequeling processes have been going on in Hollywood (and Japan, and Germany, and Italy, and France, etc) pretty much since the dawn of film. There were THREE adaptations of "The Maltese Falcon" made in the classic era in the span of just TEN years (1931-41). And there were ENDLESS Charlie Chan, Sherlock Holmes, Tarzan, Mr. Moto, Ma and Pa Ketter, etc, etc, series in the 30s-50s. So nothing's different.

Except that in those days most of those endless sequels and remakes were lower-budgeted "A" or more often "B" pictures, they didn't often star the biggest stars, and there were loads of high profile films that were NOT sequels or remakes. That way of doing things persisted to some extent into the 1980s or even perhaps the early 90s. What's different about today is that what used to be the low-A or B productions are now mega-A productions and they drown out everything else. This past year only two of the top 20 films at the domestic box office (Hidden Figures and La La Land) were not remakes, sequels, or kiddie-flicks.

So really the only thing surprising about a new Agatha Christie remake is that there aren't more of them, but I guess the prevailing notion in Hollywood is probably that few Americans are smart enough now to be able to follow an Agatha Christie film, and people in the rest of the world (where the money really is) won't care.

[alexora]

Originally Posted by virkole9

It's been a long time since I've seen the '75 original film, and I haven't seen the tv adaptations, but I have to interject here that this is nothing new - the recycling and endless sequeling processes have been going on in Hollywood (and Japan, and Germany, and Italy, and France, etc) pretty much since the dawn of film. There were THREE adaptations of "The Maltese Falcon" made in the classic era in the span of just TEN years (1931-41). And there were ENDLESS Charlie Chan, Sherlock Holmes, Tarzan, Mr. Moto, Ma and Pa Ketter, etc, etc, series in the 30s-50s. So nothing's different.

Except that in those days most of those endless sequels and remakes were lower-budgeted "A" or more often "B" pictures, they didn't often star the biggest stars, and there were loads of high profile films that were NOT sequels or remakes. That way of doing things persisted to some extent into the 1980s or even perhaps the early 90s. What's different about today is that what used to be the low-A or B productions are now mega-A productions and they drown out everything else. This past year only two of the top 20 films at the domestic box office (Hidden Figures and La La Land) were not remakes, sequels, or kiddie-flicks.

So really the only thing surprising about a new Agatha Christie remake is that there aren't more of them, but I guess the prevailing notion in Hollywood is probably that few Americans are smart enough now to be able to follow an Agatha Christie film, and people in the rest of the world (where the money really is) won't care.

Yes, but this film isn't a remake.

[virkole9]

Oh I know it's not strictly-speaking a remake but a re-adaptation, saw your earlier post - but in current Hollywood parlance and in the minds of most viewers, there's no difference. And whether it's a new screenplay, an adaptation of an earlier screenplay, or a shot-by-shot remake it is still part and parcel of the Hollywood paradigm of just offering familiar pablum in slightly different flavors, rather than ever giving us something really new and different and aimed at people who have graduated high school. You have to look beyond the multiplexes for that, with a few exceptions around awards season.

[alexora]

Originally Posted by virkole9

Oh I know it's not strictly-speaking a remake but a re-adaptation, saw your earlier post - but in current Hollywood parlance and in the minds of most viewers, there's no difference. And whether it's a new screenplay, an adaptation of an earlier screenplay, or a shot-by-shot remake it is still part and parcel of the Hollywood paradigm of just offering familiar pablum in slightly different flavors, rather than ever giving us something really new and different and aimed at people who have graduated high school. You have to look beyond the multiplexes for that, with a few exceptions around awards season.

So, is Romeo + Juliet a remake of West Side Story...?

[sordi88]

I'm so tired of these constant remakes...

[Namcot]

The day they remake Casablanca, I will go postal.

[alexora]

Originally Posted by Namcot

The day they remake Casablanca, I will go postal.

They made a colourised version of the original and it sucked.

[FrostyQN]

Originally Posted by Namcot

The day they remake Casablanca, I will go postal.

I'd pay money to see that. (Not the movie. You going postal)

Casablanca 2018 starring Johnny Knoxville. Let's make it happen.