Posted on 03/16/2006 1:35:32 AM PST by nickcarraway
I liked the original movie and I like Martin, but I saw the commercial and NEVER had any desire to see this movie.
With that, good night.
a bomb
The movie has actually performed well at the box office. It aint at Titanic levels, but it aint a flop either.
I have been a huge fan of all the original Pink Panther movies since I was a kid. Saw the last few in the theater, and I've owned them all on VHS and now DVD. BIG fan. But it never occurred to me to go see the recent Steve Martin remake for the same reason that I wouldn't buy a CD of other bands doing Beatles songs.
If you can't improve on the original, there is simply no point.
And NO WAY can anybody but Peter Sellers ever be Inspector Clouseau.
I've always liked Steve Martin as an actor, but he's no Peter Sellers, no one is.
Amen.
You're probably right, but I saw the commercials and the moview looks less funny than a Pink Panther cartoon. The kind of movie that is embarassing just to watch the promo.
Or buy a CD of the Beatles doing a song written by Berry Gordy.
that was my impression also.. once or twice through the painful looking preview was enough to convince me to skip it. I'm not sure there is someone out there who can do Clouseau better than Peter Sellers.
Don't you mean "a beaumbe" ?
An excellent point and an enduring commentary against most remakes out of Hollyweird these days.
There are some movies that certainly come out better in a remake, but sadly most of them turn out to be special effects showcases with inferior acting ruining the scenes with any potential.
Like the Batman series from '94. What a waste of celluloid. It bordered on cruel and unusual treatment of a movie audience. Michael Keaton, darn good in many roles, but NOT BATMAN. I'll stop before I go into an uncontrolled rant.
I wonder sometimes, after years of embracing liberalism, is there enough brainpower left in Hollywood to produce decent quality scripts that don't completely offend at least half the potential audience? It's not promising.
I feel that way about most remakes of movies.
I'm sitting her trying to think of a "remake" that I felt was better than, or even as good as, the original and the first one that popped into my head was "Last of the Mohicans."
"Ocean's Eleven" was a pretty good remake, "The Fly" was gorier than the original, but I still liked the Vincent Price one, LOL. "Cape Fear" and "Thomas Crown Affair" might belong on the list.
I'm sure there may be others, but I'm hard pressed to think of them.
Peter Sellers was a genius. Martin isn't.
"sigh"
Just saw M. Night Shamalayan's The Village, a horror film set in a 19th century utopian commune. Incredible dialogue -- the villgers speak in complete, elegantly-constructed sentances. Whooops -- this "exception" proves your rule -- this director is hard-core Pennsylvania, not Hollywood.
The upcoming "Miami Vice" movie is similarly non-exciting.
When half the movies that come out are remakes (and the other half are sequels or gay ranchers eating pudding), you gotta know that hollywood is not only morally bankrupt, but mentally and creatively bankrupt as well.
Remakes of perfectly wonderful movies (well, maybe except for King Kong) are horrible defacing wastes, akin to painting a moustache on the Mona Lisa. What next, remake Citizen Kane? Wizard of Oz? Gone With The Wind?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.