Hell Hath Frozen Over: Breakfast Club Remake...

[galactiboy]

I don't think that would be possible... but the Waterworld does hold a place in history as the expensive piece of turd it was. Did anyone like that thing?

 

[Darklord Dave]

Actually Waterworld made money eventually. And it's better than 10,000 BC.

 

[galactiboy]

Wow, can 10,000 BC really be that terrible?!? I have a hard time believing that

 

[DouglasMcc]

So very true.

Aside from the set-up - 5 disparate characters thrown together unwillingly - it isn't necessarily a remake. You could keep doing this formula over and over again and if the characters are interesting, the movie will be too.

But McG's involved - so forget that.

What's with all this hate for McG all of a sudden? Sure, it's pretentious to use a symbol or a set of letters for your name (ask Prince), but his work is not that bad. The first Charlie's Angels was entertaining (but Bill Murray and plenty of T&A can save any movie I guess). We Are Marshall was a great sports movie. Hell, he's only directed 3 movies so far and only the Angel's sequel could be considered weak. As a producer, he's given us Chuck (great show) The O.C. (never was a fan, but it got plenty of critical acclaim), and Supernatural. So, I just don't get it. Oh right, he's doing the new Terminator. When we don't like a director's current project, his other work instantly becomes crap. Gotcha

Two more responses to this thread: I liked Waterworld. It was by no means a classic - would rate it a 7 in my book - but it was entertaining for Hopper and the premise. I also agree it's stupid to compare this movie to Breakfast Club - it's a different environment and no one from the original film is involved. But, as Dave pointed out, people like to sell movies by connecting them to past hits.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwnhRRRQtaI

All of this shows that Hollywood hasn't changed much in the last 20+ years. As Tim Robbins character said in Altman's The Player:

[after watching The Bicycle Thief]
Griffin Mill: Great movie, huh? So refreshing to see something like this after all these... cop movies and, you know, things we do. Maybe we'll do a remake of this!

 

[Mithrandier]

The hate for McG is not sudden and new.

Not everybody is gonna like/love his work.
Same token, not everyone is gonna hate his work.

The thread is not a debate on "why oh why everyone hates McG".
I wouldn't worry about what other feel about a hack, unless you feed off of heated debates about meaningless junk.

I am not going to watch the new Terminator movie bacause McG is tied to it.
I am going to watch it because it is a Terminator movie.
And as I watch it or shortly there after, I will decide whether or not the movie is good/great/horrible.
And it will take nothing away from Terminator or Terminator 2.
It has a chance to make Terminator 3 better, only if it sucks worse.

 

[DouglasMcc]

The hate for McG is not sudden and new.

Not everybody is gonna like/love his work.
Same token, not everyone is gonna hate his work.

The thread is not a debate on "why oh why everyone hates McG".
I wouldn't worry about what other feel about a hack, unless you feed off of heated debates about meaningless junk.

Since McG is connected to the movie this thread is about, I believe it's a valid discussion.

If this hatred is not new, then where's it coming from? The man hasn't done enough in the movie industry to love or hate yet. Sure, he did music videos forever, so maybe some people hate him from that. But to say something is going to suck because of his involvement, is just plain silly. He has yet to even make a film high profile enough to "hate" yet. I like some of W.S. Anderson's films (Resident Evil, Event Horizon). But, I know alot of people didn't like RE or AVP, and since those properties are "Holy Grails", I can understand the venom in opinions about him. But, McG hasn't been involved in any of these types of films yet. Was Charlie's Angels really that important a property to you guys? LOL. Now, if he screws up Terminator, I can understand anger. But, right now, he hasn't done enough to prove the film will be a hit or a flop. He's still an unknown factor as far as I am concerned.

 

[Mithrandier]

The thread is not because he is tied to it.
The thread is because Breakfast Club is tied to it.

McG being tied to a movie does not make me want to go see it.
CA was not a McG movie, it was a Cameron Diaz shaking her arse movie.

Sorry, just my opinion.
Until he steps up and creates a great film, he is a non issue.
And because of his ties to OC and music videos, to me has a negative impact on some things.
He is no Aaron Spelling.

 

[Darklord Dave]

I sort of liked Waterworld too.

And I liked the first Charlie's Angels and Chuck and the OC. Brett Ratner is connected to Prison Break and I like that show as well.

But both McG and Ratner are a certain type of director where his personality is more important than the project. Both are rumored to be complete +++++++s, and most press reports have born this out. Both "direct" movies that are more flash over substance and very obviously reflect their television commercial origins.

But it appears I misread the original quote - the director responsible for the non-remake of Breakfast Club is just a protege of McG.

 

[Mesa]

AS long as they don't redo Weird Science, I'll reserve judgement. I never was a huge breakfast club fan, but Weird Science and Kelly Lebrock, stored that in the old "M" bank as an unsexed jr. high kid.

 

[tomandshell]

Feb 29, 2008
NEW YORK -- Veteran producer Bridget Johnson will produce "Bumped," a modern-day version of "The Breakfast Club," with McG protege Anna Mastro attached to direct from a script by Lizzy Weiss.

McG has a protege?!?