web
counter
 

12 Reasons '80s Remakes Are the Safest Bets in Hollywood

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Seriously Random Lists | Comments (16)



Miami_Vice - 13 - Jamie_Foxx Colin_Farrell.jpg

Although it undoubtedly feels like all we ever report anymore is news of ’80s remakes, the reality is — assuming my research is accurate — that there have only been 14 studio remakes of ’80s film or cinematic adaptations of ’80s television shows in the last decade. A quick look at the numbers, however, suggests why exactly there are so many more currently in development — it’s almost a no-lose situation for smart studios that know how to budget their productions appropriately. Of the 14 remakes and television adaptations released so far, 12 have either broken even or made a profit, only one lost money, and the jury is still out on The A-Team.

However, with one exception — the Karate Kid remake, released this weekend — the box-office returns for ’80s remakes have been fairly soft, which is why there hasn’t been a ton of copy devoted to their success. However, they are profitable in their initial release, which means that — for most of the titles — receipts from DVD sales and rentals is just gravy.

Here are the numbers, so far (the first number is box office total, and the second is the production budget).

1. Karate Kid (Projected: $165 million) ($40 million) = $125 million profit

2. Friday the 13th ($65 million) ($18 million) = $47 million profit

3. Clash of the Titans ($161 million) ($125 million) = $36 million profit

4. My Bloody Valentine ($51 million) ($15 million) = $36 million profit

5. The Dukes of Hazzard ($80 million) ($50 million) = $30 million profit

6. Nightmare on Elm Street ($63 million) ($35 million) = $28 million profit

7. Prom Night ($43 million) ($20 million) = $23 million profit

8. The Fog ($29 million) ($18 million) = $11 million profit

9. The Stepfather ($29 million) ($20 million) = $9 million profit

10. Fame ($22 million) ($18 million) = $4 million profit

11. The Hitcher ($16 million) ($15 million est). = $1 million profit

12. Sorority Row ($12 million) ($12 million) = $0 profit

13. The A-Team (Projected $75 million) ($110 million) = ($35 million profit)

14. Miami Vice ($63 million) ($135 million) = ($72 million profit)


What can we deduce from these numbers? Generally, that the profit margin is slim enough not to warrant a sequel — there has yet to be a sequel to a ’80s remake (if you don’t include the straight-to-DVD sequel to Dukes), although that will change, as the Hollywood Cog has exclusively revealed to us that a Karate Kid sequel is already in development. (There are also sequels to Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street in various stages of development, although it is not certain that either will ever come to fruition).

We can also see that television adaptations are not safe bets: Miami Vice was a spectacular failure; The Dukes of Hazzard failed to meet expectations; and The A-Team will likely only make a profit on DVD, if at all. That probably means certain death for the long-in development Magnum P.I. movie, and little box-office hope for Jonah Hill’s currently in development 21 Jump Street movie. We’ll probably never see the big-screen versions of “The Greatest American Hero,” “T.J. Hooker,” or “MacGyver” currently in development, either. Fortunately, that also means that “Airwolf,” “Knight Rider,” and “Manimal” will also be left alone (as well as the ’70s “CHiPs”).

However, the ’80s horror movie remakes will likely continue, unabated, as long as they continue to turn out a profit (see Fright Night, for example). The success of Karate Kid, moreover, also bodes well for other remakes of ’80s family films, like the Short Circuit film in development. The long-in-development Footloose remake will likely get a huge boost by the success of Karate Kid, and you can bet that a Who Framed Roger Rabbit? remake will be soon to follow. A Dirty Dancing remake also seems inevitable, and the in-development remakes of Monster Squad and Red Dawn look to be future successes, if MGM can release Red Dawn, given its financial difficulties.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



News: Sam Raimi Oz Prequel | No, The One With The Wizard Not The Prison | Trailer: HBO's Game of Thrones | When You Play The Game of Thrones, You Win or You Die. There Is No Middle Ground.









Comments

Please check your math on The A-Team and Miami Vice. Either You've got your numbers reversed or every financial institution wants to buy your calculator.

(The parenthesis around those figures represent negative profit -- DR)

Posted by: admin at June 14, 2010 10:45 AM

Am I the only one who didn't get quite baked enough for the Scooby Doo and Brady Bunch films of the 90s, leaving random scenes indelibly etched in what's left of my brain?

Posted by: cinekat at June 14, 2010 10:53 AM

Well, there you go.

Looking at that list I have to ask who is at fault for the success of these re-insertwhateverhere? Is it people my age who remember the originals with whatever degree of fondness one feels? Is it younger people who have an idea what the originals were about and are curious about it? Or is it the same idiots who continually go and see crappy movies and, therefore, give studio executives more of a reason to continue to churn out crap?

Posted by: admin at June 14, 2010 10:55 AM

admin, I think the answer is to take all of Sarah Palin's Good Ole Real America and ban them from seeing anything other than either The Triplets of Belville or Werner Herzog's Lessons of Darkness.

Posted by: esme at June 14, 2010 11:12 AM

They spent $50 million to make Dukes of Hazzard?!? Holy Shit!

Posted by: The Mutt at June 14, 2010 11:15 AM

Can they remake "Supertrain"? It missed the '80s by just a few months.

Come onnnnnn, you know you want to ...

Posted by: , at June 14, 2010 11:29 AM

Well, there's people who just don't give a shit. Overhearing both people I was in high school with and middle aged couples at the box office, I was stunned at this idea of just showing up, watching whatever. I just couldn't fathom being that flippant or unprepared, but...there you go.

Posted by: Jay at June 14, 2010 11:31 AM

I thought the Friday the 13th sequel in 3D was killed months ago. They were trying to rush it into production then stopped everything when the box office didn't pan out as well as they hoped. Big opening, huge drop off.

Posted by: Robert at June 14, 2010 12:10 PM

So nobody is going to reply nicely to my letter asking for a remake of The Fall Guy and Simon & Simon?
You've ruined my Monday.

Posted by: peanut at June 14, 2010 12:19 PM

(The parenthesis around those figures represent negative profit -- DR)

Please double-check those parentheses, Dustin. I do not think they appear where you think they appear.

Posted by: Joanna at June 14, 2010 12:20 PM

It'd be interesting to compare it to the remakes of 70s properties (like The Mod Squad or Halloween) or 60s properties (like The Avengers or The Brady Bunch) and see how they stack up.

I do think that part of the reason for the failure of 80s TV remakes is that they were originally TV shows. The Karate Kid was a movie and contained its entire beginning, middle and end in that movie. You never had to see the sequels to understand it or enjoy it (really, you didn't). The A-Team, otoh, was a show and people were just accustomed to the weekly thrill-ride and didn't care about its repetitive nature.

Posted by: Fredo at June 14, 2010 12:33 PM

These numbers are incomplete without marketing costs and international/DVD revenue included. Some of these movies (such as The A-Team) appear to have spent a ton of cash on marketing, which would cut into potential profit.

Miami Vice was obviously a commercial failure at the U.S. box office, but according to BoxOfficeMojo.com, it made over $100 million overseas and another $36 million on DVD sales and rentals, meaning that its gross revenue was close to $200 million. Even with tens of millions of dollars in marketing added to its budget, it very likely still made a nice profit.

Clash of the Titans, by the way, has made a ridiculous $325 million overseas, so the fact that a sequel is in the works isn't too surprising.

Posted by: Abe Froman at June 14, 2010 2:00 PM

How is it possible that Miami Vice lost money? Look at Colin Farrell's hair, ferchrissakes!

Posted by: Brenton at June 14, 2010 3:12 PM

Miami Vice was the only movie I have ever walked out of, ever. It was just so boring!

Posted by: ERM at June 14, 2010 6:01 PM

they could do Moonlighting--the Geritol Case, with the original cast. it could be a set up for a whole franchise: a sequel about exposing hair replacement fraud, another about a villain posioning seniors by doctoring their viagra, yet another one, with even more kooky flavour about a retirment home staff theft ring

Posted by: idleprimate at June 14, 2010 6:51 PM

The more I watch Miami Vice the more I like it. It's a cool movie that really grew on me. I think the digital cameras Mann uses make things feel more real. Yes, it was slow and Jamie Foxx's ego oozes, but there was a lot of coolness. Archangel Jesus Montoya! What a great bad guy!

Posted by: Clee at June 15, 2010 2:40 PM