A Fly Remake? Nooooooooooo!
So, a remake of The Fly. Why? That movie was a goddamn classic. A gloriously repulsive, terrifying sci-fi horror movie with a horrific ending. You can't improve upon the original, which still doesn't feel dated. And the make-up effects weren't just good for 1987, they were good by today's standards (they were Academy Award winning). And please: Although the 1986 version was a remake itself (only in title and premise), that was Cronenberg's film. And now? What? Some young punk, some douchebag Michael Bay protege, some debut filmmaker with a hard-on for CGI and cash is going to try to remake a classic Cronenberg film? Brother, please.
Wait? What's that? Who is remaking The Fly? David Cronenberg? No no. He was the original director? Wait? Are you serious? He's remaking his own film? David Cronenberg is remaking a David Cronenberg film? But why?
Because of technological advancements.
Huh. That just doesn't make any sense. Did da Vinci go back and repaint the Mona Lisa after he found a better paintbrush? No. Did Dylan and The Band go back and re-record The Basement Tapes in an actual studio? No. Did Sam Raimi remake Evil Dead when he got a bigger budget?
OK. That was a bad example.
The point I'm getting at is this: It's not a very good idea. Even with the same director, a bigger budget, and better special effects, there's one thing that David Cronenberg probably won't have: Jeff Goldblum. He was fully half of the reason for that film's success, and nobody today can pull off that role as effectively as Goldblum. CGI or no CGI.
In short: This idea is dumber than a box full of pixie sticks.
But then again: A remake was inevitable. And if there's got to be a remake, Cronenberg is better than Rob Zombie or Marcus Nispel.
Around the Web
Like Our Facebook Page And an Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance
blog comments powered by Disqus