Well, not everyone. I tend to take movies at their merits, though I admit to being skeptical regarding the motivations behind making something like the recent Spiderman or the planned sequel to the Shining. That being said, some remakes manage to revitalize, inspiringly reimagine, or totally surpass prior beloved…

Sita Sings the Blues by Nina Paley. A wonderful, multifaceted retelling of the Ramayana, which allows the narrative threads of Sita's story to bleed into the creator's own life. Also an entertaining example of real-world oral storytelling in action.

Right. What I'm talking about is the difference between the Illiad as an orally circulating story and the 'definitive' version that was eventually published as a book, which is what most people now mean when they talk about the Illiad. We can probably trace any story in its elemental form back to oral storytelling…

Michele Gondry is a brilliant storyteller. Thanks for sharing this!

Very good point. I think the difference in perception between the two has to do with the seeming fixedness of film. I still am irked when watching the LOTR extended editions I come across scenes where Jackson used takes that differ from the ones in the theatrical version. It's only a matter of slight variation in…

Are the Illiad and the Odyssey folk tales? I think we're playing fast and loose with the source on which this analogy is based if they are considered folk tales. It was my impression that we were comparing remakes to orally circulated folk tales, which would indeed have little to no interaction with markets.

But I think the point was that in folklore there is no market influence. Folk tales are simply told orally, from person to person, without little to no financial consequence.

Hear! Hear! You nailed it in only two sentences.

I agree with the basic premise of this article, but I think it glosses over what many of us are actually complaining about when it comes to remakes, reboots, and reimaginings in Hollywood. It isn't that the same story is being told again, or with variation, or using pop-cultural references (at least I don't care so…

More accurately stated: "Warner Bros. is looking to milk some easy money out of the name recognition of one of its properties."

Maybe it has to do with age when seeing them. I saw Raiders when it came out as an eight year old. None of the others have lived up to that experience for me. Maybe Last Crusade was your moment. It wasn't for me, and that's okay.

http://youtu.be/ The most thorough answer to your question, and a good look at the movie is here:

Well, it's been diminishing returns since Raiders. Just let the thing die.

Agreed. It's pretty rote, stale, turn of the twentieth century style "bodice ripper" material. Somehow in "fantasy," sexual power is wielded against its object in such a way that it is "overcome by its lure," or something equally as stupid sounding. The furor over the sex and his comments about it only obscure the…

I am appalled that so few have bothered to make the obvious skull-fucking joke following that quote. What's wrong with you today, internets?

I haven't read the book, but the trailer reminds me of Tezuka's amazing magnum opus, Phoenix. It looks visually beautiful, and the parts directed by Tykwer might keep the thing from being pure cheese.

Does no one else want to see it simply for the Quay Brothers animation? I must be the only one.

It may be of interest for us to consider the reality of abnormal psychology to begin with. "Depression," "mania," and "psychopathy" are all terms that a person may carry as a diagnosis if they meet a sufficient number of diagnostic criteria. There is, of course, some level of 'reality' to such disorders, but they are…

Awww. You beat me to it. I love this movie.

Yes. Exactly!