Remake needed?
-
fictionalman — 19 years ago(April 22, 2006 05:23 PM)
I don't agree that this film is another example of uncontrolled American imperialism and war mongering.
I come away from watching this film asking why the United Stated did not take a more active role supporting the pro democracy movement of Chiang Kai-Shek?
The reaction of the two American missionaries towards the end of the film, Jameson and Shirley Eckert (played by Candice Bergen, a devout lefty in real life) to the captain of this ship sent to rescue them is the most disturbing. They refused to be rescued and even denounced their citizenship. (Jameson is later shot by Chinese Militiamen. Serves him right for being so naive.)
What I found chilling was their reactions were eerily similar to those of the real life Canadian Christian missionaries recently rescued by American soldiers in Iraq. The actual Christian missionaries did not appreciate being rescued and even accused their American rescuers for their kidnapping. Talk about art imitating life. -
kenrock — 19 years ago(November 28, 2006 08:33 AM)
My take on this is that its an anti-war film in the finest tradition of that genre, e.g. Paths of Glory. Yes, the missionaries are naive, and Jameson is killed for it. But the captain, with his visions of glory, dies an equally futile death, as does almost ever character of note, including Holman. The point is, war is stupid and wasteful, and no one really benefits from it. This film makes that point par excellence.
-
uushtupsiik — 19 years ago(June 02, 2006 12:50 PM)
ohmigod no no no no no no.
There are ,obviously, few enough actual real ideas in Hollywood now. The remakes, and the screen versions are killing movie enjoyment because they never (repeat and underline) never live up to the original ideas / actors / plot, etc.
Remakes being made two or three years after the original came out (Japanese horror flicks, Insomnia, etc), and old tv shows are mostly terrible and can never live up to the original.
To remake a classic. Please. It just taints the original. What are we gonna dostart colourizing old black and white films that should remain in their film noir state?
Oh yeah. They already did that one. And I won't own one.
Remakes. Phooey. Lets get a brain and start to have an original idea or two come out in theatres.
Sorry gotta go. Time to check out that new film out called the Omen. Wow! I can hardly wait. We never get enough new ideas out in the theatres. (And if you can;t tell the sarcasm from the tone of the comments.wellllllll) -
PathofdestructionWE — 19 years ago(June 11, 2006 01:42 PM)
As for the idea of the American Public being accepting,
I came away from this movie hating the Chinese Nationalist movement (on top of already hating the PRC). Watch closely during the scene where Pohan is sliced up by those little pirates.
It depends on your mindset, you know? My favorite character of the movie was the Captain, he had the toughest job in the world. -
Memories-Of-Murder — 17 years ago(April 03, 2009 10:10 AM)
Then you misunderstood the movie, because in truth, the movie doesn't judge them. It doesn't judge anybody. The movie is far mora fatalsit then that. What the movie says is that there's movements in history to which people are too small and meaningless to face them and win out. Hell, the movie even shows that good intentions can have far worst results.
"This are Nice shoes! Couldn't you afford some real Nike?" -
tigersbb — 19 years ago(June 12, 2006 12:52 AM)
Sure you can remake any movie but the question is why?Our current relations with China have no bearing on this movie and would change everything about it.It's an absolutely beautiful and in my opinion flawless movie that needs no discussion of remake just admiration.
-
Hancock_the_Superb — 19 years ago(October 14, 2006 03:58 PM)
The movie could theoretically be reworked into another setting; I'm working on an idea (one of about a million) involving a similar story set during the US occupation of Vera Cruz, Mexico in 1914. But a direct remake? Hell no!
"We're all made of the same CLAY, you know!? Clay!
CLAY!
" -
scouterrob — 19 years ago(November 23, 2006 11:14 PM)
You simply can not re-make a Steve Mcqueen movie!!!It's been tried with The Getaway and The thomas Crown Affair and both remakes in my humble opinion are not even in the same park as their originals. There are no actors of McQueen's calibre and talent in hollywood today. A remake of this movie would not only be an insult to the original movie but also an insult to the memory of Steve McQueen. How about instead of remaking classic movies, why don't the 5 or 6 writers that actually work in hollywood take all the energy they put into re-makes and instead put out something original and fresh.
-
Lonixcap — 19 years ago(December 04, 2006 08:14 PM)
The only way a remake of this could possibly work is as a Broadway musical.
I know this sounds crazy and I'm not a big broadway fan at all, but it could be done in a Miss Saigon sort of way.
It would probably be a huge hit, with a hit pop song or two, and then they would do a movie version of it and that would suck.
The Sand Pebbles is a classic film, and a movie remake is totally unnecessary.
btw
Paul Newman was the first choice to play Holman, but apparently he did'nt want to spend a year in Taiwan.
Alex North was to be the composer, but became ill and was replaced by Jerry Goldsmith.
Theme "And We Were Lovers" was a pop radio hit.