Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

Another remake that's not needed - Can't Buy Me Love

Old 02-28-03, 01:39 PM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ohio
Posts: 286
Another remake that's not needed - Can't Buy Me Love

Why do they need to remake an already great movie? It's not even that old.

Can't Buy Me Love remake
LostHiWay is offline  
Old 02-28-03, 02:00 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Charlie Goose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Sesame Street (the apt. next to Bob's)
Posts: 20,199
Re: Another remake that's not needed - Can't Buy Me Love

Originally posted by LostHiWay
Why do they need to remake an already great movie? It's not even that old.

Can't Buy Me Love remake


One of my favorite movies, there is NO need to remake it.

[size=1]Honk![/size[/i]
Charlie Goose is offline  
Old 02-28-03, 02:16 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 16,666
Not only is it a remake...it's a black remake...and with Kenan Thompson!

Hurray!
LBPound is offline  
Old 02-28-03, 02:16 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,303
You will never top Dempsey and Peterson's chemistry. Honestly. I never thought I"d write that sentence, but it's true. You simply won't improve upon that film.
The Nature Boy is offline  
Old 02-28-03, 02:21 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 16,666
Re: Re: Another remake that's not needed - Can't Buy Me Love

Originally posted by Charlie Goose
Awesome! I'm going to have to use this in the future!

The sucky thing is it's not even Disney doing the remake, so we won't see a widescreen DVD re-release of the original, as if that were a possibility.
LBPound is offline  
Old 02-28-03, 02:55 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 2,462
This is the dumbest thing I've heard today(even worse than the live action Garfield)


this movie doesn't need to be remade, and is a total waste
the narrator is offline  
Old 02-28-03, 07:00 PM
  #7  
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: San Leandro , CA
Posts: 1,636
You know you're getting old when Hollywood starts remaking movies from less than 20 years before.
Cant Buy Me Love is a fun movie. Why do they have to remake it?
cooper2000 is offline  
Old 02-28-03, 07:47 PM
  #8  
DRG
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: ND
Posts: 13,406
I fear we're not too far off from the day where all Hollywood will make is remakes... proven commodities, right? They'll just remake the same movies in five year cycles, because 5 years is about where the music and fashion styles will make the movie 'dated'. We'll just have the same 100 movie ideas over and over again, with a few small twists and fresher casts. Sort of like auto manufacturers releasing a new model of a car.
DRG is offline  
Old 02-28-03, 08:33 PM
  #9  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Charlie Goose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Sesame Street (the apt. next to Bob's)
Posts: 20,199
Originally posted by the narrator
even worse than the live action Garfield
Back up a second there, cowboy. Live action Garfield?!? Yer joshing.

Honk!
Charlie Goose is offline  
Old 02-28-03, 08:42 PM
  #10  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,919
Originally posted by Charlie Goose
Back up a second there, cowboy. Live action Garfield?!? Yer joshing.
http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=274907
garmonbozia is offline  
Old 03-01-03, 06:00 AM
  #11  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 23,460
Nothing wrong with updating a classic premise. It's not like CBML was original at all. You guys aren't interested in a remake because you aren't teenagers anymore... this movie probably isn't being made for you, it's being made for teenagers. Just like CBML was almost 20 years ago. Kids today laugh at the 'styles' and fashions and such from that 80's flick, and that movie hinges on him becoming 'cool' which he wasn't by today's standards.

The Garfield movie is for kids probably, so I don't see why you guys wanna grouse about it either... if they made a telletubbies movie would you grouse about that too? Elmo?
Trigger is offline  
Old 03-01-03, 10:35 AM
  #12  
DVD Talk Legend
 
JimRochester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Rochester, NY. USA
Posts: 17,935
Crap I'm getting old. I was already married when the first one came out.
JimRochester is offline  
Old 03-01-03, 03:40 PM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 253
Can't buy me love only one thing sticks out. The line Have you evr seen a ti*ty quite this pretty? I seem to recall some much needed nudity on this pg-13 flick:?????????????????)
drexel is offline  
Old 03-01-03, 05:44 PM
  #14  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 16,666
Originally posted by drexel
Can't buy me love only one thing sticks out. The line Have you evr seen a ti*ty quite this pretty? I seem to recall some much needed nudity on this pg-13 flick:?????????????????)
That might have elevated it from charming 80s film to CLASSIC 80s comedy.

But I suppose there are other 80s films which offer skin...
LBPound is offline  
Old 03-02-03, 02:40 AM
  #15  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
zero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Rialto, CA
Posts: 5,416
Originally posted by Trigger
Nothing wrong with updating a classic premise. It's not like CBML was original at all. You guys aren't interested in a remake because you aren't teenagers anymore... this movie probably isn't being made for you, it's being made for teenagers. Just like CBML was almost 20 years ago. Kids today laugh at the 'styles' and fashions and such from that 80's flick, and that movie hinges on him becoming 'cool' which he wasn't by today's standards.

The Garfield movie is for kids probably, so I don't see why you guys wanna grouse about it either... if they made a telletubbies movie would you grouse about that too? Elmo?
Well old and wise one heres the thing, there is nothing wrong with updating a clssic premise, but when its a DIRECT UPDATE of a not so old movie then its not needed. Seeing as how todays "young people" er excuse me teens think anything before 1999 is classic its just a studio trying to make $$$$$$$$$. Sure theres nothing wrong with that, but at the same time you slap a new title on the same film with a new cast you cant exactly ask everyone to like it.
zero is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.