|
This is a "spinoff" from the "11 worst movies" thread.
Movie remakes of TV shows: what a disastrous idea!
by Vic Sage
There are different types of feature film adaptations of TV shows, and in order to compare or rank them qualitatively, one needs to define terms with more specificity.
First of all, some movies serve as an EXTENSION of a TV series, sometimes to cash in on a hit show, or sometimes to revive a show, or to finish off a series, or provide a coda for it, or to expand a skit or cartoon into a full story. They generally include original cast members and are usually made and released in the same era as the TV show. These are sequels and spinoffs, not remakes, and include such movies as:
- Spinoffs (SERENITY ***, NAKED GUN 1-3 (** ½), X-FILES **½ , DR. WHO & DALEKS **½, LIZZIE MAGUIRE **, BATMAN (66) **, McHALE'S NAVY (65) *, TWIN PEAKS *,MUNSTER GO HOME *, HEAD*, GONG SHOW MOVIE 0*, NUDE BOMB 0*, JACKASS 0*, DARK SHADOWS 0*)
- Sketch movies (WAYNES WORLD 1, 2 *** / **, BLUES BROTHERS 1,2 *** / *, CONEHEADS ** ½ , STRANGE BREW ** ½ , KIDS IN THE HALL: BRAIN CANDY ** ½ , STRANGERS WITH CANDY ** ½ , BEAN **, MST3K **, NIGHT AT ROXBURY 0*, ITS PAT 0*)
- Anime and/or Animation features (SOUTH PARK *** ½ , A MAN CALLED FLINSTONE **, BEAVIS & BUTTHEAD**, COWBOY BEBOP *, THE JETSONS*,POKEMON*, TRANSFORMERS (86)*) and the Nickelodeon feature cartoons (SPONGEBOB, POWERPUFF GIRLS, RUGRATS, HEY ARNOLD, DOUG, WILD THORNBERRIES)(all are around ** ½)
The nature, purpose and form of spinoffs and sequels are different than that of TV show remakes. Spinoffs do no generally re-invent or re-imagine the shows, they merely extend the shows into a new market. They are not specifically trying to appeal to new audiences, or to appeal to nostalgia of older fans, but merely exploiting the existing property in another medium for current fans.
Focusing on remakes narrows the discussion to a more consistent and manageable group of movies… contemporary feature films that try to adapt older TV shows as live-action movies, with no temporal or personal connection to the original. These try to re-invent and re-imagine the ideas, characters, themes, plot elements and spirit of the original, both for a new audience and for an older, nostalgic one.
The one exception I make is for the 10 STAR TREK movies. Although they do use the TV casts (with ST 1 constituting a spinoff, with 9 sequels thereafter), the feature series did not begin until over 10 years after the show had been cancelled and was intended to reinvent characters (to some degree) and to have nostalgic appeal. The movies are a hyrid of spinoff, sequel AND remake. So I’ve ranked them separately, as follows:
II: WRATH OF KHAN ***
VIII: FIRST CONTACT ***
IV: VOYAGE HOME ***
VI: UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY **½
VII: GENERATIONS **½,
III: SEARCH FOR SPOCK **½,
IX: INSURRECTION **
X: NEMESIS ** (thus destroying the "even number = good ST movie" theory)
ST: THE MOTION PICTURE *½
V: FINAL FRONTIER *½
Remakes based on a live-action series:
MIAMI VICE - ??
UNTOUCHABLES – great movie ****
THE FUGITIVE – great movie ****
ADDAMS FAMILY 1,2 – 1st one quite good, 2nd one not *** ½ / **
MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 1,2,3 – successful but increasingly mediocre *** / ** ½ / **
TWILIGHT ZONE – episodic by nature, some episodes better than others ** ½
MAVERICK – fair to middling ** ½
SGT. BILKO – only fair, but funny ** ½
CHARLIE'S ANGELS 1,2 – 1st one is good-bad fun; 2nd one not ** ½ / **
BRADY BUNCH 1,2 – bad, but fun; 2nd one just bad ** ½ / *
DRAGNET – not good **
THE SAINT – not good **
STARSKY & HUTCH – not good **
BEWITCHED – not good **
SWAT – bad *
LASSIE – bad *
I, SPY – bad *
FLIPPER- bad *
WILD WILD WEST – bad *
MY FAVORITE MARTIAN - bad* [on edit: thanks Yancy]
AVENGERS – disaster 0*
McHALE'S NAVY – disaster 0*
BEVERLY HILLBILLIES – disaster 0*
LITTLE RASCALS – disaster 0*
LEAVE IT TO BEAVER – disaster 0*
LOST IN SPACE – total disaster 0*
DUKES OF HAZZARD – disaster 0*
MOD SQUAD – disaster 0*
HONEYMOONERS – disaster 0*
CAR 54 – disaster 0*
Based on animated series:
GEORGE OF THE JUNGLE ** ½
SCOOBY DOO 1,2 - ** ½ / **
FLINTSTONES 1,2 ** / *
AEON FLUX - **
DUDLEY DO RIGHT - **
HE-MAN, MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE - *
JOSIE & THE PUSSYCATS - *
THUNDERBIRDS - *
INSPECTOR GADGET - *
MR. MAGOO - *
UNDERCOVER BROTHER - *
FAT ALBERT - 0*
ROCKY & BULLWINKLE – 0*
BORIS & NATASHA – 0*
[Note: TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES 1-3 are based on comic book, not the subsequent cartoon, but I’d rate them as ** ½ / ** / ** ½]
Other people’s ratings would surely vary to some degree (you might have more respect for MAVERICK or less for GEORGE OF THE JUNGLE, for example), but I think, taken as a whole, my ratings reflect a general consensus and indicate that the sub-genre of TV show remakes has been fairly disastrous, as a Hollywood concept.. Even spinoffs are rarely good, with a few notable exceptions (ie, some of the STAR TREK movies, SERENITY, SOUTH PARK, as well as the 1st NAKED GUN, WAYNE’S WORLD and BLUES BROS. Movies).
Is this general awfulness a result of something inherent in the underlying source material? Is there something about TV shows that render them unlikely to translate to the big screen, as either remakes or spinoffs? Or is there something about Hollywood’s decision-making process to greenlight such projects that renders them unlikely to succeed?
It’s a subject worth discussing, I think.
Theories, anyone?
|
