Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: What Did You Watch? 2024-12-18 (Wednesday)
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 13:43:14 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <vka15j$q63c$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vk1fbc$2tcju$1@dont-email.me> <vk5s3h$3ucc2$1@dont-email.me>
 <1921701780.756471194.323422.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
 <vk7cpl$7oo3$1@dont-email.me> <vk9df8$m455$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 22:43:16 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ee2b8d3865a5e84e8f10a7f2e67870fd";
	logging-data="858220"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/+etwDYdlW+Bpr9/Ug8VYiucoSKRpgTKY="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:P7Z271waaTRymVcaxqkYrC3IO9k=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 241222-4, 12/22/2024), Outbound message
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <vk9df8$m455$3@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 4054

On 12/22/2024 8:07 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
>> On 12/21/2024 3:22 AM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>> Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
> 
>>>> "A Star is Born" is a movie with multiple versions.  I watched all
>>>> them and didn't like any version, until the most recent version.
> 
>>> I've never managed to sit through any version, even though I know people in
>>> the Kris Kristofferson one since it was shot here. And doesn’t another
>>> version star James Mason?
>   
>> The 1954 version with Judy Garland.  I think TCM had a marathon one day
>> starting with the 1937 version, and I recorded and watched them all.
>> This was long before the most recent remake.  Somewhat interesting, and
>> you wouldn't pick up on this if you haven't watched the 1937 version,
>> but in the original version they were actors, then in 54 with Judy
>> Garland and every version since, they've hired singers.
> 
>> Even though I didn't like the original movie(s) I kept watching them
>> because I felt there was definitely a good concept in there.  They just
>> needed the right script, cast, director, etc. and eventually they made a
>> version that I did like.  And for that, I'm glad I kept watching the
>> remakes.
> 
> I keep telling you that What Price Hollywood? (1932) starring Constance
> Bennett and Lowell Sherman is the original, that A Star Is Born (1937)
> starring Janet Gaynor and Fredric March was an unlicensed ripoff by
> another studio. I liked both '30s movies because the two actresses are
> just gorgeous.
> 

If TCM didn't show it, then it doesn't exist in this dojo.

> Note that Judy Garland's band leader had been a female character in the
> two earlier versions.
> 
>>>> . . .
> 
>> Yes, I *almost* said that.  I think it was a quote from Roger Ebert
>> about remaking the bad movies instead of the good ones.  But I'm all for
>> remaking the good ones too!  I know it's been in the works for forever,
>> but just last month they gave a new announcement about the "Forbidden
>> Planet" planet.  People are going apoplectic over the possible remake.
>> But I really *liked* the original, and I would very much like to see
>> where that story goes next with either a *good* remake or a *good*
>> sequel.  As long as the movie is entertaining, I don't care if it's a
>> remake or a sequel.
> 
> Uh, Forbidden Planet was not original. It was an adaptation of The
> Tempest in an off world futuristic setting.
> 
> There weren't too many Star Trek scripts that weren't adapted from
> Shakespeare or the Bible or a story from the ancient Greeks. Since the
> Greeks invented theater, what's original?


Tell that to anyone who complains about them doing a remake!