|
Post by MelMac on Feb 15, 2008 17:49:17 GMT -5
Why would SJC announce it when they are having problems with it like the A-TEAM? It makes more sense to have other actors and such spread it around to see if excitement is worthy enough to produce it. That might be true, but given the "TGAH 2008" project, which I'm sure SJC is at least aware of, plus the fact that Collazo's endeavor did (and he admitted it) put in a casting list for that endeavor, I would be highly skeptical of ANY actor saying they auditioned for a role in this supposed movie. I still have my doubts because there is yet to be a story from an official source. Not only that, both "A-Team" and "GAH" have been in pre-production hell for years, but to the best of my knowledge "The A-Team" has had more buzz on it - good and bad. "GAH" has pretty much been Mortimer's comments - and his script is nothing like what they're proposing, and the rumors I've been reading. Plus, this might be just me, but I also get highly skeptical when I hear news regarding a movie actually being in the works because every time in the past couple of months TGAH 2008 has announced big things (putting up more stuff on their board, the actual filming of scenes), this rumor has come up on someone's blog. Third, I think it's rather convienant this is supposed to be filming in July when the "TGAH 2008" project is being released, and it's another reason why I do not trust any news that a "GAH" movie is being produced. (Quite honestly, right now I'm not even sure "TGAH 2008" is still in production, because I haven't read a new 'daily blog' on that board for a week. )
|
|
|
Post by MyTatuo on Feb 15, 2008 18:02:53 GMT -5
NEWS FLASH: William Katt, Robert Culp, and Connie Sellecca, stars of the 80's TV show The Greatest American Hero, have just signed on in cameo roles for an upcoming remake. Cannell Productions was unavailable for comment. MelMac: I'm still skeptical. Ha, ha, just kidding, Mel. I know that would never happen. You'd never use just three words like that.
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on Feb 15, 2008 18:32:28 GMT -5
NEWS FLASH: William Katt, Robert Culp, and Connie Sellecca, stars of the 80's TV show The Greatest American Hero, have just signed on in cameo roles for an upcoming remake. Cannell Productions was unavailable for comment. MelMac: I'm still skeptical. Ha, ha, just kidding, Mel. I know that would never happen. You'd never use just three words like that. True... but I'm still skeptical only because there really needs to be more to what's being touted than what they're saying in order for me to believe it. It's the journalism side - and seeing it really happen with "Doctor Who" - that makes me say what I do. Even Collazo's endeavor has at least shown through pictures that they are producing something. This is still all the scuttlebutt that is very similar to the buzz going on with "The A-Team."
|
|
|
Post by HoudiniDerek on Feb 15, 2008 22:18:10 GMT -5
NEWS FLASH: William Katt, Robert Culp, and Connie Sellecca, stars of the 80's TV show The Greatest American Hero, have just signed on in cameo roles for an upcoming remake. Cannell Productions was unavailable for comment. MelMac: I'm still skeptical. Ha, ha, just kidding, Mel. I know that would never happen. You'd never use just three words like that. I can believe that.
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on Feb 15, 2008 22:31:54 GMT -5
NEWS FLASH: William Katt, Robert Culp, and Connie Sellecca, stars of the 80's TV show The Greatest American Hero, have just signed on in cameo roles for an upcoming remake. Cannell Productions was unavailable for comment. MelMac: I'm still skeptical. Ha, ha, just kidding, Mel. I know that would never happen. You'd never use just three words like that. I can believe that. On which one?
|
|
|
Post by HoudiniDerek on Feb 15, 2008 23:27:21 GMT -5
That you would be skeptical regardless...but using a LOT more words to say it.
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on Feb 15, 2008 23:37:04 GMT -5
That you would be skeptical regardless...but using a LOT more words to say it. Because I haven't seen any large news - acting or otherwise - on it doing every search I know of, yes, I will remain skeptical regardless until that happens (i.e. BBC announcing "DW's" return). There's no official news anywhere - just blogs, which still leads me to believe that they are confusing "TGAH 2008" with Morgan with a possible "GAH" story with Ralph or a male in the lead. I had this concern too as far as possible confusion when Collazo's endeavor did come into play. This also came about with the Google ad for that site, which if you were Joe Public and went to that site first, you'd think it was a movie. This was not as serious though until "B's" comment elsewhere about a movie being made, and the fact both say July. That's too coincidental for my wanting to take this as a fact.
|
|
|
Post by Ms Boku on Apr 15, 2008 9:03:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on Apr 15, 2008 9:15:15 GMT -5
Yep... if MovieHole has it, it must be 100 percent legit - especially if it doesn't have a "rumor" tag to it. (Based on quotes given to me from a JoshT on that board). What we got in "GAH" and to a point in "GAHeroine" as to the backgrounds of the characters and the storyline worked well. Why make Pam a single mom who coincidentally has her son in Ralph's class (which is fun - this means he's a troubled student if they go the way of the series). And, they're asking for trouble if they use Johnny "The Human Torch" Storm's ability to turn into a fireball. That would be more blantant than DC's suing SJC over Ralph being Superman - and this time they have proof. If nothing else, if people keep giving comments - maybe the producers for this project (if this is legit) will know that this proposed idea is not a good one from a moviegoer's standpoint - affecting ticket sales and money - and try a different synopsis.
|
|
|
Post by ralphssister on May 11, 2008 22:54:40 GMT -5
Don't mean to digress at all, but this whole movie thing bugs me. I was 11 years old when the premiere of TGAH in 1981 on ABC, that was 27 years ago, I remember it well. From the latest news around the internet about this movie, taking liberties is ridiculous - especially for the original story....it just won't work. The latest says that it is a story regarding a bad alien influenced teacher, Pam has a son in Ralph's class, he explodes into flames unexpectedly. Why? Why mess up a classic? The original premise was about an average guy getting a supersuit and dealing with issues that occurred at THAT TIME. Hence, cold war issues, Ralph being a single father raising his son (unusual at that time), physical bad guys. Today - that is all out the window - terrorism is computer based and global, bad and good blend, Ralph isn't quite representative of America today (given the diversity), redefined Ralph's ideals would reflect Bill Maxwell's (as today - Bill would have grown up in the 60's), Microsoft and outsourcing grew up, the aspect of globalization means less "physical crime", etc. A revamped Ralph and Bill - does NOT work in this generation! Everything about Ralph and Bill will be lost in the redefinition, if defined accordingly. A big screen would work if it was centered around TGAH-the next generation - as many have said - Kevin Hinckley inherits the suit. Revamping Ralph and Bill kills the entire originality of the show. It was implied many times, that a "HERO" existed per generation (i.e., J.J. Beck) who dealt with specific issues of that time. This movie sounds like a ploy of nostalgia to make some money off of us children of the 80's and the next generation. It isn't sticking true to the original wit and social conscience promoted in the original series. I, for one, really hopes this TGAH movie, big screen like Ralph crashes in the barren desert where no one will notice.
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on May 11, 2008 23:21:40 GMT -5
Great analysis ralphssister. I totally agree with it and personally think that this movie is just that - a rumor. Still haven't found the site that had this "information" originally, so I think it was faked to start a buzz. I've read two ideas around here, one from MortimerWest and one from jdkikerx78, that have new wearers - no relation to the original characters - that were really good and had a modern day feel. Both would work well... now if the film companies would buy the ideas... :-\
|
|
|
Post by HoudiniDerek on May 12, 2008 0:23:46 GMT -5
I think the idea can be done, but I think most fans are against it. You can still have a Bill that was around in the 80s and hating pinkos and such and a Ralph that became very green and such as a kid in the 90s and into the 2000s. The idea would take some work though on the part of the actors doing the chemistry. You can still have the basic characters and how they worked. Bill would have just been in Vietnam and not Korea...etc. I don't like the Kevin angle at all. It just sounds forced...even more than Holly. Welcome to the forum, ralphssister.
|
|
|
Post by culpkatt on May 12, 2008 1:03:50 GMT -5
Don't mean to digress at all, but this whole movie thing bugs me. I was 11 years old when the premiere of TGAH in 1981 on ABC, that was 27 years ago, I remember it well. From the latest news around the internet about this movie, taking liberties is ridiculous - especially for the original story....it just won't work. The latest says that it is a story regarding a bad alien influenced teacher, Pam has a son in Ralph's class, he explodes into flames unexpectedly. Why? Why mess up a classic? The original premise was about an average guy getting a supersuit and dealing with issues that occurred at THAT TIME. Hence, cold war issues, Ralph being a single father raising his son (unusual at that time), physical bad guys. Today - that is all out the window - terrorism is computer based and global, bad and good blend, Ralph isn't quite representative of America today (given the diversity), redefined Ralph's ideals would reflect Bill Maxwell's (as today - Bill would have grown up in the 60's), Microsoft and outsourcing grew up, the aspect of globalization means less "physical crime", etc. A revamped Ralph and Bill - does NOT work in this generation! Everything about Ralph and Bill will be lost in the redefinition, if defined accordingly. A big screen would work if it was centered around TGAH-the next generation - as many have said - Kevin Hinckley inherits the suit. Revamping Ralph and Bill kills the entire originality of the show. It was implied many times, that a "HERO" existed per generation (i.e., J.J. Beck) who dealt with specific issues of that time. This movie sounds like a ploy of nostalgia to make some money off of us children of the 80's and the next generation. It isn't sticking true to the original wit and social conscience promoted in the original series. I, for one, really hopes this TGAH movie, big screen like Ralph crashes in the barren desert where no one will notice. I completely agree with your analysis. Hollywood will more than likely wreck everything that was original and unique about the series. It will be revamped as either a comedy or a dark morality tale. IMHO, the Hollywood of today will push it to one extreme or the other.
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on May 12, 2008 8:30:05 GMT -5
It being a little darker wouldn't bother me - especially since some of the "GAH" stories were a bit dark in places. Now, if they made it something like the "Batman" movies level dark, yeah, it wouldn't work. But this case, based on the summary these guys have for this supposed movie would push it to the comedy extreme. Don't think they watched "GAHeroine" and saw that totally camp doesn't work.
|
|
|
Post by mmderdekea on May 12, 2008 9:03:11 GMT -5
I think I have to slightly disagree here with Ralphssister's emphasis of concern for a remake movie.
Remember, the whole show was not about the stories and the crimes, it was about Bill and Ralph--two disparate yet kind of platonic soul-mates--who are given a suit by aliens and have to figure out how to use it, how to at first get along, and who gradually develop into a pretty decent working team and very close friends. Magnificent!
I don't believe it matters what crimes they are stopping as they stopped drug runners in the 1980s, and Russians stealing secrets, and terrorists, all still common problems today. The show has always supposed to have been about the CHARACTERS, and my concern would be them screwing that up, which we all know is the main probability. Making the show too silly without getting the heart and sentiment evident; making the characters parodies of themselves; making the suit wearer a girl, the Fed (or partner) a man and then Love develops; etc. I'm much more concerned about they ruin the wonderful relationship of Bill and Ralph than what crimes they are fighting, especially because Culp and Katt did the roles so masterfully that it is hard to think that other folks can mimic them, their faults, their positive traits, and their connection so well.
Mona
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on May 12, 2008 9:27:24 GMT -5
Personally, I think it's both - they'd ruin the characters first (i.e. the travesty of Jim and Arte in the movie "The Wild, Wild West") then the ideas behind the show, meaning, make the bad guy scenario camp, i.e. this teacher scenario. MortimerWest's and JD's story ideas of basically a continuation with a new wearer were good and have great potential of making a good movie. (Both are male BTW - I've never seen any story save "GAHeroine" and "TGAH 2008" who filmed with a female wearer ) And, though I disagree with people saying that a woman wouldn't work, I do agree that it'd be a bad idea as I feel they would end up pulling the falling love scenario with their teammate should that happen. Plus, they'd sex up the suit instead of making it look like pajamas. (IMHO, I feel the only modest female costume I've seen in recent years is Jessica Alba's as Sue Storm in "The Fantastic Four") The show was a bizarre scenario (the suit) in a real life situation. Ralph and Bill would never have met in real life had they not been partnered by the greenguys, therefore, the friendship would never blossom. But, I do agree, they'd look over the friendship of the team in favor of the flashes and bangs, like they did too with "WWW."
|
|
|
Post by MST3Claye on May 12, 2008 13:22:06 GMT -5
Since WWW was mentioned here I need to reply with a WWW moment I had this weekend. I never saw the Wild Wild West movie, never really wanted to see it. The TV series was good and I have no ill feelings towards Will Smith or anything. A couple of years or so I caught WWW on either TNT or USA, only one scene... which was enough for me to want to turn it off.. A white little dog with a black spot over his eye, looking at a gramaphone and then turns to look at the camera... *GROAN*. This weekend, I had the wonderful chance to turn to USA and see a movie on. At first I thought it was a Pauly Shore movie. Two guys in a car, with their faces dirtied up with either mud or I guess oil. They were confronted by what your stereotypical L.A. gang would be who were making a big deal about their faces being the way they were. I then noticed the two in the car had a southern type accent. They got out of the car and sure enough.. It was the General Lee............................. *GROAN* Sometimes you can just smell a bad movie from afar. Unfortunately, for this reason I don't think the current "plot" for the GAH "movie" will work at all or be successful.
Bo and Luke Duke encounter a gang............. *walks off ranting like a maniac*
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on May 12, 2008 14:08:16 GMT -5
The only... and I mean only ... potential consolation for "Dukes" was that the show never took itself seriously to begin with so the movie had that part right. Unfortunately, they digressed into a redneck kind with everyone dressing skimpy and such (even Catherine Bach wore tights - albeit as sheer as she could get away with - under her Daisy Dukes).
And yes, the RCA joke bit in "WWW" was hokey, as was the bungee cord rope bit. Sure, the original series did have some things that were out of place for the time (fortune cookies, atomic bombs and androids - this in the last TV movie the duo made, ether/anesthesia - though barely out of date, etc.), but even there they made it where they looked like they could come from that time period. The bungee cord simply was not plausible.
Then again, given that Kline played Artemus as a fop who loved to dress in drag, I'm not surprised. Ross Martin would've been really upset with it, if Conrad's opinion said anything about it.
|
|
|
Post by Videofox on May 12, 2008 14:09:12 GMT -5
Although Luke's response to being called a "hillbilly" by the gang was freakin' hilarious. "Actually, we prefer the term Appalachian-American." Sue me...I liked "Dukes." Anyhoo....I would prefer no GAH revival to a bad one. But in order for it to work at all, it would have to be updated to reflect today's social and political situations, which is why I would want a completely new team rather than redefining the original Ralph-Bill-Pam dynamic. Can't imagine a Bill Maxwell without him ranting about the "Reds." Of course, if things keep going the way they are, by the time they do a remake Bill Maxwell will have a whole new country of "Commie" agents and spies to worry about.
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on May 13, 2008 23:38:37 GMT -5
Although Luke's response to being called a "hillbilly" by the gang was freakin' hilarious. "Actually, we prefer the term Appalachian-American." Sue me...I liked "Dukes." Anyhoo....I would prefer no GAH revival to a bad one. But in order for it to work at all, it would have to be updated to reflect today's social and political situations, which is why I would want a completely new team rather than redefining the original Ralph-Bill-Pam dynamic. Can't imagine a Bill Maxwell without him ranting about the "Reds." Of course, if things keep going the way they are, by the time they do a remake Bill Maxwell will have a whole new country of "Commie" agents and spies to worry about. I can't say much - there are parts of "The Wild Wild West" movie that I liked. What I did like was the train (which, save colors, was pretty close to the original version in style), the music, costuming and scenery. The story and characterizations sadly didn't match with the original - well save for the (Arliss) Loveless ladies, but even there they pale in comparison to Antoinette, Miguelito's love in he original series. But, I do agree - a remake of "GAH" would need to update the characters to the times slightly. The only thing that would be a bummer is that Bill would probably not be allowed to say half of the names he calls people. Reason? - given how people are oversensitive to names, even if they ironically call themselves that, you know someone's going to complain or file a suit about it. So, it'd be better to have a new team who can better adapt to the current times instead of updating two characters who are best suited for the suit scenarios of the '80s (their freetime, however, still fits today ).
|
|