Why not Where Eagles Dare
Why didn't he choose to give 'Where Eagles Dare' a post-modern remake? The original was far superior than any of the Dirty Dozen clones.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
A lot of that was also because the original rewrote much of the dialogue. The Bogart version took the dialogue directly from the book and very few could or can write dialogue like Hammett.
shareYou basically sum it all up here.
Where Eagles Dare was already a great movie. The only added remake-value would be maybe more realism in the gunfights. But that's the only thing I can think of.
I like your QT analysis as well. More or less the way I see him, only I love Death Proof and Kill Bill to death, despite people "getting turned off by his self referencing style, and homages" - I can easily see that happen. But QT is, next to Mike Myers maybe, the ultimate post modern filmmaker so that's simply his style.
But I agree with you: Jackie Brown proved he was a really good filmmaker that could take a book and turn it into an awesome film without overly relying on his trademark winks and references. Since '97 I'm still waiting on the next "normal" Tarantino film. No remake, no hommage, no nothing, just a really good original movie. Here's hoping Inglorious Basterds will be the first step in a new direction. :-)
[deleted]
"the movie is a great try, but hard to take seriously "
And what, in your opinion, is Where Eagles Dare trying exactly?
[deleted]